Roger Deakins' (and many other DPs) general rule of thumb is t2.8 for interior and t8 for exterior on s35.
@dvance7586
2 жыл бұрын
So what would this be with digital?
@diatarussoulbane
2 жыл бұрын
@@dvance7586 Digital doesnt explain the aquisition format. If digital, say an ARRI Alexa, its still s35, so it'd be the same.
@joeld3312
2 жыл бұрын
What about a full frame camera?
@diatarussoulbane
2 жыл бұрын
@@joeld3312 around 1 stop slower. T4 and T11. You could use a DoF calculator as well.
@Dan-wl1fk
Жыл бұрын
@@diatarussoulbane late to the chat, but what about aps-c? Even higher?
@ArseniiSavitckii
2 жыл бұрын
“I learned a lens operated to its best advantage at an aperture of T4-5.6” - sir Roger Deakins
@yetanotherbassdude
2 жыл бұрын
Fun fact: with a lens focal length of about 22mm, the human eye has a natural f-stop of around f/2.8 when the pupil is opened to around 8mm, which would be fairly typical for indoor light levels. Our retinas are also not far off the size of a super-35 frame, albeit a curved, hemispherical one. We literally see the world in something close to super-35 f/2.8 by default. Might be that's also a factor in why so many DP's and directors like shooting it?
@zechenwei1139
Жыл бұрын
interesting!
@Cinnovations
Жыл бұрын
It makes sense because outdoors our pupils are “stopped down” and still need “ND” (sunglasses).
@mobbaddictchannel
Жыл бұрын
Interesting. On top of that it's said that the human field of view is similar to a normal lens (43mm).
@anthonyrock5039
4 ай бұрын
love that hehe ND are literally sun glasses for our cameras. @@Cinnovations
@MWB_FoolsParadisePictures
2 жыл бұрын
For how little it's discussed, this is such an important factor in answering the question, "What helps footage appear 'cinematic?'"
@nicholasboule5134
2 жыл бұрын
Except so many idiot ppl think F1.4 or even faster is the “cinematic” look lol. And ppl wonder why so many don’t make it professionally
@robertdouble559
Жыл бұрын
@@nicholasboule5134 I agree 1,000% So many Shallow DoF junkies out there churning out smeary pap with no story. There are some big time DoPs that aren't exactly helping. Certain ones addicted to Arri LF and wide open apertures. Not naming names, but they sure do set a crappy example. I hope the trend will pass soon. But alas, I fear so many upcoming wannabee DoPs grew up in a post 5dmk2 world that we're DOOMED. 😂FWIW, people who own a prosumer camera and call themselves DoP without an actual credit on something meaningful also make me laugh.
@erkkocak
6 ай бұрын
@@nicholasboule5134 Exactly.. You may also add the "sharpness" madness to this. People are going for the sharpest lenses where in reality sharpness is mostly important for photography but for video you need to look at the color rendition and saturation levels first. They buy the sharpest lens and than add a mist filter to make it cinematic. LOL.
@65Drums
2 жыл бұрын
thanks for making this video! I've been wondering about this for awhile
@RVKevin
2 жыл бұрын
This was an awesome explanation and a Big eye opener. Thank you for sharing this history and a secret to better film making.
@yeaboy707
2 жыл бұрын
Too many films nowadays use low apertures for the bokeh look. This is perfectly fine to give a certain effect, but I prefer when everything is in focus for most of the film. Great video! 👍
@Chandler_Goodrich
2 жыл бұрын
Nothing like seeing the actor’s eye in focus, and their mouth and nose blurry.
@yeaboy707
2 жыл бұрын
@@Chandler_Goodrich Sometimes it makes sense if they’re trying to capture a certain mood, but this technique really should be used sparingly, only in situations where it’s done with a purpose, not just to show off how nice the lenses that were used to film the movie are.
@ViralVideos-pr2oi
2 жыл бұрын
Euphoria is the highest viewed and most popular TV show rn and often times the actors ears are out of focus.
@VonJay
2 жыл бұрын
Looking back I always thought that the lower apertures were used to direct focus on a subject or object... Director indicating that background information in that particular scene is irrelevant to the story. But besides Zack Snyder (army of the dead's 0.95 classic lens in almost every scene) and a few KZitem creators I don't see it being misused at all.
@chrisw5742
2 жыл бұрын
I get a headache from everything being in focus. And when it is like that it looks like cheap action cam footage.
@digital-eyes
Жыл бұрын
Really appreciate just getting to the point and then offering to find out why. Which I did. Thank you.
@truefilm6991
2 жыл бұрын
Awesome video as always! Of course in a low budget film project you don't have the ability to control light to such an extent. I personally like movies with different focal lenghts mixed. Shorter focal lengths are great for those emotional tracking, Steadicam and dolly shots and longer ones are great for shallower DoF. Of course the latter is harder to achieve with a Micro 4/3rds sensor or Super 16mm film. And yes: the most recent 4K scans of classic movies reveal focus problems. If the actor hold their head just a little closer of farther away from the camera, it will be out of focus. My utmost respect to focus pullers who did things like rack focus or following a dolly-in, during an era before video tap.
@RivuSouravBanerjeeVideoEditor
2 жыл бұрын
always a treat watching ur videos
@drmatthewhorkey
2 жыл бұрын
I always learn SO MUCH from your videos. I always wonder what is optimal for KZitem videos and play with it all the time.
@houdinididiit
2 жыл бұрын
Awesome content as always. Thank you so much 🙏
@AVISIONMUSICTV
2 жыл бұрын
T2.8-T5.6 depends on the camera system, lens, lighting and composition
@MarcosElMalo2
Жыл бұрын
Not to mention it depends on the frikkin shot. This video isn’t the dumbest I’ve ever seen, but it’s in the top 100.
@hunsakermedia
2 жыл бұрын
As always, great content!
@thecrudepodcast5907
Жыл бұрын
Great in-depth video bro ❤️❤️❤️ True master class! Thank you soooooo much!!!
@uriahocean6968
2 жыл бұрын
Sooooooo amazing. Love your teaching and knowledge.
@michaelinminn
2 жыл бұрын
Probably a stupid comment, but, in still photography, I always went for f5.6. Gotta say, you are very good at explaining cinema.
@MoonWalkerTexsRanger
Жыл бұрын
No it’s not stupid. Both are closely related.
@Holtenstein
2 жыл бұрын
I agree, with anamorphics I want to be closer to an T4 or T5.6 to get that same T2.8 look due to having 2x less DOF
@vatosgym
2 жыл бұрын
Great explanation, thank you!
@LouisTinsley
2 жыл бұрын
wow. what an amazing video and breakdown
@dingdongrocket
2 жыл бұрын
i always learn alot from you - thanks.
@DrTavares
2 жыл бұрын
Your videos are amazing! Thanks!
@ifiwere984
2 жыл бұрын
I have edited myself into movies and TV shows using some of your advice, tips and tricks so thanks!!!
@wolfcrow
2 жыл бұрын
Happy to help!
@yourmommashouse
2 жыл бұрын
No way! I’ve been subbed to Wolfcrow for ever!!! Good to see no grammar errors today 😂
@MichaelSuperbacker
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the great video!
@wolfcrow
2 жыл бұрын
My pleasure!
@Oceansta
2 жыл бұрын
Love this channel ❤️
@LukePerri
Жыл бұрын
I love how you posted the same video twice with basically the same exact script just two years a part
@ethanhegel8576
2 жыл бұрын
A T-stop is simply the amount of light that is allowed to hit the sensor after passing through the lens, and an F-stop is the amount of light that enters the lens to begin with. All lenses have an F-stop and a T-stop, but you have to realize that with an F-stop on a lens you’re not getting as much light on the sensor as it says on the lens, but with a T-stop you are.
@Hotshot2414
2 жыл бұрын
T-Stops references the precise amount of light that is let through a lens, but F-Stop refers to the focal length to front element diameter distinct to specific lenses. f2.8 on non-cine lenses do not let the same amount of light in as another ens at f2.8
@loro.h9612
Жыл бұрын
Thank you for answering a question no one asked :)
@MarcosElMalo2
Жыл бұрын
@@loro.h9612 and he answered it incorrectly. Is this the Dunning Kruger effect? The commenter doesn’t know much, but lectures us as if he does.
@MarcosElMalo2
Жыл бұрын
@@Hotshot2414 Thank you. I thought I had problems with the video and its historical inaccuracies, but the comments are even worse.
@mitchcoull6290
2 жыл бұрын
What an amazing video. Thanks!
@Jazzmarcel
2 жыл бұрын
Excellent channel!……..I’ve learned much from this channel!
@saguaro
4 ай бұрын
This is one of your most useful videos. This topic can be very confusing for beginners, and it's easy to lose sight of the pros & cons for any preferred aperture. It's always a balancing act between different wants, needs, and limitations (needing tons of light for deep focus look; the troubles with leaving lens wide open; sharpness; focus pulling; etc).
@wolfcrow
4 ай бұрын
Glad it was helpful!
@2KGrapher
2 жыл бұрын
I think it depends on the lens and the camera too. Anamorphic lenses separate the subject more from the background than Non anamorphic lenses even when the T-stops are matched. Also the camera itself. High end cinema cameras have more clarity and better skin tones that give a feeling of separation compared to dslr/mirrorless style cameras
@Donbros
Жыл бұрын
Nah sony venice and other sony cameras use almost same sensor. Sony venice is just extremely flexible compred to the 8-10 cheaper options
@naveedhasan9098
Жыл бұрын
thanks for including it in the thumbnail
@chuckmac3994
6 ай бұрын
Fascinating! Didn't realise this.
@UserDestroyer
Жыл бұрын
Got tired of these amateur filmmakers, who use shallowest DOF possible, flat and bland color grading, storytelling cliches And they also combine shots of trees, branches and flowers and call it SHORT FILM! Thank you, great video
@craigdeeker4684
Жыл бұрын
I like this conversation and on the whole its a good generalisation. I think its more accurate to say there is a range. Most cine lenses past 135mm were not t2.1 back in the day. I have zeiss mk2 standards that are t2.1 and i have a 180mm that is t4. Most telephoto lenses back then were slower. I totally agree that stopping down is necessary on these old lenses, half a stop down and they are a lot sharper than wide open. Same with super speeds. Master primes and lenses made after that you could open them right up but certainly not the old gear. 2.8 - 5.6 has been the aperture range most films ive worked on, except in extreme circumstances. Wide lenses at 2.8 and longer lenses you can shoot 4, 5.6, just to control how much nd you use and so it doesnt go completely mushy. That being said having a benchmark to start from, consider 2.8 and then break the rule deliberately is the best thing. Thats why i think this is a good video.
@KnivesMonroe
2 жыл бұрын
Well I didn’t know this guy on a film shoot right now going to apply this moving forward
@aLgProduction
2 жыл бұрын
Great video.Thanks for sharing.
@danielromashov92
Жыл бұрын
I don't know whether there is an equivalent among English speaking cinematographers but there is a rhymed Russian proverb that appeared among Soviet era DoP's: "If there's sun or if there is no sun the f-stop is 5.6". This was said about S35 obviously and this wasn't a dogma, it was somewhat humor. I suppose that partly this concept appeared because of rather big difference in quality of copies i.e. sharpness of Russia produced lenses in 1960-80-s in general and partly as a matter of optics physics. Being a photojournalist myself I do use f5.6 (on FF) to obtain optimal resolution when shooting reportage and I usually try not to go further than 1/2 of f-stop of the lens, no matter which focal length, if I shoot portrait or something that I want to be more poetic.
@douglas.barbosa
2 жыл бұрын
What a class! Nice!
@teacherofteachers1239
2 жыл бұрын
I realize that sharpness isn't everything, but the discussion at 4:15 is enlightening and has me thinking (hypothetically). Suppose I want to shoot with a 2.8 aperture as much as possible. And suppose money is not an issue. Should I trade in my 2.8 lenses for (otherwise identical) 1.4 lenses, so that I can stop them down to 2.8? As things stand, to get 2.8 I have to shoot "wide open," thus sacrificing some sharpness. Just curious.
@wolfcrow
2 жыл бұрын
Yes, you should. If sharpness is important.
@DrRussell
2 жыл бұрын
@@wolfcrow love your straight talk Sir
@pacificostudios
2 жыл бұрын
I know what you mean. For example, a Canon 24 mm f/2.8 mm lens is $150 MSRP, and a Canon 24mm f/1.4 lens is $1500. However, the f/1.4 lens is a much higher quality lens than the f/2.8 "pancake" lens; it's more than just "minimum f-stop." I bought a used f/1.4 lens for about $900 and I use it all the time; I mostly shoot actor's reels. The pancake lens stays at home.
@yugorisfriwan
Жыл бұрын
i remember the days when I used a canon 5D at 1080p at f2.8 with a semi wide angle lens, u couldnt even tell if there was any depth of field or not, the image was just overall blurry (not being able to tell which is in focus and not), i think thats the reason DSLR shooters had to compensate by opening the lens to like 1.4 to even get the sense there is seperation between background and forground
@uploadsnstuff8902
Жыл бұрын
Best 10 seconds video I've spent 10 minutes watching.
@schoeferfilm
2 жыл бұрын
That is definitely true 👍🏻
@gregoryrogalsky6937
2 жыл бұрын
Some good information...Good video
@Ronbc000
2 жыл бұрын
Thank you 👍
@mrbrakelol
2 жыл бұрын
I think I remember on the BTS for the Refn movie "Drive" they said they used 2.8 for indoors and 5.6 for outdoors (day)
@KarelChytilArt
2 жыл бұрын
Nice video. I think it depends on lens. Personaly i am using min two or three Basic aperture numbers (stops). So for 2.8 it means f/5.6.It depends, but We also need good light painting, not bad picture
@MarcosElMalo2
Жыл бұрын
Don’t you think it depends on the shot? The goddamn frikkin shot? The funny thing is that I happen to agree that openings between f2.8 and f5.6 are generally where you want to be, but there is no “best aperture” for filmmaking. It depends on the god damn mother loving shot. This video does a disservice to those learning filmmaking, is laughable to those with experience or knowledge, and also contains glaring historical inaccuracies.
@zecchinon
2 жыл бұрын
Amazing content! Feels like a paid content actually! Thanks a lot
@Tazmanian_Ninja
2 жыл бұрын
My Zeiss Planar 85mm 1.4 was MAGICAL at 2.8 (on full-frame). At 4.0 it was sharpest, but at 2.8 it was magical. At 1.4 and 2.0 it was too soft. Cos as you say in the vid: most lenses, and especially older designs (like a Planar) needed to be stopped down a bit.
@Milan-cf1xe
2 жыл бұрын
You got Contax Zeiss or Canon/Nikon version?
@rezzoc91
2 жыл бұрын
That explains why even my xf 27mm on Fujifilm when is at 2.8 has a particular look
@fernandoxxd
Жыл бұрын
Nice video! But the explanation with the diffraction effect is mixed up: at "fullframe" you can go to like f11, but on "apsc/super35" only to like f8 before the effect of diffraction starts. It depends of the density of the photosides/pixels on the sensor. The higher your resolution the diffraction begins earlier. On a high resolution super35 camera like the blackmagic ursa mini pro 12k theoretically diffraction starts at f1.8..
@robertdouble559
Жыл бұрын
About time someone with this many subs started talking about sensible apertures. Thank you Wolfcrow, from the bottom of my heart.
@duelavemedia3565
9 ай бұрын
Well, I have a black magic pocket cinema camera. Does that apply to that?
@tylermerritt6370
Жыл бұрын
Is the this ideal aperture different when dealing with zooms vs primes? Also if a lens opens up only to 2.8 would it be better to shoot at f/4 ?
@zoltankaparthy9095
Жыл бұрын
Cool, way cool. I shoot stills only but this was very informative. Thanks.
@LightspeedTutorials
2 жыл бұрын
The fight scene XD 5:35 lmfao
@KristopherSatchell
Жыл бұрын
That's why the Sigma Art zoom lenses are popular by budget filmmakers.
@notnikola
Жыл бұрын
To those who are confused, the same way you multiply focal length, you do aperture as well. Meaning, a 50mm f1.4 on aps-c will be equivalent to a 75mm f2.1 on full frame. Unless cropped, aps-c cameras, like the a6500, shoot video on a sensor size equivalent to Super 35mm.
@xxphactor
2 жыл бұрын
I'm curious. In the past I tried to make sure that my skin tones were in the 65-75% ire, but now I'm about in the 50-60 % range because I think skin tones seem more natural and absence of a hotspot on the face.
@angelmurphy6832
2 жыл бұрын
Those percentages are for all skin tones?
@xxphactor
2 жыл бұрын
@@angelmurphy6832 It seems to work for me. Every time I try to reach the 75% level the subject just look too bright to my eyes and specular highlights seems hot. And I use a big softbox, no hard light.
@bovinicide
2 жыл бұрын
Informative and illuminating up to t2.8.
@RIPxBlackHawk
2 жыл бұрын
Aperture Science ofc !
@alan6233
2 жыл бұрын
Im new and confused, can someone tell me again the equivalence of T2.8 super 35 to modern full frame cameras like the Sony A7 series in F stop?
@barryobrien1890
2 жыл бұрын
It's about x 1.5 for super35 to ff, so f3.5 to f4 on a ff lens. This also applies to focal length. So 50mm becomes 75mm on ff
@MWB_FoolsParadisePictures
2 жыл бұрын
f/2.8 on an Super 35mm crop body is equivalent to f/4.2 on full frame
@Talgat1982
2 жыл бұрын
That's great! And what aperture is equivalent for cropped sensors like M43? 5.6?
@NAUTICFILM1
2 жыл бұрын
no, the other way around, ca. 1.7
@BurfieldPhoto1
2 жыл бұрын
The equivalent would actually be about 2.3. Super 35 has a crop factor of 1.66x and M43 is 2.0x so they're very close.
@ElectricLabel
Жыл бұрын
f2.8 is common because the majority of M42 prime lenses are f2.8 and most cinematographers shoot wide open for better depth-of-field. It is not "better" per se, just easier when you're working with proper lenses.
@pacificostudios
2 жыл бұрын
I still like to shoot with a 24mn f/1.4 lens, so I have an option of even shallower depth of field. However, keeping a subject in focus is increasingly difficult unless the subject is absolutely stable. On the other hand, I recently used a shallow depth of field on an interview shot outdoors, and the blurry background felt distracting to me. Is that just me?
@edpr2244
2 жыл бұрын
It all depends how much you want to see in the background. For example Roger Deakins likes to see more in the background than have it all blurry and out of focus. This is all about story telling and not about make the background out of focus just to make it nicer.
@pacificostudios
2 жыл бұрын
@@edpr2244 - I just saw a film, "Happening," and I noticed that depth of field is so narrow throughout that it felt distracting to me. I think that depth of field should be used to advance the storytelling, and focus the viewer on the parts of the image that matter the most. Moreover, "racking focus" is o.k. if you deliberately want to suddenly reveal information to the viewer, but it doesn't substitute for presenting images that are easy to view and not distracting from the overall story. I guess I'm developing my directing style.
@tommyt2974
2 жыл бұрын
Generic question: what is the difference between t-stops and f-stops? Is a 2.8t the same as a 2.8f? Are t-stops just what we say for film/video only and f-stops for photography only?
@Cuetips1000
2 жыл бұрын
T-stops (transmission-stops) work with the amount of light that really reaches the sensor after passing through the lens. The lost of light is included in the calculation. T 2.8 (and also each other number like 4.0, 5.6 etc.) is always the same, indifferent of the focal length in use or indifferent if you use a cine lens from Zeiss, Rokinon, Meike, Walimex or whatever. You will always get an identical exposed picture. Therefore different lenses are interchangeable on set. F-stops (fraction stops) are non-dimensional ratios. With some math, the f-number tells you the diameter of the aperture (iris diaphragm). F 1.0 on a 50mm-lens means, that the diameter of the aperture is 50 mm (equal to the focal length). The F-number does not tell you how much light really hits the sensor after passing the optical system. Therefore lenses with f-stop increments are not simply interchangeable. I examined all my lenses and noticed that exemply causa my sony 50mm and 35mm lens are less permeable to light than my sigma 16mm or Kamlan 28mm or Sony 18105G. For the test, the exposure was locked and the pictures of the Sony50mm and Sony 35mm were darker (light parameters like f-stop, time and iso(gain stayed the same). There are some charts of still lenses with their real transmission value.
@GlennHanns
Жыл бұрын
Just to add, T-stops were essentially used because of the development of large zoom lenses in the early 70’s where there was significant loss of light through the many lens elements inside the complex cinema zoom lenses. This needed to account for this loss using T(transmission) stops rather than a theoretical F(fraction) stop. So it’s less of a film vs photography and more a lens phenomenon.
@FloatingOnAZephyr
Жыл бұрын
I generally dislike rules of thumb, as I think they often become straight jackets over time. What wasn't mentioned in this video is the relationship between focal length and f-stop. f/1.4 is fairly forgiving on a wide shot and gets you tonnes of light, but on a long shot the background will melt and the focal plane becomes razor thin, which you may or may not want. 2.8 all the time may just be creating problems for you in a wide shot, and solving them in a long shot, if you're setting it there all the time. It's important to understand how all this works, not just rely on an arbitrary rule. That said, most of us probably would benefit from stopping down a little more in an age where we're spoiled by the quality of fast optics and excellent sensors.
@johnmeric492
Жыл бұрын
what is the sweet spot for Red Komodo in your opinion?
@dreamprophet4499
Жыл бұрын
What is that pie shot in the intro with the whipped cream from? I can’t place it
@BillAshtonNelo
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks
@ulhasarolkar
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks ...
@frankmichael7308
2 жыл бұрын
As someone who has been knocked out of the film game due to Covid, it's nice to see independent creators still going. Kudos.
@flickpharm4395
2 жыл бұрын
When you say T2.8 for super 35 and T4 for Full frame does this assume that the lens is native to the sensor or does T2.8 still apply when using a full-frame lens on a super 35 sensor?
@mvonwalter6927
2 жыл бұрын
Native image circle size (how big of a surface area a lens can project onto) ultimately won't matter. If you are using a full-frame 50mm on S35/APS-C you will have to back away to get the same framing as you would on a full frame sensor. Distance is what changes the DOF, provided the T-stop is the same.
@flickpharm4395
2 жыл бұрын
@@mvonwalter6927 gotcha thank you!
@haibowang6262
2 жыл бұрын
Just bought T2.8 zoom cine lens
@blakelarson8373
Жыл бұрын
EI and ISO are interchangeable equivalents according to Kodak. 1:45
@sopromatism
Жыл бұрын
Thank you
@FergHyde
2 жыл бұрын
What would be the best aperture for a Sirui 50mm f/1.8 1.33x Anamorphic M4/3 lens? Despite watching this upload more than once I am unable to work it out.
@FergHyde
2 жыл бұрын
Hello? Is anybody out there?
@EvKrik
2 жыл бұрын
Assuming that you're shooting an exterior scene : ISO NATIVE (800) Shutter Speed 1/50 F 2.8 Isn't that overexposed ? They're using filters to bring down the exposure ?
@zechenwei1139
Жыл бұрын
That’s exactly what ND filters are for
@jetflicks84
2 жыл бұрын
So what's the equivalent of f2.8 full frame if you're using a micro four thirds camera and lens?
@malozfilms
2 жыл бұрын
Around f1.8 or f2
@jetflicks84
2 жыл бұрын
@@malozfilms okay, thanks 👍
@heckensteiner4713
Жыл бұрын
A wiseman on set once told me f/0.0 hides all mistakes. He's f-stopping in heaven now.
@9svm
2 жыл бұрын
can you explain why its important? asking as a new filmaker
@hytalegermany1095
Жыл бұрын
This is like te question "what is the best food temperatureto eat?"... To eat what. To Film what. Ice better be cold. Soup better be hot. Same for Film shooting
@stephenericwalsh
Жыл бұрын
What is the best amount of salt to put on your food?
@brettsherman7810
Жыл бұрын
I agree. F/2.8 on APS-C and F/4 on full-frame is what I always film in. More open is too much bokeh.
@wwonders3
2 жыл бұрын
what is the best aperture for using 4/3 camera
@MWB_FoolsParadisePictures
2 жыл бұрын
f/2.8 on a Super 35mm-sized frame is the full-frame equivalent of f/4.2. So, to get the same DoF on a 4/3 camera, you would need the lens to be at f/2.1
@wwonders3
2 жыл бұрын
@@MWB_FoolsParadisePictures thank you so much ive been using the Panasonic BGH1 great camera, But i want to get even more technical to not have any limits or as little as possible
@liebabu7848
2 жыл бұрын
Legends know it's a reupload
@azamatsainaro1779
Жыл бұрын
What is the equivalent of 2.8 for anamophic 35mm?
@moisie13
6 ай бұрын
1.8
@MaxKissler
2 жыл бұрын
Sticking to one specific aperture (or t-stop) is just weird and I don't think it's good advice especially since almost no one here shoots on film. I mean a t2.8 on a 24mm looks vastly different than a t2.8 on a 100mm assuming the focus distance is the same. If I start filming everything at t2.8 I might risk creating footage that feels completely disconnected bc of the huge difference in depth of field. In my example it might be better to shoot the 24mm at t2.0 and the 100mm at t8.0. What I'm saying, know your focal lengths and apertures, know your scenes and focus distances and plan ahead. And don't stick to overly simple rules of thumb. Interesting video though, as always!
@MaxKissler
Жыл бұрын
@@spanishprisoner I need to spend time on a film set? Hah, that's grand. That's literally my job, it's what pays my bills. I'm not sure whether you've heard of these magnificient inventions, maybe they weren't around when you worked on a film set but they're really great: These things called ND filters. They work like sunglasses for your lens and are just awesome! So if you plan ahead, you might know that if you're switching from one scene with a t2.0 to another scene with a t8.0, you simply remove your 4 stop ND filter et voila, no need to adjust your lighting. I would partially accept what you're saying if you specified that it might not be suitable in a broadcast environment or for live productions and so on but not in regards to a movie production.
@MaxKissler
Жыл бұрын
@@spanishprisoner Thomas, do you understand the basics, how depth of field works? Or do you live in a world where t-stops and f-stops vary so differently, that my statement doesn't come true, like that an f2.8 lens has actually a t-stop of t8.1 or something? Do you have a problem with the fact that I wrote t-stops and not f-stops when this is about dof? I don't understand you. I also don't get why you feel the need to insult strangers on the internet. Feels like you got some personal issues that you might want to work out... Read my initial statement again and maybe you'll understand that this is about depth of field and how it relates to lens choices and that sticking to one specific aperture doesn't make a lot of sense in this day and age. Especially since this video is about "...the Best Aperture for Filmmaking". Hence my counterargument: Can there even be just one best aperture for filmmaking or should the choice of aperture not be dependent on different factors (focal length and focus distance being some of them)?
@marlonrodriguez7453
2 жыл бұрын
What film is that cigarette flick from?
@21stcenturyhiphop
Жыл бұрын
I think that's Inglorious Basterds.
@justinoff1
2 жыл бұрын
What works for Tron and the Matrix doesn't work on Django and Romcoms
@emiledhaene1297
Жыл бұрын
I disagree with your statements about focus pulling. Not many video is actually shot at 8K resolution, and those that are, are downsampled to 4K. To add to that, regular film stock would have a similar megapixel equivalent when projected on a proper projector, such as the ones used in movie theaters.
@oscarmoralesfilmdirector3240
2 жыл бұрын
For APC sensor?
@malozfilms
2 жыл бұрын
Its almost the same of Super35 sensor so around f2.8 too
@danielbautista2561
2 жыл бұрын
I think the depth of field changes depending on the sensor size. What is the equivalent for T2.8 for MFT in terms of field of focus?
@tylou4479
2 жыл бұрын
T2
@loudmotion5639
2 жыл бұрын
dof does not change on the same lens via different sensor size. only field of view..
@barryobrien1890
2 жыл бұрын
@@loudmotion5639 if only that was the case. It would open up the possibility of getting an f0.7 equivalent lens on a ff camera. T stops actually measure the amount of light falling the sensor. If the lens is smaller, the t stops are higher. F stops are a good approximation to tstops an 10mm f1.0 mft lens is equivalent to a 20mm f2.0 on from a field of view and dog perspective
@loudmotion5639
2 жыл бұрын
@@barryobrien1890 I dnt know if you replied to the correct person but naaa I never talk about 135 equivalent. A 10mm is a 10mm no matter the sensor size..thats all what my comment was stating and thats it.
@barryobrien1890
2 жыл бұрын
@@loudmotion5639 agreed. Sensor size just affects field of view and dof for the same 10mm. It seems like people like to reference it to ff, so photographers know when taking a portrait at 85mm, it will change the look based on the sensor size, unless the camera position is changed
@zdudel117
Жыл бұрын
The best aperture is the one that services the story, scene, and shot best. There is no one aperture that is objectively better than the others.
@zdudel117
7 ай бұрын
@@rc4648 that’s literally what I said
@ProphetNewYork
2 жыл бұрын
1:28 anyone know what movie this is?
@ullrichkohler5520
2 жыл бұрын
LA DOLCE VITA (1960) by Federico Fellini. Actress is Aninta Ekberg. The movie is considered one of the best films of all time. If this is true, you have to decide for your own. But the camera work, lighting, composition and visual storytelling is really great! Definitely recommend it!
@ProphetNewYork
2 жыл бұрын
@@ullrichkohler5520 Im so surprised I have't seen it... I admit I have not watched most of Fellini's work. But I have seen so many films so I know I must give this a try!
@sergioknuf
Жыл бұрын
What about with 16mm
@MediaBuster
Жыл бұрын
Didn't you post this video a few years ago?
@bingdong8571
2 жыл бұрын
Not sure of most of what you are talking about but I do know that I can't see a damn thing in half of the content put out these days which I attribute to hdr implementation not well thought out. I don't know
@BobyTechno
Жыл бұрын
Bruh my camera can't even go under f 3.5. When I wanna get the shallow depth of field effect, I always have to film from afar and zoom
Пікірлер: 230