I like Jay's answer---I was recently working on a piece about Albert Maysles, one of the fathers of the American cinema verite movement. He has also been honored by Kodak as one of the 100 best cinematographers in the last 50 years. During the interview, he looked at the poster and found his little face among the 100 luminaries, and he said to me, "I'm the only one in this group who has no idea on how to light anything"! Just thought it was funny in regards to this thread.

... depends on the effect you're trying to convey ... but mostly, I use what still photographers use ... three points ....key light, back light, fill light .... from there I'll apply gels and screens to set the tone ... fundamental but useful in many situations ....

You might find http://www.studio1productions.com/articles.htm and http://www.power-of-lighting.com/articles_index.html to be useful resources.

John Jackman's "Lighting for Digital Video and Television" is a book that provides a good starting point for lighting.

Given the light sensitivity of the PD-150, I prefer to use available light whenever possible, supplementing it with soft light or bounce from a white card. Flourescents with no-buzz ballast and 3200 and 5600 K tubes provide low cost cool, soft light, as will a commercial soft light boxe or a fire-proof Chinese lantern, for which you can find George Odell's detailed plans at http://members.aol.com/filmgroup/china.htm

Rely on a good monitor to evaluate the quality of light on your subject. Three point lighting is really another way of saying highlight, shadow and separation from the background. Any way of lighting a subject that produces this is working for you. It may look terrible to the naked eye and look great on the monitor. Trust the latter.

Rex, interesting story. I'd really like to see your doc! Will it be available, if so, when???

Yes... What Jay said.

"Rely on a monitor" -- Yes, good, but make sure you know how to calibrate it. I've had many, many times when I've looked at the lighting, looked at the monitor, and told the cameraperson or rookie field tech that the monitor was wrong. I was right every time. Generally it's when there's just no details in the shadows.

The moral is, rely on a monitor, but trust your eyes.

Rob Mack

I was out near Vacaville for a shoot several years ago. The DP had us flying a weather balloon that we were pointing 10ks at. He took his spot readings off the balloon and then we reeled it in to let a biplane fly through.

Now I use the same technique for interviews as well as dramatic scenes. It works 90% of the time.

Why don't you make a scrapbook of shots you like? Then write down your ideas of how you think they were lit.

Rob Mack

THAT is one of the most original ideas I've heard in a long, long time. Thanks for sharing!

I'm just reporting. Wish it had been my clever idea. I was just there to load weights on a crane, and then huff 4-ought at 5 AM.

4-ought cable is a pound a foot-per cable. It takes 5 to make a 3-phase run and each piece is a hundred feet. 500 pounds total per hundred feet and you can BET we lit up at least 600 feet of sky.

I'd MUCH rather be a grip. Sandbags are never more than 35 pounds unless they're wet.

Rob Mack

Oh yes! - "Why don't you make a scrapbook of shots you like? " . . I can get a lot of info from my now extensive library of miniDV SONY tapes. I can play back the tapes, from the camera, and see the "settings". OK, this are the actual settings for the camera and NOT the full story, but often I can now "remember" what the lighiting sets were.

Another tip is to do a quick and dirty "snap-shot" of the set and the placements - quick pan round of the positions - yeah? Add a quick sketch. Print off the "stills" and file with the camera settings - done!

Thanks Jack for the nudge - AGAIN! - on re-reading the Studio articles - thank you! . . It is amazing that I need to read this stuff at the point when I can then "absorb" it . . .

Great thread!

Grazie

The one thing I'd add is that often when it comes to lighting, less is often more. Super-bright, high wattage lights are hot, make your subjects squint, and create harsh shadows that you then have to put other lights up to erase. Fortunately, today's DV cameras don't need giant klieg lights to get good results.

For interviews, I use the lowest wattage, color-corrected bulbs I can get away with, and a large scrim to diffuse the key light as much as possible. For a fill, I usually use a reflector rather than another light. Barn-doors on the backlight are essential, and I try to narrow the beam down to a very thin, vertical beam aimed squarely at the back of the subject's head.

After spending hours trying to tape up windows, only finding little leaks of daylight, I finally decided to go with the flow rather than fighting it. I invested in a set of dichroic filters in swing-away mounts, so I can color-balance the lights to daylight if there are large windows in the room. On rainy or overcast days, large windows to the side of a subject can become lovely, huge, diffuse light sources that are very flattering.

Go with what you got.

BS! - oh yes, "Go with what you got." . . go with the flow .. . ?

G

I sometimes carry a compass to help me predict what the light through a window will be by the time we're ready to shoot. Also, it's common for grips to entertain themselves by making chark marks where shadows are currently falling and then track them as time goes by.

Big lights are often no more harsh than small lights. One thing a big light allows is to shine it through a really big diffusion panel like a 12x12 muslin. This can make for a very soft glow if the talent isn't too far away.

When lighting I prefer to have the light put out at least a stop more than I need. I always try to carry a 5 piece wire scrim set for each of the lights and if I need to I can drop the output with a double or two. The thinking here is that when the light is only "just enough" then you've got no headroom for diffusion and color. If it's a little too much you can always knock it down with the wire scrims.

For DV cameras (or any video camera, really) you want to keep the light on the low side so that you can shoot wide open and have as little depth of field as possible. It's a trade-off though because the lense will be less crisp than it would be at a mid-stop like 5.6. The size of the light, though, depends on the bubble of space you need to light up. If you are shooting an interview, you want the light far enough away that the person can lean forward without gaining half a stop. For a full body stand-up it'd be nice if they could take a step in any direction-which means the lights should be bigger and farther away.

For interviews, I've sometimes used a piece of mirror-like show card for the scratch light. I just reflect what I'm getting from the key as a scratch. If the key is soft, the reflected scratch will be soft too. If I'm using a hard key then I'd use a softer bounce card.

Oh, and for squinting in an interview, it helps to also light the interviewer so the subject can see them. Then there's not as much contrast for the subject to squint through.

Rob Mack

My favorite lighting technique is suspending a thermonuclear device 93 million miles above the subject and softening it with a layer of heavy water canopy.

ahhh yes, the sun - how wonderful.

Dave