My first note would have to be, while the tests I plan to perform will attempt to help answer questions such as "how grainy does ISO 3200 really get and what can I do about it?" and "what do those user defined settings really do to my image?" what looks I ultimately come up with are subject to taste. As a director, as a cinematographer, or as any kind of visual artist, your work is first and foremost subject to what you, the artist, think looks good. So if you find yourself using some of what I hope to teach with these next few blog entries to create looks that are entirely different from the ones I'll be attempting to create, that's a good thing, because you'll be creating a look that is unique to you, and how you choose to tell stories.
So, that being said, let's get started.
The other night I did three tests. I admit I was only trying to do one test, but I got a little carried away, and I sort of rushed into three tests. Call these preemptive, they are not proper tests of the camera, but a good start towards some much better and more comprehensive tests.
TEST #1: How does CSI make a flashlight look so cool?
Don't kill me, but I watch CSI. Just that original one, I'm not a fan of Miami or NY. As stupid as it sounds, I really like the cinematography. As unrealistic as that science lab of theirs is, it sure is fun to look at. But I've always wondered how they get those really cool looking "lens flare things" every time Grissom shines his flashlight at the camera.
You can pick these up from Target.
http://bit.ly/9HZVYY
and these
http://bit.ly/bk6lSL
and so many more, so be creative in your own tests.
This embedded Youtube (play it in HD for best results) video is a test of all the different stockings, screen material and cellophane that I used. In addition to putting the material in front of the lens like you would a normal filter, the first half of the tests include images where I put cellophane behind the lens as well. In future tests, I'll be trying different Behind-The-Lens effects and separating them all out.
Now, the one thing that I didn't think about while shooting the tests should be immediately obvious when you view this photo:
No MATTE BOX! So you'll see in all of the tests one big issue that I ran into is that you can see the threading of the stockings and the screen when I pan the camera, and the different lights in the room (the set) shine at it at different angles. This is a pretty interesting effect, but not great for a professional-looking feature film or commercial. In my next test, I'll either find a real Matte Box to use, or rig up something to keep the ambient lights from hitting the lens.
No. Filter Describe ISO CamSet
1 Cellophane behind lens 500 UD1
1a Cellophane behind lens 500 Standard
2 Cellophane behind – cellophane front 500 UD1
3 Cellophane behind – screen in front 500 UD1
2 takes, 2nd take is panning around
4 Cellophane behind – stocking 1 500 UD1
5 Cellophane behind – stocking 2 500 UD1
6 Cellophane behind – stocking 3 1250 UD1
I decided to drop the ISO to 320 because removing
the rear cellophane increased the total light
7 Cellophane front 500 UD1
8 Screen in front 320 UD1
9 Stocking 1 front 320 UD1
10 Stocking 2 front 500 UD1
11 Stocking 3 front 320 UD1
TEST #2: You don't need lights, I heard the 7D is great in low light
You heard right. And wrong. Yes, you don't need lights to shoot your movie on the 7D, but the resulting image will have to be shot at an extremely high ISO. The higher the ISO, the more digital noise and grain you introduce into the image. Through several color correction methods that I'll cover in a future blog entry dedicated to ISO's you can all but remove that from your image at the expense of your shadow region. Below is a video where I tested the ISO from 100 to 640.
A future test of a similar nature will feature meter readings of the different areas and a more precise way of telling what is happening to each area of the image.
ISO Shutter
100 1/30
125 1/30
160 1/40
200 1/50
250 1/60
320 1/80
400 1/100
500 1/125
640 1/160
TEST #3: Picture styles
Yep, that's it. It's awful, it's... for many reasons it's pretty awful to use.
But it does allow you to create custom picture styles and save them to the three User Defined Settings in your camera.
This is useful because, as an editor and colorist, the more information you have to work with in the image, the more range and options you have to work with when editing.
In the video below, I began by performing a very simple test. I ignored the Canon Picture Style software (for now, but I'll delve into it later), and just adjusted the settings in the camera itself.
User-Defined Setups
Standard UD1 UD2 UD3
Sharpness 3 3 0 7
Contast 0 -4 -4 -4
Saturation 0 -1 -2 -1
Tone 0 0 0 0
So that's about it for this blog entry. I'm really trying to more diligently blog, and these camera tests are a good way to go about doing that. So keep an eye out for more blogs in the (hopefully) near future.
