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 :)

Ask David Mullen ANYTHING

Ralph Oshiro said:
Just curious, David . . .

What's your opinion on lighting close-ups noticably different from masters? It's done quite often in mainstream production, but anyone who knows something about lighting can see the difference. This is often done to make the close-up "prettier." I don't mean even major "adjustments," or even total re-lights (but which still emulate the master), which are typically always done on the close-up or turnaround, I mean like, suddenly having a backlight (even if motivated) that simply wasn't even there in the master.

Or is this sort of like the "burn out the windows/don't burn out the windows" kinda thing?
Click to expand...

You're talking about cheating, and obviously some viewers are going to be more aware of the cheat than others. You have to ask yourself if the improvements you're getting from cheating the lighting in the close-up offset the mismatch in continuity and are therefore distracting. You also have to factor in the time lost from relighting the close-up. There's no right or wrong answer.

Sometimes cheating the lighting is actually less distracting because once you move into a close-up, the master lighting may be doing something unappealing to the face and you had better clean it up a bit, whereas in the wide shot, you couldn't see the problem.

I try to light master shots so that there will only be some minimal adjustment to the tighter angles, if at all, but that's an ideal scenario.
 
hello David, i m first an editor but shot 2 shorts with a friend and prepare my first alone
i have 2 questions,my first is: if someone call you to light is set and you dont know anything about you gonna find and shoot (maybe just the film spec) what is the few basics lights you would take? (perhaps one for the night and one for the day?)
in others words: is there a basic set of light that can do a valuable job in most of the case?
the second: what little details make you thing a cinematographer is good or bad?
tx u a lot
++
 
I don't know if there is a "generic" lighting package -- other than finding out if the location needs both daylight and tungsten lighting, the determining issues, assuming you only have vague details, are the size of the crew to handle the size of the package (no point in getting a 12K HMI if you only have one guy helping you) and the power situation (no point in getting a 12K HMI if you don't have a way of powering it) and the budget (you can't afford that 12K HMI anyway...)

If the restrictions were: (1) house power only; (2) mix of daylight and tungsten; (3) small crew, I tend to favor Kinoflos as part of the package, since they are low in power consumption, switchable between daylight and tungsten, and are naturally soft sources without a lot of grip work needed. Usually I'd carry a couple of 4' 4-bankers. Besides that, there might be a tungsten kit of a couple of 650w and 1K's in a case, maybe some Chimeras for those.

Besides the medium tungstens and the Kinos, then I might add some smaller HMI's if the budget allowed, like 575w and 1.2K HMI PAR's. LED panel lights could also serve some of the same functions as the Kinos.

At the other end of the scale, there might be some smaller tungstens, like Dedolights or Peppers.

If I needed a punchy light that was really bright but under 20amps, besides the 1.2K HMI PAR with a narrow lens, you could get a 1K PAR64 tungsten with a spot or narrow spot globe (the VNSP globes are called "firestarters" I believe.)

I'd also bring some Chinese Lanterns and an assortment of light bulbs.

Now if I knew that there was less daylight scenes and more night interiors, or vice-versa, I could rebalance the package towards one direction or the other, either more HMI's and daylight Kinos, or more tungsten lamps.

Of course, you need some basic grip gear, c-stands, sandbags, flags, and some electric gear like extension cords, power boxes, etc.

If you're stuck using house power, try and scout the location to see how much power is available to you -- it may be an old house with smaller circuits than the typical 20amp ones. You may need to bring spare fuses and you may have to consider running power from next door. You may even have to consider finding the budget for a generator -- some locations have diddly-squat power. I once filmed in a bar where there wasn't enough house power available to run a string of Christmas tree lights.

There was an old add with Julio Macat, ASC where he said that if he had to shoot a movie with only two lights, it would be a 20K and a Dedolight. He was joking, of course, but I can see his point -- you need the little accent lights and you need the big workhorse lights, the big brush strokes and the little ones.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
There was an old add with Julio Macat, ASC where he said that if he had to shoot a movie with only two lights, it would be a 20K and a Dedolight. He was joking, of course, but I can see his point -- you need the little accent lights and you need the big workhorse lights, the big brush strokes and the little ones.
Click to expand...

The poor man's version of this example is a 6K HMI, some gridcloth and a 4x8 silver b-board.
 
David, I was really impressed with the look of Children of Men, and read that the DP used very little in the way of movie lights. In my upcoming feature I would love to get away with minimal production lights and go for a more realistic, documentary feel, yet still maintain a "filmic" quality. There will be many day interiors, some outside day and night, and a few low light interiors, including hallways.

Given the speed (t3) of the 18-50 red zoom, which I plan to use shooting mostly on the shoulder, how realistic is it to assume I can get away with mostly available light? Particularly if I want shallow DOF on occasion with wider lenses...

Being able to move quickly and shoot a lot of set ups each day with a small crew is a factor as well. (not to mention budget)

Thanks in advance!
 
T/3 is a bit slow for low-light work, unless you are willing to live with some noise from underexposing and having the brighten the image in post. You can gain another stop of speed by turning off the shutter (360 instead of 180) but with an attendent increase in motion smear which some find to be very video-ish (see some of the action scenes in "Apocalypto" for an example.) You can also gain exposure by undercranking, but then you have motion problems.

If you are determined to use very low levels of available light, like for night exteriors or candlelight scenes, you should get some high-speed lenses (T/2 and faster.)

For day interiors, T/3 is probably fast enough most of the time. And well-lit night interiors.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
I have a black lab mix and drive a Prius, if that's enough personal info...
Click to expand...

My wife keeps on at me to get a prius for her. Do you like yours? (so sorry for being quite so far off topic, straying into cars could be a little dangerous.)
 
Hi David - thanks for the opportunity to learn.

I was curious what your experience has been like with the Directors you have worked with over the years... as far as how well they have truly understood the technical details of the cameras and lenses that were being used on a project and how important/unimportant that was during the making of the film.

As an aspiring Director of features, I am trying to learn as much as possible (technically) as well as keep the story and actors at the highest priority. So I have often wondered just how much is expected of the Director from a DP's perspective. Since all Directors will have their own unique strengths and talents (as well as weaknesses), I would imagine there would be quite a range in this area...

any stories about this "from the trenches" would also be appreciated.

thanks again,
 
David Mullen ASC said:
...At the other end of the scale, there might be some smaller tungstens, like Dedolights or Peppers.
Click to expand...


I will second David's suggest here. I love the Dedolight 150 series sources. Their 25:1 spot to flood ratio and really even coverage makes them one of the most useful tungsten sources that I have ever had the privilege of using. Take a look at their photometric data and you will quickly learn that they have a lot more usable punch than anything else in their power range. Their very small physical size make them ideal in situations where no other fixture would work.

The Peppers are great too, but I consider the Dedo's nearly essential on almost every project that I lens.
 
David thank you for your answer that just exactly what i want to know
++
 
David Mullen ASC said:
If you are determined to use very low levels of available light, like for night exteriors or candlelight scenes, you should get some high-speed lenses (T/2 and faster.)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback. Hopefully I'll be in a position to rent some higher speed primes when needed. (if I can't swing getting the RED primes, that is)
 
David, thanks for the opportunity to pester you. Can you talk for a minute about the ASC. How you got in, what it means for you professionally and personally and the path a young cinematographer can follow to help him achieve this level.
 
Hi Mr. Mullen,

I know there have been a lot of questions so I don't expect this to be answered. That said, I am hoping to one day (a long ways away from now considering I'm a first year University student) become a DP. I do own a copy of Cinematography which I believe you had a large role in writing and while there is a huge wealth of information which I have gleaned a ton from, I feel that I am not at the level of knowledge yet where I can advance further in the book than where I am. I am stuck on the film stock section. I am having difficulty understanding how the stock related to light and ties into how you judge what lights to use at what intensities etc etc.

So basically, I am wondering if there might happen to be a book or resource you might be able to recommend I read before that that is perhaps a little more general so that I can better understand the concepts put forth in Cinematography. I hope to take a course this summer on lighting but that depends on my work and how much time I have. Thanks a lot for taking the time to answer people's questions! Oh and I have to agree on The Fountain. That film was absolutely beautiful. Incredible work. And Children of Men was very powerful for me and I believe that was due to the way in which the camera work followed the scene. What was done made me feel like I was there. Anyways, my humble 2 cents!
 
Casey,
As a director, you will probably delve as deep into any subject as your intellectual curiosity drives you to, regardless of exactly how practical everything you learn is. I love researching about obsolete film processes like 3-strip Technicolor, Cinerama, Autochromes, etc. Don't know the real value in that, but it's interesting to me. How much you need to learn technically sort of depends on what you'll be trying to do, with what equipment, and if you'll be doing it on your own or not. Even among DP's, there are different depths of knowledge - I know one DP who does his own densitometry readings of his negatives while another does his own lens collimination work. This is sort of deeper than I necessarily want to go. Ultimately all that matters is the quality of the work you do. As you shoot more, you'll find more areas that you want to study and explore, while other areas may seem less and less important over time.

What I encourage any filmmaker to do is develop their ability to previsualize, to develop a visual imagination, and find ways of conveying emotion and story information through images. Learning the technical stuff is useless if you don't have a creative idea to express using that knowledge.
___

Chris,
Getting into the ASC: It's an honorary society, membership by invitation only. You need letters of recommendation from three ASC members, then your credits, work are reviewed by a commitee who also interviews you. If they all vote for you, then your name is passed to the Board of Governors, if they vote for you, your name is posted to the general membership; anyone who objects has thirty days to do so, and if no one does, then you're invited and you have to pay a membership fee.

Honestly, I felt I was a bit young and my credits were small to be attempting to join at the time, but I was encouraged to go through the process -- they were looking for new faces that had a passion for cinematography, not just to do it, but to teach and talk and promote it. So my work combined with my writings on cinematography, my research, and my occasional lectures and teaching about it, weighed in my favor. I think it also impressed them that I had written an entire index to the 1970's issues of American Cinematographer magazine. Also, "Northfork" had just come out at the time, which was some of my best work ever. And a lot of members knew me from the time I was a film student pestering them with questions -- even if they didn't know my name, they knew me as the kid who seemed to have memorized a decade's worth of American Cinematographer articles.

Myself, along with a few other DP's, sort of represent the indie feature wing of the ASC...

Obviously I'm honored and flattered to be in there. The best thing is chatting with my heroes -- the last meeting, I had a nice talk with Richard Edlund about "Star Wars"; we also share an interest in Japanese cinema.

___

Yash,
In terms of simpler intro books than "Cinematography", I'm not sure if there are any noticably simpler, though you may find how someone else explains things to be easier to understand -- maybe Blain Brown's book, for example, or the Ascher book. Otherwise, I'd probably read some basic intro to photography books, since the principles are the same regarding film speed, shutter speed, f-stop, etc. I think I started with the old Upton Photography textbook, but also the Ansel Adams series too.
 
David, I have a particularly odd question for you.

I'm flirting with a little business venture which requires either a fresh new idea and design.... Or re-hatching an old one for further use.

I won't get into particualrs so forgive me for asking this question in such a vague sense but........

What focus chart and or shape (if any) would be the most or atleast seldomly useful one to be printed on an object that is 3" x 3" 1/2 ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top