The MUST KNOW lighting technique ALL cinematographers use!

[@stayontarget999]

Great content and very educational. I'm not in the movie/tv making business and only stumbled on your channel, but your videos are changing how I watch movies and tv by showing how the technical aspects of lighting directly add to the narrative aspects. Thanks!

[@NateCaywood]

Thank you so much for watching. And taking the time to drop me a line here. I'm very excited you are looking at films differently. I think when you have a little more understanding and appreciation for the craft it really opens up even more love for what movies can do!! Thanks again!

[@StefanRingelschwandtner]

Great breakdown!

[@Just_Samson]

FYI, 76% of all percentages are made up on the spot! 😂 just say’n! Haha, sorry, just couldn’t resist. Great vid. Appreciate you. ✌🏼

[@NateCaywood]

@@Just_Samson haha!! Yes! Exactly! Thanks so much for watching! More to come.

[@fineart47]

Great job Nate. I enjoyed the information.

[@NateCaywood]

@@fineart47 thank you!! For watching! Appreciate it.

[@steve_arcenio]

Thanks for sharing. Cinematographer in Pacnw. Love all the explanation. I’m a student of the game and we will never stop learning. Enjoyed the video.

[@NateCaywood]

@@steve_arcenio Thanks so much for watching! Much more to come!

[@REMY.C.]

98%, not more, not less, just 98%.

[@NateCaywood]

Haha! Exactly! It's science!

[@urbanwolf6570]

Loved the breakdown ✌🏼

[@NateCaywood]

Thanks for watching! More to come!

[@REMY.C.]

Very cool video because this technique is always hard to grasp. Here's a question: how to do when there's no eyeline? My case, I'm experimenting with shooting cooking videos and products, I'm using 2 cameras because everything goes fast in cooking and the 2 angles make it easy to cut and get seamless transition from an action to another. How would you do as a cinematographer to position your 2 cameras dark side AND keeping the shots interesting and relevant enough (using 2 focals, like 28 and 50). I'm still struggling to find a good application.

[@NateCaywood]

This is a great question!! Thanks so much for watching, and asking and getting involved. So the great thing about cinematography, lighting really is that you can paint with so many brushes. For instance are you shooting cooking content the way The Bear does? Or a series on Tastemade? The content is similar but the vibes and emotion created from the lighting is different. How exciting is it that making those choices are our jobs!? Okay so now to the practical stuff. I think I would use your 28mm as you A camera and shoot that straight on. The I would use the 50mm as a B cam shooting 45 degree off the A cam. Now where ever you place the B Cam, I would place the Key light on the opposite side of A CAM. Does that make sense? Then I would also say depending on the vibes you are looking for either move the Key light closer or narrower to the A cam. If you want it to feel more Bear like put the key light beyond the subject directly in line with the B Cam field of view. Which would be a total back light. Now you should ask yourself what quality of light best tells your story. For brighter more Tastemade feel you probably want to soften up the Key. Then you will definitely want some fill to bring up overall levels, and a back light to create some separation from the background. And that's traditional 3 point lighting. Then you just choose contrast ratios to taste. Okay, I am getting into the weeds. Let me know if that makes sense. But also to be clear most of my experience comes in narrative and music videos, not table top work. So others may have better advice for you!! Thanks again for watching.

[@REMY.C.]

@@NateCaywood thank you so much for the extensive answer. Yeah it makes sense. You made me realize that I was almost doing that but with a mistake, I was sometimes moving my B Cam from dark side and that made a different feeling. Your "in line with" is the key point and need to sink in. I'll also watch Bear again to get inspired. I screenshoted your answer and will read it until it becomes second nature. Thanks a lot, it helps tremendously.

[@NateCaywood]

Great!! I'm stoked for you. Please send me over some of the work from your next shoot. Would love to see what you're cooking up!! And also keep in mind, these are always just rules of thumbs, not laws. So trust your gut when assessing your images. Again, thanks for watching! Speak soon.

[@SimaoNunhes]

realy liked congratulations

[@NateCaywood]

Thanks so much for watching!! More to come soon! Cheers.

[@sflacko14]

Legend !

[@NateCaywood]

@@sflacko14 Thank you!!

[@ragulragul6975]

What is the app he using

[@NateCaywood]

Right now I'm pulling images from Shotdeck. And then using preview to draw on them. And Quicktime to screen record. Is that what you were asking? 🤣🤣

[@ragulragul6975]

@NateCaywood yes because I also want to do study like this that's why I ask & thanks for your doing this kind of videos which are more helpful for us,keep growing👍

[@NateCaywood]

@@ragulragul6975 Thanks so much!! Send me your channel when you get it up and going! Can’t wait to see it!

[@faizankhan09858]

Hello brother I just want you to please breakdown some frames from the society of the snow movie. I mean how cinematographers achieve that harsh look that feels real. Around their skin underneath their eyes. I'll truly appreciate if you breakdown the Cinematography of this movie. Thanks you

[@NateCaywood]

Hey there! I absolutely love this idea! And I have been meaning to watch this film. I will 100% make a breakdown. I've already got one I'm working on for this week. But maybe next? Stay tuned.

[@faizankhan09858]

@NateCaywood "That’s awesome! I’m really looking forward to it. Can’t wait to see your take on the cinematography and how the frames tell the story. It’s always inspiring to hear your insights-this is going to be great!"

[@NateCaywood]

Thanks man! I appreciate you suggesting it. Even just watching the trailer last night got my hyped. Can't wait to get into it!! Thanks again for the suggestion.

[@faizankhan09858]

@@NateCaywood I’m glad the idea got you hyped. it’s such a visually stunning movie, and I know you’ll break it down in a way that will make us all appreciate it even more. Can’t wait to see what you come up with....

[@NateCaywood]

@@faizankhan09858 🙏🙏🙏

[@jgo1961]

98%. No.

[@NateCaywood]

@@jgo1961 Perhaps!! But an awful lot of them are. What percentage do you think would be more accurate?

[@documentaryinprogress]

⁠​⁠@@NateCaywoodI don't think it's about the number, it's about the exaggeration and the clickbait nature of the title. It brings audience for sure, but for many of us it also cheapens the value of the content (speaking of which, don't say it's not hyperbole when it clearly is, and intentionally so at that). As for the video itself, perhaps the technique is used a lot, but mosts of the examples are extremely dark and high contrast, which simply doesn't happen all the time. See, for example, Wes Anderson, where the characters are very often looking at the camera, so the analysis doesn't apply (because the key is often strictly to one side, there's no "sandwich"). Even "Boy With Apple" (from The Grand Budapest Hotel) has flat, full-face low contrast light, and it's a painting! Beyond Wes Anderson, the analysis only applies when there are faces on the frame. I would be interested to see if there's any parallel when the shot doesn't feature persons, like location establishing shots, prop-only inserts, etc.

[@documentaryinprogress]

@@NateCaywoodby the way, not saying anything against the lighting technique itself. It's clearly very powerful. The criticism is about the exaggeration, and it would've been nice to see more cases where it is not used. The one you showed (where the kids are illuminated by the bus) is not convincing *to me* as you can see two main sources, one to each side and with different color temperature, instead of actually trying to simulate a bus' headlights, which would be truly unflattering and way brighter (even then they "managed" to keep the frame mostly dark).

[@NateCaywood]

@@documentaryinprogress Listen, I hear what you're saying about the title and appreciate the feedback. I definitely don't want to frustrate people with my titles of cheapen the content at all. I am just starting up this new format here on youtube and I have a lot to learn and naming and thumbnails is a huge part of that journey. Of course I want to extend my reach to as large of an audience as possible but don't want to turn people off at the same time. So I will certainly be more mindful of the the titles going forward. As far as your examples I would say it's interesting your choice to use Anderson as an example to back up your premise, because he is a once in a generational visionary filmmaker and no one else on the planet does what he does the way he does. So yes, he falls under the 2% of filmmakers not included in the 98%. However, I will mention that when you look at Robert Yeoman's work for Anderson there are plenty of examples where he is indeed using the Far-Side Key technique. As far as "Boy with Apple" is concerned, I would actually posit, that it is using the Far-Side Key technique. The boy is not actually facing directly at the painter, or in our case, the camera a la American Gothic. He is clocked 45 degrees to the left of "camera." Now you see the Key light is illuminating his right side of his face, our left side. The side that is "furthest" from camera and there is a darker fall of on his "near side" cheek. This painting is lit very similarly to many Rembrandt and Vermeer paints, who were largely the basis for this lighting technique for portraiture. And finally I would like to point out that whether an image is "extremely dark and high contrast" or brightly and broadly light doesn't effect this technique. The intensity of the lights, and quality, i.e how hard or soft this light is, are up to the filmmakers and the storytellers as to how it best suits their story. Which is why I think this is a very valuable technique. It's just establishing WHERE the light should come from, not the QUALITY of light. Now this all being said, I do really appreciate your feedback. All of this is valuable information because it either tells my I'm not being clear in my explanation enough, or not allowing for exception enough. Either way it's extremely helpful and I appreciate you watching and the candor of your feedback. Maybe I need to do a video breaking down Robert Yeoman's work with Wes Anderson and how unconventional it is? Let me know what you think! Thanks!

[@documentaryinprogress]

@@NateCaywood Cheers, thanks for replying. KZbin is a never ending learning process for sure, and it can be very steep at the beginning. You are spot on about Boy With Apple, of course, I should've stressed more that it was different to the other examples in that the light was very flat, which is why I think more examples would've been helpful, especially examples with other "qualities" of light. I'm always up for watching analysis videos of the Yeoman+Anderson collaboration, especially from an industry professional, who can bring more interesting insight than the likes of me as mere amateurs and outsiders. I'll be subscribing to wait for that video :wink:

[@jay10242]

How did you calculate that? Have you seen ALL the movies? Clickbait bs.

[@NateCaywood]

Hey thanks so much for watching!! I calculated it anecdotally from the tens of thousands of images I have analyzed and shot during my career. But more importantly, did you learn the far-side key technique?