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

Inspired by the light meter for RED thread I wanted to ask you David what do you think of light meters when using HD cameras like the F900 for example? Do you find it useful for anything else but setting contrast ratios? Do you trust it at all for exposures?
A meter is much easier to use and carry around than testing monitors. Thanks.
 
photo anime ?

What in gods name does that mean ? Can someone elaborate ? I would have called it a 'split layered-dioptic'


(I'm copywriting that term) = )
 
I let John Gaeta elaborate himself:

"When we looked clesely at Japanese animation, we noticed that a lot of it is done with a large painted background and modified layers on top of that, like traditional cel animation," says Gaeta. "It puts everything in focus."

As you may know, Speed Racer was originally an anime. Composites (I have learned a new English word :)) is nothing new in deep focus cinematography. The suicide attempt scene i Citizen Kane is in fact a composite.
 
OK David here's a simple framing/compostion question: On shooting OTS, it's my practice & understanding for the person nearest the camera (the back of their head is near the camera) to angle them/shot so their nose isn't in the shot, just a side of face profile. What is your take on this?

Also, when doing reversals on this OTS shot, what are your thoughts on framing so the other actor's, head size and eye line position, mirror the other preceding shot head size and eye position? (of course, each actor is on their own side of the screen)
 
Good question 10s

I'd like to add to your question if I can:

Shouldn't an OTS generally be shot on the shoulder of the talent ? An example would be an actress of 5'4" and an actor of 5'9". When shooting over the 5'9" actor, we would be looking down towards our actress and then visa versa.

I see many OTS's where they appear as more straightforward Reverses; camera at the same height on each reverse shot but not necessarily OVER THE SHOULDER
 
I dislike getting overly picky about matching reverses, where you not only use the same focal length, but measure the distances so they match too. I understand why it's a good idea, but if that's all it took to cover a scene, a computer could direct the movie. You can spend all this time matching the two directions perfectly and then when the actors step in, the director screams "the actress's close-up looks looser!" -- which is due to the fact that the actress has a smaller head than the actor in the reverse angle. So in the end, you might as well eyeball things and go by instinct, based on the dramatic needs of the scene.

As for over-the-shoulders versus raking shots, it just depends on which works better.
 
When I saw Indian Jones IV, it appeared to me that some scenes had some "blue streaking". I faintly remember David Mullen saying that some lenses can cause blue streaking in certain situations or may be I remember incorrectly. Did anybody else notice that?
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Anamorphic lenses (in particular, front anamorphic element prime lenses) create a blue horizontal streak across the cylindrical surface of the anamorphic element.
Click to expand...

Thanks David for the response. I remember seeing many horizontal streaks in the latest Indiana Jones movie that is consistent with your explanation.
 
David,

since you covered setting up back and forth shots, can you go on more about the topic?

I recently directed a simple scene and I decided I wanted to cover a two way conversation as dirty singles. Anyway, we really blew it. Even though I kept the focal length the same and tried to keep the camera about the same height, one of my actors ended up looking like an elf (really small) compared to the other. Of course there is still the master shot so the audience KNOWS she isn't actually smaller. But it's really distracting in the "back and forth" part of the edit. I should have caught it on set, but I didn't notice the mistake until I started the edit.

So, my question is... do you have any tips for getting everything right on this sort of setup?
 
I haven't had that problem, you can usually see that stuff when you line up the shot. The main problem with dirty singles (i.e. sort of over-the-shoulders) is that if you are shooting a 2-person scene with a 2-person master and two dirty singles, then both actors are in all the coverage, so it can be hard to cut if one actor or both is not good about matching their actions take to take, shot to shot. Because you may want to use a particular moment in one take but the f.g. actor is taking a drink or something during that point but isn't doing it the same way on the reverse angle.
 
I'm sure David will freak on this but, I want to experiment with an electronic overlay, like the lines used for determining the aspect frame. I want adjustable sized head shaped ovals that can be moved within the screen space, and matching reversals, and + + markers on the eyes for lining up the shot. Yes, it's over the top & a crutch but, so what, I'm really interested in the end product.

I'd even go so far as to import traced lines from story boards and overlay these lines to help guide set up. Anything to get the original composition on the screen using minimal time & conflict.

OK, tear me apart David. :rip_1:
 
Hello David. What did you think of the way Indy 4 was lit and shot?
 
lordtangent said:
I recently directed a simple scene and I decided I wanted to cover a two way conversation as dirty singles. Anyway, we really blew it.
Click to expand...
If the camera or video monitor has the ability to store a frame and switch between the stored frame and the live view, couldn't this be useful to preview what cutting between reverse shots will look like?
 
10s said:
I'm sure David will freak on this but, I want to experiment with an electronic overlay, like the lines used for determining the aspect frame. I want adjustable sized head shaped ovals that can be moved within the screen space, and matching reversals, and + + markers on the eyes for lining up the shot. Yes, it's over the top & a crutch but, so what, I'm really interested in the end product.

I'd even go so far as to import traced lines from story boards and overlay these lines to help guide set up. Anything to get the original composition on the screen using minimal time & conflict.

OK, tear me apart David. :rip_1:
Click to expand...

I don't want to tear you apart, just that it seems like a rather mechanical and non-intuitive way to make a movie -- it's like how big efx movies are made. You certainly wouldn't end up with a "In the Mood for Love" type of movie with that approach.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
I haven't had that problem, you can usually see that stuff when you line up the shot. The main problem with dirty singles (i.e. sort of over-the-shoulders) is that if you are shooting a 2-person scene with a 2-person master and two dirty singles, then both actors are in all the coverage, so it can be hard to cut if one actor or both is not good about matching their actions take to take, shot to shot. Because you may want to use a particular moment in one take but the f.g. actor is taking a drink or something during that point but isn't doing it the same way on the reverse angle.
Click to expand...

Awesome reply David.

I just absorbed that like a sponge in heat.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
I don't want to tear you apart, just that it seems like a rather mechanical and non-intuitive way to make a movie -- it's like how big efx movies are made. You certainly wouldn't end up with a "In the Mood for Love" type of movie with that approach.
Click to expand...

First off, it's a ton of work & I agree the idea appears rather mechanical, and it is, but in my mind the real inspiration & intuition should occur way before shooting time when the script is being interpreted into shots. That's where the conceptual design & artisty should take place, the design phase. Then on set if further inspiration arrives in the moment (and it often does), well go for it! As Hitchcock, Mamet & others say, you have all the time in the world to get it right before you get on set, so prepare ahead of time, because once you're on set it's a little late.

Anyway, it's food for thought. :waaa:

Thanks
 
10s said:
As Hitchcock, Mamet & others say, you have all the time in the world to get it right before you get on set, so prepare ahead of time, because once you're on set it's a little late.
Click to expand...

That's my general philosophy too, preparation is vital. But composition is an interactive and fluid thing, affected by how the actors move, the light falls, etc. so I don't see much point in exactly framing in advance for whether a chest-up shot is composed with the top two shirt buttons in frame or only one button in frame, etc. Those sorts of decisions can be made while looking through the lens at the subject. Prep & design is really for the big picture and broad strokes, to get all the elements in place. If all it took was planning and design, you could hand your storyboards over to anyone else to direct and photograph the movie...
 
David Mullen ASC said:
If all it took was planning and design, you could hand your storyboards over to anyone else to direct and photograph the movie...
Click to expand...

I agree with the little things (buttons, etc... that's really getting picky!) on set approach.

An interesting side note: On the statement of yours (above) I believe I remember Hitchcock saying something to the effect that, all I really need to do is hand off my script, notes and storyboard directions and have someone carry it out: direct actors, do the photography, etc... because it's still my design, it's my story. I think he was being half serious and half silly, but the point he was stressing is the design is the director's job, at least his job, when he was directing.

I guess there's a million ways to peel an orange. :wacko:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top