I have to admit, when I heard "here's a tip that no one is talking about.." I was immediately sceptical. But a few minutes later I'm pleasantly surprised😎 What a great tip! And like all great advice, it's so damn obvious once it's pointed out😂Great stuff, thanks for sharing!
It makes perfect sense because of the inverse square law. If we're motivating our light to make it feel realistic, then the light we're using to expose with needs to appear to obey the same laws. I honestly never thought about it that way before, but it makes sense. Great video!!
while the gyllenhaal shot is "realistically" lit, i think it's more effective because it creates contrast, composition, and structure around the lighting on the face by using checkerboard lighting. it's narrative implications are also a big part of it.
Thanks man! I appreciate it! 🙏🏼 I don't know if I'll do a video about it, because everyone's budget is different, it's complicated to give general advice. But I'll keep this comment in mind 😊
Wow! I know other people are saying the same thing, but this is definitely extremely valuable information to keep in mind. I haven't heard this from anyone else so it's nice to have someone to break it down! Definitely earned a subscriber!
Really great. 99% of videos on UA-cam that profess to share a “little trick that nobody is talking about” don’t pay off. This one paid off big time. Real useful info that will change the way you think about lighting, thanks!
thanks for not describing everything as "cinematic", you describe things better by saying "realistic", "motivated", and lighting based on mood / in function to the story. Well done
Great video! As others have said. I was skeptical when the title mentioned a trick no one talks about. And to be fair there are videos that have touched on similar lighting techniques but never in a way you explained here. This is great advice for anyone wanting master lighting!
I just came across this video and wow this is brilliant. Denny you explained this very well. Love when I have picked up something new. I have subscribed! Looking forward to more. Thanks!
1% better = to 100% better! The magnificent episode is very well spoken and described and case proved. Well done! What are you working on these days? Any exciting feature film projects?
Awesome advice! It’s always in the details and that 1% improvement that makes the difference between ‘get it done’ and ‘get it done the best it can be.’ thanks for sharing this Danny , waiting for Ep02❤
Thank you so much for this video. I recently started on my journey and this video clarified a lot of things for me. One of the most confusing things I learned on UA-cam was exposure for skin tones should always sit at a certain IRE range and you should be exposing +2 stops above the "normal exposure". I've come to realize that good exposure should be what fits the story and mood... and really it's okay if things fall to black if it makes sense in the scene. Thanks for sharing
Amazing video. I think it's interesting what happens at 10:19 in the video with the skin tone exposure and the narrative effect, at the left, applying the trick You mentioned, i think the important one is the interrogated person, but at the right image, more lit, i think the important is the interrogator and we almost forget about everyone else within the frame. So i think we can play with all this tiny differences you mentioned for story purpose. You video sparks new thoughts, thank you. EDIT: I wrote that when i paused the video, then you said exactly the same haha.
I’m definitely a new subscriber, thanks for your help and practical explanation, you have a bright future! (But not brighter than the light source hehe)
Franchement merci , j'ai vraiment appris quelques chose , et c'est vrai quand tu dis que personne d'autres n'en as parlé ! Bref je me suis abonnée, continue ton super travail , et super chapeau btw 😎🙌
Very good video, mate. Even more so with English not being your first language. Great stuff, well explained and insightful (and still coherent and clear at x1.5 speed!)😎💯👍🏽
Thank you for sharing. Especially the examples from Fincher movies are very interesting. It´s called "short side" or "far side" key light, which creates the so called Rembrandt-triangle on the cheek closer to camera. This style of lighting was practically introduced by Rembrandt in his paintings. It is one of the best and most expedient ways to create the illusion of depth and three dimensionality in pictures. - Using neg fill is in many cases already enough to create the effect.
Actually It happens more and more to see front lighting in movies, I'm always wondering why, as it doesn't look as good as far side key. But on the other and you can quickly get stuck by only lighting in one way. So I need to experiment a little bit more before doing an episode on it. How do you feel about short side lighting?
@@DennySaladino most cameramen i know have never heard of the framework or far side key. i met on recently who is also into it. it really felt like a secret brotherhood. there is rarely an occasion where front lighting is really useful. it is just lazy lighting cause it is easier to place the fixtures just next to the camera, i guess. and many cameramen are afraid of shadows.
I have an book called "Set Lighting Technician's Handbook" from the 80's which I just began, and inside they talk about far and near side key, it's not a new thing. (People I work with usually have no clue about it neither 😬) On the other side the term "framework" is only from wandering dp isn't it?
ahaha nice comment! Thank you! You don't always need equipment, you can always rent it. That's what cinematographers do anyway, they don't own anything most of the time. (But it's easier to have some if you want to practice tho)
I actually stoped what I was doing and took the time to open my apple notes and wrote a note on this. Amazing video!, and loved that you did the test. Hope your channel grows fast! Channels like yours inspires me to start my channel too. PS. How do you record and draw on the stills while showing the false color?
Thank you very much, this is a really nice comment! 🙏🏼😊 For false color I have an plugin in Davinci Resolve. For the drawing my workflow is terrible, I take screenshots into photoshop, but I need to find a better solution, maybe I'll try it directly on resolve next time
@@DennySaladino I know the “Wandering DP” uses resolve. I saw this video a few days ago, and I’m considering doing something similar with the iPad ua-cam.com/video/kovGit0HIxE/v-deo.htmlsi=dtYjLTLZ9LzvWpRp
I personally love motivated light but also I always think back to that story from Lord of the Rings when someone asked the DP where the light was coming from and he said “the same place the music does”. I think the masters can supersede a lot of the common tricks and rules we fall into, including motivated light!
Ahah great answer ! 😁 Of course, as you said rules are made to be broken once you master them. And also I guess that when you're doing a sci-fi movie, you dont really look for realistic. It always depends, as I said you must do what's best for the story.
This was SUCH a great video - it made me think. The movies that you’re referencing have colour grading - and we’re viewing false colour with the final grade. I wonder what the LOG false colour looks like from these movies VS the final grade and if the theory still holds true
Thank you very much! Great thinking! I would guess the theory still holds true because color graded or not, the lighting ratios stays the same as it was set by the cinematographer. But it would for sure be great to apply false color to the original footage to see how close the final image is to what was captured on set.
@ totally - the ratios would remain the same you’re right. I’m always interested in how much the grade pushes the exposure of the images down. Sometimes I exposure for skin, sometimes I expose for the brightest part etc.
I used to expose to the right to have a "cleaner image", but since an episode on the deakins podcast I changed it. He said to be the closest to the final image you want to achieve, even if it's dark, it's dark, your image won't be noisy unless you try to bring more exposure in post, it totally makes sense I think.
so keep face highlight green instead of pink/light gray in false colors. For these type shots do you recommend a spotlight lens that is around 19 degrees or 36 degrees for bounce? Subscribed!
I think it depends, in the "sicario" exemple the face is not even in the green. So it really depends on the mood you're trying to get. For the spotlight question, 36° is a wider angle beam and result on a bigger part of your bounce material touched by the light. With a 19° you would have to back up the light quite far, if you have a tiny room it will give you a hard time. Also the 19° gives you way more power, as it focuses your light in a little area. So they both have pros and cons.
Subscribed! A question, how do you think this relates to interviews? As a beginner it is a bit confusing, because I also sometime hear people say that for interviews the face should be among the brightest parts of the image to lead the viewers eyes...
Thank you! Great question! First of all, everything shouldn't follow this technique, only if what you want is realism. I'd like to answer with another question, in the example with Jake Gyllenhaal did the window took your attention? Or even in the set up of myself with the practical behind? If I was talking you wouldn't look the lamp instead of my face, would you? 😁 In my opinion the problem would occur if there was a huge difference of exposure between the subject and the practical. In this case yes it could be quite distracting. Also there other things that can lead you eye to the actor (framing, leading lines, depth of field, lens choise,...)
at 5:56 and 8:02 could you please make a video about how to "read" what the camera "sees" . (fausse couleur?) I have another "suggestion". Can we say that you have very decent gear? Now, how about a similar explanation but with basic gear - lights, low end DSRL - Ce serait un bon défi pour ton esprit curieux.- A bientot
Meaningful lighting doesn't need to always be motivated by realistic sources. And even in naturalistic styles, cinematographers will routinely change the entire direction of lighting between reverse shots of a dialogue scene to better serve continuity of the mood of whats in frame, rather than appease one person focused on analyzing the accuracy of physics of a location when most of the audience will be taking in the story. Of course it has to be done carefully to not stand out as FEELING wrong. Your video does teach important points about the initial skillset of replicating realistic light! Although if you honestly think this is a topic not taught in film schools or other online videos... you'll be pleasantly surprised if you go to any film school or look up any online cinematography courses.
I agree with everything you said here! And thank you for the constructive comment! Actually I've planned to do an episode about how cinematographers change the lighting to maintain continuity. But usually, even if the lighting changes, you still got a sense of what motivates the light in the wide shot, which bring meaning to the rest. I could be wrong but that's what I notice most of the time. And I'm also talking about my experience, because I went to a film school in brussels, and all I knew was that I had to expose a light caucasian skin at 1 stop over middle gray 😅
@@DennySaladino Haha I see. Yeah thanks for taking my feedback well :) I am inclined to always point out exceptions to rules. Looking forward to your future videos!
this is wonderful! i love the concept of motivated light. and that example from Sicario at about 8:30... if her face was brighter "it would have looked like crap".. that is personally how i've always felt about outdoor flash photography in low ambient light, where the natural ambient light and the light on the model's face look completely different and disconnected. to me it really looks like poo.
I don't think image doesn't look lit because the subject is brighter than the light that's being used as the motivation, I think it's because there isn't any ambient/room tone. I would love to see the same test again but with a 3rd option adding a lot more room tone.
My room tone was provided by the light coming from the windows (in a controlled way as I closed some blinds), Without any room tone it would have been less natural actually. In the test where I bring the window's exposure down it's kind of what's happening, the ambiant is lowered aswell at the same time which increase the sensation of being lit. Btw thanks for the inspiration and the comment, an episode about room tone could be great!
@@DennySaladino Sorry for not explaining well. I understand that the light from the window creates the roomtone, but how about increasing that room tone by adding another light and bounce it of the ceiling? Sure it will change your contrast levels a lot but it will make the current keylight feel a lot let sourcey.
Love the content but can’t really understand what u are saying ( my bad ) what if I want to keep my iso at 100 but had a light source which looks natural ???
Is it because of my english or the way I explained it? Because I still don't know if I have to write subtitles on the next videos. Your iso doesn't have nothing to do with natural lighting, I was simply lowering the exposure of my iso to lower the exposure of my window.
Hey ! Your video was great , not talking about the English or the subtitles , everything was perfect . Loved the vid . My confusion was what if u just wanted to shoot the video at 100 iso . So should I be lowering my key light to the windows light quantity!
Great! thanks for the feedback! Yes if I got the question right, you should as you said lowering you key light, in order for it to be less powerful than the exposure of the window. What I did wrong tho is to show the entire window, and even the sky. In the one from prisoner you can't really see the window actually, which makes it easier to expose.
YES LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE ON THE BACK. Jesus I am tired of everyone telling me "BuT it iS nOt eXpOSeD coRrEcTLy" BROTHER IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE DARK MY MAN
@@DennySaladino Because in the 80s and 90s they alse did motivated lights but it was usually not natural. Very strong separation from the background, bright hair line, rich colors. And it was very cinematic and beautiful.
It's a youtube feature which allow you to upload 2 or 3 thumbnails that are constantly alternating for a few days, and based on the results, the more attractive one is chosen
I have to admit, when I heard "here's a tip that no one is talking about.." I was immediately sceptical. But a few minutes later I'm pleasantly surprised😎 What a great tip! And like all great advice, it's so damn obvious once it's pointed out😂Great stuff, thanks for sharing!
It is! right? ahah Thank you for your nice comment! 😁🙏🏼
I’ll second that! When you started talking about motivated lighting, I ALMOST clicked off… glad I stuck it out, you’re totally right!
I'll try to better introduce the subject next time, thank you for the feedback! 😊
It makes perfect sense because of the inverse square law. If we're motivating our light to make it feel realistic, then the light we're using to expose with needs to appear to obey the same laws. I honestly never thought about it that way before, but it makes sense. Great video!!
Thank you!🙏🏼 Yes exactly!
while the gyllenhaal shot is "realistically" lit, i think it's more effective because it creates contrast, composition, and structure around the lighting on the face by using checkerboard lighting. it's narrative implications are also a big part of it.
Of course, it's never one thing only, it's always a combination of a lot of things that makes a final image.
Really Good Video Bro. Please make video on best budget lights anyone can buy who is starting out, if you can. Thanks
Thanks man! I appreciate it! 🙏🏼
I don't know if I'll do a video about it, because everyone's budget is different, it's complicated to give general advice.
But I'll keep this comment in mind 😊
excellent work
Thank you very much! 😊
people always call me out for doing this as if it's wrong, thank you for confirming im not crazy
either you're not, or everyone in the comment section (including myself) are crazy 😁
thanks for this 1% i will try to aplly it
Glad to know! Thank you! 🙏🏼😁
nice one! subbed, keep those coming :)
Thanks man! 🙏🏼😊
Wow! I know other people are saying the same thing, but this is definitely extremely valuable information to keep in mind. I haven't heard this from anyone else so it's nice to have someone to break it down! Definitely earned a subscriber!
Thank you! It means a lot! 😊🙏🏼
Really great. 99% of videos on UA-cam that profess to share a “little trick that nobody is talking about” don’t pay off. This one paid off big time. Real useful info that will change the way you think about lighting, thanks!
Ahah thank you very much! I appreciate it!
Accuracy is crazy so good
thank you very much! 😊🙏🏼
The importance of light metering and false colour. Great video dude thanks for sharing.
Thank you very much! 🙏🏼😊
This is probably one of the best explanations of realism and realistic lighting. New subscriber and can’t wait to hear what you have next.
Thank you very much! I appreciate it! 🙏🏼😊
Well shown. And you're right - I haven't seen a discussion on this specific topic before!
Thanks! I hope to find some other topics like this now 😅
thanks for not describing everything as "cinematic", you describe things better by saying "realistic", "motivated", and lighting based on mood / in function to the story. Well done
Thank you! 😁🙏🏼
So well explained and illustrated.
Thank you very much! 🙏🏻☺️
Great video!
Thank you! 🙏🏼
Great video! As others have said. I was skeptical when the title mentioned a trick no one talks about. And to be fair there are videos that have touched on similar lighting techniques but never in a way you explained here. This is great advice for anyone wanting master lighting!
I love to read this kind of comment! thank you very much 🙏🏼
I just came across this video and wow this is brilliant. Denny you explained this very well. Love when I have picked up something new. I have subscribed! Looking forward to more. Thanks!
Thank you very much for the compliments, it means a lot ☺️🙏🏻
I'm constantly just looking for ways to stack 1% more to everything I do, that's how you ultimately get better overall. Great video! Subscribed.
Thank you very much! Let's stack 1% ✊🏼
Love the insights, Denny! Great examples and explanations 👌
Thank you very much! I appreciate it! 😊🙏🏼
Amazing video, thank you so much. I was always told in film school to keep practicals dim and I think now I will do the opossite 😂
😂😂 this was funny! Thank you! 🙏🏻
1% better = to 100% better! The magnificent episode is very well spoken and described and case proved. Well done! What are you working on these days? Any exciting feature film projects?
Thank you very much for the kind words, it means a lot! 😊 Actually I've never worked on a feature film, only short ones for now. Do you?
This was so incredibly helpful! Thank you 🙏🏽
Thank you! It means a lot! 🙏🏼
Awesome advice! It’s always in the details and that 1% improvement that makes the difference between ‘get it done’ and ‘get it done the best it can be.’ thanks for sharing this Danny , waiting for Ep02❤
Exactly! Thank you! 😁🙏🏼
Thank you so much for this video. I recently started on my journey and this video clarified a lot of things for me. One of the most confusing things I learned on UA-cam was exposure for skin tones should always sit at a certain IRE range and you should be exposing +2 stops above the "normal exposure". I've come to realize that good exposure should be what fits the story and mood... and really it's okay if things fall to black if it makes sense in the scene. Thanks for sharing
I came from this exact same path 😅
This is the most valuable tip so far I got , from tones of videos I watched instant sub🎉🎉🎉
Really? wow thank you for telling me this!! 😁🙏🏼
Amazing video. I think it's interesting what happens at 10:19 in the video with the skin tone exposure and the narrative effect, at the left, applying the trick You mentioned, i think the important one is the interrogated person, but at the right image, more lit, i think the important is the interrogator and we almost forget about everyone else within the frame. So i think we can play with all this tiny differences you mentioned for story purpose. You video sparks new thoughts, thank you. EDIT: I wrote that when i paused the video, then you said exactly the same haha.
Ahah! I love it! Thank you!! 😁🙏🏼
Here before this channel reach 100k subs ❤🎉
Thank you very much, this made me smile 😊🙏🏼
Fantastic video! I appreciate you taking the time to make this. It’s very helpful to me.
Thank you very much! I appreciate you taking the time to comment, it's also very helpful to me 😁
I’m definitely a new subscriber, thanks for your help and practical explanation, you have a bright future! (But not brighter than the light source hehe)
😂😂 I loved it! Thank you very much!
Deni I really enjoyed your little indie film in the desert called "Dune"
Oh yeah? thank you! It was something quick in my backyard, playing with worms and stuff.
Wow makes sense
😁🙏🏻
Denny this video is a master class in motivated light! Keep up the good work, Much love from Tennessee
Thanks you su much! It means a lot! 🙏🏼
Subscribed, so chill and smart. Never considered this before. Love Deakins references.
Thank you for the compliments! 🙏🏼
Franchement merci , j'ai vraiment appris quelques chose , et c'est vrai quand tu dis que personne d'autres n'en as parlé ! Bref je me suis abonnée, continue ton super travail , et super chapeau btw 😎🙌
Mon accent m'as trahi? ahah
Merci beaucoup pour ton commentaire! Et mon chapeau te remercie aussi! 😁
Thank you for this video. It was indeed very helpful
Glad to read it! Thanks you! 🙏🏻☺️
thank you for the 1% well doe!!!
Thank you very much ☺️🙏🏻
This was perfect!!
Thank you very much for this comment! 😁🙏🏼
seems so simple, but very helpful...subbed
Thank you! 😊🙏🏼
Very good video, mate. Even more so with English not being your first language. Great stuff, well explained and insightful (and still coherent and clear at x1.5 speed!)😎💯👍🏽
Thank you very much for the feedback about my english, I wasn't sure if I had to put on subtitles, so thank you for your great comment! 😊🙏🏼
Really a good observation.
Thanks! 🙏🏼
Cool, learned a few things, thank you!
It's what I wanted, thank you! 😁
Great lesson. Please Do more lighting tutorials
Thank you! I will 😊🙏🏼
Love the video and love the personality! Just subscribed. Brilliant work. ✌️
Thank you very much! It means a lot 😊🙏🏼
great insights!
Thanks! 🙏🏼😊
Great information, thank you!
Thank you very much! 🙏🏼
Thank you for sharing. Especially the examples from Fincher movies are very interesting. It´s called "short side" or "far side" key light, which creates the so called Rembrandt-triangle on the cheek closer to camera. This style of lighting was practically introduced by Rembrandt in his paintings. It is one of the best and most expedient ways to create the illusion of depth and three dimensionality in pictures. - Using neg fill is in many cases already enough to create the effect.
Exactly! I've planned to do an episode on this aswell, even if there's already a lot of videos on the subject.
@@DennySaladino do it anyway. For my part, I am always interested how other film guys deal with this.
Actually It happens more and more to see front lighting in movies, I'm always wondering why, as it doesn't look as good as far side key. But on the other and you can quickly get stuck by only lighting in one way.
So I need to experiment a little bit more before doing an episode on it.
How do you feel about short side lighting?
@@DennySaladino most cameramen i know have never heard of the framework or far side key. i met on recently who is also into it. it really felt like a secret brotherhood. there is rarely an occasion where front lighting is really useful. it is just lazy lighting cause it is easier to place the fixtures just next to the camera, i guess. and many cameramen are afraid of shadows.
I have an book called "Set Lighting Technician's Handbook" from the 80's which I just began, and inside they talk about far and near side key, it's not a new thing. (People I work with usually have no clue about it neither 😬)
On the other side the term "framework" is only from wandering dp isn't it?
Game changing stuff. THANK YOU!
Thank you very much Natalie ! 😊🙏🏼
Subscribed! Even though I don’t have any lighting equipment yet lol
ahaha nice comment! Thank you! You don't always need equipment, you can always rent it. That's what cinematographers do anyway, they don't own anything most of the time. (But it's easier to have some if you want to practice tho)
Nice video Thank you 🙏
Thank you very much! 😊
Great video!! Thank you so much for sharing this
Thank you for commenting this 😁
This is a fantastic video!!
Thank very much! 😊🙏🏼
Great video mate, really great information - love your vibe.
Thank you very much man! It Means a lot🙏🏼
just from watching 1 minute and 40 seconds i subscibed, because A, image quality is great and i am a 1 percenter.
So cool! Thank you! 😁
🌍 Strong... really educational !!!
🥰
Beautiful video, thank you!
Thank you very much! 😊🙏🏼
Wow!!! fantastic🎉
Thank you very much! 🙏🏼
This is great!
Thanks!!
What an awesome video man. So many great tips!
Thank you very much! 😊🙏🏼
Awesome !
Thank you! ☺️
Simply exceptional information. Thank you so much.
Thank you very much! it Means a lot! 🙏🏼
Nice bro 👍 good job make more videos new subscriber ❤
Thank you very much! I will! 😊🙏🏼
Great piece of content 🙌🏼
Thanks a lot! 🙏🏼
I actually stoped what I was doing and took the time to open my apple notes and wrote a note on this. Amazing video!, and loved that you did the test. Hope your channel grows fast! Channels like yours inspires me to start my channel too.
PS.
How do you record and draw on the stills while showing the false color?
Thank you very much, this is a really nice comment! 🙏🏼😊
For false color I have an plugin in Davinci Resolve.
For the drawing my workflow is terrible, I take screenshots into photoshop, but I need to find a better solution, maybe I'll try it directly on resolve next time
@@DennySaladino I know the “Wandering DP” uses resolve. I saw this video a few days ago, and I’m considering doing something similar with the iPad ua-cam.com/video/kovGit0HIxE/v-deo.htmlsi=dtYjLTLZ9LzvWpRp
Great technique! But maybe complicated to draw without really seeing the picture and where you draw?
Love this channel 🚀
Thank you! 😊
Very informative 👏 👌
Thank you for the feedback! 😊🙏🏼
Great content! Really helpful 🔥Subscribed!
Thank you very much! 🙏🏼😊
I personally love motivated light but also I always think back to that story from Lord of the Rings when someone asked the DP where the light was coming from and he said “the same place the music does”. I think the masters can supersede a lot of the common tricks and rules we fall into, including motivated light!
Ahah great answer ! 😁 Of course, as you said rules are made to be broken once you master them.
And also I guess that when you're doing a sci-fi movie, you dont really look for realistic.
It always depends, as I said you must do what's best for the story.
@ Totally agree! Great video
Thank you! 🙏🏼😊
Very good observations, something to keep in mind for sure. Your shot at 3:01 is fantastic.
Thank you very much! 🙏🏻☺️
This is a dope video, please come out with more!
Thank you!! I will 😊
This was SUCH a great video - it made me think. The movies that you’re referencing have colour grading - and we’re viewing false colour with the final grade. I wonder what the LOG false colour looks like from these movies VS the final grade and if the theory still holds true
Thank you very much! Great thinking! I would guess the theory still holds true because color graded or not, the lighting ratios stays the same as it was set by the cinematographer.
But it would for sure be great to apply false color to the original footage to see how close the final image is to what was captured on set.
@ totally - the ratios would remain the same you’re right. I’m always interested in how much the grade pushes the exposure of the images down. Sometimes I exposure for skin, sometimes I expose for the brightest part etc.
I used to expose to the right to have a "cleaner image", but since an episode on the deakins podcast I changed it.
He said to be the closest to the final image you want to achieve, even if it's dark, it's dark, your image won't be noisy unless you try to bring more exposure in post, it totally makes sense I think.
Great video! Great work!
Thank you very much man! 🙏🏼
Love the breakdown, thanks!
Thank you very much! 😊🙏🏼
Banger video 💪
Thank you! 🙏🏻
Bro I learned more in this video about lighting than I have in like idk four years of studying film XD
Really? ahaha thank you for saying that ! 😁
Tres bon ça, subscribed.
Merci beaucoup ! 😁🙏🏼
"Seeee yooooohhhh in the next one." Is this some sort of verbal freemasonic handshake amongst the initiated of the framework secret society?
I love this comment so much! 😂 It is!!
so keep face highlight green instead of pink/light gray in false colors. For these type shots do you recommend a spotlight lens that is around 19 degrees or 36 degrees for bounce? Subscribed!
I think it depends, in the "sicario" exemple the face is not even in the green. So it really depends on the mood you're trying to get.
For the spotlight question, 36° is a wider angle beam and result on a bigger part of your bounce material touched by the light. With a 19° you would have to back up the light quite far, if you have a tiny room it will give you a hard time. Also the 19° gives you way more power, as it focuses your light in a little area. So they both have pros and cons.
GOOD CONTENT u got my sub
Thank you man! 😊🙏🏼
Great content. Subbed for more.
Thank you! 🙏🏻☺️
keep up the great work!
Thanks a lot! ☺️🙏🏻
Very good!
Thank you! 😊🙏🏼
Subscribed! A question, how do you think this relates to interviews? As a beginner it is a bit confusing, because I also sometime hear people say that for interviews the face should be among the brightest parts of the image to lead the viewers eyes...
Thank you! Great question!
First of all, everything shouldn't follow this technique, only if what you want is realism.
I'd like to answer with another question, in the example with Jake Gyllenhaal did the window took your attention? Or even in the set up of myself with the practical behind? If I was talking you wouldn't look the lamp instead of my face, would you? 😁
In my opinion the problem would occur if there was a huge difference of exposure between the subject and the practical. In this case yes it could be quite distracting.
Also there other things that can lead you eye to the actor (framing, leading lines, depth of field, lens choise,...)
@DennySaladino thanks, makes sense!
Great video! Loved the light on your shot on 3:01. what was the light setup? :)
Thanks man! ☺️🙏🏻 I bounced my key light into a wide fabric and I had a negative fill on the other side close to camera.
@ Like the cove light? With different stops?
Like a cove light but with just one light, i didn't want to work that hard for just an example 🫣😂
@@DennySaladino did you „shape“ the unbleached? Like a „C“
Yes! Are you using cove light often?
Great Great Tip 👌 Subbed
Thank you! 😁
👏🏻 Keep those videos coming
I will! Thanks! ✊🏼
great quality.
Thank you ☺️🙏🏻
Great video! Sucked me in from the beginning!
Thank you! Really nice to read that! 😍🙏🏼
at 5:56 and 8:02 could you please make a video about how to "read" what the camera "sees" . (fausse couleur?) I have another "suggestion". Can we say that you have very decent gear? Now, how about a similar explanation but with basic gear - lights, low end DSRL - Ce serait un bon défi pour ton esprit curieux.- A bientot
Challenge accepted! 😁🙏🏼
Meaningful lighting doesn't need to always be motivated by realistic sources.
And even in naturalistic styles, cinematographers will routinely change the entire direction of lighting between reverse shots of a dialogue scene to better serve continuity of the mood of whats in frame, rather than appease one person focused on analyzing the accuracy of physics of a location when most of the audience will be taking in the story.
Of course it has to be done carefully to not stand out as FEELING wrong.
Your video does teach important points about the initial skillset of replicating realistic light!
Although if you honestly think this is a topic not taught in film schools or other online videos... you'll be pleasantly surprised if you go to any film school or look up any online cinematography courses.
I agree with everything you said here! And thank you for the constructive comment!
Actually I've planned to do an episode about how cinematographers change the lighting to maintain continuity.
But usually, even if the lighting changes, you still got a sense of what motivates the light in the wide shot, which bring meaning to the rest. I could be wrong but that's what I notice most of the time.
And I'm also talking about my experience, because I went to a film school in brussels, and all I knew was that I had to expose a light caucasian skin at 1 stop over middle gray 😅
@@DennySaladino Haha I see. Yeah thanks for taking my feedback well :)
I am inclined to always point out exceptions to rules.
Looking forward to your future videos!
Of course, I like those kinds of comments, as long as they are constructive as yours is.
Looking forward you pointing out exceptions to rules then 😁
Am I watching this right? Key light 2 stops under ambient?
Hum I think I never talked about ambient, I talked about the practical only.
@ sorry 2 stops under motivated light??
Yes
this is wonderful! i love the concept of motivated light. and that example from Sicario at about 8:30... if her face was brighter "it would have looked like crap".. that is personally how i've always felt about outdoor flash photography in low ambient light, where the natural ambient light and the light on the model's face look completely different and disconnected. to me it really looks like poo.
Thank you!! I feel the same 😁
I don't think image doesn't look lit because the subject is brighter than the light that's being used as the motivation, I think it's because there isn't any ambient/room tone. I would love to see the same test again but with a 3rd option adding a lot more room tone.
My room tone was provided by the light coming from the windows (in a controlled way as I closed some blinds), Without any room tone it would have been less natural actually. In the test where I bring the window's exposure down it's kind of what's happening, the ambiant is lowered aswell at the same time which increase the sensation of being lit.
Btw thanks for the inspiration and the comment, an episode about room tone could be great!
@@DennySaladino Sorry for not explaining well. I understand that the light from the window creates the roomtone, but how about increasing that room tone by adding another light and bounce it of the ceiling? Sure it will change your contrast levels a lot but it will make the current keylight feel a lot let sourcey.
Oh I get it now! Yes you're totally right! It also depends on the contrast you're trying to achieve.
You watched the wanderingDP Exposure course, right ?
I haven't seen any of his course, but I watch every videos he makes! He's the best!
I consider subscribing to his patreon actually.
Love the content but can’t really understand what u are saying ( my bad ) what if I want to keep my iso at 100 but had a light source which looks natural ???
Is it because of my english or the way I explained it? Because I still don't know if I have to write subtitles on the next videos.
Your iso doesn't have nothing to do with natural lighting, I was simply lowering the exposure of my iso to lower the exposure of my window.
Hey ! Your video was great , not talking about the English or the subtitles , everything was perfect . Loved the vid . My confusion was what if u just wanted to shoot the video at 100 iso . So should I be lowering my key light to the windows light quantity!
@@DennySaladinoplease post more videos . Very humble and informative . Not really many channels teach really nice stuff like this . ❤️
Great! thanks for the feedback!
Yes if I got the question right, you should as you said lowering you key light, in order for it to be less powerful than the exposure of the window.
What I did wrong tho is to show the entire window, and even the sky.
In the one from prisoner you can't really see the window actually, which makes it easier to expose.
YES LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE ON THE BACK.
Jesus I am tired of everyone telling me "BuT it iS nOt eXpOSeD coRrEcTLy" BROTHER IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE DARK MY MAN
If the image you get matches what you had in mind, then it's exposed correctly 🙃
Have you looked into 80s films?
Not particularly, why?
@@DennySaladino Because in the 80s and 90s they alse did motivated lights but it was usually not natural. Very strong separation from the background, bright hair line, rich colors. And it was very cinematic and beautiful.
Do you have movies in mind?
All the movies from the 80's I can think of are scifi, Wich could explain the unnatural light
@@DennySaladino Not only sci-fi, try any action, thriller movie.
Let me know if some movies come to your mind, It could be helpful to analyse the "evolution" of cinematography!
Why did u change your thumnail
It's a youtube feature which allow you to upload 2 or 3 thumbnails that are constantly alternating for a few days, and based on the results, the more attractive one is chosen
I was taught this. But I also forgot it.
😂