Any pro/amateur filmmakers here? What do you use for your lighting?

ambient lighting + bounce boards

t. extreme poorfag amateur

>>81762784
how does it look?

>>81762179
Lights

>>81762179
At the moment nothing, since I never have time to fucking shoot anything. I'm working on it though.

I have a couple LEDs and I might get a posterboard at some point to use as a bounce board.

Lighting is just a tool and each sign requires different setups for different looks. I've been using more and more natural and practical techniques (bounce, silk, etc) vs battling light artificially. On commerical/corporate, kino flo, arri dp kit, Lowell omni is still good light too. For run and gun tv interviews/reality, LED lights have been helping tremendously. There's some great variable temp ones on Amazon for around $38. Took 7 to New York for a pilot and they held their own + weighed nothing.

T. Hollywood Director fag

File: light.jpg (69KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1000x1000px

>>81762179
change bulbs, add subtract, bounce, filter at will.

>feature films are cheaper than ever to make, yet still too expensive
>shorts don't get you into making features anymore
>spec scripts aren't bought anymore (well, around 100 a year)
>crowdfunding campaigns are dime a dozen and usually not successful unless you are already popular/it's a meme project

I have the feeling that amateur filming, nowadays, is and can only be done for the pleasure of working on that specific project, and not to ever expect to get to film something bigger.

How wrong am I?

I just use available light for everything. That's what soderbergh does.

Cameras are good enough these days to make it work and it looks more real than anything your "director of photography" is going to come up with when you're working at this low a budget.

Honestly one of the biggest things that takes me out of a movie is overlighting.

>>81763206
Probly not wrong but it's also easier to sell indie stuff than ever.

>>81763294
You can drop lighting easily enough in post but not enough light will eventually fuck you.

What are you filming?
What situation?

I like LED ring lights for talking head shots. Depends what you're doing though. Try and use natural light when you can.

>>81763336
I'm not sure what you mean. I mean, even Kubrick used single point lighting constantly.

How is it going to fuck you? Just look at the camera and see what your exposure looks like. If it doesn't work change it. Sometimes you're going to need more light, sure.

>mfw lightfags in my thread
OH GOOOOD FOR YOUUU. AND HOW WAS IT? WELL I HOPE IT WAS FUCKING GOOD CAUSE IT'S USELESS NOW, ISN'T IT? IT'S LIKE... HELOOOO, I'M ACTIIING, YOU KNOW HOW FUCKING DISTRACTING IT IS TO GET INTO A SCENE AND TO SEE ONE OF YOU GUYS JUST WALTZING INTO THE SHOT "ET TERE TERE" I WANT YOU OFF THE FUCKING SET YOU PRICK. YOU AND ME, WE'RE FUCKING DONE PROFESSIONALLY.
AND YOU'RE A NICE GUY, YOU'RE A NICE FUCKING GUY BUT IT DON'T FUCKING CUT IT WHEN YOU CAN'T DO YOUR JOB

File: image.jpg (137KB, 763x476px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 763x476px

>>81763397
If you want to be a real hard cunt, don't use electric light at all. Pic related.

>>81763475
You can do this a lot easier now and no, you don't need a f/ .95 lens to do it.

>>81762179
Lightning and low ISO
need to check forecasts a day before