Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

8K Monsto and an aging actress

steve green

steve green

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
1,049
Reaction score
1
Points
36
Location
Thousand Oaks, Ca
Hi guys,

I've got an upcoming shoot with a beautiful late 40's actress. We've done a lot of these shoots in past years and I've pretty much keep the resolution to 5K-6K. We always have a giant soft source right by camera for her key, so her light is very soft and flat.

My client does take the time to do work in Flame, but I'm always be battling the "Alexa is easier to work with". In spite of this, they've deferred to me to use the camera of my choice, which is always the latest Red offering.

On this upcoming shoot we've got a small intimate set but they'd still like the BG to be soft, so I'm thinking the Monsto is perfect, but I'm getting push back from the producers saying they absolutely don't want to shoot in 8K resolution for a 1080 release (TVC) because "well see every pore" in her skin.

Being that spending money in Flame doesn't scare them (within reason), what can I suggest, in regard to post methods, or lens diffusion that will help our cause? I haven't used lens diffusion lately, right or wrong, I was under the impression that can be finessed better digitally.

As always, any input is appreciated.
 
I've hit this rather humorous hurdle a few times. Take a weekend and do some tests, toss in some filtration in there too. It isn't exactly how that limited opinion works. If you want to go the extra mile, shoot some 4K and 5K too.

Also find some glass that's a bit more less ruthless if there's a real concern.
 
steve green said:
Hi guys,

I've got an upcoming shoot with a beautiful late 40's actress. We've done a lot of these shoots in past years and I've pretty much keep the resolution to 5K-6K. We always have a giant soft source right by camera for her key, so her light is very soft and flat.

My client does take the time to do work in Flame, but I'm always be battling the "Alexa is easier to work with". In spite of this, they've deferred to me to use the camera of my choice, which is always the latest Red offering.

On this upcoming shoot we've got a small intimate set but they'd still like the BG to be soft, so I'm thinking the Monsto is perfect, but I'm getting push back from the producers saying they absolutely don't want to shoot in 8K resolution for a 1080 release (TVC) because "well see every pore" in her skin.

Being that spending money in Flame doesn't scare them (within reason), what can I suggest, in regard to post methods, or lens diffusion that will help our cause? I haven't used lens diffusion lately, right or wrong, I was under the impression that can be finessed better digitally.

As always, any input is appreciated.
Click to expand...

I agree with what Phil said. I just ordered a Schneider Radiant Soft filter to help with skin while preventing tons of highlight bloom. This seems like a filter right up the alley of this shoot. Give the radiant soft filters a look on their vimeo page: https://vimeo.com/schneideroptics
 
Canon CN E 85 + 50 are luscious on Monstro, along with your giant source, for just her face, add a barely there, opal/slight coral filtration on a full flood inkie/w snoot underneath the lens, so it is just reads in her eyes, back it off a bit, it is like putty on a scratched board.
 
Last edited:
Zeb B said:
"Fix it in Post" ;-)

Click to expand...

Yes of course, but it is not just tongue in cheek anymore, society is being trained to expect it. It is easy now, but you take all the character away from your actor, If you want a 20 year old hire a 20 year old, if you are hiring a 40 something actress it is partly because she is 40. There is a lot, lens choice, camera angle, lighting angle, filtration, color, intensity, reflections etc., on set with a real person that you can work with before you apply some Apple approved, consensus beauty algorithm to cleanse her of character. Poet Ann Morrow Lindbergh (Chuckie's wife) noted- "beauty in youth is an accident of nature, beauty in age is a work of art." Aim any modern cine style camera at a beautiful young woman/person, punch in the prefab numbers, over crank, and voila you have little short bursts of dazzling beauty that Vimeo, Facebook, and RedUser are full of. But a narrative demands more and that is where the working at it part, the cinematographers crack at it, of "a work of art" comes to bear.
 
Tell them that resolution is not sharpness. The more resolution you have, the less you have to make "it look" sharp.
More resolution gives you more natural skin nuances and a less artificial look. It's always easier to soften your picture by choosing filtration, lenses, ... if really needed.
 
Patrick Tresch said:
Tell them that resolution is not sharpness. The more resolution you have, the less you have to make "it look" sharp.
More resolution gives you more natural skin nuances and a less artificial look. It's always easier to soften your picture by choosing filtration, lenses, ... if really needed.
Click to expand...

^Pin this
 
Patrick Tresch said:
Tell them that resolution is not sharpness. The more resolution you have, the less you have to make "it look" sharp.
More resolution gives you more natural skin nuances and a less artificial look. It's always easier to soften your picture by choosing filtration, lenses, ... if really needed.
Click to expand...

Show them, a picture says more than a thousand words...
 
Patrick Tresch said:
Tell them that resolution is not sharpness. The more resolution you have, the less you have to make "it look" sharp.
More resolution gives you more natural skin nuances and a less artificial look. It's always easier to soften your picture by choosing filtration, lenses, ... if really needed.
Click to expand...

Exatly what I try to incept into peoples brains that dont think we need 4k or 8k. Its not about sharpness! Its about capturing more natural details. Also red have quite strong olpf filter so it will stand more of the nasty sharpening the end viewer going to have on there television.
 
Zeb B said:
"Fix it in Post" ;-)

Click to expand...

Impressiv! But I like the older woman:)
I wish this was only used in movies to show a younger version of an actor as a part of the script. Some times it feels like women in media are expected to quitt eaging at 30. We as content creators have an important responsibility in this.
 
Joel Arvidsson said:
Impressiv! But I like the older woman:)
I wish this was only used in movies to show a younger version of an actor as a part of the script. Some times it feels like women in media are expected to quitt eaging at 30. We as content creators have an important responsibility in this.
Click to expand...

Hollywood, Bollywood, Nollywood, whateverwood still think people(men) only want to watch young women. When you really want to know what men want to see, check the P0rn statistics. It's not young and skinny...
 
Jens Jakob Thorsen said:
Old glass i the way to go. The Canon FDs are beautiful if you pick them right.
Click to expand...

Can you please elaborate on how to pick them? i've contemplated building a set of FDs. My dad used to shoot on Canon back in the 80s and gave me some of his lenses. The FD 50mm f1.4 was atrocious until about F8. I think it's from a bad batch or something. I just really want to see what a good set can look like. Thanks!
 
RJ_Ortiz said:
Can you please elaborate on how to pick them? i've contemplated building a set of FDs. My dad used to shoot on Canon back in the 80s and gave me some of his lenses. The FD 50mm f1.4 was atrocious until about F8. I think it's from a bad batch or something. I just really want to see what a good set can look like. Thanks!
Click to expand...

I bought all of mine on ebay. Looked carefully at the pictures and bought mostly from Japan. Did not buy the cheapest ones. Bought both the FD and FDn 100mm models to test the difference. Wasent intirely happy with my 28mm so I bought another one. Sold all the ones I didnt need or wanted. Go with the older models SCC. 55mm and 24mm must be aspherical. I am going to have them rehoused at GL-Optics. http://www.canonclassics.com/canon-fd-prime-lenses/
 
Use a vintage Cooke. My cooke 20-100 zoom definitely softens the skin while retaining sharpness. Gives it a cleaner, softer feel, a bit like silk.
The reason is because the coatings associated with skin tones have a slight halo, while the other coatings (which correspond in RGB to hair, eyebrows, blacks, etc.) do not, so they remain sharp.
Far more natural looking results than most filtration I see out there.
Most vedettes (aging stars from the past) definitely knew these lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top