• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

Lighting for Naturalistic Thriller Night Shoot

M

meow1984

My DoP and I are having a disagreement. We'll be filming at an abandoned asylum that has no electricity and I want it to be as realistic as possible. Therefore, I want it to be lit by powerful flashlights because that is what the characters would be using. He says that this would look horrible. I say, so what. If the story is good and it's well acted and well directed, the lighting can be realistic. Plus, since we'll be steadicamming most of it, it will be difficult to set up a generator and still have freedom of motion. I respect this DoP very much and have worked with him on numerous other movies, and it has been my pleasure to do so. However, in this particular instance, I feel that he is mistaken.
Before I make any definite decisions, I would like to know what other DoP's think. Who is right? Me, with the we can get away with realism approach, or him, with the need to artificially light for the sake of professionalism approach?
FYI, we're doing this on a shoestring budget.]
Any help you can give would be very helpful.
Thank you.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Seems to me choosing not to light that set, is a waste of an awesome location.
Not lighting the actors is a waste of good actors. We have to see them, acting is 50% body language... no light.. no body language.. no acting..

Realism, who wants that? We all LIVE in the real world, we want BETTER than real. Scarier than real, darker than real, brighter than real.

That said, I think you have a great idea in your head, you have this vision, that your not able to express clearly, hence the frustration.

Try expressing your VISION as you see it.. Not the process you think should be use to get there but just what you "see"

A vision of dark corridors, with pools of light catching the scary bits is cool, but it needs CONTRAST to make it special.

100% noob opinion..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks for the feedback.

We'll try to figure out a power source to get some lighting in there. I think we'll be able to meet somewhere in between with just enough lighting to make it pop.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
meow1984 said:
He says that this would look horrible. I say, so what.
Click to expand...
So what?

There is a difference between looking like it’s being lit only by
the flashlights of the characters and looking horrible. Really
good, natural lighting takes a lot of work, talent and skill. As
wheat points out, the audience expects better than real. You can
point a camera and get an image and it will look horrible. You can
light the scene well and it will look “HORRIBLE”.

I think your DP is right. Of course it will be difficult. But
that’s the difference between pointing a camera and shooting
what’s there and making a movie.

Realism can be the most difficult result to get.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
you have an advantage in that a few lights can go a LONG way in a setting like that. Think of looking down a hall.. rather than lighting the the corridor, you stick a light in a few of the rooms that OPEN on to the hall, lights spilling out into the hall just stink of menace.. each lighted doorway suggest a different doom.

The classic master shot of tension. Low angle of someone looking down a connecting corridor. The viewer cant see down the corridor so we take our queues from the actors body language.. and scream at the screen DON'T GO DOWN THAT CORRIDOR!!!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yep, like wheat and rik said, your DP knows of what he speaks.

I shot scenes for my latest movie in the dank tunnels underneath the city, theoretically lit primarily by a flashlight. Took all the lighting gear I had and many hours to achieve.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
+1 to what's been already said.

And don't forget that the human eye is the most sophisticated piece of optical technology in the world. It's puts to shame even the best cameras and lenses. Therefore the lighting we see with our eyes simply cannot be picked up by a camera if you just point and shoot. You need to help the camera see how we see, or maybe trick, not help? Either way, that's why your DP is right and you need to figure out how to light it so the final product looks like the real thing.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
+1 on the comment about the eye.. the eye as cool as it is is only a small part of the process..
check out Saccade and fovea..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saccade

(as a total sidebar by the way completely OT!)

A person may observe the saccadic masking effect by standing in front of a mirror and looking from one eye to the next (and vice versa). The subject will not experience any movement of the eyes nor any evidence that the optic nerve has momentarily ceased transmitting. Due to saccadic masking, the eye/brain system not only hides the eye movements from the individual but also hides the evidence that anything has been hidden. Of course, a second observer watching the experiment will see the subject's eyes moving back and forth. The function's main purpose is to prevent smearing of the image.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'd be interested to see what you come with-I'm going to be shooting in a similar location (factory in my case) in the near future, and would like to see the ideas you come up with for lighting!

Wheat and Directorik pretty much nail it-it's not that you want the "Realistic" effect in real life-you want what would be "realistic" (or as said, more than real) to the audience.

I've been learning a LOT about lighting lately and how much it means :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top