Focal Length and Cinematography

[Peter De Smidt]

https://youtu.be/DGujsKb2e10

[Bernice Loui]

https://youtu.be/DGujsKb2e10

Good examples and explanation of how lens "focal" lengths should be used.

~Opening scene from Clockwork Orange~ Note how a wide focal length range zoom is used by Stanley Kubrick.~
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HI-mDTdeKR8

Angenieux 12-240mm f/3.5 Zoom Lens with a 1.6x extender was used "enlarge" the zoom lens image circle to work in S35mm film.
This is what the hardware looks like:
195109


The other and IMO, more significant aspect of image making.. lighting..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOLZMr52Wcc



Bernice

[Leszek Vogt]

https://youtu.be/DGujsKb2e10

Sure, the focal length matters, but there are soooo many things-nuances to propel the story. It's always about the story. Sometimes the special effects get in the way of that, tho it suppose to further propel it. Most cinematographers know the renderings of different optics.....between Angenieux, Cooke, Panavision, Schneider (to mention a few) and they use each to acquire specific look.

To follow that, the DP on Bonnie and Clyde used old and trusty set of Cooke primes. Vilmos Zsigmond often used Angenieux zoom to provide "softer" look vs Panavision's biting-sharp zoom. In fact, sometimes Dior hose (panty hose), was used to obtain the desired consistency, in order to give further softy look. The Godfather DP had little to worry about consistency (optics), since the camera and the optics were set aside for him in the NYC rental house....as if for his personal use :>). Lots of these little tricks in cinema are not discussed.

Overall tho it's about motion (as in motion picture) and I might be too generous including My dinner with Andre, since there is a myriad of decisions to be made on the set (10000 places one can set up the camera). The focal length of a lens, and I don't mean to minimize it, while there are more important issues of lighting, matching scene consistency, bla bla bla.....so the editor actually has something to formulate towards the story. Case in point, Woody Allen "finished" production on Annie Hall and was reminded by the editor, that the story was different than intended....needless to say, more material had to be shot - consequently it became a funny moomie.

Les

[Vaughn]

Good examples and explanation of how lens "focal" lengths should be used...
Bernice

A good watch! I am always getting in trouble for saying that perspective changes with focal length.

[Peter De Smidt]

Well, it does if you keep the subject the same general size in the frame, and the people who regularly harp about this should realize that.

[Bernice Loui]

More examples..
https://www.cinema5d.com/understanding-focal-length-and-how-to-let-it-improve-your-work/

IMO, more than a few image makers do not fully understand how to use and fully exploit the power of focal lengths for image making to all it can be. This is directly tied to composition ( Structure-Rules !! NO !!) and lighting, then tonality and more.


Bernice

[TrentM]

So Kubrick used essentially a zoom lens designed for 16mm cinematograhy with an extender to cover a four perf 35mm frame? Hmmm.
interesting. I would think fall off and loss of sharpness around the edges would be pretty bad. But I'm sure he ran tests and really knew his lenses.
Most behind the scenes photos of Kubrick at work on Clockwork show him using an Arri IIc with wide angles. Some exteriors with the Angenieux zoom. And a good 'ole Mitchell BNC.

I like most of David O. Russell's work (directed Three Kings). He works with excellent cinematographers. Check out "The Fighter".

[Alan Klein]

This is a good reason to remember to slow down and get the shot in the camera. You can't change composition, angles, perspectives, etc in PS.

[Bernice Loui]

Kubrick used this converted 12-240mm Angeniuex in Barry London and ... He was quite fond of this creation, optically more than adequate.

More recently, these folks did the same for Canon DSLR video.
https://www.cinema5d.com/crazy-people-modify-12-240-lens-to-go-with-7d/

Mitchell BNC's were not valued much at that time, Kubrick understood well how excellent these cameras were, began collecting them. One was modified to be used with that Zeiss f0.7 Planar used in Barry London.

Later, Tim Burton used a Fleet of Michell cameras to produce Nightmare Before Christmas. The Michell was THE only 35mm cine camera with enough precision frame to frame to meet the needs of frame to frame animation.

Regardless, there is MUCH still image makers can learn from Film makers including lens choice, how they can and should be used, composition, lighting and a LOT more..

Keep in mind Stanley Kubrick worked for Look Magazine.. his still image ways and habits followed him and served him well for Film making.


Bernice







So Kubrick used essentially a zoom lens designed for 16mm cinematograhy with an extender to cover a four perf 35mm frame? Hmmm.
interesting. I would think fall off and loss of sharpness around the edges would be pretty bad. But I'm sure he ran tests and really knew his lenses.
Most behind the scenes photos of Kubrick at work on Clockwork show him using an Arri IIc with wide angles. Some exteriors with the Angenieux zoom. And a good 'ole Mitchell BNC.

I like most of David O. Russell's work (directed Three Kings). He works with excellent cinematographers. Check out "The Fighter".

[TrentM]

Bernice,
You'd be surprised. I actually gave a lesson on hyperfocal distance and depth of field to a very experienced and busy cameraman. It was like I flipped a light switch. On a shoot the other day, I suggested to a cameraman that we could narrow the field of view of a background by moving the camera away from the subject and zooming to a longer focal length. "That did the trick!" was the response. BTW. I'm not a camera operator or DP!
Thanks for the Kubrick info. I'm a big fan. Once the Arri 35BL became available, the Mitchells were relegated to efx shots.

[Corran]

I've been a boom op, sound designer, recording engineer, as well as general tech guy and even producer on several student films, medium budget productions, and corporate/gov't video projects.

On many occasions, I've had to explain to very experienced cinematographers as well as directors and even educators teaching video production how exactly focal length, perspective, and foreshortening works.

Of course, good luck getting any of those folks to sit down and watch an educational video that seems to be explaining "basic" concepts!

I remember one time a director insisting on a certain shot, and once he described what he wanted I had to explain why it wasn't going to happen without blowing a hole through the ceiling to get the camera much further away from the subjects on a straight-down shot. Certainly was no budget for that ;).

[Jac@stafford.net]

I've been a boom op, sound designer, recording engineer, as well as general tech guy

Sound is 50% or more of the image.

[Vaughn]

Foreshortening is a just a type of perspective control, correct? Most definitions I stubble upon suggest it.

[Bernice Loui]

Story time...

Friend worked in the video design group at Ampex. The entire group of video engineers were absolutely obsessed with getting the video image as accurate, stable, spot on color and ..... They are totally focused on the image only, the sound was near zero priority for them. Design confronted his video design peers telling them how important sound is to any video or film. They had a good and deep belly laugh... He simply turned off the sound during an important demo. The folks viewing the demo was not amused, demanded the sound be proper or no deal.

It was about that time when this group of video design engineers began to grasp how important sound is to the overall presentation.


The End,
Bernice



Sound is 50% or more of the image.

[Corran]

Sound is 50% or more of the image.

Yup. Technically less on film (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/USN16mmSoundtrack.jpg), ha!


Foreshortening is a just a type of perspective control, correct? Most definitions I stubble upon suggest it.

I love this scene from Jaws that used a "dolly zoom" to affect perspective, and you can see the "foreshortening" effect here:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbeXzJDYxS0

Another interesting gif that shows perspective changes and foreshortening (I didn't make this fyi):

http://i.imgur.com/kzCj0.gif

[Vaughn]

I think I am see-saw sick!

I have read people here that seem to refer to perspective and foreshortening as two different things. Anyway...when I find an image to photograph, it often comes with the framing pretty much laid out, more or less. I then move around to find the perspective/composition to fill the frame. Once found, I grab the camera and pick a lens that will match the framing. Learning to do this with just one lens per format (all 'normal') for the first 25 years or so has helped me to do this without much thought. I guess it is called learning to see like the camera/lens while manipulating the camera/lens to see how I see.

[Leszek Vogt]

I've seen this and I always scratch my head. Much like Vaughn....and likely like many others, one chooses the optic/s to align it with the desired composition. Those who have done this shouldn't have any issues what's needed. Did I misunderstand something ? Maybe we should take a poll :>) if this is useful to someone here.

195192

Les

[Corran]

It's much harder to visualize wide-angle, forced-perspective imaging. That works fine for normal/long lenses. If that's not your bag, it may seem obvious to just "look" at what you are shooting.

The visual look of a wide-angle lens stuck in the face of an actor or other parts of their body or things in the scene closer to the camera to over-accentuate their size is a very useful tool (both video and still imaging). Obviously many of you know I have a fondness for wide-angles.

[DarioLT]

Bernice,
You'd be surprised. I actually gave a lesson on hyperfocal distance and depth of field to a very experienced and busy cameraman. It was like I flipped a light switch. On a shoot the other day, I suggested to a cameraman that we could narrow the field of view of a background by moving the camera away from the subject and zooming to a longer focal length. "That did the trick!" was the response. BTW. I'm not a camera operator or DP!
Thanks for the Kubrick info. I'm a big fan. Once the Arri 35BL became available, the Mitchells were relegated to efx shots.
This happened to me too!

[chris_4622]

Corran,

I find it difficult to understand why someone in the film making industry wouldn't take an interest to learn everything he/she could about the craft of lenses/perspective/lighting.
The "Jaws" example I hadn't noticed but there is a nice dolly pull back while zooming in, in the movie about Freddie Mercury, I think it's mentioned in one of the videos in the links above.

The video with the guy explaining how each face requires study to know which focal length to use to tell that part of the story was so useful though many of us probably noticed this in movies without ever thinking about it. I know I had that reaction with the Ace Ventura movies where they would use a wide lens close up to Ace and really exaggerate his face..."well alrighty then".