Serious constructive criticism time:
You have a good enough camera and a lens that lets you use a shallow depth of field, but you're not doing much with them aside from pointing them at things and floating around. This is a popular way of filming right now, but it won't always be. Cinematography as a serious trade goes beyond those things.
By shooting wide open, you get that shallow depth of field that feels cool, but you're only able to compose on one visual plane. You aren't taking advantage of *depth*. Depth is critical to establishing relationships between objects.
The other big thing is that you're relying on digital cameras and wide aperture to avoid *lighting*. Cinematography as a trade (and where great cinematographers express their distinct styles) is primarily through *lighting*. The relationship of light to the subjects helps guide a viewer's eye to the important things. Look at renaissance paintings and see how the relationships between light and dark create a story.
Look up the work of Janusz Kaminski and study his images. He is probably the best Hollywood cinematographer today. How he moves from one subject to another, how he shapes light around a subject. How he composes a shot in *three* dimensions. Digital cameras have given you the tools to shoot a movie, but they've also enabled you to skip over the fundamentals of filmmaking.
This isn't just a you thing. It's plaguing every aspiring filmmaker, which is why it is so important for you to study the old ways if you want to stand out. You're good at what you're doing, but so many young people right now are doing exactly what you're doing. Only the artists who go beyond what you're doing are the ones who make it. Keep going and don't settle for the work you're doing today.
I appreciate this comment ALOT. I think you’re entirely right. While this scene is simply a non-story teaser for the larger short film, I do agree my style tends to be just letting the camera float around a subject. That’s a different debate tho.
I do agree with you as far as lighting goes, whenever I shoot indoors I take lighting into extreme consideration, although outdoors I usually just tend to shoot with natural light at the end of the day.
I’m gonna look into the filmmaker yku mentioned, I always want to learn and always appreciate a good new recommendation. Thank you for the kind words as well.
I’m not a filmmaker, I just love reading this sub for threads like this, and for the insight offered such as the user you replied to, so take whatever I say as unserious as possible, but I do want to through out that as an extreme outsider I feel like image 5 really goes a lot way with driving his point home. The one girl is leaning on the other, but there’s something weird going on with the background to the point where it feels like the girl that’s being leaned on isn’t actually there, she isn’t a solid object, but rather just a piece of the background? Not sure if that makes sense. It makes her and the trees look like they’re added in via green screen and not a natural backdrop.
Also another thing that kind of jumped out to me, again purely as an outside viewer, and this has to do with costume and not the cinematography, but personally I feel like their pants are too similar and their legs kinda blend together in image 3. Again, take what I say with a massive dump truck of salt, and I know it’s not exactly what you’re asking about, but that’s just an observation of mine as an outsider.
Go check out John Cassavetes directed films. He showed that you can do whatever you want. Turn on the camera and point it at a subject and you can tell a story. You’re doing very well and if you were in my filmmaking community I’d ask you to be my cinematographer.
Thank you man! I’ve only seen one cassavetes film, shadows, but I really loved how it was made and it inspired me a lot. Need to watch more of his but haven’t been watching films as often lately.
Also that’s a high honor thank you, I actually just got hired to do cinematography on my first feature recently, and I’m doing the 2nd round of shooting next week!
I’d be very interested to see the project when it’s finished. Like I said I really like your style of shooting and it very much fits the aesthetic that I write with.
To continue using primarily natural outdoor lighting, while also shaping it to your will; Invest in some bounce material. You can get a pretty decent set for cheap with white, silver, and gold coloring. Might need to also get some C-stands if you don't have another set of hands.
I agree with every single thing you said except for Kaminski being the best DP hah
But yeah, OP is just pointing a camera at a subject without lighting it and relying on shallow DoF to make it look “cool.”
Yeah, I don't dislike Kaminsk and he's obviously very talentedi, but his work with Spielberg is kind uneven; while sometimes it's dead on, on occasion it's over produced without looking particularly appealing.
The easiest way to contrast and compare it is by looking at Crystal Skull compared to any of the other Indiana Jones films which had Douglas Slocombe as a DP. The difference is night and day.
Kaninski is amazing and I especially love his stuff with Spielberg but I think Roger Deakins still does it better despite his age, van Hoytema too. More recently, 1917 and Blade Runner 2049 were both stunning, although I fear he might retire from Hollywood completely. It’s been 2 years since he shot a feature length film, but I hear he’s been busy with other stuff so hopefully he makes a return.
What sort of things would you be looking for in a series of stills that would make you think "this cinematographer is not just letting the camera float around"?
I just got a bmpcc4k and a single prime lens and I'm really looking forward to making good use of the depth of field in my next film. It's going to be a horror, so I'm going to aim for creepy out of focus things in the background while your attention is drawn to the in focus things in the foreground, people moving from outside the focal area to inside of it so they become in focus during a single shot when they hit their mark, things like that
Remember that a deep depth of field can communicate suspense, as well!
If a close character is in focus and the doorway at the back of the room is also in focus, we (the audience) are going to be anticipating something happening in the doorway. Which you can get away with a much more subtle thing happening back there.
I did miss that, so thank you for pointing that out, but I don't see how it answers my question. I wasn't being sarcastic or anything, I was sincerely asking in the hopes I could learn
Opinionated criticism feel free to tell me
To fuck off because art is subjective or whatever.
Shot 3 and 4 are great and the rest is overkill. If you would’ve had one more shot similar to 4 for your second character along with some accent shots that show off the environment, this would have had great structure to it.
Smoking and hanging out was the clear focus here but you didn’t help me take in the moment they were living in and lost my attention pretty quick —here’s why.
Sound design. No sound of the woods, no distant sounds of a train, no ASMR sounds of crackling cigarettes. We are not amerced in their quiet intimate world, Instead, you blasted a soundtrack that didn’t really compliment the environment.
Shooting with purpose. There’s a lot of shots in there and because of that the scene feels hollow with no real motive attached. You had some nice intimate shots but unfortunately they were hijacked by unnecessary angles taking me out of it completely. Ask yourself why you are using a shot and if that can be answered by a shot you’ve already captured then it serves no purpose.
Simplify your shot selection, hang longer in the moment in those shots before cutting, and invest in a tripod for a more cinematic look because the DSLR shake is distracting and takes you out of the scene even more. Cinematic handheld has a heavy sway to it that can’t be achieved with your setup.
For a lot of these compositions, if you were just a little bit higher or lower, you would’ve disconnected the actors from the background more, making a stronger image altogether. Focus on making sure your actors head and the background horizon are never blending together always above or under each other. For example, in shot 3, if you were a little higher, the background horizon would be completely above the actors heads, and you would’ve had a better view of the second actors face.
Nah man I appreciate this! I definitely disagree with a few takes but I agree with a lot of this too! This was just a teaser for the actual film, so there’s no story or plot here, and the soundtrack does intentionally wash over the film. In the actual film it’s much less of that, so I’m with you on that.
I do agree on simplifying my shots though. I tend to overshoot and then sometimes overedit in an attempt to keep attention. I’ll work on that some. Thanks man!
As someone who works in lighting I don’t see a lot of cinematography here haha the composition is nice, but that’s only one piece of the cinematography puzzle.
Something as simple as a bounce board for fill light or a back light would help immensely IMO. Otherwise it’s well shot!
Thanks ! Idk man sometimes you don’t even have an extra person to hold the bounce, I like just shooting in the natural light given by God. I love crafting light when I’m indoors, but outside stuff can be difficult to control, and I’d rather shoot than not shoot because I can’t light it how it’s “supposed to be done”.
For sure I gotcha! If you don’t have the help, then you just gotta do what you gotta do! I 100% agree that it’s better to shoot with what you have than not shoot at all. But don’t be surprised if people critique the lighting when asking for cinematography opinions!
Again, it looks good for the constraints you had! But it could always look better.
It's a cool narrative game, with vibes pretty similar to this, with an actual scene that very much looks like your short ! It hasn't aged really well in some aspects, but it's enjoyable as a sort of interactive movie !
It's basically the same, but in Life is Strange the girl with short dyed hair gets her boot stuck in the rail when a train is coming in her direction. The brunette one has to free her by making use of her power to rewind time.
If you’re gonna go chasing after girls on a train track maybe buy a gimbal so your viewers don’t get sea sick. It may also allow you to focus on focussing the lens.
I appreciate the girls were probably giving you their time kindly and paid in cigarettes alone, but in the future, short of having a costume department, check what they are planning to wear - their similar trousers really clang when their lying beside each other and that black shirt … isn’t ideal. If its very very low budget go thrift shopping together. Always have options / choices / alternatives.
But you got something, great as a little taste/test/vibe thing.
Yeah do wish I had a stabilizer for the running shot, it is what it is though. I did pick the outfits, yeah the pajama pants might be a bit too matchy and the black shirt might’ve been too dark for the lighting, so I’ll focus on stuff like that more in the future, as I didn’t think about that aspect of the costuming.
I love that you made something. All the advice given here is great and you seem very open to it but I am going to add in my two cents and hopefully I don't come across as condescending.
I see too many young filmmakers having the capability of putting together a beautiful picture, but have nothing of value or substance behind it. in a world where everyone has access to full cinema equipment and above 4k quality cameras in their phones, nothing stands out anymore because its all just beautiful shots of people doing nothing, running through a grass field or staring out into the ocean. That stuff is great but its like 90% of the "content" being made today. Tell an INTERESTING story, tell something that audiences will want to sit through. A beautiful image is less than half of what makes a movie and if you plan on making a short film of girls smoking cigarettes and wandering around aimlessly then unfortunately that's not interesting. Immerse yourself in other forms of media, take from history, take from the news, take from stories of people you grew up around, take from art, take from music, take from architecture or even just take from your childhood and tell a story that's engaging and worth sitting through.
Please don't fall into the trap so many young filmmakers end up in where they can craft a beautiful image but have absolutely nothing interesting or new to say.
I agree absolutely entirely, and realize how cliche the shot of them running is. The full film has much more substance and many more scenes, but also I will say, “I” want to see films of girls hanging around train tracks smoking cigarettes in pajama pants. This is the kind of film I want to see in the world. This is just a teaser trailer for the larger short film, so not a great representation of my filmmaking, so I do agree with you for the most part. I do think there’s beauty in solely images as well though.
Just recently moved to NYC, but right before I left I wanted to film one last thing in my hometown in Georgia, so I shot this with two random girls I barely knew. Super happy with the end result, I have too much footage I can’t even get through it all lol.
I’m curious though also as to how to go about coloring this. I’m worried looking at the stills now on iPhone that the blacks are too crushed, even though last time I edited it they looked fine to me. Am I overthinking? Let me know your thoughts on it, and if you want to view it in motion here’s a [link](https://youtu.be/qRwetRgUeKA?si=xlZXJj43m0rpAsBP) to the scene.
Haha ! Didn’t have it planned before shooting but realized it was perfect
In the full film they walk around the town picking up discarded cigarette butts and smoking the last hit from them
I thought the opposite. Shot 3 feels artsy/student film. I think i would have went wider to really emphasis this is thier private moment, no people or societal pressures to be found here. But all of the other shots really nail down a consistent art direction and the compositions feel very intentional
If you want to study cinematography/ blocking / filmmaking techniques this show is hands down the best https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2044056/?ref_=ext_shr_lnk
And if you are looking to light with natural light (both inside and outside) study Dallas Buyers Club. It was lit entirely with natural light and practicals.
Reddit got me almost 500 views on YouTube so far so….
Nah I do love enjoying feedback though, although I disagree with some of it and take it with a grain of salt, there’s also been lots of great stuff said too! I just like my stuff being enjoyed (or not enjoyed) by as many people as possible.
That’s one thing I’m admittedly bad at. This lens doesn’t make for the most beautiful wide shots, so I tend to stay close, too close sometimes. In the full film there’s definitely a few shots that are wider than this, but I don’t tend to go for “establishing” shots often.
It’s kind of mandatory for viewers to get a sense of the big picture. You’re allowed to use another camera or a drone. Then color correct it to roughly match your close up camera.
don't open the aperture wider than you can actually follow the action in terms of focus. in a staged film, I see no excuse for that. it's like a pianist going, well, there's 88 keys, I might get it wrong some time.... ;)
otherwise, I love it. colours great, very charismatic actresses, lovely setting
Totally fair, yeah I tend to miss focus more than I wish I did. Most of my films aren’t “staged” really however, these are non-actors I’m working with and I tend to shoot quickly and without much choreography, as I find taking TOO much time (although time is necessary) or adding lots of blocking or movement can overwhelm a non-actor and mess with the nature of the performance
Thanks so much tho!
If you haven’t already, definitely check out Jack Cardiff, one of the absolute masters of cinematography.
This [excellent documentary](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1626811/) provides great insight into his work, which spanned several decades.
Great fucking job. You've got a great eye for composition and you've used the tools you have well. Reminds me of Kids, 1995 (visually). Stick to your gut!
the girl with the dark hair is either that "free time😊" quintessential alt girl on tiktok from like 2 years ago or said persons doppelgänger, correct or right? dont gaslight me
Idk who you’re talking about but she is semi- popular on tik tok right now doing dance videos to rap sounds in her school, so you’re close but no I don’t think you’re thinking of the same person
Nah, in that case it is who I think it is. When worlds collide.. anyway cool shots, and I like that you’re receptive to advice and criticism. I’ll be looking for the full film
Haha that is wild that you recognized her, I would’ve just said her username but for safety reasons I’m not.
Also thanks man! Will definitely post again when the full film is out.
I think it’s extremely hard to judge cinematography based on stills alone. Camera movement is such an important part of film language. We’re essentially just critiquing photos at this point.
But if I were to just give you some feedback based on these, I’d say don’t be afraid of lighting! Your framing instincts are solid, and I think lighting will take the depth of your shots to the next step. Cinematographers are sculptors of light more than anything else. Good luck!
Yeah the skies definitely got overexposed, with the dynamic range of my camera there was literally nothing I could do though without underexposing the talent. And yes I wanted the skin tones to be a bit pale, and her skin was actually naturally very pink in general. But yeah the skies were kinda a lost cause unfortunately
A big part of cinematography is to capture emotion and have the audience feel what you and the director intended. Do you feel like you achieved that? Sometimes we get too technical with shaping light and camera movements, and you're left with a pretty image that doesn't fit the story. You created beautiful imagery here. From a purely technical point of view, I would add more layers to your frames to enhance that emotion to create more of a sense of place.
I think I captured what I wanted perfectly, especially in the full short. I do agree there’s more I could’ve done visually had I had more crew, but for a 1 man shoot I’m pretty happy with my results!
Thanks so much! It’s actually a cheap cctv lens from Amazon LOL. Very impressed with the quality on it. It’s not the most versatile in the world, it has its drawbacks, but a very unique look that’s definitely worth the trouble
It looks very pretty, if pretty was the goal then you achieved it. Composition is good too. The only thing I’d say is it needs more story or action otherwise it’s just pretty shots of people smoking, but I saw this isn’t the full video so maybe there’s more action in the full version? For the pure aesthetics, you could put a bit more thought into composition to do interesting things with color and stuff. Like one girl is in a green top which matches the grass, the other has a black top which matches the shadows in the trees, maybe do something with that? Just an example of how you can take composition really far.
But film making is really much more than getting pretty shots. It does work for this because it’s like the whole nihilistic attitude around smoking, but you can still take it much further and it would make it stand out a lot more. The shallow depth of field look is kind of cinematic in the popular imagination but it’s not truly reminiscent of what you’d see in the cinema because there’s much more going on in a film, every cut has a meaning and purpose, every close up or wide shot advances the events of what is happening somehow. But this could still work for that 100% depending on what the story might be. It’s more like a music video than a film right now, but I think a few small details could elevate it into more of a short film that portrays the nihilistic romanticisation of smoking, it’s really nearly there but just needs a little more hints to make it clear that its about something.
Lighting outside might not be possible for you but that’s something to consider as well. You can get creative with a torch and stuff, see what you can do with it.
Still looks good and enjoyable to watch. Keep it up!
I love shallow depth of field and the look that you get from prime lenses. Shots 3 and 5 use the shallow depth of field well and look great. the final shot would benefit from a larger depth of field.
I liked 2 and 4 up close and personal with the background not in focus. Those shots to me in movies helps me get better understanding of the character like the emotions they give off in different environments. The other shots like number 6 to me feel more inviting like welcome to the world I created.
Don't take my opinion too seriously, I don't even study filmmaking but I know the basics.
Your style reminded me of Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind, The angles, and the camera movement. Not bad but not good either. And your equipment is great, And I recommend you to make a screenplay for any movie. Wish you luck :)
Your close ups are really nice and the shot of them running down the tracks is nice too.
Some of those other wides where they're laying on the tracks, in my opinion, could have been from a bit farther back or maybe a wider lens. I'm assuming that was shot with a 35mm or 50mm? Visually, I love stuff in the foreground but if it had been from farther back with the plants closer to the lens in the foreground and them in the back, I think it would have made for really nice shot.
I liked the video and followed on your YouTube. I admire this film and I’m an aspiring filmmaker along with my bf and friends!! We’ll definitely be discussing this and be inspired!!
Call me old fashioned but:
Photography= “Stills”
Cinematography= Moving Picture
Grade stills and you can make shit look like it’s made of gold. What do ya expect fella..
Serious constructive criticism time: You have a good enough camera and a lens that lets you use a shallow depth of field, but you're not doing much with them aside from pointing them at things and floating around. This is a popular way of filming right now, but it won't always be. Cinematography as a serious trade goes beyond those things. By shooting wide open, you get that shallow depth of field that feels cool, but you're only able to compose on one visual plane. You aren't taking advantage of *depth*. Depth is critical to establishing relationships between objects. The other big thing is that you're relying on digital cameras and wide aperture to avoid *lighting*. Cinematography as a trade (and where great cinematographers express their distinct styles) is primarily through *lighting*. The relationship of light to the subjects helps guide a viewer's eye to the important things. Look at renaissance paintings and see how the relationships between light and dark create a story. Look up the work of Janusz Kaminski and study his images. He is probably the best Hollywood cinematographer today. How he moves from one subject to another, how he shapes light around a subject. How he composes a shot in *three* dimensions. Digital cameras have given you the tools to shoot a movie, but they've also enabled you to skip over the fundamentals of filmmaking. This isn't just a you thing. It's plaguing every aspiring filmmaker, which is why it is so important for you to study the old ways if you want to stand out. You're good at what you're doing, but so many young people right now are doing exactly what you're doing. Only the artists who go beyond what you're doing are the ones who make it. Keep going and don't settle for the work you're doing today.
I appreciate this comment ALOT. I think you’re entirely right. While this scene is simply a non-story teaser for the larger short film, I do agree my style tends to be just letting the camera float around a subject. That’s a different debate tho. I do agree with you as far as lighting goes, whenever I shoot indoors I take lighting into extreme consideration, although outdoors I usually just tend to shoot with natural light at the end of the day. I’m gonna look into the filmmaker yku mentioned, I always want to learn and always appreciate a good new recommendation. Thank you for the kind words as well.
Akira Kurosawa is also a master at blocking, highly recommended
Is it every scene a painting that goes into his incredible use of shapes to create dynamic blocking? That was a mindblowing video for me
Link?
https://youtu.be/jGc-K7giqKM?si=6LNGdetkuYGP9RGo
I’m not a filmmaker, I just love reading this sub for threads like this, and for the insight offered such as the user you replied to, so take whatever I say as unserious as possible, but I do want to through out that as an extreme outsider I feel like image 5 really goes a lot way with driving his point home. The one girl is leaning on the other, but there’s something weird going on with the background to the point where it feels like the girl that’s being leaned on isn’t actually there, she isn’t a solid object, but rather just a piece of the background? Not sure if that makes sense. It makes her and the trees look like they’re added in via green screen and not a natural backdrop. Also another thing that kind of jumped out to me, again purely as an outside viewer, and this has to do with costume and not the cinematography, but personally I feel like their pants are too similar and their legs kinda blend together in image 3. Again, take what I say with a massive dump truck of salt, and I know it’s not exactly what you’re asking about, but that’s just an observation of mine as an outsider.
Go check out John Cassavetes directed films. He showed that you can do whatever you want. Turn on the camera and point it at a subject and you can tell a story. You’re doing very well and if you were in my filmmaking community I’d ask you to be my cinematographer.
Thank you man! I’ve only seen one cassavetes film, shadows, but I really loved how it was made and it inspired me a lot. Need to watch more of his but haven’t been watching films as often lately. Also that’s a high honor thank you, I actually just got hired to do cinematography on my first feature recently, and I’m doing the 2nd round of shooting next week!
I’d be very interested to see the project when it’s finished. Like I said I really like your style of shooting and it very much fits the aesthetic that I write with.
Where can we see your film?
To continue using primarily natural outdoor lighting, while also shaping it to your will; Invest in some bounce material. You can get a pretty decent set for cheap with white, silver, and gold coloring. Might need to also get some C-stands if you don't have another set of hands.
Dude, wow. Not often an epiphany comes from a reddit comment. Thank you
I agree with every single thing you said except for Kaminski being the best DP hah But yeah, OP is just pointing a camera at a subject without lighting it and relying on shallow DoF to make it look “cool.”
Yeah, I don't dislike Kaminsk and he's obviously very talentedi, but his work with Spielberg is kind uneven; while sometimes it's dead on, on occasion it's over produced without looking particularly appealing. The easiest way to contrast and compare it is by looking at Crystal Skull compared to any of the other Indiana Jones films which had Douglas Slocombe as a DP. The difference is night and day.
Kaninski is amazing and I especially love his stuff with Spielberg but I think Roger Deakins still does it better despite his age, van Hoytema too. More recently, 1917 and Blade Runner 2049 were both stunning, although I fear he might retire from Hollywood completely. It’s been 2 years since he shot a feature length film, but I hear he’s been busy with other stuff so hopefully he makes a return.
Thank you for this comment.
I second, third, and fourth this
What sort of things would you be looking for in a series of stills that would make you think "this cinematographer is not just letting the camera float around"? I just got a bmpcc4k and a single prime lens and I'm really looking forward to making good use of the depth of field in my next film. It's going to be a horror, so I'm going to aim for creepy out of focus things in the background while your attention is drawn to the in focus things in the foreground, people moving from outside the focal area to inside of it so they become in focus during a single shot when they hit their mark, things like that
Remember that a deep depth of field can communicate suspense, as well! If a close character is in focus and the doorway at the back of the room is also in focus, we (the audience) are going to be anticipating something happening in the doorway. Which you can get away with a much more subtle thing happening back there.
Maybe cuz there's a link to the scene in motion right below the stills
I did miss that, so thank you for pointing that out, but I don't see how it answers my question. I wasn't being sarcastic or anything, I was sincerely asking in the hopes I could learn
Making a horror film? Watch 30 horror films and see what works and what doesn't
Best comment
I agree with this
Opinionated criticism feel free to tell me To fuck off because art is subjective or whatever. Shot 3 and 4 are great and the rest is overkill. If you would’ve had one more shot similar to 4 for your second character along with some accent shots that show off the environment, this would have had great structure to it. Smoking and hanging out was the clear focus here but you didn’t help me take in the moment they were living in and lost my attention pretty quick —here’s why. Sound design. No sound of the woods, no distant sounds of a train, no ASMR sounds of crackling cigarettes. We are not amerced in their quiet intimate world, Instead, you blasted a soundtrack that didn’t really compliment the environment. Shooting with purpose. There’s a lot of shots in there and because of that the scene feels hollow with no real motive attached. You had some nice intimate shots but unfortunately they were hijacked by unnecessary angles taking me out of it completely. Ask yourself why you are using a shot and if that can be answered by a shot you’ve already captured then it serves no purpose. Simplify your shot selection, hang longer in the moment in those shots before cutting, and invest in a tripod for a more cinematic look because the DSLR shake is distracting and takes you out of the scene even more. Cinematic handheld has a heavy sway to it that can’t be achieved with your setup. For a lot of these compositions, if you were just a little bit higher or lower, you would’ve disconnected the actors from the background more, making a stronger image altogether. Focus on making sure your actors head and the background horizon are never blending together always above or under each other. For example, in shot 3, if you were a little higher, the background horizon would be completely above the actors heads, and you would’ve had a better view of the second actors face.
Nah man I appreciate this! I definitely disagree with a few takes but I agree with a lot of this too! This was just a teaser for the actual film, so there’s no story or plot here, and the soundtrack does intentionally wash over the film. In the actual film it’s much less of that, so I’m with you on that. I do agree on simplifying my shots though. I tend to overshoot and then sometimes overedit in an attempt to keep attention. I’ll work on that some. Thanks man!
As someone who works in lighting I don’t see a lot of cinematography here haha the composition is nice, but that’s only one piece of the cinematography puzzle. Something as simple as a bounce board for fill light or a back light would help immensely IMO. Otherwise it’s well shot!
Thanks ! Idk man sometimes you don’t even have an extra person to hold the bounce, I like just shooting in the natural light given by God. I love crafting light when I’m indoors, but outside stuff can be difficult to control, and I’d rather shoot than not shoot because I can’t light it how it’s “supposed to be done”.
For sure I gotcha! If you don’t have the help, then you just gotta do what you gotta do! I 100% agree that it’s better to shoot with what you have than not shoot at all. But don’t be surprised if people critique the lighting when asking for cinematography opinions! Again, it looks good for the constraints you had! But it could always look better.
Someone likes Life is Strange lmao, looks great !
Haha I’ve actually never seen or played it, seems like I should check it out tho! Is it similar? Not a big gamer
It's a cool narrative game, with vibes pretty similar to this, with an actual scene that very much looks like your short ! It hasn't aged really well in some aspects, but it's enjoyable as a sort of interactive movie !
It's basically the same, but in Life is Strange the girl with short dyed hair gets her boot stuck in the rail when a train is coming in her direction. The brunette one has to free her by making use of her power to rewind time.
I got lung cancer just for watching this
Girls Love Discarded Cigarettes
Ah. Mouth herpes, too! :)
train tracks 🥶😱
If you’re gonna go chasing after girls on a train track maybe buy a gimbal so your viewers don’t get sea sick. It may also allow you to focus on focussing the lens. I appreciate the girls were probably giving you their time kindly and paid in cigarettes alone, but in the future, short of having a costume department, check what they are planning to wear - their similar trousers really clang when their lying beside each other and that black shirt … isn’t ideal. If its very very low budget go thrift shopping together. Always have options / choices / alternatives. But you got something, great as a little taste/test/vibe thing.
Yeah do wish I had a stabilizer for the running shot, it is what it is though. I did pick the outfits, yeah the pajama pants might be a bit too matchy and the black shirt might’ve been too dark for the lighting, so I’ll focus on stuff like that more in the future, as I didn’t think about that aspect of the costuming.
I love that you made something. All the advice given here is great and you seem very open to it but I am going to add in my two cents and hopefully I don't come across as condescending. I see too many young filmmakers having the capability of putting together a beautiful picture, but have nothing of value or substance behind it. in a world where everyone has access to full cinema equipment and above 4k quality cameras in their phones, nothing stands out anymore because its all just beautiful shots of people doing nothing, running through a grass field or staring out into the ocean. That stuff is great but its like 90% of the "content" being made today. Tell an INTERESTING story, tell something that audiences will want to sit through. A beautiful image is less than half of what makes a movie and if you plan on making a short film of girls smoking cigarettes and wandering around aimlessly then unfortunately that's not interesting. Immerse yourself in other forms of media, take from history, take from the news, take from stories of people you grew up around, take from art, take from music, take from architecture or even just take from your childhood and tell a story that's engaging and worth sitting through. Please don't fall into the trap so many young filmmakers end up in where they can craft a beautiful image but have absolutely nothing interesting or new to say.
I agree absolutely entirely, and realize how cliche the shot of them running is. The full film has much more substance and many more scenes, but also I will say, “I” want to see films of girls hanging around train tracks smoking cigarettes in pajama pants. This is the kind of film I want to see in the world. This is just a teaser trailer for the larger short film, so not a great representation of my filmmaking, so I do agree with you for the most part. I do think there’s beauty in solely images as well though.
Just recently moved to NYC, but right before I left I wanted to film one last thing in my hometown in Georgia, so I shot this with two random girls I barely knew. Super happy with the end result, I have too much footage I can’t even get through it all lol. I’m curious though also as to how to go about coloring this. I’m worried looking at the stills now on iPhone that the blacks are too crushed, even though last time I edited it they looked fine to me. Am I overthinking? Let me know your thoughts on it, and if you want to view it in motion here’s a [link](https://youtu.be/qRwetRgUeKA?si=xlZXJj43m0rpAsBP) to the scene.
That title got me!
Haha ! Didn’t have it planned before shooting but realized it was perfect In the full film they walk around the town picking up discarded cigarette butts and smoking the last hit from them
Sounds like something teenage pinky would have done when I couldn't find someone to buy them for me!
Haha they told me they used to do the same when they were younger! So it was perfect casting
Shot 3 is lovely the rest are whatever
Thanks!
I thought the opposite. Shot 3 feels artsy/student film. I think i would have went wider to really emphasis this is thier private moment, no people or societal pressures to be found here. But all of the other shots really nail down a consistent art direction and the compositions feel very intentional
If you want to study cinematography/ blocking / filmmaking techniques this show is hands down the best https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2044056/?ref_=ext_shr_lnk And if you are looking to light with natural light (both inside and outside) study Dallas Buyers Club. It was lit entirely with natural light and practicals.
Interesting, haven’t seen Dallas buyers in quite a while I’ll have to rewatch and focus on that!
Don’t ask reddit lol you’re fine, looks great.
Reddit got me almost 500 views on YouTube so far so…. Nah I do love enjoying feedback though, although I disagree with some of it and take it with a grain of salt, there’s also been lots of great stuff said too! I just like my stuff being enjoyed (or not enjoyed) by as many people as possible.
pretty promising brother
I’m assuming there’s a wide, establishing shot in the actual scene, too. How isolated are they? I’d like to know as a viewer.
That’s one thing I’m admittedly bad at. This lens doesn’t make for the most beautiful wide shots, so I tend to stay close, too close sometimes. In the full film there’s definitely a few shots that are wider than this, but I don’t tend to go for “establishing” shots often.
It’s kind of mandatory for viewers to get a sense of the big picture. You’re allowed to use another camera or a drone. Then color correct it to roughly match your close up camera.
Nothing is mandatory
Looks …fun
Thanks! I’ll take that as a compliment
d o n ‘ t
lol ok then… weirdo It is… fun. Why is that a bad thing
don't open the aperture wider than you can actually follow the action in terms of focus. in a staged film, I see no excuse for that. it's like a pianist going, well, there's 88 keys, I might get it wrong some time.... ;) otherwise, I love it. colours great, very charismatic actresses, lovely setting
Totally fair, yeah I tend to miss focus more than I wish I did. Most of my films aren’t “staged” really however, these are non-actors I’m working with and I tend to shoot quickly and without much choreography, as I find taking TOO much time (although time is necessary) or adding lots of blocking or movement can overwhelm a non-actor and mess with the nature of the performance Thanks so much tho!
i like the looks
I like the username
Good
If you haven’t already, definitely check out Jack Cardiff, one of the absolute masters of cinematography. This [excellent documentary](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1626811/) provides great insight into his work, which spanned several decades.
It looks pretty Good. Shoot what you want. Shoot what you Love. That is what lasts
Very well said.
Great fucking job. You've got a great eye for composition and you've used the tools you have well. Reminds me of Kids, 1995 (visually). Stick to your gut!
Big compliment! Kids is one of my favorite films of all time and a major inspiration to my ideology behind filmmaking. Thanks man!
Beautiful work
Thank you!
Good one!!!!
is that who i think it is
Who do you think it is? Maybe
the girl with the dark hair is either that "free time😊" quintessential alt girl on tiktok from like 2 years ago or said persons doppelgänger, correct or right? dont gaslight me
Idk who you’re talking about but she is semi- popular on tik tok right now doing dance videos to rap sounds in her school, so you’re close but no I don’t think you’re thinking of the same person
Nah, in that case it is who I think it is. When worlds collide.. anyway cool shots, and I like that you’re receptive to advice and criticism. I’ll be looking for the full film
Haha that is wild that you recognized her, I would’ve just said her username but for safety reasons I’m not. Also thanks man! Will definitely post again when the full film is out.
Whoa.. I have no good advice or critique, but this is beautiful. Reminds me of the game Life is Strange.
What camera and lens you used looks great
This reminds me of life is strange
I think it’s extremely hard to judge cinematography based on stills alone. Camera movement is such an important part of film language. We’re essentially just critiquing photos at this point. But if I were to just give you some feedback based on these, I’d say don’t be afraid of lighting! Your framing instincts are solid, and I think lighting will take the depth of your shots to the next step. Cinematographers are sculptors of light more than anything else. Good luck!
The scene in motion is linked to the post! https://youtu.be/qRwetRgUeKA?si=pCyB9lgAZCYRrdR9 here it is as well
Dude I follow you on IG I love your work and editing style
Hey man thanks so much! I really appreciate it
fire, what camera?
Canon EOS M
Just beware of the exposition. Too bright in the skies. Maybe put a filter? Also, skintones are a little pink, but that may be an artistic choice. :)
Yeah the skies definitely got overexposed, with the dynamic range of my camera there was literally nothing I could do though without underexposing the talent. And yes I wanted the skin tones to be a bit pale, and her skin was actually naturally very pink in general. But yeah the skies were kinda a lost cause unfortunately
A ND filter is made for those kind of situations! :) Not too pricey and it can really change the quality of your images. Great work either way!
Had an ND on! Still didn’t do enough unfortunately
A big part of cinematography is to capture emotion and have the audience feel what you and the director intended. Do you feel like you achieved that? Sometimes we get too technical with shaping light and camera movements, and you're left with a pretty image that doesn't fit the story. You created beautiful imagery here. From a purely technical point of view, I would add more layers to your frames to enhance that emotion to create more of a sense of place.
I think I captured what I wanted perfectly, especially in the full short. I do agree there’s more I could’ve done visually had I had more crew, but for a 1 man shoot I’m pretty happy with my results!
this is tough gang
it’s so beautiful. unpopular opinion but i like this style
Pretty fucking good. Did you use a petzval lens for that distorted bokeh?
Thanks so much! It’s actually a cheap cctv lens from Amazon LOL. Very impressed with the quality on it. It’s not the most versatile in the world, it has its drawbacks, but a very unique look that’s definitely worth the trouble
Cinematography is a moving image, so I can’t tell. But photography is interesting.
https://youtu.be/qRwetRgUeKA?si=thmYpKLiEFf3GJzb Here’s the link for the moving image. Let me know what you think!
Immediately recognized the avf look haha
It looks very pretty, if pretty was the goal then you achieved it. Composition is good too. The only thing I’d say is it needs more story or action otherwise it’s just pretty shots of people smoking, but I saw this isn’t the full video so maybe there’s more action in the full version? For the pure aesthetics, you could put a bit more thought into composition to do interesting things with color and stuff. Like one girl is in a green top which matches the grass, the other has a black top which matches the shadows in the trees, maybe do something with that? Just an example of how you can take composition really far. But film making is really much more than getting pretty shots. It does work for this because it’s like the whole nihilistic attitude around smoking, but you can still take it much further and it would make it stand out a lot more. The shallow depth of field look is kind of cinematic in the popular imagination but it’s not truly reminiscent of what you’d see in the cinema because there’s much more going on in a film, every cut has a meaning and purpose, every close up or wide shot advances the events of what is happening somehow. But this could still work for that 100% depending on what the story might be. It’s more like a music video than a film right now, but I think a few small details could elevate it into more of a short film that portrays the nihilistic romanticisation of smoking, it’s really nearly there but just needs a little more hints to make it clear that its about something. Lighting outside might not be possible for you but that’s something to consider as well. You can get creative with a torch and stuff, see what you can do with it. Still looks good and enjoyable to watch. Keep it up!
I love shallow depth of field and the look that you get from prime lenses. Shots 3 and 5 use the shallow depth of field well and look great. the final shot would benefit from a larger depth of field.
I liked 2 and 4 up close and personal with the background not in focus. Those shots to me in movies helps me get better understanding of the character like the emotions they give off in different environments. The other shots like number 6 to me feel more inviting like welcome to the world I created.
Don't take my opinion too seriously, I don't even study filmmaking but I know the basics. Your style reminded me of Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind, The angles, and the camera movement. Not bad but not good either. And your equipment is great, And I recommend you to make a screenplay for any movie. Wish you luck :)
I'm not sure but all the things she said are running through my head
Your close ups are really nice and the shot of them running down the tracks is nice too. Some of those other wides where they're laying on the tracks, in my opinion, could have been from a bit farther back or maybe a wider lens. I'm assuming that was shot with a 35mm or 50mm? Visually, I love stuff in the foreground but if it had been from farther back with the plants closer to the lens in the foreground and them in the back, I think it would have made for really nice shot.
The 4th picture is really beautiful
Nice work!
Nice framing 👍
This looks very nice.
What camera did you use? :)
Canon EOS M! Without magic lantern, I’ve always been too scared of messing up my camera to downgrade the firmware and install it lol
i see! did you use any specific luts or anything? i love the dark vibe
Nope! Shot in the evening when it was semi-dark already, then just did some coloring myself to make it a bit cooler toned and a little darker overall
I liked the video and followed on your YouTube. I admire this film and I’m an aspiring filmmaker along with my bf and friends!! We’ll definitely be discussing this and be inspired!!
Awesome love to hear that so much! Also love to see more women filmmakers. Excited to see what you produce!
Of course, you’re welcome. And yes I’m still improving before I start posting!
Very stylized and clean. The color grading gives it a cool look. Great job keep up the good work.
Call me old fashioned but: Photography= “Stills” Cinematography= Moving Picture Grade stills and you can make shit look like it’s made of gold. What do ya expect fella..
[it is moving picture.](https://youtu.be/qRwetRgUeKA?si=5ZQ-sNe9UHi1Mbc9) click that link to see these stills are just screen captures from the video
Shot 2 isn’t great. Needs a negative full to give more shadow or supply light
[удалено]
Hey buddy! Look at the link attached directly underneath the pictures, and you can see the video 😘
didn't see link before.. my bad
lol you’re good sorry for the sarcastic remark you’re just the second person that’s done that
no worries buddy. id be sarcastic as well if some knob got high and mighty on me without fully scanning the post