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 :)

Tips for getting the best lookig footage

M

Mohamed Younis

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
453
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Cairo-Egypt
I've been doing a lot of tests with the Epic. It's frustrating to get "okay" results when you're on a shoot.
I'd love to know some tips everyone uses to get their best results.

I'll share one I think I got from Mark Toia and it has changed the way I shoot for the better.
Iota never look at the histogram anymore, I light and expose footage by checking the EVF and getting an image I like.
Also another thing I've been doing lately is shooting really bad footage and fixing it in post just to see how much I can get away with if I really need to.

I also never shoot wide open even in the darkest situation as I feel the image gets too one-dimensional if that makes any sense. This doesnt really apply for wide lenses though.

My favorite lens so far is the 12mm Arri zeiss standard.
 
I light and expose footage based on the histogram and a light meter.
I usually light to a 4-5.6, unless I'm looking for a shallow DOF - then I'll go maybe 1.8 either with less lighting or some ND.
I prefer 85mm or 100mm (RPP's) and recently shot 4 TV spots for a client all on the 300mm (RPP).
12mm is far too wide for me.
I base my decisions on 20++ years of working / shooting


Isn't it great that we can all have different ways to approach our art?
 
Last edited:
It has always been considered wise to "keep it between the goal posts" so keeping an eye on the histogram is not a bad idea. I believe more can be done in post if you do.
As far as lenses go I've got 7 RPPs and prefer the longer lenses. Just personal taste. Like Glen I love the 300 for many situations.
 
Learn to trust the camera, like you would a particular film stock. If you work against it, if you push it to the edge you have to proceed at your own risk. Generally speaking, when you light to the camera's strengths you get good results. Admittedly, I have seen good DPs get far more out of my R1 than I could ever get with it, even on my best day. So, it's that combination of knowing the camera, trusting the camera, and having a ton of talent/experience to make exceptional imagery.
 
For the thickest negative, light and shoot at ISO320 making sure you have zero highlight clipping. Epic needs lots-o-light. Get some fast-ass lenses and good portable non-flicker lights. I have LitePanels LED's, K5600 HMI's and a full set of Canon F1.2 - 2.0 primes. Proper exposure is everything on Epic.
 
That's a great way of putting it Josh - 'thickest negative' I think that is exactly what I've been missing when I shoot Epic or Scarlet. I'm with you Mohammed on the 'one dimensional' look and trying to stay away from it- I'm curious to hear from more people on their way of approaching this as well.
 
In camera, I agree about lighting to ISO 320. I am typically rating between 320 and 800 for the vast majority of my work. Gives me a lot of latitude in post. Pay careful attention to your histogram and "stop lights" as they tell you when there's a reason for concern.

On the optics side (and speaking in extremely general terms), most lenses are pretty sharp about two stops from their widest aperture. Meaning a f/1.4 lens at f/2.8 will often produce a very good image. Personally I'll happily shoot up to f/16, but tend to stop there.

On the post side as we are shooting in a raw format, unsharp mask for sharpening and Neat Video for noise reduction are very good tools.
 
It all starts with the lighting design - not the camera's sensor. Study the Masters at lighting in layers since we are trying to emulate a 3D world in 2D. Depth of Field, Depth of Lighting, Color and Contrast are the tools we have to do this with.

Guys like Arny Freytag take the ordinary glamor genre and through the use of lighting layers create a rich look that is his career signature. I would study his work very closely . . . alone ; - )
 
Last edited:
A point on fast lenses: most pros agree lenses are sharpest at 3 stops above wide open. This means an F1.4 is optimized at F4 where as an F2.8 lens is best at F8. Try to shoot available low light at ISO320 at F8 then you'll see why real fast lenses are cheaper in the long-run. At F4 you can do without bringing in the lighting team most times.
 
If you read the 320 vs. 800 threads on Reduser as well as everything Graeme has said about exposure, then spend 10 hours on test shoots for every ten minutes you spend on the forums - you shouldn't have any problems producing great images.

Personally, I'd agree with the 'thick negative' approach. Expose for the sensor, watch your goal posts, use your eyes only for aesthetic decisions. Additionally, never shoot below 3K. If you need highspeed and 3K doesn't allow the your desired frame rate at a good compression ratio, shoot at half that speed and use Twixtor to bring you the rest of the way in post (or use a different camera).
 
Exposing Epic properly, or any other camera (film or digital), is the 'easy' part.
Focus on lighting, composition and blocking - these three are truly format agnostic... master these and it doesn't matter what you shoot on.
 
I absolutely agree about studying and practicing lighting. That's a given considering the visual medium. There are million types of lights out there and likely more ways to shape them.
 
Josh Beadle said:
For the thickest negative, light and shoot at ISO320 making sure you have zero highlight clipping. Epic needs lots-o-light. Get some fast-ass lenses and good portable non-flicker lights. I have LitePanels LED's, K5600 HMI's and a full set of Canon F1.2 - 2.0 primes. Proper exposure is everything on Epic.
Click to expand...

Excellent post. This has been what I have been doing since day 1 with great results.
 
I find that flat light usually makes it hard to get pretty images, or in other words when your histogram is narrow and there is lots of wiggle room both left and right it's going be hard to get the texture you want. I like a wide histogram with lots of highlights and shadows. If there is no black and white in the shot then it won't be pretty IMHO. I know I'm simplifying things here, but you get the idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top