Ask David Mullen ANYTHING

[Douglas Underdahl]

It happens all the time, the editor using bad footage in the cut.

I had problems timing a night exterior shot done on the RED because some B-camera had rolled on part of the location before the lighting had been turned on (maybe at the request of the director or someone) and the editor then liked the shot and used it, despite it being quite underexposed.

I've certainly had my share of soft, sloppy, long-lensed B-camera shots cut into a movie. Makes me cringe.

I did one movie in 35mm anamorphic 2.40 and the editor cut out most of the wide shots and used close-ups for the whole movie... and then told the director that he didn't shoot enough close-ups so he could cut out even more of the wider shots in the movie! Then he took a dozen shots or so and had them digitally zoomed into to make them tighter as well.

How awful. I shot a short and then the editor decided to crop everything about 2.4:1 when I shot it 16:9, so now I will never show it to anyone lest they think I enjoy slicing the tops of actors heads off for no apparent reason.

I'm tired of seeing so many close-ups in movies. Seems to me to be a TV aesthetic. So few directors and DPs really know what to do with the big screen. CITIZEN KANE had only a handful of cu's, which made them so much more powerful when they did appear.

 

[M Most]

I was thinking of something like this:

Roberto, I think you're making this much more difficult and convoluted than it has to be. I get the impression that you feel your time spent trying different color approaches is worthwhile, and it might very well be. But if you're ultimately going to have a professional colorist at a facility do the final work, you should probably re-think how far you either need or want to go. There are a number of facilities that would not require you to render anything, nor would they want you to bring them DPX files. Any competent colorist can get to a "base" grade very, very quickly, particularly if the material is professionally shot. You might want to consider the following:

1. Decide what shots are going to be involved in the VFX and create an EDL of just those shots.
2. Using that EDL, gather together the R3d files that those shots came from.
3. Put the files on a drive, bring it to a facility (the ones that use Scratch are good candidates for this due to the efficiency of that system in what I'm going to propose) along with the EDL.
4. Have the colorist load up the EDL. You can then do the base color corrections for those shots (in real time, very quickly) and render them out to DPX files for the VFX artists. Once the effects are complete, they will be returned to you as a new set of DPX files.
5. Instead of doing your own conform and color correction, go through the show in your editing software and using the color correction available in the program (both Final Cut and Avid have very good basic color correction that works in real time) create a version that shows your basic visual intent. Unless you're really changing what it is that was shot, this should be very do-able given sensibly converted dailies.
6. Render out a Quicktime movie of the show, balanced by reels. This will be used for the conform check, and also as a color guide by the colorist.
7. Let the facility do a conform directly from the R3d files. Given the proper tools, they can do this very quickly, efficiently, and accurately - much quicker than you can. It thus becomes a rather low cost item, and it gives you the ability to work directly from the original R3d files for everything but the VFX shots, which will be integrated directly from the DPX's.
8. Sit back and watch the colorist do a much better job in real time than anyone you would hire could do using a desktop approach. It also ensures that the grading is done in the proper color space for your eventual delivery, be that film, HD video, SD video, Internet, or whatever. In most cases, it will be done in a way that ALL of those deliveries can be accomplished with little to no variation in look.

If you need suggestions as to who to talk to for this kind of work, I'd be happy to make some suggestions privately.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Hey Mmost! Thanks for answering here.

Roberto, I think you're making this much more difficult and convoluted than it has to be.

:watsup:

5. Instead of doing your own conform and color correction, go through the show in your editing software and using the color correction available in the program (both Final Cut and Avid have very good basic color correction that works in real time) create a version that shows your basic visual intent. Unless you're really changing what it is that was shot, this should be very do-able given sensibly converted dailies.

I did plan to do this in Color, or even in FC.

I would love to ask you for some guidance and sincerely appreciate your help!

 

[M Most]

I would love to ask you for some guidance and sincerely appreciate your help!

Feel free to ask.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Feel free to ask.

You got PM :watsup:

 

[Mike S. M.]

Running a movie camera at high speed means that with the 180 degree shutter, the shutter times are also shortened -- at 100 fps, your shutter speed is 1/200th.

Hi David,

Just a question about what you said above. In Digital cine cameras, be it the Sonys, Varicam or the RED, does the shutter compensation happens automatically when you change frame rate or is something you normally do manually? And when over cranking or under cranking, what are the standard shutter speeds/angles for the most usual rates like 60fps, 50fps, 22fps and 18fps? Is it the same math as 24fps? I guess what I'm asking is, is 180° the normal for over cranking and under cranking shooting too and the choice of another angle like 45° is an aesthetic choice as is with 24fps? I'm talking from a digital point of view as much as a film one here.
Thanks for all your time and great advice.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

If you're trying to match the look of a film camera running at faster frame rates, yes, you generally stick to a 180 degree shutter angle, i.e. at 48 fps, that would be 1/96th (though if you selected anything similar like 1/100th, it would be close enough.)

Of course, you may break with that tradition if you have a good reason. Even on film shoots, some people close down the shutter angle for a crisper look for the slow-motion shots, like to see droplets of splashing water for example.

Some digital cameras allow you to select a shutter angle and thus are compensating the shutter speed when you change the frame rate. Others allow or require you to set a shutter speed independently of frame rate, except that your shutter speed can't be longer than the frame rate allows (i.e. you can't open up more than 360 degrees.)

 

[Tim Whitcomb]

Hi David-

Have a creative question... and trust it is technical as well. Ive seen lots of great RED footage, and seen some that really struggles with night and the ocean...
I am going to shoot a test because I am seriously considering shooting this film.. as Im afraid of noise and motion artifacts in the white crashing waves... if I cant pull it off
on the RED. Im not hiring a DP on the test, and am just trying to learn .

Have you shot anything like this? or close to it?

SCENE:

EXT. BEACH RESORT -- NIGHT. (OPENING CREDITS)
Waves crash; the camera slowly pulls back from the waves
and we see a series of run-down cabins overlooking
the stormy Pacific Ocean. An old sign flapping in the wind
reads PARADISE BEACH RESORT.


I was planning on highlighting the crashing waves with a far off and heavily gelled Tungsten (to replicate the source of the cabin lights and so we can see the waves.. and to hopefully avoid too much noise.

it also needs to be stormy... fortunately, thats almost everyday on the Oregon coast.
its always windy and there are always waves.

your thoughts, ideas, lighting, relative to the RED ONE... are greatly appreciated... thanks in advance. especially as I will be moving from near dark to light.

Usuing a crane on a dolly as well to pull back and up over the cabins for the reveal.

thank you... my fear is I wont be able to avoid the noise... and may end up shooting this small, but extremely important (foreshadowing) scene on film...or shooting night for day... (or is it day for night) and correcting it for night in post?
id much rather capture this correctly in camera if I can...

EDIT: Zeiss Superspeed 18 1.4 (MK III) is the widest lens i have. forgot to mention that.

 

[Mike S. M.]

Thanks for the reply David.

Of course, you may break with that tradition if you have a good reason. Even on film shoots, some people close down the shutter angle for a crisper look for the slow-motion shots, like to see droplets of splashing water for example.

This sounds interesting. Would you know of any movies that used a 45 or even 90 degrees shutter during slow motion? I would think a crisper slow motion would probably look somehow more interesting.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I mostly recall it in some sports commercials, like one in b&w of a bunch of track runners and their feet splashing in the mud.

I suppose it's possible that some of the slow-motion in "300" also closed down the shutter, but I'm not sure.

Trouble is that you lose exposure running the camera fast and you lose even more exposure by closing down the shutter angle, so it tends to only be done in bright conditions like outside in sunlight.

 

[Mike S. M.]

Oh yes, almost forgot the exposure problem.
By the way, the compensation for shutter goes something like that right:

45 +2 stops
90 +1 stop
235 -1/3 stop
360 (for HD since not possible with film) -1stop.

Not sure if all the above is right, just from the top of my head.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I'd probably switch the minus and plus signs, since usually you are noting how many stops are lost with a minus sign... so 90 degrees would be -1 stop correction.

And not sure about 235 equally a gain of +1/3 stops compared to 180... you'd think it would be 240...

 

[Tim Hole]

Hi David! Question to something that has been weighing on my mind recently. I am planning on shooting some lowlight shots, some from a cheated single candle shots and another single photoflood in a low hanging ceiling light over a table.

The issue lies with green screen. I am going with the Alton 'Painting with light' philosophy here so really only want to ambiently light the set I prefer the idea of having a virtual set rather than a physical set...How would one go about and what should you keep in mind when lighting something like this...where there is isolated light around the players, darkness and then the green screen bleeding green light into the orifaces I don't want it to go...

Hope that makes some kind of sense to you.

Thanks for your time...

 

[Mike Best]

I'm due to shoot desert exteriors soon for the first time, on the Red.
What advice would you give for coping with the desert light, that is presumably very high contrast and very harsh?

Would you recommend the use of contrast-lowering filtration? Or just stick to flying silks over the actors and creating soft bounce as fill?

Any other things to think about, or kit that is vital?

Thanks

 

[AntonyCASAFilms]

Some digital cameras allow you to select a shutter angle and thus are compensating the shutter speed when you change the frame rate. Others allow or require you to set a shutter speed independently of frame rate, except that your shutter speed can't be longer than the frame rate allows (i.e. you can't open up more than 360 degrees.)

I'm sure this is correct for most digital cameras.
But I used to use a Sony camera which did allow more than a 360 degree shutter. I could shoot at 50i with exposures of 1/2 second!
It made for some interesting "smeared" lights when filming at night.

 

[Mike S. M.]

I'd probably switch the minus and plus signs, since usually you are noting how many stops are lost with a minus sign... so 90 degrees would be -1 stop correction.

And not sure about 235 equally a gain of +1/3 stops compared to 180... you'd think it would be 240...

Yeah, switching them would work too. My line of thought was 45 you need to open the lens 2 stops to compensate, so you need + 2 stops etc. But I guess we are on the same page.
I was also not so sure about 235 or even 360. I remember that when you use a 1/24 shutter in a HD camera you gain 1 stop and 1/24 is a 360 shutter. So going 180° up equals 1 stop gain but going only 135° down to get at 45° equals a 2 stop loss. Quite confusing but I seem to remember 1/24 is in fact a 1 stop gain. Now 235° I'm not sure at all.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I'm sure this is correct for most digital cameras.
But I used to use a Sony camera which did allow more than a 360 degree shutter. I could shoot at 50i with exposures of 1/2 second!
It made for some interesting "smeared" lights when filming at night.

Generally in order to do that, the camera actually drops the capture rate. So it wasn't shooting & recording 50 fields every second anymore if the shutter time was 1/2-sec long per field. In one second, that would only be two fields captured max.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Yeah, switching them would work too. My line of thought was 45 you need to open the lens 2 stops to compensate, so you need + 2 stops etc. But I guess we are on the same page.
I was also not so sure about 235 or even 360. I remember that when you use a 1/24 shutter in a HD camera you gain 1 stop and 1/24 is a 360 shutter. So going 180° up equals 1 stop gain but going only 135° down to get at 45° equals a 2 stop loss. Quite confusing but I seem to remember 1/24 is in fact a 1 stop gain. Now 235° I'm not sure at all.

I'd avoid throwing the word "gain" in regards to shutter time around too much (even though i just did it above!) because digital cameras also allow electronic gain in order to boost exposure.

Yes, at 24 fps with a 360 degree shutter (which is no shutter), exposure time is 1/24th. At 180 degrees, it's 1/48th. At 90 degrees, it's 1/96th. At 45 degrees, it's 1/192nd.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I'm due to shoot desert exteriors soon for the first time, on the Red.
What advice would you give for coping with the desert light, that is presumably very high contrast and very harsh?

Would you recommend the use of contrast-lowering filtration? Or just stick to flying silks over the actors and creating soft bounce as fill?

Any other things to think about, or kit that is vital?

Thanks

I'd only use contrast filters if you want a contrast-filtered look, unless they are very mild. But the truth is that people often expect desert photography in sunlight to be very crisp.

Generally you'd use some bounce fill, maybe some thin diffusion overhead for close-ups (I'd use something like a Half Soft Frost, which is like Opal -- not a full Silk, unless you are suggesting the actors are standing under the shade of a hillside.)

Truth is that in an open exterior space, the contrast is high but not horrible -- maybe a three or four-stop difference between sun and shadow. The problem with contrast comes in darker environments like a forest or day interior where you can have spots of sunlight that are several stops hotter than the shadows. Or when the sun is being reflected off of water at the beach.

Though I'd avoid white clothing for the actors if I were you.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

The issue lies with green screen. I am going with the Alton 'Painting with light' philosophy here so really only want to ambiently light the set I prefer the idea of having a virtual set rather than a physical set...How would one go about and what should you keep in mind when lighting something like this...where there is isolated light around the players, darkness and then the green screen bleeding green light into the orifaces I don't want it to go...

Hope that makes some kind of sense to you.

Thanks for your time...

Sounds like you want high-contrast lighting with black shadows against a green screen. Well, I'd keep the green screen as far back as you can and put black flags just off camera to reduce the green spill bouncing back, and make the green screen as dark as you can get away with and still pull a good key. Avoid shiny objects in the f.g. If you have to, use a weak amount of backlight to wash out the green spill. There are some good compositing software also that gets rid of spill.

Then time the final composite on the contrasty side with deep blacks.