RIght on, thanks for your reply. I'm used two 600watt halogens with umbrellas for that shot. Maybe I could raise the lights a bit? Or do people use diffusers between the light and subject ever? Like a big white screen or something? See lights here, although this shot wasn't done on that green screen....just using those lights.

Thanks again.

This may not help much, but if this is going to be a repeating project with the same talent, you might consider having them purchase glasses that are designed for TV work. These are low or non-reflective lenses.

Dave T2

Good idea, but not really in option here. The subject is our CEO/President. Wouldn't have him buy glasses for these spuratic video pieces!!! Thanks though!

Have the subject tip the glasses forward slightly (i.e. raise the earpieces off the ears).

Also try moving the lighting (or the subject's seating angle) so the light is striking from an angle.

Maybe a polarizing filter would help while you're shooting.

Thanks...using one actually.

Remove the lenses???

Now that's original! I think next time I'll play with the light placement, diffusion, and the anlge of the glasses on his head.

A few suggestions for you.
If you can afford it, buy a softbox. I used umbrellas for years and always had problems with glasses. Using a softbox was a HUGE improvement.
Secondly, try bouncing the light instead of using umbrellas. You can buy large pieces of foamcore at art supply stores. Cut it into 4' x 4' pieces and fasten them to your light stands somehow. Just make sure not to get the light too close to the foamcore or you'll burn it up. The drawback is that the light will splatter everywhere. Another reason for a softbox.
Next, start collecting eye glasses people no longer use. Pop the lenses out and store the frames until needed. As long as your talent doesn't need them to read from a teleprompter, you won't realize that they have no lenses in them and you won't have to deal with the reflection problem.
Finally, there's a good series of articles at the bottom of http://www.bluesky-web.com/ that you may find interesting, especially the one on cheap fluorescents.

Mike

I've solved this problem by utilizing different camera angles. But that solution may not work if you desire a straight forward shot.

Softbox huh...I was wondering about that. It may be worth the investment as we keep doing more projects of this nature. Thanks.

I used to pop the lenses out of the subject's own glasses if they were not needed. Thought that solved the problem. But, . . . There is always a "but."

I kept getting snide comments from the subject's relatives and loved ones that the talent didn't LOOK right, s/he looked ODD somehow.

It always came down to the glasses. If there was no glass in the glasses, there was no subtle reflection when s/he moved (Not the major one you are worried about, just the little ones), no shadow on the face when s/he moved. No subtle distortion (defraction) that distorted the eyes. Things like that.

It looked "False" to those who knew what the talent SHOULD look like.

And the talent, once s/he got this feedback from those who KNEW, never wanted to do that again.

Once you are clued in to what "NO" glass looks like, you can spot it every time.

End of story.

No answer to your glasses dilema, Cool house though.
Hey Andy, do you got a CD out yet? Iremember watching your vid what was it called Rectify? Liked the harmonies in that one.
Like to hear more.

Raise your key light up a bit and take a small light like a 150w or something similar and bouce it off a white card that is aiming at your subject from below. Raising your key will cause shadows under eyes but it should get rid of the reflection. The bouce will fill in the shadows...

mike

In looking at the clip, finally....

Reflections aren't that bad.. my suggestions above should work to eliminate that excess...

A bit too much on the voice echo in the room.. may not hurt to hang some blankets around him in the future (off camera of course :) )

Video looks great! Really nice depth of field on the interview. Nice colors.. overall, really nice piece of work. Glare won't be an issue to people viewing.

mike

It's a thorny issue. Generally removing the glasses leaves dents on the subject's nose so it's not a good solution. Likewise, tipping the glasses forward often gives the viewer a nagging feeling that something just isn't right.

The other problems are that if you get the light too high then the eye sockets go dark. Also, heavy lenses can bend and concentrate the light shining throu them. But it could be worse, the talent could also be bug-eyed and bald.

Generally, the solution is to move the lights far enough so that they aren't too offensive-usually the key has to go higher. Then you can add some soft fill in to ease some light back into the eyes.

Everyone is different so you just have to try until it's right. Get the person to talk to you a bit while you stand next to lens. This way you can see how much they tend to move their heads. You'll get a little light in the lenses no matter what but you want to minimize it.

Most eye doctors offer coated lenses that help to minimize these hot spots. It's good to expound the virtues of these wherever you go, especially on shoots.

The really hard part is that usually the interviewee won't sit down until you say you're ready to go so "first looks" is also "last looks".

Rob Mack

even worse than a glasses reflection is a female doctor with orange perma-tan skin, wearing black... then we had her remove her huge, ugly reading glasses and had the prompter about 6 inches from her face so she could read it....

Rob's right about first and last looks.. last thing your talent wants (especially when they're unreimbursed talent in many cases), is to sit under the hot lights while you set up your shot.

Again, you did good in this. Looks great, colors are really nice. I wouldn't worry about changing it but get your "talent" to sit as long as possible to set up the shot.. preferably while someone else is talking to them so they're relaxed and not feeling like a subject in an art class...

mike

I didn't read the whole thread. Did anyone bring up using a wax pencil to remove the flare/glare? this is a fairly common production tool/technique

As someone that's wore glasses since I was six, I almost fell on the floor laughing reading some of the suggestions. YES people that wear glasses (a big chunk of the aging population) or people that work or live with people that do will know instantly if you pop out the lenses. It look more than a little "off" its downright insulting and stupid.

Besides I can't imagine anybody wearing glasses letting some camera geek "pop" them out to compensate for their inability to shoot good video.

Get the lighting right or leave alone. Geez!

The reflections in your video are really not that bad and only visible when he tilts his head back occasionally. Having subjects not tilt their heads up would be the easiest solution or having them start with their heads tilted slightly down. Your video is a lot better than the Tony Scott movie "Revenge" where the entire camera crew can be seen reflected in Kevin Costner's sunglasses. Studio lights are glaring in Woody Allen's glasses in "Love and Death," especially in his final to-the-camera monologue, and that story takes place before electricity! In comparison your shot is hardly distracting at all.

Don't feel too bad if you can't completely get rid of the reflections. If you are a fan of the Internet Movie Database (IMDB.com), and you look at the goofs section for movies, you will find countless cases where the viewer reports being able to see the crew in the reflection of people's glasses. "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" comes to mind, where you can see the crew in Sean Connery's glasses as he scares some seagulls off the ground and into the propeller of an oncoming fighter plane.

So, if Speilberg can't entirely get rid of reflections, don't feel bad if you can't either.

BTW, the no-lens glasses were used a lot in old B-movies. The old Superman series comes to mind. Most of the character wore glasses with no glass in them (including Clark Kent).

BillyBoy, I had my tongue in my cheek as I was typing it! :-)