First Born
 

In the mini-35 thread Charles Papert mentioned a film he worked on called FIRST BORN which was shot on video and they worked for a film look. I asked him to discuss it so I'm starting this thread to discuss this film specifically.

You can see the film at iFilm here:
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilm/product/f...413801,00.html

Below I'll quote over the messages Charles first posted about it.

CR post from the mini-35 topic thread
 

I ASKED C.P. ABOUT WHAT THEY SHOT WITH AND DOING THE FILM
 

Looks very nice! Haven't had time to see the whole 25 minutes
yet though.

yeah, I'm ready for all the stories in as much brutal details as Charles would care to go into.

Kevin, you could be opening up a Pandora's box here! I'll watch the short this weekend to refresh my memory and have at it. It's too bad the image quality on iFilm is not as high as it could be, it really does lose a lot in the process. Having seen it projected at Sony's Hollywood screening room on an absurdly state-of-the-art projector (and from that moment convinced of the viability of DV filmmaking), it's tough to reference that teeny low-res version you guys are seeing. But I'll do it! I'll do it!

(G) Bring it on.

I agree about the low quality of the version on iFilm, even the quicktime one is less then spectacular but I think details would be helpful not only to me but the others here.

OK here we go!

Opening scene in park: was actually the first scene shot. Some opening-morning jitters, especially mounting the XL1 to my full-size Steadicam for the first time (I had just fitted a 5.6" LCD to the rig to replace the CRT monitor for lightweight work but hadn't had the opportunity to test it first). Considering that the first shot pulling back from the mom was in low-mode, it was a busy morning! Some 4x4 reflector boards were in use as well as 4x8 beadboard for bounce. The high speed roundy-round of the panicking guy was obviously Steadicam also, and the "Evil Dead"-esque rocket towards him was sped up and blurred in post. (The director, who works in digital effects at Sony, edited on FCP 2.0 with AfterEffects).

Nightime living room scene: I wish you guys could see it in its native form, it seems so bright on the web! I was interested in seeing how far into underexposure DV would hold up. Pretty far, as it turns out. The reflection shot in the glass door was picked up at a different location at dusk. The fireplace area was lit from underneath with a soft bounce; the shot where they hug is one of my favorite in the film, and it made me realize how great the XL1 is at achieving warm skin tones.

The office: the car (nice ride huh?) pulling up was low-mode Steadicam. Still not sure why the headlights flared (no, we weren't using a star filter!) I'm never crazy about having actors drive cars right up to me for safety reasons but this guy did a nice job. I'm also not crazy about doing Steadicam on shows that I'm also DP'ing, especially with digital where you need to keep a serious eye on exposure, but they couldn't afford a separate Steadicam operator so I relented. Not any more though... I've always liked the wide shot of the lobby, kinda Kubrickian. The director got the "Bannon Biotech" lettering from a prop house or something, didnt' cost much and lent much authenticity (much more so than a flat sign). Probably lit with Kinoflos off to the side and below the receptionist's face and perhaps a tungsten edge light. The elevator was another Kino, plus one for outside that was knocked out once the door closed.

I had a prior commitment and another gentlemen shot most of scene with the labtech. Unfortunately he managed to not follow my notes for the lighting so I can't really comment on the intention...the lab itself was supposed to be much darker to hide the somewhat low-tech environs. We brought it down in post, but the ratios are not where they should be. I returned in time to shoot the walk and talk, thankfully we had another Steadicam operator that day so I could focus on other issues. We handheld a small Kino for fill and let the overheads provide the basic illumination. The dialogue was later looped becuase the hall was too echo-y or something.

(next post)

Mom in the baby's bedroom: Lit with a large tungsten unit outside the window to the right for texture, plus a Pepper bouncing into a card hidden to the right of the large box in front of her (simulating the practical lamp). We used a skateboard dolly on track.

Dinner scene: a soft key just below the table provided the glowing fill light, with another unit mounted up high behind the actors for separation. I was also trying to play the depth of the hallway seen in the master shot by alternating light and dark areas. That confounded depth of field in DV--the only way to deal is with lighting unless you can go seriously long lens, and that has another effect entirely (distancing from the subject) which isn't always appropriate. The greenery outside the windows behind the guy's head was lit with some of our big guns (5k's I think) because the glass was tinted and it took a lot for the trees to read. We used the dolly for the coverage (close-ups) so we could jockey into new compositions as each character moved around the room.

Walk-and-talk in the park: Same location as the first scene. We used a long dolly run to add some spice to the master shot. For reasons to be pointed out later, we had an Arri geared head with us that day (here's an Arrihead) which I used as it would deliver smoother results at the long focal length than the scrappy fluid head we had that first day, which was subsequently replaced on my insistence. My operator was not comfortable with the gear head so I took over the reigns for the master shot, which unfortunately meant I couldn't keep as close an eye on exposure--the result is it was shot about a half stop hotter than I would have liked and some of the highlights are blown out, a look I hate. To help isolate the close-ups, we went extremely long lens and knocked the exposure down with ND filters.

"2 years later" I've always liked the slightly ominous music scoring behind this scene, which augmented the somewhat creepy feel of being watched that we created with the opening dolly move and the longer lens coverage of the guy coming around the car. Even though the couple is smiling and happy, we are setting up "trouble in paradise". I used silks and reflectors on the shot of the mom getting out of the car to countour the light. The shot of them entering the house was the one I referred to in an earlier post where we tented the area outside the door to keep the exposure similar to the interior. Video has such a limited exposure range, if I had shot without the tent it would have been completely blown out outside (or virtually black inside, either one). A couple of 12x12 double nets hang over the doors seen in the background to control that exposure. HMI's provide fill light. The Steadicam shot of the mom checking out the photo on the mantle was made as the light was dying and we were scrambling to knock down exposure to maintain the light outside the windows. Another favorite shot follows as the dad comes home from work. A double net hangs outside the door, cutting down the background light, with several HMI's pumping up the interior. The hot vertical strip of light on the background was an open door to the exterior around the corner, held at just the right angle.

Balcony scene--late afternoon sun, nice warm saturated colors. We shot the master and his coverage first while the sun was still above the horizon, then turned around for her closeups after it had dropped but was still providing skylight. I think we used a silk for his closeups to smooth out the direct sun a little bit. We shot handheld for the energy of the scene and also to be able to keep the actors from blocking each other. It was a race to the finish line because of the setting sun.

(next)

Baby's birthday: Our first shot inside the house, and in retrospect I wish I had made it a little more contrasty. A 2500 HMI par bounced into beadboard from the right side of the room provides most of the illumination, but should have been topped so that the level would fade higher up the walls. I was pretty happy with the Steadicam shot that opens the scene though.

Kitchen at night: A single large tungsten unit blasts through the windows, with some other units in the living room down the hall. When he turns the lights on, it's just the existing overhead lighting in the kitchen working (although I recall turning off certain of the globes to provide modelling to the scene). Convenient.

Hospital: When we scouted the location, I was struck by the round porthole-type window and came up with the single-shot concept which the director took to. It really would have required a jib arm on track to execute properly because of the short distance between the window and a desk behind it, but we ended up having to go Steadicam with a zoom snuck in (I think we had a Varizoom on the white 16x lens). This was the same day we had another Steadicam operator, so he performed what is a truly difficult Steadicam move, and did a great job. We backlit the fish tank and also worked a fresnel unit that bounced off the surface of the water and created the ripple effect on Mom's body. Because of the somber moment I kept the mood down as much as possible, including on the doctor as she walks up (using solids for negative fill, and a Kino downlight at the door).

Carport: We didn't plan the dissolve transition from the previous window at the hospital to the opening shot of the archway, but the director came up with it on the spot and I thought it worked great. It was a nice overcast day, perfect for the story (and unusual in LA!). The dialogue in the car required a substantial amount of lighting through the windshield and netting the individual actors to balance.

Graveyard: Here's why we had the Arrihead (this was same day as the park scenes, thankfully it got overcast when we moved to the cemetary). A friend was shooting a spec commercial and wanted to use my Hot Gears, which work with a geared head to make it a full blown remote head such as one would use on a crane (here's Hot Gears). We arranged to use his crane and gearhead with my Hot Gears during the day which netted us this crane move as well as the last shot in the movie, and then he got to use our stuff at night. Perfect situation! Ultimately it cost us nothing to get these high-production value shots. We did lose the light and had to come back another day to get the close-ups, in the pouring rain. I think the director had to paint out some raindrops in post. I really love the light quality on those close-ups though.

Argument over mom leaving in living room: not much to say about this except I like the blocking. And for some reason we had to re-shoot the close up of Mom just before she heads down the stairs, so that was a different day. It matches pretty nicely I think. In looking at the closeups, I remember that I always had to give the dad an eye-light because his eye sockets were pretty deep and he would look too sinister otherwise. Mom had a great face and took all kinds of light well, although I preferred to give her soft light which seemed to work best with her character. I love her extreme close up when she says "I know".

Argument continues at carport: We were lucky enough to get the master opening shot done in overcast light. When it turns into coverage as she gets in the car, I had to do a lot of silking and filling and adding light to balance out the sunlight on the trees etc. For the shot on the hood of the car, we mounted the camera on a sandbag and tied it down securely. I'm still amazed we got it considering how just a little variation in her driving angle would have blocked the dad in the background.

Dad returns to the office: the low angle of the feet (we referenced "The Right Stuff" for that shot) was low mode Steadicam, the same day as the other lab scenes.

(next)

Dad returns to baby's room: Shot at night with a 5K tungsten unit and some theatrical blue, with plenty of gobos breaking up the light; I recall using 1" paper tape all over the windows to create the patterns)

Dad at the cemetary: It was tough creating the fill on the shots that look up at him with the trees behind. Too much and it starts to look lit, but it required quite a bit to manage the overcast sky. I think the high-contrast background is pretty interesting in that the trees went jet-black. Sometimes you can get things on DV that would photograph differently with other mediums, and it can be striking. The insert of the trowel in the grass is obviously long lens and shallow focus, one of the few in the film. It's almost distracting to me for this reason. I fought hard to shoot all the coverage that we ended up with, which meant two sizes on the dad and two sizes of his point of view (over the shoulder and clean), because I knew that the director would need it all to be able to compress the action and not have to keep cutting back to the same shot, which was the case. The final crane shot (using the setup described earlier) was technically tricky, because it required the track to be laid perpendicular to the arm, and as the base was dollied left to right the arm was swung in such a way that the camera appeared to be pulling straight back. Any variation in speed between the various folks operating the base and the arm meant that the camera would wander from side to side during the pullback. Not to mention that it is a challenge to operate such a shot, in that one is constantly backpanning (dialing the pan just to keep the camera pointed in the desired direction). Once the dolly had finished moving, we then swung the arm fully from left to right along a 180 degree arc while booming up, which gave us that massive travel as dad walks away. The funny part was seeing the XL1 sitting at the end of this 23 foot arm, on top of a remote head many times larger than the camera! Since we were fighting the light as usual and dealing with the logistics, I never noticed the car parked behind the taxi that keeps poking into the frame at the end. It's always frustrated me, because you really want to feel the isolation at that point and have the guy and the taxi be the only signs of life in the whole cemetary. It may not look like a big deal on the little web screen but when projected, it's definitely there...

Anyway, there's some thoughts on First Born. I'd be happy to elaborate on any of it, if you guys are still awake...!

Wow, I feel like I just got a $1,000 workshop for free! This is excellent stuff, Charles. I, for one, am extremely grateful for this information, as the quality of your footage is excellent. I would love to see it on my TV or projected on a big screen. How did that fare? The lighting and the cinematography are so film-like, I bet most viewers would be fooled.

This really proves the point that just because it's 'DV' doesn't mean you can skip out on the production values that would make 'film' look good. And DV itself has some qualities that can be used to your benefit, not just used to imitate film (something I've heard Richard Linklater say as well). The end result speaks for itself...

Thank you!

Thank you, Imran.

I think it looks best on a great broadcast monitor, but that screening at Sony was pretty breathtaking. I'm sure some major line scaling was in effect, but it managed to hold up extremely well on a 30 foot screen without looking too soft (I have since seen it on lesser projectors at festivals and it didn't fare as well). The frame mode does cause that 25% loss of resolution which becomes an issue with a large image size, but I think it looks great on a 14" broadcast monitor.

Which reminds me that I forgot to mention that I did not use any diffusion, feeling that the frame mode softened the image as much as I wanted. I also was interested in experimenting with not going to the standard black promist to flare/soften the highlights, wanting to see if I could reign in the dark forces of over-exposure. I know I used ND's and a polarizer, and I think I looked at using Ultra-cons for one of the exteriors that I couldn't control as well as I would have liked, but then the sun went in and all was well.

Charles,

Great info...thanks for that!

Two things...first, for some reason, I'm unable to view "First Born" at iFilm. Never had a problem with any other films at that site. Do you know of another URL where it can be seen?

Second...I feel like an idiot, Charles, but some of the things you mentioned I'm not too clear on. Can you explain these?

- silking (When to use silking? What is the exposure compensation? How big are the sheets? Where to you buy them?)
- beadboard (basically...what is it?)
- skateboard dolly on track (Aluminum track or flexible track? What kind of dolly?)
- 12x12 double nets (no idea what this is)
- Ultra-cons (ditto)

Hi John.

No idea why you can't view "First Born". As far as I know it is not being shown elsewhere.

Please, my dear Mr. Locke, feel not like an idiot! I have a similar reaction when I look into some of the threads here that deal with the computer end of things--I get lost REAL fast. But that's why we are all here, I guess. I purposefully chose not to minimize or explain my terminology partly so I could just get through that diatribe without burning up too much bandwith, but also so that anyone interested could ask (as you did) for me to clarify, which would probably be more beneficial to all involved.

Silking--silks come as part of the grip package, ready to stretch onto the various size frames (6x6, 12x12, 20x20 and so on). There are different grades and thicknesses, and other materials such as vinylite (which looks like shower curtain) that can be used. They are all intended to diffuse the sun to make it less harsh. They will all cut light to some degree but rather than compensate the exposure, we usually fill in with a different light source to bring the level back up if needed. Generally they are a rental item. Somewhat unsuited for a smaller shoot because of the size of the frame required to get enough coverage and the height that the frames have to work means enough skilled personnel to know how to tie them down and be prepared to move them as the sun shifts. Other grip "rags" that are flown on these frames are singles and doubles (nets that cut the light one half or one stop respectively, which are also used on smaller metal frame flags to work in close), solids for blocking light and grifflon or muslin which reflect light.

Beadboard is a foamcore-type material that has a white, slightly shiny surface (must be some kind of glass bead coating, I've never looked that close!) It's used to bounce light with high efficiency without being as spotty as a silver material.

Our skateboard dolly was a low-end affair, really just a wood board with skate wheels riding on standard aluminimum or possibly steel track. The flexible track (Losmandy) had not yet been introduced. I've been looking into that with interest. We did have a Chapman Peewee with us for one of the days (the crane day) which is much more flexible, having a hydraulic arm. It's the same dolly I spend my days on at "Scrubs" when not running around with the bloody Steadicam!

Ultracons are a very interesting filter that Tiffen makes (check their website). I think they are underrated, but its probably because they are a little tricky to use. Essentially they pull some light from the brightest part of the frame and use it to fill in the darkest, thus compressing the contrast range. Very useful for video. The problem is when you pan from a contrasty frame to a low contrast area, you can see the effect change. Unlike soft cons or low cons, they manage to do their job without causing flare around highlights.

Keep 'em coming folks!

As always, Charles...you're the man. Thanks for the detailed explanations.

Now, of course, I'm frothing at the mouth with "gotta buy toys" syndrome. Why wasn't I born a Vanderbilt?

Thanks for this Charles, I learned a lot from this post.

I have a quick question for you. The final product appears widescreen. Was this done entirely in post? Or did you shoot the film with black bands over the lcd screen as a guide, knowing you were going to crop the image...or did you use the fake widescreen mode?

I'm confused on how that aspect ratio is acheived, I really love the look.

Yes, the widescreen was added as a matte in post. We masked off the color viewfinder (sure wish I had my B&W back then) with scotch tape to create the 1:85 framelines.

The director and I looked at tests beforehand and didn't like the look or inconvenience of working in the 16:9 (1:78) mode, which would have required additional cropping to get down to 1:85 anyway.

Thanks Charles for your extremely generous gift of time, knowledge
and genuine experience to this forum.
I agree with Imran that you have provided what could have been a very
expensive workshop, one worth every penny.

This is the kind of stuff that makes dvinfo.net the best of the best imo.

PS Thanks to Mr. Hurd for hosting it.

Did anyone notice the contant CNN footage from the Kuwait temp studio during the war? There was a large window behind the anchor with a skyline view of the city. They had obviously draped something over the window to cut down the light to balance with the indoor lights.

Problem was, it must've been some sort of net material, so all the footage has a textured background that looks like a painting canvas. To be honest, I didn't care for it much. Considering their budget and the preparation time they had, seems to me they should have just put a sheet of polarized glass shading on the window (like what's put on car windows). That would've prevented the textured look and improved the look overall, I think.

<<<-- Originally posted by Charles Papert : Yes, the widescreen was added as a matte in post. We masked off the color viewfinder (sure wish I had my B&W back then) with scotch tape to create the 1:85 framelines.

The director and I looked at tests beforehand and didn't like the look or inconvenience of working in the 16:9 (1:78) mode, which would have required additional cropping to get down to 1:85 anyway. -->>>

------------------------------------


ok that clears things up. Did you use a specific measurment for the scotch tape bands on the viewfinder, or did you just guesstimate?

thanks again. Your film gives people like me hope that we can achieve a great look with miniDV! You should have been the DP for Soderbergh's Full Frontal.

Brad:

We created a Photoshop matte in the 1:85 ratio, then exported to FCP, ran it out to tape and played the tape in the XL1. Then we matched up the edge of the Scotch tape (which had been highlighted with a black Sharpie) with the edges of the matte.

John:

Usually we would squeegee ND or 85ND gel directly onto the windows, and it is close to optically clear...for a situation where the light changes quite a bit and you have to be able to switch the level of ND back and forth (such as that studio, which would probably have been active at night also?) the best choice would have been hard gels, which are the same thing as regular gel but mounted into lexan panels, which are quick to place and remove. Sounds like CNN took a cheaper/lower end route, which somehow doesn't surprise me all that much.

Thanks again Charles. I have a few more questions I'd like to ask if I may.

1. You shot this in frame mode right? If so, were you pleased with the results instead of regular interlaced? What are the advantages to this method, and are there any disadvantages that you came across?

2. What are the advantages of cropping the 4:3 image in post instead of shooting in 16:9 with an anamorphic adapter? How exactly does First Born look on a widescreen TV, and on a regular TV? On a regular TV, does it have the black horizontal bars on the top and bottom, and on a widescreen, does it just fill the entire screen?

3. What specific lenses did you use for the shoot?

4. I hate to ask, but if you know, could you point me in the right direction on making a 1:85 widescreen matte in photoshop? I just don't know the exact pixel ratio that I would need.

Thanks again for the description you gave. I've learned a lot about lighting for DV in this thread.

Brad,

For questions number 2 (first one) and 4, you'll find a lot of information already available here. Try searching and you'll have tons o' reading material. ;)

Also, for number 4, one of the wranglers here at DVInfo.net, Rob Lohman, has made an online calculator that tells you exactly how to make a letterbox matte in PhotoShop...AND then goes ahead and offers the matte as a free download to boot. You can find it by clicking here.

Thanks John. Yea I've been looking through some of the threads and I couldn't find a definitive answer on the whole widescreen issue, as there appears to be different opinions from a lot of people on this. Thanks for that link! Good stuff there.

Brad:

1) The only disadvantage I found (and still find) with Frame Mode is the loss of resolution, which as I think I mentioned here just meant that I didn't need to use any diffusion. I'm used to shooting 24fps film, so I'm comfortable with the strobing issues that can result from certain panning rates and thus avoiding them. I've actually seen much less problems with this at the 30 fps speed as characterized by Frame Mode.

As John points out, 2) and 4) are covered elsewhere.

3) We used the Canon 14x manual lens, and for one or two shots a wide-angle converter of a brand I can't remember (might have been the Century). It was a rented package. I bought an Xl1 after the shoot.

Hey Charles, thanks for answering.

I just saw your film Hollywood in Valentine. Great work!
What camera did you use for that? I'm curious to hear some info and details about the shoot.

Hi Brad:

Thanks!

That was a DVX-100, my first time with that camera. I liked it quite a bit for that shoot, even discovering that its lightweight construction (normally something of a durability issue) came in handy for the overhead shots, made it much easier to rig.

We used a fog machine to create a little atmosphere and depth in the backgrounds. The lighting package was pretty humble, a couple of Kino's and some small tungsten. We did a few Steadicam shots, notably the one long one in the kitchen.

It was a long, long day, as most are with Instant Films! We got the script at 8 am, started shooting sometime after noon and went till about 5 in the morning. I felt awful for the actor who played the writer (great, wasn't he?) because his big monologues were shot last, around 4 a.m., when he was virtually braindead...!

This being my fifth film with Instant Films, I was very focused on stretching myself a bit and making the most theatrical presentation I could given the time frame. Thus I attempted to give each of the characters a different visual style: the writer is usually seen "boxed in" to a static, usually skewed frame which represents his introverted personality; the actress is always in shot with a moving camera to augment her extroverted personality and the two producers are somwhere in the middle, shot with conventional coverage.

You shot that whole thing the day you were handed the script!? Thats awesome. I like the choices you made regarding composition as well as camera movement. I love that shot in the kitchen where the camera tracks the actress on the phone. What type of steadi or glidecam did you use?

Also interesting is the very first shot, where you see the ashtray in focus, and the main character is at his desk in the background. You managed to pull off a nice shallow DoF look. Was that done in post or were you able to acheive that during the shot, and how?

Did you shoot this in 24p mode?

Also, was this again shot in 4:3 aspect and then cropped in post? Seems like that look really works.

The lighting in that kitchen scene with the woman on the phone was lit very well, aside from the web compression artifacts, it looks like it could be high end DV, or film.

<<You shot that whole thing the day you were handed the script!? >>

Yup, and the script was written the night before...the process is described on the website where you saw the film, www.instantfilms.tv, also there is a documentary on the site that also details how it works.


<<What type of steadi or glidecam did you use? >>
This particular Instant Films was kind of funny in that we had something like 5 Steadicam operators onboard; myself, the DP, the sound guy (who actually operated the shots in the video), the PA and one of the actors (the older producer)! Chris, the operator, uses a PRO rig (same as mine), and we weigh down the camera with a lead weight to get it to approach the weight of a 16mm setup. Lighting-wise, that kitchen scene was virtually natural light, just the overhead fluorescents since we were seeing 360 degrees. A couple of lights in the adjoining rooms were all.

<<Also interesting is the very first shot, where you see the ashtray in focus, and the main character is at his desk in the background. You managed to pull off a nice shallow DoF look.>>

I used the macro setting and placed the ashtray very close to the lens. Macro is one of the very few ways to get a noticeably small DOF in DV.

<<Did you shoot this in 24p mode? was this again shot in 4:3 aspect and then cropped in post? >>

Yes and yes.

The heavy compression is a real bummer. I hope one of these days we will be able to afford the server etc. to deliver better looking video. The short really pops when seen in full resolution.

Sorry I never got to respond to this Charles.
Thanks for all the info, I've learned alot from this thread and from watching your films.

Hi Charles,

Where can the film be seen now? The ifilm link did not seem to work.. would love to see this to gain beter perspective on what you wrote regarding your lighting setup.

Thanks,

Hi Dennis,

I won't even ask how you dug up this relic of a thread...!

Sorry to hear that iFilm has killed the link. I'll ask the director if it is online anywhere else (the iFilm version was pretty rough looking anyway by today's streaming standards)

Try doing a search for "First Born".

This link might work: http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2413801

Great stuff.

Thanks Glenn. I will check it out... I've probably already watched it but forgot which short is was.

Charles I was searching DV info for lighting up master shots and this was one of the threads that popped up.

I'm going to be shooting a feature next month with the XL2/mini35 and I will likely be involved in lighting some of the scenes. I'm particularly interested in knowing the best way to light a wide (aka master) shot using lighting that will match the close ups.

One scene for example will be interior night bar/lounge scene where two main characters are introduced and meet each other for the first time. The male is sitting at a table while the female is at the bar. They are about 15 feet apart, male in the foreground and female in the background. Eventually the female joins the male at the table.

The location is narrow (12 feet wide) and as long as about 70 feet. For the establishing shot we will be shooting down the length of the area. I've thought of picking out the actors with fresnel ARRI's since open face will likely spill and not work as well from far distances. There might also be the possibility of overhead lighting the male in the foreground. But where I'm stumped is the female in the background - who then makes her way from (correction made 10/14/05) the bar. Overhead lighting is not possible, and underneath lighting would be captured in the scene.

Any ideas?





Dennis

Dennis:

This is tricky to advise on without pix of the bar itself. Can you hide a backlight deeper in the set that will create a hot rim on the actress (try colored light for this)? Or a side light from behind the bar that can be rigged in the barback somwhere and thus not be photographed in the wide shot? If you have the DVD of "Swingers", check out the scene shot at the Dresden room (where the guys prompt Favreau to go after a girl at the bar like the "R-rated guy", and he ends up getting her number). A sidelight (looks like a Kino) picks out the two at the bar nicely, although a little bit hot for my taste; there was very little supplemental lighting being used in this scene.

Speaking of which, Kinos are a great tool for lighting bars--you can put them under the bar itself for sparkle on the glasses, or hide them behind banquettes for texture, or even tape them to the walls with colored gel and photograph them as if they are neon.

As far as matching wide shots to closeups, you can always cheat the lighting between the two as long as they are similar. So if you have to use hard light on the girl in the wide, you can bring in a diffusion frame for the closeup, just amp up the intensity of that light so that the ratios match between the shot (i.e. have a scrim in the light in the wide shot, then pull it for the closeup when you add the diffusion closer to the subject).

Thanks Charles.

Here's a hand drawn pic of what the bar looks like top view. www.starcentral.ca/dvinfo/bar.pdf

For the master shot I'm thinking since she doesn't move in it at all I can shoot a pepper light from behind her for the rim. Her body would block the stand, but still not sure how to give her some key or fill.

As for the male actor at the table.. where would you suggested the "practical" light is coming from? For the master shot I obviously can't place the key light in the scene, but somehow imagined for the close up shots of the actors (and some medium side shots of both) that the key would be between them and the bar, and then I'd use reflectors for fill/bounce on the opposite side.

Dennis,

Thanks for the pic, that helps.

Tons of opportunities here. I would recommend pulling his table a bit camera right to come off that wall, that shouldn't affect your background composition all that much. You can key him with a low crosslight, positioned between his table and the next one upstage, which is good because the woman will not cross in front of it. Depending on the type of bar, if you were able to put a little pratical lamp on each table, this will motivate this type of lighting beautifully. You can add another unit for her seated position also. Alternately you can use a high key from far camera right which the woman will cross underneath, this will give her a little backlight when she sits down.

For her, I'd hide the rim light between the far edge of the bar and the next table; given that the bar is going to have a fair amount of dark areas you can probably just put a solid (black flag) in front of it to keep it hidden, and you'll never notice it in the shot. Or there may be some set piece around or a jacket hung on a peg or something that you can use to block the light from the camera. I like the sidelight idea still, that can be positioned off camera left (remember, we moved his table camera right and this gives you some room for that light) which she can move through on her way to the table. A 4x2 vertical Kino with egg crates would be great for this, but a straight tungsten unit will work also.

The washroom gives you a nice opportunity to place a unit that can rake the camera right side wall, use a good size tungsten unit with color gel to taste. This will also rim whoever is in that aisle area by the bar (just keep people from crossing close to the washroom door).

Are you planning on shooting through the front window at all? Feels like a good possibility to get some nice long lens stuff happening--if there are interesting details to the front of the building or signs in the window, having a few soft bits of that might make a much more interesting frame. It really helps that you will have the Mini35--you are so close to the actors that it would be impossible to get the background to drop off with a straight DV setup. Definitely get your camera jammed back against the glass window for the longest focal length possible otherwise.

Are you planning to shoot coverage of the two seated (i.e. over the shoulders or singles)? If so and you think this is a lot of how the scene will play out, you might want to rethink how you have them placed--you will be shooting into two walls and losing all of the production value of the bar, or perhaps this helps because you don't have to keep all the extras around! If that's not a consideration, think about placing the guy facing camera and the woman would have to come around and sit with her back to the window--this gives much more interesting backgrounds in both directions, assuming that you can shoot out of the window (i.e. you aren't shooting day for night at the location).

Hope this helps!

Thanks for such a detailed response. Changing their seating may actually work better technically, but in the script he looks away from the bar towards the window and when he turns back he's eye level with the lady's navel, (a moment of surprise) then she sits down. The director might feel more comfortable having the male distracted momentarily by the window so I don't know if he'll go for it - but I'll run it by him.

I appreciate all your input to this and understand how hard it is to offer advise when there are so many variables and situations you haven't been made aware of. Having said that you've given me some great ideas, some starting points and things to consider. I really do appreciate it.

We're scheduled to start shooting next month, the principle cast will be finalized this weekend. This is my first feature length film with the mini35 and I'm quite looking forward to it.