D'Arcy Foley-Dawson
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 14, 2008
- Messages
- 119
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
- Website
- www.charliepigdog.com
Photography is a technical process and as such there are guidelines to follow for proper or 'correct' exposure, based on the amount of light, the film stock or sensor sensitivity, the lens, aperture blah blah friggin blah - that's why we have light meters. By following these guidelines you aim to achieve the most out of a) what the camera is seeing, with b) what the camera is using to record what it sees (be it film or digital). By 'most' I mean dynamic range, image detail, shadows, noise etc. Of course these are only guidelines and don't need to be observed to the letter in order to obtain good results. Sometimes you may want to, for example, under expose something for whatever reason.
The point is there are standards by which we measure exposure, just as in say music there is a standard as to what constitutes the note A, or C, etc. It is beneficial to be aware of this standards, and probably a good idea to be competent in observing them.
A style of lighting has nothing to do with exposure. All lighting styles observe more or less the same exposure logic.
What I'm saying is the best approach is to think in terms of the technical criteria outlined above first, how to achieve it, whether or not you want to, etc.; before thinking about a particular style, be it classical, new wave etc. because this criteria forms the fundamentals of photography, and of all lighting styles.
Then I would suggest you make a list of all films nominated for a Best Cinematography Oscar and try to watch as many of them as possible. You should also try to watch them chronologically, as this way you will appreciate the gradual evolution of lighting styles over time. Take notes as you are watching them. Take screenshots from the DVD on your computer.
This would be a far more effective way to obtain this knowledge than to ask people to explain it with words on this forum.
Well, kinda, except there is no absolute definition of 'what feels right for the scene'. What feels right to you will feel wrong to someone else. That's the artistic side of it, I guess. Proper exposure is the technical side, and you will find a far greater degree of consensus as to right/wrong here.
No, other human beings can and will judge other human beings' work all the time. That's why we have Oscars!
OK, maybe I haven't been very clear, so I'll try to restate it:
1) People will always judge your lighting. Just as they will judge story, dialogue, acting, etc. etc. There is really no such thing as 'good' or 'bad', lighting follows fashions that change over time.
2) But there are some fundamental standards that can help anchor and orientate your development as a photographer. Learn about correct exposure, what this means, what implications this has for the work. Learn about classical 'three point' lighting. Learn what the Academy thought was 'good' cinematography in the 50s, 70s, 90s, etc. Try to learn what Europeans thought/think was/is 'good' cinematography. Try to learn the lighting traditions of Asian cinema.... Once you have these fundamentals, you can develop as an artist. Perhaps you will realise you like hard light, or soft light, or a stylised look, or a more realistic look. Perhaps you will realise different looks suit different scenes, different stories.
3) You will not learn much from internet forums. We can only give you words. You need to go out there and look at images. Like I said, make a list of films and go out and try to find as many of them as you can. Watch them. Try to figure out how each scene has been lit.
Good luck.