Ask David Mullen ANYTHING

[David Mullen ASC]

I’d make a scope DCP.

 

[Kemalettin Sert]

Hey David do you know what kind of HDR conversion process studios does on old movies which is shot on negative? do they start with scanning the original negative again and which color gamut they use?

 

[Joe Cage]

Hello David,

The black pro mists lower the contrast and smoothens the highlights. I especially like to use them to smoothen the highlight roll-off, and smoothen the image somewhat. But I am not sure when shooting with a Ursa Mini Pro or Scarlet-W in Log/Raw lowering the contrast makes any sense anymore? Or does it? (escpecially when you do not add more contrast in the image in post, feels like shadow noise/fpn is more present or am I wrong about that?)

I do have the issue when shooting with the black pro-mists and shooting into the sun or hard light, the image gets incredibly hazy. There is probably no way around that is there(besides framing differently in another angle)?

Cheers,

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Hey David do you know what kind of HDR conversion process studios does on old movies which is shot on negative? do they start with scanning the original negative again and which color gamut they use?

I'm sure it varies by studio and budget, plus the quality of whatever digital master they already have. Not sure what you mean by color gamut, do you mean Rec.709 vs. P3?

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Hello David,

The black pro mists lower the contrast and smoothens the highlights. I especially like to use them to smoothen the highlight roll-off, and smoothen the image somewhat. But I am not sure when shooting with a Ursa Mini Pro or Scarlet-W in Log/Raw lowering the contrast makes any sense anymore? Or does it? (escpecially when you do not add more contrast in the image in post, feels like shadow noise/fpn is more present or am I wrong about that?)

I do have the issue when shooting with the black pro-mists and shooting into the sun or hard light, the image gets incredibly hazy. There is probably no way around that is there(besides framing differently in another angle)?

Cheers,

If you like the Black Pro-Mists for most of your shots, you just need a second type of diffusion for the moments when the Black Pro-Mist doesn't work, something less hazy or bloomy. I often use Tiffen Black Diffusion/FX for those shots, it softens a little but with very little haze or fogginess. I've heard that the new Schneider Radiant Softs don't bloom too much but I haven't tried them yet.

 

[Benjamin Reece]

David,

Two quick questions. #grateful

1.

I've been enjoying shooting almost everything with the Pro Mist 1/4 for the past year on my A7S w/ various lenses. (Based on your recommendation & Jon Chema)

Two months ago, I ran into a Tiffen rep and told me I should switch to the Pearlescent (1/8?) because Pro Mist was old tech essentially. I know buying/renting both would be ideal. But what do you shoot with more when you want a romantic feel? My gut is to stay Pro Mist since I know it, but I just bought/switched to a Scarlet-W (Dragon Sensor), so wanted your expert opinion, as I saw from a thread in 2010 that you used both.

2.

I'm wanting to use screw-on filters to reduce size/look my subjects in the eye. I would ideally leave the Pro Mist/Pearlescent on all the time, and stack the IRND/VariableND on top. Does that create light issues, or is that ok?

Thank you so much sir! Huge fan for many years.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

If you like the ProMist, I don’t think you need to switch to the similar Pearlescents just because they are newer.

Right now, I mostly use the Hollywood Black Magic for a romantic look, it has a 1/8 Black Frost as a base combined with degrees of HD Classic Soft.

You may want a less misty-foggy diffusion when the ProMists glow too much, something like an HD Classic Soft or a Black Diffusion/FX. I’ve heard that the new Radient Softs are good but I haven’t tried them yet.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Trouble with stacking filters is getting a double reflection around bright areas like a hot backlight. Best thing to do in those cases is to get the two pieces of glass right up against each other with no air gap, which is hard to do with screw-ins.

 

[Les Hillis]

...

I've been enjoying shooting almost everything with the Pro Mist 1/4 for the past year on my A7S w/ various lenses...

Two months ago, I ran into a Tiffen rep and told me I should switch to the Pearlescent (1/8?) because Pro Mist was old tech essentially...

In terms of 'glow', the Pearlescent 1 (or maybe 2) would be the closest match to a Pro Mist 1/4, based on what I've seen. Side by side, the Pearlescents do look more 'modern', with more accurate and contrasty colours and a more targeted effect (halation/glow and some softening). The Pro-Mists are comparitively dark, less contrasty and have a slight green tint to them. But they're not so different that they can't be made to look practically identical in post. Both of them look good in their own ways imo.

 

[Uday Bhaskar Karra]

Hi David,

What strength(1/8, 1/4, 1/2, 1, 2) of Schneider Digicon filter would be apt for MX sensors (Epic-MX). Or does it depend on the Lighting and contrast areas in the shot.

By the way, Is it really required for Red cameras with IPP2-RAW (No Prores).

Thanks
Uday

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Nothing is “required” - use filters when you want their effect. If you don’t want or need the effect of an UltraCon or DigiCon, then don’t use them. I haven’t shot with DigiCons myself so I don’t know which strengths to use but you should have some range to choose from depending on the shot.

 

[Benjamin Reece]

If you like the ProMist, I don’t think you need to switch to the similar Pearlescents just because they are newer.

Right now, I mostly use the Hollywood Black Magic for a romantic look, it has a 1/8 Black Frost as a base combined with degrees of HD Classic Soft.

You may want a less misty-foggy diffusion when the ProMists glow too much, something like an HD Classic Soft or a Black Diffusion/FX. I’ve heard that the new Radient Softs are good but I haven’t tried them yet.

David,

Thanks for the insight. You inspired me to go ahead and order a couple of these filters to test out. In regards to stacking screw on filters and hot spots- I'll go ahead and test it with a hard backlight, to see if its something I can live with.

Much appreciated,

In terms of 'glow', the Pearlescent 1 (or maybe 2) would be the closest match to a Pro Mist 1/4, based on what I've seen. Side by side, the Pearlescents do look more 'modern', with more accurate and contrasty colours and a more targeted effect (halation/glow and some softening). The Pro-Mists are comparitively dark, less contrasty and have a slight green tint to them. But they're not so different that they can't be made to look practically identical in post. Both of them look good in their own ways imo.

Les,

Ah- for some reason I thought I had read that Pearlescent was stronger. Thanks for the heads up. When you say dark, you mean in the shadows, correct? I've ordered a 1/8, but I'll go ahead and order a 1 as well to compare. Thank you!

 

[Les Hillis]

...
Les,

Ah- for some reason I thought I had read that Pearlescent was stronger. Thanks for the heads up. When you say dark, you mean in the shadows, correct? I've ordered a 1/8, but I'll go ahead and order a 1 as well to compare. Thank you!

Had a look back at some test shots (not just the notes and graded frame grabs) - the comparative darkness is negligible, more of an impression resulting from slightly different contrast levels and colours, barely worth mentioning. Still seeing Pearlescent 1 as the closest match to Pro-Mist 1/4. That was just with hard lighting and a contrasty grade on a close-up of a face though (different subject-matter might give or emphasize a different effect). So yeah, best to see for yourself what's what.

 

[Benjamin Reece]

Copy that, will do! Thanks for the detailed and informative response!

 

[David Mullen ASC]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GCd29Yq4HXU

Season 2 teaser of “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel” has just dropped.

 

[John David Pope]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GCd29Yq4HXU

Season 2 teaser of “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel” has just dropped.

That looks wonderful, David! I imagine you had a lot of fun on that one. Films set in that time period have such possibilities what with the wardrobe from the period, the hairstyles, the vehicles, and the interior design. They must be an Art Director's dream.

My questions for you are:

* How do you decide when to back-light actors in an interior scene and when to go without any back-light / edge-light? For instance, the scene in the opening of the trailer where the women are in the hair salon. Is it often dictated by the genre of the film? For that scene in “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel” you went without any backlight or obvious top-light / hair-light. As opposed to the following scene, also in a beauty salon, in which the DP used back-light / edge-light / hair-light:

* Do you and / or your gaffer write down any visual style notes for a film that you refer to throughout the production? I am wondering how it is that you maintain the visual style throughout. Do you ever start to light a scene in a particular manner and then alter or back off of that style because it won't be in keeping with the visual style? I imagine it would require discipline not to fall into habitual lighting. That is, to be mindful not to fall into doing something out of habit and instead seeing to it that the lighting choices for each scene are keeping to the visual look of the film. And maintaining the visual style regardless of the setting of a scene- be it day interior, night interior, day exterior, night exterior.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

1) For day interiors, I avoid backlighting from directions where it can't be coming from a window, just because it looks odd to me, unless it is a location with a high ceiling where there could be skylights, or it is a day interior that is so far from windows that it can look like the practicals are on. But for night interiors, I sometimes backlight, I think it can be motivated or justified in many situations, but I don't do it all the time because then it becomes a formula.

2) I don't usually write down a style guide except maybe early on as a talking point for discussions in prep, after that, it's just a day-to-day thing to maintain, a judgement call. It's good when the style guide isn't too specific or too long a list because you have to be able to adapt to new locations, new staging, new story elements. It's good when the style guide is simple and easy to remember, like "no tight close-ups except for rare exceptions", or "keep the lighting natural but flattering to the leads", or "avoid long-lensed coverage, try to shoot clean singles instead of overs, etc."

One thing I try to do even though I'm often shooting on standing sets for television is to avoid going to the same lighting set-up for daytime, I try to create different moods and different times of day.

 

[Shawn Nelson]

David,
Why do we put the camera on the side of the face with the shadows? Is it purely aesthetic (better dimensionality) or is there more going on? I’m embarrassed at how recently I learned about this convention.

 

[Ferhan Khan]

Hello David I hope you are well. I wondered if you would be so kind as to give me an insight into the lighting setup for this video particularly the moving shadow shots. I can see there are a few variations of the lighting but it would be great to know the best way to recreate this lighting look.

https://vimeo.com/287897586?activityReferer=1
https://vimeo.com/271110156

Thank you so much for your time.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Yes, it's a more sculptural angle for the light since it brings out dimension and skin texture (not always desirable though), and it's a moodier angle, less flat, but I think one good reason is that the light looks like it is coming from the direction that the person is looking at, their eyes catch it better.

When the key is coming from the opposite side, the eyes look like they are turned away from the source even though in reality if you moved the camera to the other side of the face, the eyes would now look like they are pointed in that direction towards the light though the real relationship hasn't changed.