Ever notice that movies have alot of ambient light?

[Crenshaw]

Im watching this 2 part tv show at the moment called "Flood"

They are all underground and stuff, but yet there is this Greenish glow coming from....another dimension? definetly not coming from the one Pelican LED light they are carrying.

So, ever notice that in most movies, where people are in a supposedly "dark" situation, there is actually way too much light? especially the recent apocalyptic style movies we have been having.

Of course, unless the darkness serves the plot..... and sometimes even then....:candle:

I get that its a movie and all, but it makes one thing what would one do in one of those situations, where probably even the dying light from a CMG Infinity, or maybe a Photon Freedom, would seem really bright, and like the people in the shows, dont have one.

Crenshaw

 

[yellow]

that only notices, who has been in absolute dark (=caves) already.

I wonder much more how they (film crew) is able to give something like a holspital floor a spooky appearance ...

 

[sjalbrec]

a lot of "night" scenes are actually filmed during the day and then they darken the background somewhat in post-production. i'm not in the film industry but have watched a few film shoots during the day for scenes that are then presented as being at night in the final movie. might be some members here in the industry who can fill in more of the technical details.

for some reason, this practice is usually more noticeable in low-budget films. all i know is that once you realize this is done, you start to notice it more often when watching movies...sorry if i've spoiled anyone's ability to suspend disbelief!

ok, ok, forget i said anything. when the main character goes into the forrest at midnight, and you can easily discern every tree as far as the eye can see, there are actually 100 crew members with OLight M30 Tritons + diffusers just out of camera range

 

[Crenshaw]

i finally figured out why it bugs me....

is there is so much ambient light, they ordinarily dont even really need to use the flashlights that they are using....

i remember seeing that day-night thing in cast away, it was a whole bunch of filters as far as i could tell from what they were saying...

it looks quite realistic though! im guessing they do it so they cant capture details they normally would not be able to capture at night

Crenshaw

 

[Cataract]

I think it is due to the producer's worry of not confusing anyone in a large audience. I remember as a kid, they would often have very dark scenes (if not just a black screen with sounds) in suspense movies, but people would ALWAYS ask "what's going on? I can't see anything". To solve that issue now, they just fake the darkness, which I personally think is a little lame... there should be a mid-point where you can exerience the feeling of the movie character and still see their faces...

 

[Benson]

I think it is due to the producer's worry of not confusing anyone in a large audience. I remember as a kid, they would often have very dark scenes (if not just a black screen with sounds) in suspense movies, but people would ALWAYS ask "what's going on? I can't see anything". To solve that issue now, they just fake the darkness, which I personally think is a little lame... there should be a mid-point where you can exerience the feeling of the movie character and still see their faces...

I think this is most of it -- not just for movie theaters, where things should be set up rather decently for accurate depiction of dark scenes, but also for the DVD release which is going to be played on thousands of misadjusted TVs in rooms with way too much ambient light, and still needs to be visible. There may also be difficulties in recording in very low light conditions, but I'd think they could be overcome by filming in moderately dark conditions and post-processing for realistic darkness if the directors wanted realism.

As for seeing their faces, if it's SF, you can always put lights inside their helmets illuminating their faces.

 

[Cataract]

Good point mentioning bright living rooms and misadjusted TV sets, but with current technology (I know a few cameramen) they could shoot using candles and it would still be too bright for a night scene. I think there is too much a tendency of making sure people of all IQ's (low and lowest) get the idea and they flood everything with light even if the characters are totally in the dark. Even if light was a problem for cameras, there's always good software to make it look like actual night, but they don't...

One scene that looks totally stupid in the Lord of the Rings is when Frodo gets caught in the spider's web... he's supposed to be inside a cave and unable to see the tip of his nose, and yet it looks brighter than moonlight... They probably thought it would seem more realistic to use flashlights instead of projectors, but where unaware a couple of flashaholics where in charge of lighting...

 

[cave dave]

There is a scene in The Spiderwick Chronicles where the kid is reading a book with a Surefire M6. I wonder if the poor kid has permanent vision damage.

pic linked below
http://www.collider.com/uploads/ima...k_chronicles_movie_image_freddie_highmore.jpg

The M6 seems to be a pretty common EDC light in a lot of movies. :thinking:

 

[Size15's]

If this thread strays too much into the thread about flashlights in movies and tv shows then it'll likely be merged since that thread has highlighted (sic) this topic on a regular basis over the years.
However, if this thread can say concentrated on the filming aspects the it may be able to stand alone and be moved out of the general flashlight discussion forum.

Or we could just look this thread and use the main flashlights in movies and tv shows thread like we have been doing...

 

[cave dave]

Well i am curious as to if there is some technical reason that a M6 is needed (250 lumens) when they shoot such a scene. We certainly have some movie and theater people as members on CPF, maybe they could chime in?

 

[herbicide]

Well i am curious as to if there is some technical reason that a M6 is needed (250 lumens) when they shoot such a scene. We certainly have some movie and theater people as members on CPF, maybe they could chime in?

I think ^^that's^^ so that they can have the illusion of a darkened room without actually turning the lights off (if you see what I mean) - light the book intensely, then expose for the torchlight, making everything else (relatively) pitch-black.

 

[Crenshaw]

I think ^^that's^^ so that they can have the illusion of a darkened room without actually turning the lights off (if you see what I mean) - light the book intensely, then expose for the torchlight, making everything else (relatively) pitch-black.

that makes sense, the more powerful the light, the less dark it has to be to capture a good "flashlight in the dark" shot

Crenshaw

 

[divine]

I think as I've seen it in the movie thread... Cameras don't respond well with actual darkness. They get all grainy... so the movie people shoot them in a bright setting and either use special film (which ends up adding a dark blue tint to it) or processing the recording to make it darker.

Now, the bright light thing, if you are shooting in a bright setting, and you use a normal mag... you're not going to see anything. The only way you'll be able to tell there is a light at all is to use an extremely bright light. That is why we see maxabeams and M6's and some other pretty amazing lights in movies.

 

[Crenshaw]

if movie cameras are anything like DSLRs, then im pretty sure grainy is a result of trying to enhance an image that is too dark. IN DSLRs, if you up ISO to 1600, its VERY grainy...


Crenshaw

 

[Mike V]

Yeah, it's basically an artistic decision.


One technique that is used sometimes is to use special flashlights.

They look like a a standard large Maglite or whatever, but actually have a powerful Xenon inside. You run the header cable up the actor's sleeve, down his back and pants and then to the ballast.

That way the flashlight can still look like the brightest light source in what is actually quite a bright environment.

"Day-for-night" which is where you shoot during the day, but want it to look like night time goes in and out of fashion. It can be very effective if done well or it can be pretty ordinary looking.

It's mainly out of fashion at the moment, but most techniques come around, so I'm sure it will be back. It just takes one big DOP to mention it in an American Cinematographer interview and it will be all the rage again.

 

[IMSabbel]

if movie cameras are anything like DSLRs, then im pretty sure grainy is a result of trying to enhance an image that is too dark. IN DSLRs, if you up ISO to 1600, its VERY grainy...
Crenshaw

Film(i.e. Movie cameras using film) cameras are much worse than DSLR in the noise department.
Things that make it worse:
- Exposure time: 24fps. Time needed to move the film, etc. Lets say 1/100s of a second.
- Lens aperture: Wide aperture lenses create narrow depth of field, which can be very bad if you dont want your background blurred out / want the guy with the flashlight and what he is shining at sharp at the same time.

Stanley Kubrick used some VERY wide lenses ( f/0.7, modified from moon missions http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/sk/ac/len/page1.htm) to be able to shoot in candlelight, and he had to order the actors to move slowly, otherwise they would run out of the very narrow depth of field. (http://www.cinematographers.nl/GreatDoPh/alcott.htm)

There is a reason that studios have kW after kW in illuminiation installed...

 

[2xTrinity]

if movie cameras are anything like DSLRs, then im pretty sure grainy is a result of trying to enhance an image that is too dark. IN DSLRs, if you up ISO to 1600, its VERY grainy...


Crenshaw

There are actually a couple differences here between digital and film, but the end result is similar. For film, the information is stored in grains of silver halide. In order to make the ISO higher/faster, the film must have fewer, physically larger grains of silver. This results in much higher sensitivity, but reduces resolution and increases "graininess" because the large grains themselves are actually visible...

In the case of digital CCD sensors, the number of pixels on the sensor are fixed, however, when exposure time is made to be very long random thermal noise will tend to expose the sensors as much as the actual signal you want, resulting in visible "grain" because you are recording a random noise pattern on top of your signal. In digital sensors used for astrophotography, for example, the actually chip may be cooled with liquid nitrogen to greatly reduce this effect (not so practical for a handheld DSLR). I'm not sure if there is an analogous "fix" for film, but I highly doubt it.

 

[Crenshaw]

you know..i actually forgot that "film" existed...

lol, blame it on the modern age we live in i guess...

Crenshaw