Just to continue the thread of the Crewdson piece, there is an interview with his director of photography, Richard Sands, This guy does ferocious work. I have worked on many large scale sets, non film, all still photography, but seeing their lighting set list is quite daunting. 136 lights at one time, massive. So a major shout out to Richard and his crew. But I found listening to the interview, an expression I had vaguely heard before, maybe not, I just don't want to sound like a complete idiot. Lumen. A lot of film guys have different terms for the same gear we use on still shoots, but in context of the interview I was a little lost. Sands says "because we are trying to achieve an F-stop 32.5 we have to use intense Lumieres? (type of HMI?). HMI sources have the best Lumens per watt effecicecy". Lumieres must be a type of light, though I could not find a reference for it anywhere. Please tell me he is not using the French term for light. But Lumens? Not comin to me. Anyway I looked up Lumen in the dictionary and here it is. If a light source emits one candela of luminous intensity into a solid angle of one steradian, the total luminous flux emitted into that solid angle is one lumen. Alternatively, an isotropic one-candela light source emits a total luminous flux of exactly 4π lumens.
Boy can't you hear that on the walkie talkie, "That 10K needs to come down -4π lumens and not a candela more. Yes Gregory".
1 comment:
The question is removed
Post a Comment