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 :)

Lens decisions in building the look of a piece

This video has a lot of good info on shooting with candles. He talks about shooting clean with candles and then using filtration on day exteriors, etc. If you have the option of using Master Primes you might reconsider using them clean and filtering on other situations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOZ2rtxMDGo
 
Ben Scott said:
a quick looks says my oldest Helios shots on flickr are from 2007 :) - and they are great fun and can give wonderful results but I certainly intend to use cine glass for this production.
Click to expand...

Then go Dog Schidt?
 
Mark Wuerthner said:
This video has a lot of good info on shooting with candles. He talks about shooting clean with candles and then using filtration on day exteriors, etc. If you have the option of using Master Primes you might reconsider using them clean and filtering on other situations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOZ2rtxMDGo
Click to expand...
Thanks Mark will watch this later. Have considered MPs.
 
Scot Yount said:
Then go Dog Schidt?
Click to expand...

Been using those since Richard first started making them too! But I intend to use cine glass and anyway, their flaring characteristics would play havoc with what I am trying to do. Cheers.
 
Swiss Army Man used the Xtal Express lenses for the bus sequence and it looked beautiful. The rest of the movie was shot with S4's so it was a great combination.
 
I have a set of S35 Illuminas. (18,25,35,50,85,135)

They have some glow to them at T1.3 and they produce a beautiful flare all over. The glow goes away at T 2.0. 18 & 25 cover 5.5K on Dragon and 6.5 -7 K on Helium.

I just got them so I am planning a more comprehensive test soon.

I am in Bucharest, Romania, and if you want to use them for the shoot I can fly with them. They are great for gimbal work also as the weight is UP comparable.
 
I remember a few days ago, someone posted a question about filters. Why not rent good-but-cheap lenses (Sony, RED, even Mamiyas), and investigate filtration? You don't have to use off-the-shelf filters, as you can make your own if you want. For example, fine black stocking material. Or a combination of two or more weak filters to create a semi-unique look.

I can't find the blog post now (I don't know if I'll ever find it again) but a British DP, back in the '70s I think, had to come up with a filter that gave some blooming to street lights but retained sharpness. He ended up using clear filters and very, very lightly spraying them with white paint from a spray gun.
 
Ben Scott said:
I'm going to be shooting a short later in the year to use to try and fund a proper feature or pilot and I want to devise a look for the piece to give it a strong aesthetic. It's set in 14th century England and is a fun, if dark, adventure. Laughs, scares, action and drama. I'm veering away from Master Primes as possibly being too perfect, and veering away from Cookes as it seems every single British drama (period or not) shares the Alexa / Cooke aesthetic and I want to push it a bit.
Click to expand...
You can always degrade the material in post and get all kinds of looks, some massively different. Lenses are not going to make the kind of change you're talking about. Different lighting styles can also make a drastic change. I don't think starting off with a soft lens is the answer; you can always add diffusion as a filter or use selective softness and glows in color-correction.

Look at the current ITV series Victoria (shot on Alexa). It looks like nothing I've ever seen shot on Alexa. I think it's kind of an extreme look, but by god, it's unique and original. And it wasn't done with lenses -- it was done with a lot of interesting looks in post.

 
Justus de Jager said:
I know Ex Mechina was shot on them but with the Sony F65 if i'm not mistaken

Have a look

I can repost an older post of screen grabs where I used them but don't have video clips available yet
Click to expand...

Yup think you are correct about Ex Machina. That feature was also shot completely Tungsten I beleive.
 
I do love older glass, i had some old Cookes once and then Russian Lomos and decided that the lomos were pretty much the same - same fall off, bokeh and flare. But i shoot more stills on it than anything else.

But at the same time i think one of the first questions is how will post happen? Is there any planned, or will it all be in-camera?

A lot of characteristics that we talk about lenses are very much from the film days, when the lens really was a major source of colouring. Now though, post can be so much more delicate, from a better master source - you can take away but you can add what wasn't there in the first place. Softening an image with the aberration characteristic of a particular lens is pretty common place, it has to be for CG integration.

And of course if there is any post vfx work (and you say short, but you never know) then vintage lenses bring their own potentially huge issues - depending on the nature of that post. Landscape extensions, buildings - a real pain to get source from a plate which is distorted like crazy across the field and lots more time emulating the same effects for any additional elements. Then tracking in anamorphic, and crazy lens distortion is a painful process.

So IMHO characteristics like colour, flare and glare (to a degree) and 'softness' can often be done in post. Other features like DOF, Bokeh and spherical vs anamorphic, not so. So personally i'd concentrate on those visual aspects.

Would shooting on Master Primes be more reliable and faster, is that a consideration?

I find some issues with vintage in that clearly there aren't good lens sets overall out there. In Silence, which is beautifully shot, there is one lens used which is so crazily out of whack that it took me out of the story a bit and cutting with other lenses it really jumped out. I'm pretty sure i've seen this exact same lens before as well. Theory of Everything, if i was to guess! So consistency in vintage sets could be an issue too.

And i also know that we tend to obsess about lenses and hopefully whatever the story is would shine regardless. I doubt anyone else in the cinema watching Silence paid even a second glance at those shots.

I think the Alexa look is just very easy, path of least resistance at the moment and that's all post, those Arri LUTS are ubiquitous! However whilst not a fan of the Victoria grades (bit too blue and heavy handed IMHO) it is nicely different. Also the Crown series i thought was wonderful and i can't find for sure what lenses, but i read Cooke. However i found the shadows and grade just sublime, and the detail in the shadows wonderful. There was a film on Vermeer not that long ago and again, shot on the usual modern suspects, but the look was so spot on. There's a site i think called lowepost that has some nice colourist stories on and the occasional example - i liked the peaky blinders one for 'old'.

cheers
Paul
 
paulcurtis said:
There was a film on Vermeer not that long ago and again, shot on the usual modern suspects, but the look was so spot on.
Click to expand...

Was it 'Girl with a Pearl Earring' shot by Eduardo Serra? What a gorgeous film that was. Shot on 35mm 5218 and Cooke S4s, if I remember correctly.
 
Satsuki Murashige said:
Was it 'Girl with a Pearl Earring' shot by Eduardo Serra? What a gorgeous film that was. Shot on 35mm 5218 and Cooke S4s, if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...

I don't think so, the one i am thinking of was an Alexa show. I will have to see if i can dig it out - it was more indie than Girl with a Pearl Earring.

cheers
Paul
 
This is shaping up to be quite a debate I think.

The question, .. with all of the control we have in post now, . how "necessary" is creating the look in camera?

Makes sense to me to capture the best quality image and add filters, diffusion etc later.

Curtis
 
Best quality image is subjective. Trying to glow every light source the way a particular lens does in post, or create pretty flares, or add a slight vignette and focus fall off to every single shot is a shit ton of work. Plus, unless you are deeply involved in the post chain, there is no hope of getting the look you intended.

Personally, I like to shoot as close to how the final product is going to look as possible. Make decisions, make choices, own them and go for it. Another thing with the add it in post idea, is if you are shooting on a particular set of lenses, you may choose to use a particular artifact for a shot. That impacts your shot design on the day in a way that is singular to the lenses you are using. For instance shooting on anamorphics makes you think about when to rack focus much differently than on sphericals.

Personally I like glass with quirks (optically, not mechanically). I recently modified a 50mm with a reversed front element, and I have been using the hell out of it ;-) Just my two cents.

Nick
 
Interesting thoughts Nick,

I think most of us here including myself are lens "crazy"
Heck I'd have an entire building full of lenses if I could afford it.

Curtis
 
I love tech but Certain things I prefer in front of the sensor and in front of post, in exactly the same way my guitar effects pedal rig might be both analogue and digital. Optical diffusion for example is something I love and have never felt with my own work was something I could get anywhere near in post.

Not to say Master Primes aren't a strong option for this, but it would be one tool in the palette to craft a distinct aesthetic, alongside art direction and framing and movement etc. Which is why I was interested in the methodology of people making these sorts of decisions possibly even more than wanting outright recommendations, which of course are also very welcome.

To Add, Im going to be doing just about everything on so the post pipeline will be whatever I want tit to be.
 
Last edited:
Nick Gardner said:
Trying to glow every light source the way a particular lens does in post, or create pretty flares, or add a slight vignette and focus fall off to every single shot is a shit ton of work. Plus, unless you are deeply involved in the post chain, there is no hope of getting the look you intended.

Personally, I like to shoot as close to how the final product is going to look as possible. Make decisions, make choices, own them and go for it.
Click to expand...

QFT.
 
This is an interesting conversation to have and one that I've been dealing with a lot, both as a DP and as a camera/lens tech at a rental house.

I've seen DPs take the same kit every shoot, sometimes throwing a filter or two in front (after considerable amount of testing) to give their image the character they want. As a result, we have stocked up on filters like Hollywood Blackmagic, Black Satin, Pearlescent, etc. While I respect this method, I do however shy away from it as I have this snobby/purist mentality about not veiling the natural look of a lens.

I've also seen DPs spend days testing different lenses that either we carry or that we would source. Cooke S2/S3s, K-35s, Kowas, Lomos, Super Speeds, B-Speeds, Super Baltars, etc. They all have very unique characteristics that compliment the visual style they are looking for. This is the camp I personally fall in as a DP.

In every case of course, this is complimented by different techniques in lighting that come support the visual style.

There is a reason why many DPs today talk about lenses the same way they would talk about film stocks. And it's the same reason Panavision is bringing back older glass back to life as well. With the increase in sensor quality and the power of the color suite, these are now some of the few analogue choices we are left with as image-makers.

The hunt for the perfect glass for a project is also what I find to be one of the most exciting parts of the job. It allows you to really dig deep into the film and try to get the best understanding as to what emotion you are trying to convey. I'm also very fond of the idea of "burning in" your look. You can take the most perfect lens with the idea of tuning in your look in post, but honestly, there is something magical about being on set and seeing how your light reacts to the unique (often flawed) optics you've chosen. It inspires this spontaneous creativity that I am fond of.

In your case, I would try contacting rental houses around you or that you are familiar with and request a couple of days of testing. Bring as many references you have and just start playing around. You could also check out rental catalogues of such places like Panavision, Keslow, Camtech (known for their custom coatings on modern optics) and Vantage.

I'm extremely interested in the choice you make, so be sure to report back once you find your style!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top