View Camera for Interiors and Lighting

[Kirk Gittings]

ditto squared......

[Luis-F-S]

This is going to sound dumb, but I will offer it anyway. Many moons ago I did a lot of wedding photography. And in a sense, especially in large spaces such as churches, one runs into the same issues as in photographing interiors........Best thing to do before you do much else is get a real good flash meter, and learn how to use it for both flash and ambient light, and learn how to balance those two. Then you can start looking at how you want to light up certain parts of the interior, which will basically be a matter of balancing. And don't forget the inverse square law. Just because you light something adequately doesn't mean that things behind will be lit adequately. Light falls off with the square of the distance (if you double the distance the light falls off the square of that doubling, or 2 squared. i.e. 1/4 the intensity) If you have a very large object or interior you may have to use multiple lights from front to back to keep a balance on the entire object.

Minolta Flash Meter III. I would not leave home without it with film. I still have it and although if I were going to shoot interiors again, you can bet I'd use digital. You can still use the flash/ambient meter to balance lights and then check it on the digital. It will give you a good starting point so the whole thing does not become overwhelming. I still have my Nikkor PC28 that should be usable on my D800, but I've not had a reason to try it. Maybe I will for the hell of it, though you could use a wider lens and then crop. With the large file size, it's doable either way. L

[tgtaylor]

...

Seriously, I couldn't imagine trying to get consistent, professional results on film... not unless I used digital as a 'Polaroid'.

If I were you, I'd get a digital rig, forget the lighting and learn how to blend exposures. That's the common workflow for a lot of my competitors.

IMHO,
CB

BTW... this is the amount of lighting we usually fly with, but I think my generation of Arch Shooters are becoming the exception.

Attachment 151060

Chris,

There's a number of Hollywood directors that would vehemently disagree with you and I'm sure they don't shoot Polaroids. Just checkout today's blockbuster film releases (and blockbuster TV sitcoms) and how many of those are shot on...dare I say...FILM; and note the absence of Polaroid credits. Those are shot on 35/70mm stock not LF.

Thomas

[Kirk Gittings]

Chris was a recognized master of shooting LF film for architecture and interiors and continues such with digital. We are not talking about movies but still captures of architecture and interiors. Besides that, movie directors don't actually shoot anything. They have a crew of expert camera and lighting people who do that for them, interpreting the director's vision.

[Taija71A]

Chris was a recognized master of shooting LF film for architecture and interiors and continues such with digital. We are not talking about movies but still captures of architecture and interiors. Besides that, movie directors don't actually shoot anything. They have a crew of expert camera and lighting people who do that for them, interpreting the director's vision.

+100.

[Christopher Barrett]

Chris,

There's a number of Hollywood directors that would vehemently disagree with you and I'm sure they don't shoot Polaroids. Just checkout today's blockbuster film releases (and blockbuster TV sitcoms) and how many of those are shot on...dare I say...FILM; and note the absence of Polaroid credits. Those are shot on 35/70mm stock not LF.

Thomas

Absolutely. A production company can produce outstanding results on film using nothing more than experience and light meters when they have all day to light a 10 second scene. It's all just math when you have an abundance of time and lighting resources. I try, however, to keep my forum responses grounded in reality and relevant to the actual problems of the original post. Having made my living solely in architectural photography for the last 20 years, the real world constraints are a constant consideration and heavily influence the advice I've given here.

Cheers,
CB

[tgtaylor]

We are not talking about movies but still captures of architecture and interiors. Besides that, movie directors don't actually shoot anything. They have a crew of expert camera and lighting people who do that for them, interpreting the director's vision.

I think it is fair to say that every movie is about architecture and interiors - and exteriors as well. But the director is not interested in merely a record of the subject as the architectural photographer is, rather they try to invoke a certain atmosphere in the scene to be recorded (consider, for example, the Film Noir genera), a Wabi-Sabi if you will, and that requires "the right" lighting - not the correct but sterile lighting of the architectural photographer. After all, it is all about the lighting, isn't it?

Thomas

[Richard Wasserman]

- not the correct but sterile lighting of the architectural photographer.

Now you've done it! I think the architectural photographers among us may somewhat disagree with this statement....

[Kirk Gittings]

So Macolive there you have it. You have gotten sage advice from a few people who actually do this for a living at the very highest levels of the profession like Chris with 20 years in and a client list that most dream of, me with 38 years in practice plus 30 years teaching it at a university level and some others here that seem to know what they are doing vs. typical internet "expertise"..............anyway, good luck. AP has been very good to me and I can't imagine doing anything else.

[Taija71A]

According to Wikipedia...

Wabi-sabi (侘寂 ?) represents Japanese aesthetics and a Japanese world view centered on the acceptance of transience and imperfection.
The aesthetic is sometimes described as one of beauty that is "imperfect, impermanent, and incomplete".
--
I cannot help but feel, that just 'perhaps' a couple of the responses in this Thread... Sound like 'Wabi-sabi' (*Or at least to me they do).
I.e., they 'seem' to reflect an aesthetic that is... Imperfect, Impermanent, and Incomplete.
--
However, on the other hand 'Kudos' go to both Chris and Kirk for providing responses in this Thread...
That not only were Accurate, Educational and Informative -- But also showed an exceedingly, great deal of Professionalism and 'Restraint'.

Thank-you! -Tim.