Where do you find the night effect? I dont see it listed in Video FX.

Thanks

Ken

Hello Ken...
another consideration is if the night scenes will take place over a period of time; OR will take more than one night to shoot... so if you are trying to blend separate night scenes together, the individual adjustments for each night's shooting might be different; so, when you apply similar filters in post, the results might be different for each night scene. In the long run, the separate scenes may take some time to make them all look alike - or from the same night...

The only way to ensure the proper lighting for each night scene is to do it under lighting so you have control of what is being recorded from the beginning.

Videotaping in the daylight isn't such a bad idea if you are looking for a full moon sort of shot - so the shadows don't make it obvious that it was shot during daylight hours.

Many factors to consider, no doubt... you've come to the right place to find a good solution...

You might even consider green screen - shooting the talent and the night shots separately ...
IF you don't have any medium or long shots of the talent walking or running across the road or something like that... well, then again, you'll have to light the talent in the studio identical to the lighting of the night scenes - so perhaps a little too ambitious - I know it is for me... (grin)

Depending on the discernment of the producer, I believe the only way to get the night feel is to shoot it at night - that way the lighting is consistent and the night shadows have proper perspective and shading...

Until that time ... Earl J.

With all the creative control available in post, I would do it that way.
If you use underexposure and blue gels during the shoot, which is how it was done in the film era, you are pretty much limited to what you have.

There is no "night effect" I know of in Vegas. You would create what you want using a combination of gamma, levels, and color. I'd start with the black and white filter about 80-90%, then color corrector in that order.

Read this thread:

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=703229

Jøran

I read a good article in DV magazine several years ago about faking night shots. Basically, it was use blue light. Everybody thinks nighttime is blue, use that assumption!

Having done it both ways, I'd say that night-for-night beats day-for-night about 90% of the time. Trying to do a good day for night shoot typically requires some testing and a lot of prep in terms of setting up the shots. It's very easy to have things in shot that don't translate properly - such as street lights, neon signs or car headlights, which look totally wrong unless it's at least dusk. Shots typically need to be designed to avoid the sky, or you may need to cut ND mattes and combine with Pola filters. One interesting way to go in post is to pull all the color out of a scene, then bring in an overall bluish tint, and bring down the exposure.
At least if you're shooting at night and lighting it, you can see what the lighting looks like on a monitor.
Good luck with it!

@musicvid - actually there is a "night" effect in Vegas, under the Color Curves, it's called "Night".

Not that it'll be perfect right off the bat, but it's a good start for someone who doesn't know what they're doing (like myself).

Thanks for that, I hadn't thought of looking for a curves preset.

Tried it, and I would still take out a lot of the saturation with a filter upstream -- the warm colors show through too much.

-- Reminds me of the lyrics from a song I used to cover during the seventies:

"Cold hearted orb that rules the night,

OK, I have way too much time on my hands this weekend. Here is a rough draft of a "Moonlight" preset using only the Color Corrector.
Based loosely on what we did in the photo lab eons ago. YMMV

Low:
-- Angle 300
-- Mag .600
Mid:
-- Angle 300
-- Mag .675
High:
-- Angle 300
-- Mag .650
Saturation: .225
Gamma: .300
Gain: .925 (Be careful and adjust accordingly, esp. if working in a sRGB space!)
Offset: Varies (Same note as above)

Remember, as with any fx, the 'scopes are your friend!

[clip removed by author]

Hi to all

Thanks for the advice, settings etc. i am going to start playing around. Luckily I have a few weeks to experiment!

Regards

ken

I looked at that several times trying to figure out why I wasn't 'sold' that it was night. I came up with a few ideas but none of them should be show stoppers, there just isn't anything that says "hey, this is night".

Then it dawned on me. I doesn't sound like night.

Bob.

Well... no, it doesn't look like night. Perhaps if I quote from the previous thread: "don't forget that the most convincing DFN is shot backlit or 3/4 backlit, so that the camera is looking at mostly shadows. High overhead sun or front light will tend to look like just an exposure error"

I agree with Dave Onset having had my own experiences. I am in a position to reshoot a scene for Transitions, because of some decision that were made on part in "experimenting with" day for night.

The comment about making "sound" like night is right on also.

Chad

I hope no one assumed that the clip was shot pre-emptively with a night lighting effect in mind. It was a daylight clip I use for a lot of test renders. Also, the sound was left out on purpose.

The stated goal was to approximate some basic color, saturation, and gamma levels (the latter which Youtube messed up) as a starting point, nothing more. Despite all my caveats to that effect, someone apparently took it as a finished product?

If someone gets some use from them as a starting point, or if someone makes the effort to post their own solution, so much the better.

Classic film day for night with film is to WB for 3200, underexpose about 1 to 2 stops, shoot at 90 degrees to sun or more, use polaroid filter to darken sky and fill subject with tungsten lights. Video offers masking possibilities for the sky. If you can afford the budget, a point source 5600K to simulate moonlight may help. You are trying to simulate the moon as your source, so if you can work in a moonrise over water, that will help sell the effect

Ralph

@musicvid - please repost your Day to Night example, I'd like to see it, and I realize it's not a 'perfect' example or finished product.

Here's a video I made a couple of years ago that has some Day to Night footage. The footage from 0:25 to 0:47 was shot at EARLY dusk, still very much 'day time', but not sunny and no shadows or bright spots.

Note: the scene at 0:48 - 0:50 was actually shot at dark, and you can tell because you can see the lights on in the house. Not sure how you'd recreate lights on in the house effect anyway.

Yeah, the video is cheesy, but had fun with it. The girl is my daughter, I'm the "Dad" at the very end.

http://www.vimeo.com/1917266Day to Night Example[/link]

musicvid, your caveats were understood but in the end there was the question "is this convincing?" If not, then why not? No criticism, merely using your "test" for further learning.

>>>>with film is to WB for 3200<<<

Perhaps you intended to say that one film technique is to use tungsten balanced film in daylight without a colour correction filter (so resulting in a blue caste). Then your tungsten fill will provide some correct skin tones for the talent. A polariser can help a little in some areas of the sky, but better to avoid including it in the shot.

@ dibbkd,
Actually, I liked yours quite a lot. The woods scene worked, and I'm glad that all are safe and sound ;?)


I was a bit disappointed that Youtube added so much contrast to the .m2t that looked quite nice on my calibrated monitor. So I tweaked and flattened a bit, which still is not as good as the original .m2t. The first one is still on the channel too for comparison. And not as good as something shot at dusk where there is much flatter chroma and range to deal with.


@ serena,
No criticism taken. I just wasn't sure if my intent (a 30 min. fun experiment on a Saturday evening) made it past the result, which anyone can see was ill-lit. On the contrary, we should all be learning from you. Which is why other solutions were invited, and in this case are eagerly awaited.


And finally,

@ arenel,
Your descriptions are not exactly how I remember it.

Classic film day for night with film is to WB for 3200,
White balance does not exist for film. Nor do the curves "tip" the same way as with video. As noted by Serena, color film is manufactured for daylight or tungsten lighting. Or using a Wratten 80c filter more-or-less effectively converts the former to the latter, at a considerable EV loss. IIRC, cinema day/night often involved daylight balanced film with a cooling filter and ND (see below).

underexpose about 1 to 2 stops,
That's not enough as I recall, an ND8 filter (2.5-3 stops) or even an ND16 (4 stops) was often used. That way, we could leave the lens open to maintain some DOF control.

use polaroid filter to darken sky
Polaroid is a patented film and camera process. I'm sure you meant "polarizing."

a point source 5600K to simulate moonlight
Moonlight is about 4100-4200K, so if you use a 5600K point source with a tungsten filled subject as you seem to suggest, it would appear as a garish, neon blue, not "moon-like" at all.

@Musicvid

I located my second edition American Cinematographer Manual. I should have written Pola Screen filter since the patent was owned by the Polaroid Corporation.

Are you sure that moonlight measures 4100-4200K? Maybe close to the horizon, it is a gray surface illuminated by a 5600K source.

The manual does recommend 1 1/2 to 2 stops underexposure.

ND filters do help with DOF but not day for night effect.

Ralph

Well, I certainly won't argue with a manual.

However, my understanding on your last three points is entirely different than yours.
1) Yes, full moonlight is 4100-4200 deg K. I just checked, and today's internet agrees with what I learned 45 years ago. 5600K is approximately mid-hemisphere daylight.
2) and 3) Schneider Day for Night ND filters, which are often regarded as the industry standard for this effect, are 4 stops. As I mentioned, that gives some headroom for DOF control.

If you think about it, stopping down to achieve underexposure is ridiculous, because the increase in DOF is exactly the opposite of the way the human eyes react to low light levels.