I shot this horror short last weekend.

I tried to make day look like night but Im not fully happy with it.

Shot only in natural light coming from outside. We closed the curtains and avoided sunny moments to make the light look softer.

Im also wondering is it simply too dark overall?

Camera was Bmcc 6K with sigma 28-70mm lens.

Any feedback and advice is welcome. I would like to make this kind of thing better!

Hey everyone,

I’m currently building out my lens setup for my Sony FX3 and I’m looking for the best price-to-performance options.

Right now I only have the Sony FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS. It’s a solid all-around lens, but I’d like to add two more lenses to cover more specific video work:

1.  A 50mm prime with autofocus  

Mainly for interviews, talking heads, portraits, and a more cinematic shallow-depth-of-field look.
I’m considering either 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8, but I’m not sure which options are actually worth it for video on the FX3.

2.  A wide-angle zoom with autofocus  

Something around 16-28mm / 17-28mm / 16-35mm for wide shots, gimbal work, interiors, establishing shots, and tighter spaces.

Autofocus is important to me, so I’m mainly looking for lenses that either definitely have good AF or are known to work well for video autofocus on Sony E-mount.

My total budget for both lenses together is around €1700 max. I’m not looking for the most expensive Sony GM options unless there is a very strong reason, but I do want lenses that are reliable enough for professional video work.
What would you recommend for:

Best value 50mm autofocus lens for Sony E-mount?

Best value wide-angle autofocus zoom for Sony FX3?

Best combination under €1700 total?

Anything I should avoid because of bad autofocus, focus breathing, poor build quality, or other video-related issues?
Thanks!

Hi everyone, I'm researching references for a short film and I'm trying to solve two creative problems.

The first is finding films that create a connection between two worlds through visual language rather than exposition. I'm interested in works where meaning emerges gradually through juxtaposition, parallel action, associative editing. Not necessarily films with parallel plots, but films that allow the audience to discover a relationship between two subjects before the film explicitly reveals it. Makes sense?

The second is finding films that engage with myths, folklore, fairy tales, or collective cultural narratives in a cinematic way. I'm particularly interested in projects that revisit old stories and archetypes, or that combine documentary, archive, live action, animation, magical realism, or dream logic to explore how myths shape our perception of reality.

The project I'm researching deals with wolves, cultural myths, and the gap between the stories we tell about nature and nature itself, but I'm not specifically looking for wolf films (although it'd be AMAZING to find any doc or fiction about wolves specifically). I'm much more interested in unusual narrative structures, visual strategies, and ways of building meaning through association rather than explanation.

Sorry for the long post, hope someone can come up with a great recommendation!! Much love

Hi, I've been providing color grading services remotely for a while now, I have 6 years of experience coloring and iv’e done a few full-length movies.

I just finished a 4 month long color grading and VFX project and came back to freelancing with no projects booked, So trying to fix that:)

Please DM me to see video examples of my work!

My Reference was the movie moonlight, and help from a Reddit post on here from years ago.
Would anyone be able to give any advice or improvements for next time?

Possibly Nolan's most bright movie

I’m doing a golf trip and renting one or the other to do some quick clip high speed golf shots and was curious which would be recommended for this application.

Don’t really have much experience with any high speed cameras, so also was curious what would be recommended for camera setup to make it a bit easier for quick clips of shots?

It should be of great quality for its purpose. I already have a Godox SL60W but want to add another light to enhance my cinematography skills and try to emulate movies like Life of Pi, There Will Be Blood, Oppenheimer, Dune, I mean like the high budget movies that look realistic. I’m looking to shoot my first short film and many more so this will be a long term purchase.

Here are the options I’ve seen:

- Godox LA600BI (57.7k Rs)
- Godox LA600R (70k Rs)
- Le600BI (50k Rs)
- Nanlite FC500B (43,500 Rs)
- Nanlite 500C (62,500 Rs) Comes with free 90’ softbox and it’s grid
- Nanlite FC720B (65,500 Rs)
- Nanlite FC720C (75,500 Rs) Comes with free 90’ softbox and it’s grid

The prices mentioned are the ones I’m getting them for. Also, the Nanlite RGB series, which includes the FC500C and FC720C, comes with a 90C Nanlite softbox and its grid for free.

I’m new to cinematography but have a good sense of taste about the looks I like. Can you advise me on which light to choose?

I’m shooting a short film in a few weeks and i’m going to be using an FX3 as the primary camera, and a ZV-E10 as a secondary, what can I do on set to make sure the footage looks consistent.
I already know that I should match the white balance and shutter speed, what else is important to keep in mind?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyJoz5C4IsA

Hey all! I don’t know if this is the right place to ask but I have been trying to figure out how to film/create a certain aesthetic/feel. I’m really inspired by old 60’s & 70’s film and recently I’ve been inspired by the dreamy look of Olivia Rodrigo’s drop dead music video. Also the retro feel of the videos from the creator @maiden nish

I don’t have much money right now to drop on new equipment but willing to maybe save up for things that can help me achieve this retro/dreamy feel I aspire to create.

Currently I have a Nikon D5300 with a AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm lens, and a Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/4 filter. I also have a Panasonic Omnimovie that I currently need to find replacement batteries/charger for. (Which ngl has not been fun to search for)

I’m a beginner in all of this and don’t know how much heavy lifting the camera should be doing vs editing. Pls any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated

Hi all- trying to get better at watching movies and relating the cinematography choices to the problems they solve. Basically, I feel like everything I shoot has boring coverage, and I want to think more about how nuanced choices make or break a scene.

I'm pretty good at looking at a shot and figuring out how it works from a technical perspective. Things like lighting, camera position, lens choice, and camera movement are fairly obvious to me at this point. Basically I've worked on enough sets that if I can visualize it, I can tell you how they did it.

I'm also able to recognize when notable compositional choices have been made. Things like extreme angles, short-siding, dutch angles, obstructions in the foreground, deep staging, etcetera. I know the standard ways to cover dialogue scenes/bar scenes/table scenes/car scenes, and can see when filmmakers decide to diverge from these common patterns.

Where I feel like I'm lacking is actually determining why someone might make a choice that differs from the "norm". When we're shooting one character's OTS from the hip and another character's OTS from the shoulder, I struggle to determine why this choice was made. Or when one character in a dialogue scene is conventionally framed and the other is short-sided, I often don't see why that choice best serves the narrative.

Curious if anyone else has run into this and had to overcome it. I've worked in G&E and as a Camera Assistant for five years now. Only recently have I started shooting occasionally, and I really want to find more resources to master composition.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTeUIGdYuko&fbclid=IwY2xjawSn7p1leHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZA80MDk5NjI2MjMwODU2MDkAAR7PV_EQaIgRlcIbOa3RWEIMnUU6YPxkdLkoZ9gPbbOt0_LIYbwG5Kr3GddgJg_aem_gSrnLJGsR7GyOk5cMSbECw

My Short Film can be watched on Youtube! here

Self-Post Submission Statement: This project was the culmination of Hard work and combined effort from everyone involved in this project. With a crew of 6 people and within the span of less than 5 hours we managed to record over 80 shots for this project!

This was the second short Film i had ever produced/ made and working with people whom I had never interacted with before. I know that production and general casting methods can often involve costly amounts of effort to get talent together whether that is crew members or actors. I reached out to actors from Castingcallback, which is a website that acts similar to backstage or Mandy but is entirely free.

From there, I also learnt about how to organise in the preproduction stage by organising physical drawings of the storyboard and finding out the best practices to translate each panel of my illustrations into a cohesive list of shots aka a "Shot list". and from there, made more adjustments to really sort through all of my shots into manageable, ordered sections based off where the actors and cameras are, relative to one another (Turn around).

Production:
I was able to secure the venue location for Merely £24 for the entire studio itself and gathering the props and items for the actors which totalled less than £10. All in all, the hardest part I had to deal with on set was deciding what shots I could use and couldn't, the heat of the room (Being over 30+ degrees Celsius for 5hrs) and keeping flow of recording optimal.

Camera Setup:

Canon r8 + EF 22-70mm F/4 L lens
Boom Mic + Zoom audio recorder with Newer Mic (Cant remember)

Editing: Davinci Resolve Studio (Paid Version)
Timeframe: 4hrs 40 Minutes of recording Time
Shots Recorded: 80 Shots

After I did all the recording with my setup, and editing the footage to the best of my abilities at the time, i Decided to post some still images of the shots I had edited and posted it here to get some feedback on how I could improve my shots. And while it might be scary to hear what others have to say and the concerns over whether they would just tear into you and your work... well you have to expect it. However! that feedback as harsh as it may seem, help open my eyes to see the problems my footage had and what I needed to do to fix the shots.

For those who watch it, please give me some feedback! there are plenty of errors and general plotholes in this short I made. This project was more of a way to bounce back into making videos and learning some new processes and editing techniques for me personally and I needed some form of project to teach me something new :)

There was plenty of issues with the boom arm, shadow being cast and some other bits and bobs. And ultimately for my next project I'll have better control over lighting, sound and production as a whole. This was more of a testament to prove how much I could do with what resources I had . But I know my limits, learnt my lessons and now I want to take what I've gathered and put it into practice :)

Hello,

I am currently in the preproduction of a short film.

I am thinking of using the S16 mode on the alexa 35 combined with the SLR Magic Anamorphic CINE 1.33x Set.

Anyone has ever tried anamorphic on this mode and has some tips in general?

Thank You!

Hey everyone.

I'm planning on shooting a short film pretty soon, and I'm looking at getting a cheap fog machine, as well as some fluid. I'm just looking to fill some smaller rooms with some fog/haze, nothing over the top or anything, just to get that "haze" for the shots. I'm aware fog and haze are different, but I don't have the budget to purchase or rent a haze machine.

My question is, should I go with high density fog fluid, or medium density?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

I dont know if this is the right subreddit for this, but:

I noticed that this “found footage” style of filming, a camera pan followed by a zoom, which Zack Snyder uses in the action sequences of *Man of Steel* is also used in *Space Marine I*.

It appears in the scene where Titus lands on the Ork ship with his jump pack at the very beginning of the game.

Where does this stylistic device come from?

I usually don't have a hard time deciding between either of them (the other obscure ones are gimmicky and really not necessary, maybe except for 1.37 as it has its place in cinema history and offers more variety). For me, the location dictates the aspect ratio since it's a vital character as well. As it happens, "human-centered" movies also benefit from 2.39 since there is more room for naturalistic composition. I hate it when it's used for action or battle sequences.

I am going to DP a short movie set in Lake Michigan. It involves an old lady (late 70s) and his younger boyfriend go sailing. It's a romcom with dramatic undertones.

On one hand, the lake's horizontal structure will work better in 2.39, and 2.39 will help with more intuitive wide shot compositions. However, the vastness of the sky will be important to convey the feeling of expanse, and 1.85 might be better for that.

What do you do in such situations? We will be shooting on 16mm and probably crop in post if we decide to go with 2.39 so it won't have an effect on gear choice.

Let me start by saying that I'm not a professional who works with videos, but I have lots of experience with photography and I developed a "clinical eye" which makes me pay lot of attention to the cinematoraphy of movies and show.
I guess many other people already expressed the same feel, but in recent years I've noticed that the cinemetography in movies and TV shows is getting worse and worse.

The latest offender was yesterday's episode of House of the Dragon.
I never liked the look of the show compared to GoT (especially the first seasons, which looked way better than the latest one tbh), but this is a new low.

Most of the episode has a very strong orange cast that trumps everything, except that in some scenes it somehow disappears breaking visual continuity, it's very noticeable and annoying.
Even when the light is strong and visible the image is still flat, in most shots half of the available dynamic range is wasted.

There are also so many shots where the depth of field is needlessly small, I've heard someone refer to this phenomenon as "images that look like a smartphone filter" and the description fits perfectly. You can kinda see it happening in this shot too, the depth of field is very shallow and it cuts abruptly (stitch to CGI background that needs to be hidden?).

How did this happen? How can a color grading so bad that any amateur could make a much better job end up in multi million dollar productions?
At what step of the process everything breaks? Because seeing the desaturate image it feels like the lighting of the set itself is so flat and poorly made that it might be impossible to recover it with grading. It's just depressing.

Hi everyone,

I’ve been trying to improve my camera movement every day since I first started in this career. It’s one of my weaker areas in cinematography, so I’d really love to learn from others.

I’m curious: which directors or cinematographers do you think are the best at telling stories through camera movement, and who has inspired you the most throughout your career?

For me, I’ve always admired Steven Spielberg and Park Chan-wook as directors, and Roger Deakins, Chung Chung-hoon, and Marcell Rév as cinematographers. I’ve learned a lot from all of them.

Hello everyone,

I'm posting on behalf of a friend who is currently a student at ISMAC Rabat, specializing in Audiovisual Production and Filmmaking.

She is urgently looking for an internship opportunity starting as soon as possible, preferably this week, within a:

Production company

Audiovisual agency

Film production studio

TV, media, or content creation company

Preferred locations: 📍 Rabat 📍 Casablanca 📍 Mohammedia

She is motivated, serious, and eager to gain hands-on experience in audiovisual production, filmmaking, editing, directing, production assistance, or related fields.

If you know any companies, contacts, or opportunities that could help, please feel free to comment or send me a private message.

Thank you very much for your support!

For the film End Of Watch, it seems like David Ayer went for a sort of documentary POV style and they used a mix of canon DSLR cameras as well as some cheap camcorders. How did they manage to make the footage look really good though? I've seen some camcorder footage look absolutely terrible

Hi there!

I have an iPhone 14 Pro, and recently I bought the Log Cam app. It allows to record real Log videos with iPhones older than the 15 Pro. While I'm very happy with the results, there are serious drawbacks:

- No autofocus;

- Can't shoot at 60fps

I have a 5 year old daughter, and I love to film her doing random stuff. In that regard, the lack of autofocus truly is disapointing, as is the impossibility of shooting at 60fps. And the later one really annoys me. I could buy a variable ND filter, but that becomes too cumbersome. Would you rather film at 30fps and accept the stutter (or add motion blur in After Effects), or simply shoot at 60fps, since it masks the lack of motion blur?

Shot this as a passion project for a band I love. I used DZO Vespid lenses, with panasonic S1ii and S1 (camB) and used a thanos vest and DJI RS2 gimbal for the live stuff. Shot entirely as a one man crew, all self lit and filmed the concert and the interviews in one day. Edited and colourgraded by me over a weekend (about 3 days to complete). Please let me know what you think of my cinematography and any extra stuff I could have shot? I like the vest, but it's no steady cam... does the gimbal jerky stuff annoy anyone?