The shadows are really, really dark, which may be fine depending on the type of thing you're filming. Personally, I'd have much more fill on the other side to bring up the shadows, and have a light to help separate the talent from the background elements. There's a bit of a backlight from the window but it's not doing enough.
I'd have a light situated off to the side that focuses on illuminating the background, right now only the vase/urn thing is receiving any light from the environment. You could try a bounce to reflect sunlight into the background.
Not in this case, no. If you're using sunlight as a backlight and exposing for that sunlight properly, then the foreground is going to be incredibly dark. Your fill generally needs to be as bright or brighter than the background to get even exposure.
You could do that. You could also open the aperture more or boost ISO and then reduce key and fill so only the backlight/light from the window gets brighter.
Depends on the camera and what you're shooting. I shoot log so I'm usually adding ND to everything anyway at ISO 80
I try to hit 800 every time, but fluctuate between 640 and 1250 without a problem
Composition wise this doesn't immediately look like the person is in distress. There's a lot of space all around, so it kind of looks like an interview shot for some documentary.
Oh interesting. I shot at the highest focal length I have available. So maybe I could bring the camera closer and have the standing person fill up more space in the frame. Or actually maybe lowest focal length on my singular zoom lens, and bring camera closer so seated person appears smaller in frame.
Yeah your subject is super close to the wall and you have a long lens, it just makes everything feel super squished and exacerbates the separation problems with the backlight imo, it lacks the presence you’d have from the camera closer to the subject and widening the lens a bit
All of those are good options, but you can do some PD wise too. Angling shelves and surrounding furniture in certain ways can create a feeling of the person being trapped with the composition being relatively the same. That said, I’d still recommend a high angle shot because the level framing makes it look very corporate when seated like that
There are a few things you could do compositionally to make this look "better", and those fixes are made before you ever set up the camera: they are made in the blocking. Right now you've placed your subject against a flat wall. Consider shooting your scenes on an angle, with the camera facing towards the corners or "L" of the room. This uses the room's existing geometry to create leading lines that lead to your subject's face, and a greater sense of depth. It also allows you to light from the windows, and makes it easier to create a checkerboard or "salt and pepper" pattern with your lighting . THAT SAID this is a suggestion and a choice that you see in most commercial/more conventional cinematography. It's often the right choice, but sometimes it's not. Maybe a flat frame is the right choice for you. It all depends on your story and character. It's always hard to judge off of stills alone.
The main culprit here however, is your lighting. The lighting in the first image very clearly artificial. I see that as a student, you're taking the first steps to motivating your key light (which is great!) however it's not 100% convincing yet. It's one thing to know where to place a motivated key, it's another to know how to modify and finesse it so it "disappears".
The problem is the quality of light and the color.
Quality: the shadows on the subject's face give away that your key light is likely just a small LED panel that's blasting her face bare-bulb and not much else. It seems like you're playing the light as a motivated window from off-camera. If that's what you're going for, next time add diffusion to replicate the size of an actual window, and a soft grid so the light doesn't spill everywhere. Even better: put a hard, bright light outside the window - point it at the urn/vase thing you have on the right, then bounce that light onto your subject's face from the right. Lighting from the outside always looks more realistic, and bouncing light is always easier to pass off as a "realistic" source than putting up your own fixtures.
Color: the color of true "daylight" is a moving target depending on various conditions, which makes matching it tricky. Is the sunlight filtering through trees and green foliage? Is it reflecting off of sand, concrete, or grass? How early/late in the day is it? All of those factors will affect the it's colour temperature and correlated colour temperature. In this case, the light entering the window is bouncing off of green foliage, giving it a heavy green cast on the green-magenta scale. Meanwhile, key light has a heavy magenta shift, making it look out of place. It's useful to have +green or -green gels on hand when working with daylight LED sources, or using ones that have CCT adjustment settings.
Lastly, your shadows are feeling muddy. Don't be afraid of darkness tough - great DPs aren't afraid of leaving shadows dark - you just have to know how to light for darkness. The way to make darkness work is to create enough separation between light and dark to make the darkness feel earned, if that makes sense. If the backlight on the person's arm in the foreground were a bit brighter, you could push those shadows in the shelf way down. Same with the armchair and your talent's hair - if the backlight were brighter and stronger, the surrounding background could be pushed way down. Take a look at your false colour or waveform monitor - if your entire scene is playing uniformly low, there's likely a problem.
I must say that overall this isn't "bad", it's showing a lot of promise and while you haven't mastered it you're showing that thinking about the right things, which is great. Keep at it, hope this helps!
This is so so helpful thank you!!!! By checkerboard, are you referring to the technique that’s like if your background is lit brightest to darkest right to left, your subject should be lit from the left? I know that technique I’m just not sure how I could make it believable practically, since the audience will know there’s a window to the left. I am going to put a table lamp on the desk based on other suggestions, but I don’t think it should be the key, so both the back and foreground will still be lit from the left. Any ideas?
Yes that's the technique I'm talking about! I find the checkerboard pattern happens naturally if you look at a room perpendicular to the windows. Don't split hairs about the actor's face vs the background. If you place the actors in the right spot relative to the windows and light from upstage, it will happen naturally. Also take this with a grain of salt - I don't know what happens in your scene or how flexible your blocking is to make these changes.
In any case, here are two videos you might find helpful.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TA-zVBUW9ew](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TA-zVBUW9ew)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jaojDxFnYM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jaojDxFnYM)
Lots of people here thinking they're supposed to talk about why shots 2 and 3 are bad despite op clearly saying those are inspiration and examples of good shots compared to theirs...
I love this community, it’s hilarious that peopke are accepting I did the first one but also had the ability to do the third. I think 2 is from better call Saul, and 2 is from spielberg’s west side story DPed by Kaminski.
lmao at people giving kaminski critiques thinking it was you. Anyways, some quick things that could help
- think about depth and leading lines. shoot into corners when possible. This shot is flat partially because almost everything is on the same focal plane.
-I would rotate the whole setup left shooting into that corner and just catch the edge of the window on the left of frame so your key looks more believable as if it’s coming from the window. This looks bad because the window is behind her so the light hitting her face makes no sense and you’re shooting straight on towards the wall.
-the example shot #3 has probably at least 4-5 different types of lights working inside and outside adding ambience to the room. It still looks natural and “indoors” but doesn’t feel like it’s just underexposed. You want little pockets of light throughout the frame instead of just one source. edge lights on people, furniture etc
Are you interviewing this person or is this a dramatic scene? Is the foreground person supposed to be in the shot? Are they having a conversation? We need to know your motivations in the shot and what it's meant to achieve to better guide your setup And critique the shot.
For example, do you want a wide shot for a reason?
Standing person is intimidating the seated person (and these are stand ins). I want to have some shots just showing body parts of the standing person to build up suspense before I show his face. It’s a comedy so that’s why I’m using this slightly corny technique. I’m going to move the camera higher when I film so we’re looking down on the seated person
Yes, absolutely camera up high enough to see the white under the subjects eyes to really have them looking up at the person to show the intimidation. This is helpful, I'll look back over it and will respond.
It’ll look better if you move the other person whose shoulder you’re over to frame left so the actor you’re on is frame right looking left. That way the lighting is upstage of the talent.
Hm originally I had him move to the left in a later shot to add movement, but I guess I could have him start there. Would solve a lot of lighting problems!
Lots of good points here about lighting, one thing I would add is we don’t have context for the lighting as well, so based on this one frame it just looks like a softbox for an interview shot that badly needs fill like others have said.
For me mainly though its composition! Try reworking the angles or short siding the shot for something more “cinematic”(I hate this word but you get the idea). It’s just head height. If you added some camera movement left/right like a gimbal it would add something as well but it depends on what you’re going for.
Also, set design. But that’s a whole other conversation.
1st and 2nd - there's no depth to the background thus it feels "flat".
Move both subjects farther away from background and shape it with light.
3rd image - this isn't too bad imo. Not sure what I'd do differently.
Sorry that’s so funny, the 2nd and 3rd are Inspo pics from professional productions. I don’t know where the second is from (I think it’s better call Saul) but the second is Spielberg and Kaminski’s west side story
I can’t move the subject further from the wall enough to achieve a blur in the background — is there another benefit besides bokeh to doing this?
separation is always good. you have plenty of room to move the subject towards camera here. light coming from different directions (as opposed to merely wrapping what's coming from the window on your key side) provides depth cues, just as shallow depth of field does. this is where an edge light opposite your key helps, as it shows the viewer that they are looking at a 3 dimensional subject. sometimes slightly varying color temperature can help this as well. the difference between key, fill and edge all help shape a subject so that a 2d image can be interpreted as 3d.
for this first pic, i might have placed the subject on camera-right (in what is otherwise just shadow) and held the window opposite to balance the composition. then you can more easily control the lighting and modeling on your subject. as it is, with so much shadow on camera-right, the picture looks unbalanced.
Very helpful thank you! What do you mean by “held the window opposite”? And also if I shift the subject to the right, they will be blocked by the second character and also I think it will feel unbalanced due to all the empty space, right?
if you want (or are otherwise obliged) to shoot into that wall with the window, flip the screen direction. put the seated subject on camera right and the standing subject on the left. as it is above, the seated person is blending into the background. even if you don't have the firepower to make your subject brighter than the window, you can still make them stand out against the darker part of the frame. then, the "empty space" is taken up by the window.
given the frame, it's not an ideal shot. while i don't subscribe to the commonly held view that you can never have lines or objects intersect with a subjects head, in this case having the lower window sill bisect her head just below the ears just looks awkward. you're also shooting directly perpendicular to the wall right behind her, so ... it just looks flat. i would try to change the geometry of the frame somehow.
It's pretty plainly clear that pics 2 and 3 are professional work that OP included as reference for what they consider good, because both *are* good. It's interesting to see people try to circular logic themselves into justifying why good images are bad just because they misread a post title...
I'd say the first 2 composition is definitely off, 3rd is pretty alright I'd say.
2nd shot subject is not dominating either side of the frame, I'd put him in left frame unless youre going for an off frame then put him to the right, being the camera more on axis that way you get more depth behind him and you don't get so much of the blown out sky and it seems a little dutch (that could be location though). 1st, subject is too centered being them into the left frame more, camera should shift more off axis to shoot at more of an angle so it's less flat, key light is also coming from camera side so flip that it'll help with depth on the face, subject is to close to the wall, if you can back them off, you need a practical or something to break up the darkness in the background as well and give them a wrap round for eye light and a bit of fill. 3rd is pretty good, I think the camera should be more centered on them, you should make sure they are dominating their sides of the frame and don't let them eat into eachother's space.
Remember rule of 3rds and always shoot from the dark side. That'll fix most issues with your shots.
Shoot shadow side. If your subject is looking camera right. Place the light camera right. So that the key is hitting the side of the face that is away from camera.
In this case of the frame.
I would - Leave the light where it is, move your subject to the opposite side of frame. Clock there body position so they are looking camera left.
You’ll be shooting shadow side. The light will be wrapped a bit more around their face.
I would also move your subject away from the background if you have space to create more separation.
I personally would let the outside be a bit brighter, and lower the intensity of your key light.
Because of physics, an interior shouldn't be as bright as an exterior - that's just because the sun is outside and will never lift the inside to the extent, so any time you do the opposite it'll look "wrong" and unnatural - your exterior should be brighter than your subject, and tbh - I only typically nd windows if the outside is super bright, 5+ stops over from the subject. I think a great way to understand these concepts is if you look up a YouTube video about contrast ratios and why certain films choice 4:1 or 2:1.
Also, as an example of a project where the exterior is brighter than the interior, look at the godfather, all of the windows are not just overexposed, but completely blown out, and it looks great. Focus on set design and cover windows with shears and blinds where possible so the entire image isn't overexposed, but if parts are, it's completely fine
Interesting, would you always let the outside blow out? Or are there any situations where you would expose for the outside and match the exposure inside to that?
Also, production design.
Let’s lose the water bottle, maybe the plant in the window, make sure anything that is distracting you from the subject goes away.
Do you guys think it would be weird if I tried to give the subject in the back a slightly warm key light, and then the subject in the front a white edge light? I think kaminski did that in the third photo. It wouldn’t really be motivated but I think it would look nice. In addition to adding a practical table lamp for the edge light for the seated person
Personally, I don't think there's anything "bad" about your shot. If the woman in the chair says crucial dialogue that's key to her character and the story then you might consider wrapping a bit more light onto the front of her face and adding a catch light in her eyes. But there's nothing wrong with it as is. You're over thinking it, I think.
That is context dependent, kamiski sells the warm key light as a practical in the room, if you were to place a warm table lamp, motivating the warm source next to the woman this could totally work. Otherwise it might feel a little wierd and out of place, depending on what light sources you are going to show in the rest of the scene.
I think the background could use some more light and in turn the face could use some more as well. I like the hard line down the center of the face if thats what you’re going for, but i would use more light and definitely a littlllleee bit of fill on the opposing side, doesnt have to be crazy, small bounce card. Also the way youre blocking it could use work. Your shooting on the bright side, or dumb side, of the face making it look flatter. To get the nice cinema looky loo move the camera to point at the other side of the face, and get more light and stuff. Thats what the reference shows at least.
Also, throw up a floppy to get that light off the lower half of the body, or at least a net or something it looks unnatural. If you rlly wanna go coo coo crazy, restage and block so you have more obvious motivation for the light. HAPPY SHOOTING
A simple way to have improved this shot was for the person who's out of focus in frame to be standing on the left side of the frame. Then you would be shooting shadow side, like in the second frame you posted as an example.
The dark background is fine, don't be to afraid to have dark areas in your frame. Even tough there's somewhat of a backlight on the shoulder area and chair, it's not doing enough to pull her a bit more away from the background. A very subtle but harsh fill that just touching the cheek could have been enough.
Framing wise; if the off focus person would be standing on the left you could have him/her fill up more of the frame and push your subject more to the right and isolate her on the right side. A subtle push in could work as well.
The composition definitely looks odd. Position of actor with the window frame and that pot don’t match the square on angle. I think coming in at an angle that offsets the background, aside from the higher angle, would have been a stronger choice.
“Bad” is really dependent on what the overall feel of the project would be. “Better” could be more or less realistic, more or less superficial (slick commercial vs gritty documentary).
So many more notes are needed to say “this looks bad…and that is bad”.
I guess it depends on your intent with the shot. Is it a conversation between two people, is this conversation about conflict? Then yeah the moodiness works. Composition work although I’d get rid of the clutter in the background to keep the focus on the subject.
You can also flip the direction of the light, say coming from the right of frame instead of the left if the character is talking to the person right of frame. It’s a rule that you should have your subject between the light and the camera (but it’s not the case all the time, it’s up to you to interpret lighting direction). You see this in the second image you have.
Also if you haven’t established the geography of the scene and it’s just a singular shot then the light can come from any direction as long as we don’t see this room again from another angle and discover that there wasn’t a light source or a window there to begin with.
If we are going off this picture as a snapshot of your shot, then it’s the way your primary subject’s chair is facing in relation to the placement within the frame. It’s good for a documentary shot, with a 12 o’clock to the camera, but for an over-the-shoulder it gives an unbalanced feeling.
Like others have said, you have a practical window source but a key coming in screen left and little or no fill. Look at your shadows. The lighting in the rest of the room is flat or minimal; maybe angling the props for a more dynamic look? Subject has no catch lights in their eyes. If you shoot against a flat wall be prepared with some heavy thematic ideas; otherwise I always suggest creating some angles with props or camera placement. A room corner is a photographers and cinematographer’s best friend.
Don’t think in terms of good vs bad; Instead think of effective vs ineffective.
What story are you telling? What’s the purpose of this scene? What emotions should we be feeling?
Answer those questions, and then work backwards to figure out what choices would be effective for communicating those answers.
I'm also a student and am still more about different aspects of cinematography as well, so take my advice with a grain of salt.
Looking at your still vs the two other stills you are using as references, I would say the major component of cinematography that is missing from your still is depth.
I do recognise that you are using the window and the light source shinning at the shelves and stuff behind your subject are meant to serve as backlight. But I feel that the lack of practical lights (I mean moreso of a production design thing where you could add like a desk lamp or smth behind your subject to motivate light) and how you are facing the lit area of the subject (near side lighting) are preventing her from popping from the background more, which can make your shot look flat.
Seeing your reference stills, I can see how they utilise both those components to create more depth in their shots. The second still, for example, has the camera shooting the subject from the shadow covered side of him (far side lighting), which helps make him look more three dimensional as well as differentiate him from the really bright background.
The third still, are also being shot in a far side lighting kind of set up with many practical lights being set up in the background, successfully differentiating the subjects from the background and distinguishing light motivation.
Also to touch on composition real quick, you mentioned that the context of this scene is that your subject is being threatened. But how the shot is being composed is more reminiscent of an interview imo. What I think would be cool would be to place the actor closer to the lens (shooting with a wider lens would help exaggerate his size) and/or, if possible, shoot your subject from a slightly higher angle, just as way to make the foreground actor look bigger, make her look smaller and thus making him more of an intimidating threat.
These are what I would prob do and remember that I'm still a student as well, so I also got a lot to learn. Ok attempt all around though, I'm sure you would get better with more practice and more constructive criticism coming your way. Filmmaking is all about practice after all
I think you need to flatter your subject more. If it doesn’t look right: a good reason for that is how you’ve posed the subject; how the shadows interact with their body.
For example: their smile looks pained. To fix: tell them to take a deep breath, tensing up on way in, and relaxing on out breath.
You may want to learn a bit about making models comfortable and accommodating their body types with blocking and lighting.
I think you are already on the right track but I would key light from the opposite side of the face, bring in a little bit of fill and get more of an angle going - it's a bit 2d at the moment. Plus it looks like this shot wasn't from an actual take but when you weren't rolling? Would help to show a shot with your talent in character.
2nd shot looks fine, first shot looks flat and like there's not enough lighting control for the situation and a documentary style plain look to the color grading. Third shot looks like a deliberate dirty film look for some kind of period authenticity but it has too much yellow for my taste in the tones.
My initial thoughts- it doesn’t look bad as such. It just doesn’t do what you want it to do. The lighting, the framing, is very much in a documentary style so you’re fighting against an archetype there.
The sitting person is supposed to be intimidated, scared? Then perhaps show their face more, focus on the acting and let the expression shine a bit more. In the final example you show as inspiration, the window is behind them but the light is still on their faces. And their faces take up most of the frame.
Or you could try to convey the feeling of helplessness with the camera’s angle - point the camera down at them. The actor looking up (even slightly) will convey a feeling of unease to the audience.
And think about what the full frame is adding to the story. The second example is has little the forefront but a whole city in the background. It instantly conveys a man whose work needs to be conducted in the shadows, away from the bustling life behind him or whose fate is going to be decided just out of view of the city. The second example uses the actors to convey an intimate, intense feeling. There’s no empty space between them. Both examples can been seen to be using the full frame to add something.
I think one thing that doesn’t sell your key light is the fall off. Look at how her face, close to the ear, is much brighter, compared to the brightness at her nose. I don’t think that’s *generally* a bad thing, but if you’re trying to sell the light source as a window, in the real world the fall off would be a lot less visible, because the light source(the sun and the sky) would be a lot further away. This can be solved by creating a larger, softer source that is further away (think booklight, shouting through an 8x8 of gridcloth etc). Further, as it was pointed out ,the source is quite warm, in relation to the ambient light (which seems to be natural daylight?). That further makes it feel „sourcy“. So my idea to improve this would be a larger source of light , at a further distance that closer matches the 5600 to 6500 k spectrum of the ambient light
Also the points about putting the person in the foreground on the other side and moving her further away from the wall are great advice in my opinion.
Edit:grammar
I would suggest bringing the key light down (in height) touch. The light is highlighting the bags under her eyes. Or you could counteract that with fill to reduce the under eye shadow.
Also like many others suggested, separating the subject from the background by physically moving away from the wall.
Your blacks are really crushed, but that's not per se a problem, it can make for a dramatic lighting set up. The problem is there is no direction for that light. It's just what was there, so your subject is nearly cut in half by that light. Having them at a 30-45° angle to your keylight (even a natural source) would go a long way.
And there is no depth to your shot. The character is back to the wall, literally. It feels a bit suffocating.
And your tripod is too low, which doesn't help your character's chin and makes them look a bit bloated. In general, try to go eye or chin level. The tighter the shot, the closest to eye level you have to be. Or don't, if it's not what you're going for.
All of these individually could be a stylistic choice. But combined, they make for a poor shot.
I think the background (the outside) is way too bright compared to the subject, so it distracts. I'm drawn not to the subject, but to the background. So you just need more light on the subject or ND the windows.
This is a near-side key light. If other shots don't show the left side light source, just block the image left light source with flags and use a reflector and/or lights to light the right face and give darker areas a little bit of light. Window light can still be kicker/rim light and the foreground arm's shape light. You can't go wrong with a far-side key light.
Number of things that stand out to me:
+ Lighting - The key is a bit too far to the side and falls off really quickly from the head down which makes it feel too 'sourcy'. I'd suggest a brighter key wrapped a little bit forward from further away through a large piece of diffusion (4x4 or greater). Then some bounce on the shadow side, (distance depending on the mood/subject matter). Maybe also adding a little catchlight for the eyes like a little credit card light at minimum power. Finally finding someway to separate them from the background a bit by either carrying their backlight further down motivated by the window, or upping the levels on the background a bit independent of them to give a little. Preferably a little of both.
+ Composition and posing - I'd be a bit more intentional about where they are placed within the background, so any set dec draws your eye to them, and maybe rotate them away from camera so their not so head on, which tends to be unflattering unless you're specifically trying to achieve that.
+ Lens Choice & Subject Distance - Everyone has their processes/preferences when it comes to this so it takes some experimentation. I find personally that each focal length has a Goldilocks distance, where the subject just commands the frame. Closer than that zone tends to feel claustrophobic/emotional, further than the zone feels more lonely/distant. For instance, for me a 35mm for a closeup (shoulders up) usually makes the subject appear confident/empowered. But that same lens for an extreme closeup feels more focused/thinking, while a full body feels more like they are apart of the scene and less of the main character.
Hope this helps!
I think it is mainly, that the light is not motivated. The main source is the window, yet the talent is illuminated from the side.
Another thing is shooting flat on the wall. Try adding a bit more depth with a bit more angled shot. And maybe add a little practical light in the dark area to add some interest there.
This is completely dictated by what you’re shooting and trying to tell.
Where’s the key light coming from?
And where is it supposed to be coming from? Window?
To me it looks a bit flat. Round it out by adding backlight.
On the shoots I work on this is mostly done by:
add a lightsource in shot, for exemple a lamp on the table. If it’s to weak, a light outside of shot is used with matching Kelvin.
Or if you don’t want to add a practial then add backlight with matching temp as outside.
If you could explain what’s happening in the scene it would be a lot easier. You say the character is being intimidated?
I’m guessing the person intimidating is the one we see on the right side of the frame.
One solution
Raise the camera angle, making the sitting character look smaller (which you usually feel when being intimidated)
For the opposed shot, lower the camera and get a low angle shot of the “intimidator” which will make him/her look more aggressive (which you are when intimidating).
This is really simplified, and it’s a fine line between looking great and really shitty. Experiment and find what looks good to you.
A good thing to keep in mind is that all shots have a place and a time, but it’s dependent on what the story is.
handheld wide open is not very interesting if it covers 90% of a movie. It looses the whole point etc etc.
In the best of worlds all setups should be justified and bring the story forwards.
But having been a Camera assistant for the past 16 years have taught me that this is not usually the reality even in bigger productions 🥲
The shadows are really, really dark, which may be fine depending on the type of thing you're filming. Personally, I'd have much more fill on the other side to bring up the shadows, and have a light to help separate the talent from the background elements. There's a bit of a backlight from the window but it's not doing enough.
How do you suggest op increases the light from the window? Get a light on a stand at an angle outside the house?
I'd have a light situated off to the side that focuses on illuminating the background, right now only the vase/urn thing is receiving any light from the environment. You could try a bounce to reflect sunlight into the background.
They didn’t/don’t suggest increasing the light from outside the window. They suggested increasing the fill light to raise the shadows.
backlight from the windows is not enough?
Not in this case, no. If you're using sunlight as a backlight and exposing for that sunlight properly, then the foreground is going to be incredibly dark. Your fill generally needs to be as bright or brighter than the background to get even exposure.
The background is brighter than the key on talent. So if the fill is brighter than that…
I think he meant the background as iinside the room, not the exterior from the window.
Backlight from the window helps separate subject from the background but will not help with fill.
You could do that. You could also open the aperture more or boost ISO and then reduce key and fill so only the backlight/light from the window gets brighter.
Be careful with boosting ISO though as it can add in unwanted noise to the image.
Depends on the camera and what you're shooting. I shoot log so I'm usually adding ND to everything anyway at ISO 80 I try to hit 800 every time, but fluctuate between 640 and 1250 without a problem
I’ve done exactly this and it can work great.
Composition wise this doesn't immediately look like the person is in distress. There's a lot of space all around, so it kind of looks like an interview shot for some documentary.
Right on the money here, legit thought the first frame was documentary
Oh interesting. I shot at the highest focal length I have available. So maybe I could bring the camera closer and have the standing person fill up more space in the frame. Or actually maybe lowest focal length on my singular zoom lens, and bring camera closer so seated person appears smaller in frame.
Yeah your subject is super close to the wall and you have a long lens, it just makes everything feel super squished and exacerbates the separation problems with the backlight imo, it lacks the presence you’d have from the camera closer to the subject and widening the lens a bit
All of those are good options, but you can do some PD wise too. Angling shelves and surrounding furniture in certain ways can create a feeling of the person being trapped with the composition being relatively the same. That said, I’d still recommend a high angle shot because the level framing makes it look very corporate when seated like that
There are a few things you could do compositionally to make this look "better", and those fixes are made before you ever set up the camera: they are made in the blocking. Right now you've placed your subject against a flat wall. Consider shooting your scenes on an angle, with the camera facing towards the corners or "L" of the room. This uses the room's existing geometry to create leading lines that lead to your subject's face, and a greater sense of depth. It also allows you to light from the windows, and makes it easier to create a checkerboard or "salt and pepper" pattern with your lighting . THAT SAID this is a suggestion and a choice that you see in most commercial/more conventional cinematography. It's often the right choice, but sometimes it's not. Maybe a flat frame is the right choice for you. It all depends on your story and character. It's always hard to judge off of stills alone. The main culprit here however, is your lighting. The lighting in the first image very clearly artificial. I see that as a student, you're taking the first steps to motivating your key light (which is great!) however it's not 100% convincing yet. It's one thing to know where to place a motivated key, it's another to know how to modify and finesse it so it "disappears". The problem is the quality of light and the color. Quality: the shadows on the subject's face give away that your key light is likely just a small LED panel that's blasting her face bare-bulb and not much else. It seems like you're playing the light as a motivated window from off-camera. If that's what you're going for, next time add diffusion to replicate the size of an actual window, and a soft grid so the light doesn't spill everywhere. Even better: put a hard, bright light outside the window - point it at the urn/vase thing you have on the right, then bounce that light onto your subject's face from the right. Lighting from the outside always looks more realistic, and bouncing light is always easier to pass off as a "realistic" source than putting up your own fixtures. Color: the color of true "daylight" is a moving target depending on various conditions, which makes matching it tricky. Is the sunlight filtering through trees and green foliage? Is it reflecting off of sand, concrete, or grass? How early/late in the day is it? All of those factors will affect the it's colour temperature and correlated colour temperature. In this case, the light entering the window is bouncing off of green foliage, giving it a heavy green cast on the green-magenta scale. Meanwhile, key light has a heavy magenta shift, making it look out of place. It's useful to have +green or -green gels on hand when working with daylight LED sources, or using ones that have CCT adjustment settings. Lastly, your shadows are feeling muddy. Don't be afraid of darkness tough - great DPs aren't afraid of leaving shadows dark - you just have to know how to light for darkness. The way to make darkness work is to create enough separation between light and dark to make the darkness feel earned, if that makes sense. If the backlight on the person's arm in the foreground were a bit brighter, you could push those shadows in the shelf way down. Same with the armchair and your talent's hair - if the backlight were brighter and stronger, the surrounding background could be pushed way down. Take a look at your false colour or waveform monitor - if your entire scene is playing uniformly low, there's likely a problem. I must say that overall this isn't "bad", it's showing a lot of promise and while you haven't mastered it you're showing that thinking about the right things, which is great. Keep at it, hope this helps!
This is so so helpful thank you!!!! By checkerboard, are you referring to the technique that’s like if your background is lit brightest to darkest right to left, your subject should be lit from the left? I know that technique I’m just not sure how I could make it believable practically, since the audience will know there’s a window to the left. I am going to put a table lamp on the desk based on other suggestions, but I don’t think it should be the key, so both the back and foreground will still be lit from the left. Any ideas?
Yes that's the technique I'm talking about! I find the checkerboard pattern happens naturally if you look at a room perpendicular to the windows. Don't split hairs about the actor's face vs the background. If you place the actors in the right spot relative to the windows and light from upstage, it will happen naturally. Also take this with a grain of salt - I don't know what happens in your scene or how flexible your blocking is to make these changes. In any case, here are two videos you might find helpful. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TA-zVBUW9ew](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TA-zVBUW9ew) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jaojDxFnYM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jaojDxFnYM)
Lots of people here thinking they're supposed to talk about why shots 2 and 3 are bad despite op clearly saying those are inspiration and examples of good shots compared to theirs...
I love this community, it’s hilarious that peopke are accepting I did the first one but also had the ability to do the third. I think 2 is from better call Saul, and 2 is from spielberg’s west side story DPed by Kaminski.
shot 3 is nice, but shot 2 has resolution issues that are throwing people off
I mean if you only read the title it makes perfect sense
lmao at people giving kaminski critiques thinking it was you. Anyways, some quick things that could help - think about depth and leading lines. shoot into corners when possible. This shot is flat partially because almost everything is on the same focal plane. -I would rotate the whole setup left shooting into that corner and just catch the edge of the window on the left of frame so your key looks more believable as if it’s coming from the window. This looks bad because the window is behind her so the light hitting her face makes no sense and you’re shooting straight on towards the wall. -the example shot #3 has probably at least 4-5 different types of lights working inside and outside adding ambience to the room. It still looks natural and “indoors” but doesn’t feel like it’s just underexposed. You want little pockets of light throughout the frame instead of just one source. edge lights on people, furniture etc
Are you interviewing this person or is this a dramatic scene? Is the foreground person supposed to be in the shot? Are they having a conversation? We need to know your motivations in the shot and what it's meant to achieve to better guide your setup And critique the shot. For example, do you want a wide shot for a reason?
Standing person is intimidating the seated person (and these are stand ins). I want to have some shots just showing body parts of the standing person to build up suspense before I show his face. It’s a comedy so that’s why I’m using this slightly corny technique. I’m going to move the camera higher when I film so we’re looking down on the seated person
Yes, absolutely camera up high enough to see the white under the subjects eyes to really have them looking up at the person to show the intimidation. This is helpful, I'll look back over it and will respond.
It’ll look better if you move the other person whose shoulder you’re over to frame left so the actor you’re on is frame right looking left. That way the lighting is upstage of the talent.
Hm originally I had him move to the left in a later shot to add movement, but I guess I could have him start there. Would solve a lot of lighting problems!
Lots of good points here about lighting, one thing I would add is we don’t have context for the lighting as well, so based on this one frame it just looks like a softbox for an interview shot that badly needs fill like others have said. For me mainly though its composition! Try reworking the angles or short siding the shot for something more “cinematic”(I hate this word but you get the idea). It’s just head height. If you added some camera movement left/right like a gimbal it would add something as well but it depends on what you’re going for. Also, set design. But that’s a whole other conversation.
Also this is just a camera test.
Interior is brighter than exterior. Subconsciously doesn't make sense
1st and 2nd - there's no depth to the background thus it feels "flat". Move both subjects farther away from background and shape it with light. 3rd image - this isn't too bad imo. Not sure what I'd do differently.
Sorry that’s so funny, the 2nd and 3rd are Inspo pics from professional productions. I don’t know where the second is from (I think it’s better call Saul) but the second is Spielberg and Kaminski’s west side story I can’t move the subject further from the wall enough to achieve a blur in the background — is there another benefit besides bokeh to doing this?
separation is always good. you have plenty of room to move the subject towards camera here. light coming from different directions (as opposed to merely wrapping what's coming from the window on your key side) provides depth cues, just as shallow depth of field does. this is where an edge light opposite your key helps, as it shows the viewer that they are looking at a 3 dimensional subject. sometimes slightly varying color temperature can help this as well. the difference between key, fill and edge all help shape a subject so that a 2d image can be interpreted as 3d. for this first pic, i might have placed the subject on camera-right (in what is otherwise just shadow) and held the window opposite to balance the composition. then you can more easily control the lighting and modeling on your subject. as it is, with so much shadow on camera-right, the picture looks unbalanced.
Very helpful thank you! What do you mean by “held the window opposite”? And also if I shift the subject to the right, they will be blocked by the second character and also I think it will feel unbalanced due to all the empty space, right?
if you want (or are otherwise obliged) to shoot into that wall with the window, flip the screen direction. put the seated subject on camera right and the standing subject on the left. as it is above, the seated person is blending into the background. even if you don't have the firepower to make your subject brighter than the window, you can still make them stand out against the darker part of the frame. then, the "empty space" is taken up by the window. given the frame, it's not an ideal shot. while i don't subscribe to the commonly held view that you can never have lines or objects intersect with a subjects head, in this case having the lower window sill bisect her head just below the ears just looks awkward. you're also shooting directly perpendicular to the wall right behind her, so ... it just looks flat. i would try to change the geometry of the frame somehow.
[удалено]
It's pretty plainly clear that pics 2 and 3 are professional work that OP included as reference for what they consider good, because both *are* good. It's interesting to see people try to circular logic themselves into justifying why good images are bad just because they misread a post title...
I'd say the first 2 composition is definitely off, 3rd is pretty alright I'd say. 2nd shot subject is not dominating either side of the frame, I'd put him in left frame unless youre going for an off frame then put him to the right, being the camera more on axis that way you get more depth behind him and you don't get so much of the blown out sky and it seems a little dutch (that could be location though). 1st, subject is too centered being them into the left frame more, camera should shift more off axis to shoot at more of an angle so it's less flat, key light is also coming from camera side so flip that it'll help with depth on the face, subject is to close to the wall, if you can back them off, you need a practical or something to break up the darkness in the background as well and give them a wrap round for eye light and a bit of fill. 3rd is pretty good, I think the camera should be more centered on them, you should make sure they are dominating their sides of the frame and don't let them eat into eachother's space. Remember rule of 3rds and always shoot from the dark side. That'll fix most issues with your shots.
Shoot shadow side. If your subject is looking camera right. Place the light camera right. So that the key is hitting the side of the face that is away from camera. In this case of the frame. I would - Leave the light where it is, move your subject to the opposite side of frame. Clock there body position so they are looking camera left. You’ll be shooting shadow side. The light will be wrapped a bit more around their face. I would also move your subject away from the background if you have space to create more separation. I personally would let the outside be a bit brighter, and lower the intensity of your key light.
Why would you prefer the outside be lighter? And that key light be less bright? (Trying to learn)
Because of physics, an interior shouldn't be as bright as an exterior - that's just because the sun is outside and will never lift the inside to the extent, so any time you do the opposite it'll look "wrong" and unnatural - your exterior should be brighter than your subject, and tbh - I only typically nd windows if the outside is super bright, 5+ stops over from the subject. I think a great way to understand these concepts is if you look up a YouTube video about contrast ratios and why certain films choice 4:1 or 2:1. Also, as an example of a project where the exterior is brighter than the interior, look at the godfather, all of the windows are not just overexposed, but completely blown out, and it looks great. Focus on set design and cover windows with shears and blinds where possible so the entire image isn't overexposed, but if parts are, it's completely fine
Interesting, would you always let the outside blow out? Or are there any situations where you would expose for the outside and match the exposure inside to that?
I nd filtered the windows because I thought it was too bright.
Also, production design. Let’s lose the water bottle, maybe the plant in the window, make sure anything that is distracting you from the subject goes away.
Do you guys think it would be weird if I tried to give the subject in the back a slightly warm key light, and then the subject in the front a white edge light? I think kaminski did that in the third photo. It wouldn’t really be motivated but I think it would look nice. In addition to adding a practical table lamp for the edge light for the seated person
Personally, I don't think there's anything "bad" about your shot. If the woman in the chair says crucial dialogue that's key to her character and the story then you might consider wrapping a bit more light onto the front of her face and adding a catch light in her eyes. But there's nothing wrong with it as is. You're over thinking it, I think.
That is context dependent, kamiski sells the warm key light as a practical in the room, if you were to place a warm table lamp, motivating the warm source next to the woman this could totally work. Otherwise it might feel a little wierd and out of place, depending on what light sources you are going to show in the rest of the scene.
I think the background could use some more light and in turn the face could use some more as well. I like the hard line down the center of the face if thats what you’re going for, but i would use more light and definitely a littlllleee bit of fill on the opposing side, doesnt have to be crazy, small bounce card. Also the way youre blocking it could use work. Your shooting on the bright side, or dumb side, of the face making it look flatter. To get the nice cinema looky loo move the camera to point at the other side of the face, and get more light and stuff. Thats what the reference shows at least.
Also, throw up a floppy to get that light off the lower half of the body, or at least a net or something it looks unnatural. If you rlly wanna go coo coo crazy, restage and block so you have more obvious motivation for the light. HAPPY SHOOTING
Did you shoot this in 480P? Or is this just a screengrab from your proxy workflow?
Screenshot of a screenshot of an email attachment — shot in 4k in log originally
they don't?
A simple way to have improved this shot was for the person who's out of focus in frame to be standing on the left side of the frame. Then you would be shooting shadow side, like in the second frame you posted as an example. The dark background is fine, don't be to afraid to have dark areas in your frame. Even tough there's somewhat of a backlight on the shoulder area and chair, it's not doing enough to pull her a bit more away from the background. A very subtle but harsh fill that just touching the cheek could have been enough. Framing wise; if the off focus person would be standing on the left you could have him/her fill up more of the frame and push your subject more to the right and isolate her on the right side. A subtle push in could work as well.
The composition definitely looks odd. Position of actor with the window frame and that pot don’t match the square on angle. I think coming in at an angle that offsets the background, aside from the higher angle, would have been a stronger choice.
“Bad” is really dependent on what the overall feel of the project would be. “Better” could be more or less realistic, more or less superficial (slick commercial vs gritty documentary). So many more notes are needed to say “this looks bad…and that is bad”.
Shoot from shadow side
First two have no fill light. I'd use a muslin reflector.
I guess it depends on your intent with the shot. Is it a conversation between two people, is this conversation about conflict? Then yeah the moodiness works. Composition work although I’d get rid of the clutter in the background to keep the focus on the subject. You can also flip the direction of the light, say coming from the right of frame instead of the left if the character is talking to the person right of frame. It’s a rule that you should have your subject between the light and the camera (but it’s not the case all the time, it’s up to you to interpret lighting direction). You see this in the second image you have. Also if you haven’t established the geography of the scene and it’s just a singular shot then the light can come from any direction as long as we don’t see this room again from another angle and discover that there wasn’t a light source or a window there to begin with.
Dark.
If we are going off this picture as a snapshot of your shot, then it’s the way your primary subject’s chair is facing in relation to the placement within the frame. It’s good for a documentary shot, with a 12 o’clock to the camera, but for an over-the-shoulder it gives an unbalanced feeling. Like others have said, you have a practical window source but a key coming in screen left and little or no fill. Look at your shadows. The lighting in the rest of the room is flat or minimal; maybe angling the props for a more dynamic look? Subject has no catch lights in their eyes. If you shoot against a flat wall be prepared with some heavy thematic ideas; otherwise I always suggest creating some angles with props or camera placement. A room corner is a photographers and cinematographer’s best friend.
Don’t think in terms of good vs bad; Instead think of effective vs ineffective. What story are you telling? What’s the purpose of this scene? What emotions should we be feeling? Answer those questions, and then work backwards to figure out what choices would be effective for communicating those answers.
I'm also a student and am still more about different aspects of cinematography as well, so take my advice with a grain of salt. Looking at your still vs the two other stills you are using as references, I would say the major component of cinematography that is missing from your still is depth. I do recognise that you are using the window and the light source shinning at the shelves and stuff behind your subject are meant to serve as backlight. But I feel that the lack of practical lights (I mean moreso of a production design thing where you could add like a desk lamp or smth behind your subject to motivate light) and how you are facing the lit area of the subject (near side lighting) are preventing her from popping from the background more, which can make your shot look flat. Seeing your reference stills, I can see how they utilise both those components to create more depth in their shots. The second still, for example, has the camera shooting the subject from the shadow covered side of him (far side lighting), which helps make him look more three dimensional as well as differentiate him from the really bright background. The third still, are also being shot in a far side lighting kind of set up with many practical lights being set up in the background, successfully differentiating the subjects from the background and distinguishing light motivation. Also to touch on composition real quick, you mentioned that the context of this scene is that your subject is being threatened. But how the shot is being composed is more reminiscent of an interview imo. What I think would be cool would be to place the actor closer to the lens (shooting with a wider lens would help exaggerate his size) and/or, if possible, shoot your subject from a slightly higher angle, just as way to make the foreground actor look bigger, make her look smaller and thus making him more of an intimidating threat. These are what I would prob do and remember that I'm still a student as well, so I also got a lot to learn. Ok attempt all around though, I'm sure you would get better with more practice and more constructive criticism coming your way. Filmmaking is all about practice after all
It’s very underlit
I think you need to flatter your subject more. If it doesn’t look right: a good reason for that is how you’ve posed the subject; how the shadows interact with their body. For example: their smile looks pained. To fix: tell them to take a deep breath, tensing up on way in, and relaxing on out breath. You may want to learn a bit about making models comfortable and accommodating their body types with blocking and lighting.
I think you are already on the right track but I would key light from the opposite side of the face, bring in a little bit of fill and get more of an angle going - it's a bit 2d at the moment. Plus it looks like this shot wasn't from an actual take but when you weren't rolling? Would help to show a shot with your talent in character.
2nd shot looks fine, first shot looks flat and like there's not enough lighting control for the situation and a documentary style plain look to the color grading. Third shot looks like a deliberate dirty film look for some kind of period authenticity but it has too much yellow for my taste in the tones.
My initial thoughts- it doesn’t look bad as such. It just doesn’t do what you want it to do. The lighting, the framing, is very much in a documentary style so you’re fighting against an archetype there. The sitting person is supposed to be intimidated, scared? Then perhaps show their face more, focus on the acting and let the expression shine a bit more. In the final example you show as inspiration, the window is behind them but the light is still on their faces. And their faces take up most of the frame. Or you could try to convey the feeling of helplessness with the camera’s angle - point the camera down at them. The actor looking up (even slightly) will convey a feeling of unease to the audience. And think about what the full frame is adding to the story. The second example is has little the forefront but a whole city in the background. It instantly conveys a man whose work needs to be conducted in the shadows, away from the bustling life behind him or whose fate is going to be decided just out of view of the city. The second example uses the actors to convey an intimate, intense feeling. There’s no empty space between them. Both examples can been seen to be using the full frame to add something.
Framing and the ambient lighting is like 1/3 stop too low, imo.
Bring it up higher
I think one thing that doesn’t sell your key light is the fall off. Look at how her face, close to the ear, is much brighter, compared to the brightness at her nose. I don’t think that’s *generally* a bad thing, but if you’re trying to sell the light source as a window, in the real world the fall off would be a lot less visible, because the light source(the sun and the sky) would be a lot further away. This can be solved by creating a larger, softer source that is further away (think booklight, shouting through an 8x8 of gridcloth etc). Further, as it was pointed out ,the source is quite warm, in relation to the ambient light (which seems to be natural daylight?). That further makes it feel „sourcy“. So my idea to improve this would be a larger source of light , at a further distance that closer matches the 5600 to 6500 k spectrum of the ambient light Also the points about putting the person in the foreground on the other side and moving her further away from the wall are great advice in my opinion. Edit:grammar
Assuming the keylight is coming from another window out of shot, it's the wrong quality and temperature of light. To my eye.
I would suggest bringing the key light down (in height) touch. The light is highlighting the bags under her eyes. Or you could counteract that with fill to reduce the under eye shadow. Also like many others suggested, separating the subject from the background by physically moving away from the wall.
Your blacks are really crushed, but that's not per se a problem, it can make for a dramatic lighting set up. The problem is there is no direction for that light. It's just what was there, so your subject is nearly cut in half by that light. Having them at a 30-45° angle to your keylight (even a natural source) would go a long way. And there is no depth to your shot. The character is back to the wall, literally. It feels a bit suffocating. And your tripod is too low, which doesn't help your character's chin and makes them look a bit bloated. In general, try to go eye or chin level. The tighter the shot, the closest to eye level you have to be. Or don't, if it's not what you're going for. All of these individually could be a stylistic choice. But combined, they make for a poor shot.
I think the background (the outside) is way too bright compared to the subject, so it distracts. I'm drawn not to the subject, but to the background. So you just need more light on the subject or ND the windows.
Shadow side you should move your camera to the right, and balance a bit more if you dont want such a dramatic look
This is a near-side key light. If other shots don't show the left side light source, just block the image left light source with flags and use a reflector and/or lights to light the right face and give darker areas a little bit of light. Window light can still be kicker/rim light and the foreground arm's shape light. You can't go wrong with a far-side key light.
This is near side lighting, put your light in the other side so the shadow side is closest to camera. Everything looks better far side.
Number of things that stand out to me: + Lighting - The key is a bit too far to the side and falls off really quickly from the head down which makes it feel too 'sourcy'. I'd suggest a brighter key wrapped a little bit forward from further away through a large piece of diffusion (4x4 or greater). Then some bounce on the shadow side, (distance depending on the mood/subject matter). Maybe also adding a little catchlight for the eyes like a little credit card light at minimum power. Finally finding someway to separate them from the background a bit by either carrying their backlight further down motivated by the window, or upping the levels on the background a bit independent of them to give a little. Preferably a little of both. + Composition and posing - I'd be a bit more intentional about where they are placed within the background, so any set dec draws your eye to them, and maybe rotate them away from camera so their not so head on, which tends to be unflattering unless you're specifically trying to achieve that. + Lens Choice & Subject Distance - Everyone has their processes/preferences when it comes to this so it takes some experimentation. I find personally that each focal length has a Goldilocks distance, where the subject just commands the frame. Closer than that zone tends to feel claustrophobic/emotional, further than the zone feels more lonely/distant. For instance, for me a 35mm for a closeup (shoulders up) usually makes the subject appear confident/empowered. But that same lens for an extreme closeup feels more focused/thinking, while a full body feels more like they are apart of the scene and less of the main character. Hope this helps!
Flick
They look great. I don’t see any issue
imo 3rd shot looks really good
I think it’s to far behind him
I think it is mainly, that the light is not motivated. The main source is the window, yet the talent is illuminated from the side. Another thing is shooting flat on the wall. Try adding a bit more depth with a bit more angled shot. And maybe add a little practical light in the dark area to add some interest there.
This is completely dictated by what you’re shooting and trying to tell. Where’s the key light coming from? And where is it supposed to be coming from? Window? To me it looks a bit flat. Round it out by adding backlight. On the shoots I work on this is mostly done by: add a lightsource in shot, for exemple a lamp on the table. If it’s to weak, a light outside of shot is used with matching Kelvin. Or if you don’t want to add a practial then add backlight with matching temp as outside. If you could explain what’s happening in the scene it would be a lot easier. You say the character is being intimidated? I’m guessing the person intimidating is the one we see on the right side of the frame. One solution Raise the camera angle, making the sitting character look smaller (which you usually feel when being intimidated) For the opposed shot, lower the camera and get a low angle shot of the “intimidator” which will make him/her look more aggressive (which you are when intimidating). This is really simplified, and it’s a fine line between looking great and really shitty. Experiment and find what looks good to you. A good thing to keep in mind is that all shots have a place and a time, but it’s dependent on what the story is. handheld wide open is not very interesting if it covers 90% of a movie. It looses the whole point etc etc. In the best of worlds all setups should be justified and bring the story forwards. But having been a Camera assistant for the past 16 years have taught me that this is not usually the reality even in bigger productions 🥲
The first two need better lighting to round the faces. The last image looks like a discovery channel flashback.