Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Would anyone use something like this?

G

Gino Varisano

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I recently gaffed a film with lots of candle and fire light scenes, which gave me this idea... So I built this device that flickers a light in sync with an actual flame, be it candle or fire... (it is currently set up to handle up to 1k but could easily be modified for higher wattages) The sensor, which reads the light levels, is currently attached to a length of speaker wire and is very small (easy to hide in a scene) I guess i'm wondering if anyone would actually use something like this or if people are happy enough with current methods. Here is a lousy video example I filmed with my droid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ihoepxi2iCo
 
I'm always interested in trying out new gear. Looks like a cool idea.
 
That's pretty damn brilliant! As long as it's more practical than a flicker box unit, I don't see why not to give it a whirl.
 
Wow, thats pretty cool. Have you done any tests? I'm wondering if the flickering of a larger lighting unit at the rate of a little candle might be too much fluctuation in intensity for the latitude of cameras for most purposes?
 
I have yet to test it with higher wattage lights but I don't think it would be an issue, the way I have it set up right now, there are two knobs controlling the sensitivity of the sensor and how it maps to the light, as well as a standard dimmer controlling overall intensity. And it could also be used in conjunction with a constant light to ensure a relatively stable exposure.
 
Gino Varisano said:
I have yet to test it with higher wattage lights but I don't think it would be an issue, the way I have it set up right now, there are two knobs controlling the sensitivity of the sensor and how it maps to the light, as well as a standard dimmer controlling overall intensity. And it could also be used in conjunction with a constant light to ensure a relatively stable exposure.
Click to expand...

Great to hear it's controllable
 
that's cool gino, very interesting. looks just a bit stroby... can you blend the sensor data at all to create smoother intensity changes? same idea as frameblending. for example, you could output the average of the current sample and the x(+/-) previous samples. else, put some kind of limit on the amount of intensity change over time.
 
I think at that point though, its essentially becoming a flickerbox that's perfectly in sync with a candle. I am not a huge fan of flickerbox's, I don't find the change in light level realistic, but that's just me. I thought this was a very cool solution to a common issue. My only concern is how this sort of device can be used without being in the frame...

Great work Gino.
 
Really cool
 
Looks very cool, you are almost there. Try using a chimera with an egg crate for a more directional light source from out of frame. The candle would motivate the light. Maybe screen down the light a bit to blend it in with the practical. Looks so much better than a flicker box as even though they are supposed to generate random light patterns it seems like quite often they either don't or it takes a lot of tweaking to make them look truly random.
 
How much? And how soon?

Stephen
 
Thanks for the replies everyone, I didn't really intend for that lighting set up to be realistic as I was just using what I had laying around in my house (which sadly isn't much) it was more to show how it works. It flickers a lot in the video mostly because he is blowing on the candle the whole time, a steady flame produces a more stable flicker. I suppose I should have shown that. It's also partly an issue with the speed of the parts I'm using, which I'm working on sorting out. A more ideal setup would have two lights one being the lowest level of illumination wanted and the other being the flicker that way the lighting change is a bit less dramatic, and obviously they would be positioned realistically... As far as hiding it in the frame goes, I don't think it should be too hard... the sensor is smaller than a pea.. it is currently taped to some speaker wire but could be connected to any length of very thin wire and rigged up to whatever candle you have. Obviously depending on the scene and shot some set-ups would be easier than others. I don't know if I mentioned but the effect can be turned off and it doubles as just a dimmer. I was also working on buttons to trigger different effects such as lightning.


Stephen Pruitt said:
How much? And how soon?

Stephen
Click to expand...
not exactly sure at the moment, but certainly a hell of a lot cheaper than a flicker box!
 
Well, I'm definitely interested. Keep me on your list.

Stephen
 
If you'd like some help with design, production, and potentially making it wireless...PM me. What hardware you're using will determine just how useful I can be ;)
 
Andy Jarosz said:
If you'd like some help with design, production, and potentially making it wireless...PM me. What hardware you're using will determine just how useful I can be ;)
Click to expand...
Thanks, I thought about wireless options but it I feel like it would just make it harder to hide and just be an added expense that isn't really necessary.

http://youtu.be/9ruHodNoMYo?hd=1

newer example, made the flicker less harsh by adding control of the lowest level of light output. So for the fraction of a second between flickers it can only fall to whatever level you choose instead of turning completely off. (unless thats what you set it to) It also occurred to me that the light change would likely be more smooth with larger fixtures as their cooling time is slower.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top