Reinventing the Cooking Show for Driscoll’s Berries

Art Adams covers his approach to lighting for a cooking show in his lighting blog for ProVideo Coalition.

I don’t watch a lot of cooking shows, but the ones I see are not lit the way I would light them. An idea for a lighting setup has been kicking around in my head for a while and I finally had a chance to try it out on a shoot for Driscoll’s Berries. It worked! Here’s why…

Years ago I operated a camera on a cooking show and I remember that the lighting director, a DP who shot a lot of sitcoms, lit the kitchen as if it were a small sitcom set. He used small lights without diffusion, which resulted in shadows everywhere. It didn’t look very “natural” to me. Maybe that’s the wrong word: rather, it didn’t feel “believable.” The set looked exactly like what it was: a fake kitchen ringed with lights, lit big and bright.

A lot of cooking shows seem to take this route. They may use softer light but nothing about many of these lighting setups speaks to me and says “good taste” or “believable.” Friends who work regularly on cooking shows tell me that producers often opt for big and bright over subtle and complex, and much of this has to do with budget and dealing with cable networks that don’t really want artistry so much as inexpensive content.

I felt I could light a cooking show set in a way that reflected my background shooting commercials while also keeping in mind the demands of a fast-paced TV show. (I worked in episodic television as a camera assistant and operator earlier in my career and those shows move FAST. Cooking shows aren’t quite as complex as you don’t change sets much, but there’s still a lot to get through in a day.) Fortunately the production company, Compass Rose Media, appreciates high quality work and was willing to let me push the look a bit provided we stayed on schedule. (And we did!)

The problem I faced was threefold:

(1) Food doesn’t want to be lit the same way people are lit;

(2) People don’t want to be lit the same way food is lit;

(3) The two are in the frame at the same time.

ProVideo Coalition | Read the Full Article

10 Classic Movies that their Contemporary Critics Hated

A lot of critics write to score cultural brownie points. Here are 10 examples of films that have become cultural classics that were originally panned by their contemporary critics.

When you boil it all down, it’s all subjective. Movie critics are really just people who are better at communicating their opinions clearly, but they aren’t perfect all of the time. Nor are they psychics in any way. Sometimes time (and audiences) won’t going to agree with them, and that’s okay.

As the following ten movies show us, there are times when a film isn’t an instant classic. Some require a bit more time to be broken in. Today’s trash might be tomorrow’s classic.

10. Fight Club
Don’t worry… There are actual “classic” films on this list. However I wanted to add some potential classics to this as well. Just don’t go freaking out.

Not the worst reviewed movie out there – but that’s actually what makes it interesting. What I mean is that this is the kind of movie you’d expect people to either hate or love – as Roger Ebert puts it in his October 1999 review of the film: “Fight Club is a thrill ride masquerading as philosophy – the kind of ride where some people puke and others can’t wait to get on again.” What’s interesting, however, is that even that review doesn’t love it or hate it. In fact most reviews for Fight Club aren’t polarized but rather so-so.

See for yourself. New York Daily News called it “hardly groundbreaking”, the Miami Herald referred to it as “a bit of a dud”, and the Boston Globe said that its “chic indictment of empty materialist values fizzles.” They were all just too cool for this film.

There were some great reviews out there as well – but it’s interesting that when the critics didn’t like it, it was because they were bored by it.

Film School Rejects | Read the Full Article

105 Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 Questions Answered

Scott Simmons answers a long list of questions from the recent Premiere Pro CS6 for Final Cut Pro editors webinar.

1) Will Premiere Pro CS6 output an OMF file for audio mixing?

Yes: File > Export > OMF will bring up this export dialog box to choose your preferred settings:

2) How to bring one timeline from one project to another?

The simplest method is you have a project open that you want to move a select sequence from is to just select the sequence and COPY. Then open the next project and PASTE. That will paste that new sequence into the edit. Note that all the media that is in that new timeline will get new items created in the project as well.

A more interesting method is to do a File>Import and choose a Premiere Pro project that contains a sequence you want to import. You’ll get an option import an entire project or a selected sequence:

Choose Import Selected Sequences and you can choose exactly what edits to import:

That’s one of the joys of Dynamic Linking amongst the Creative Suite applications, great interchange.

3) Can a FCP project be brought into CS6?

Premiere Pro CS six supports FCP XML so projects can be both imported and exported from Premiere Pro to Final Cut Pro. Export your entire project from Final Cut Pro as an XML and then import that XML into Premiere Pro. You may have to reconnect some media and it might not be a one hundred percent translation but it’s actually quite easy process.

4) How many clips in a multicam can you have while connected to a broadcast monitor using thunderbolt?

I’m guessing the question is really how many clips can play back in real time in the multicam split because you can have many more clips in a multicam and you can play back. How many you can play back at once in real time is dependent on many factors including frame rate, resolution, speed of your Mac but more importantly hard drive speed. The exact number is a bit unknown since I don’t know of a specific formula but if you’re using thunderbolt storage and you’re using ProRes as your codec of choice you will be able to play back more simultaneous streams you can actually keep track of in real-time
ProVideo Coalition |
Read the Full Article

Facebook’s Guidelines for Content Moderators

Everything you upload to Facebook gets moderated at by a human being often in a low paying third-world-country. But it’s not all dirty pictures. The turnover rate for the position is very high as the moderators are exposed to a “Sewer Pipe” of depravity.. So much so, a disgruntled former employee sought revenge by releasing internal documents laying out exactly what is and isn’t allowed on the popular social network.

Via Gawker

Cheat sheet:

The Full Document


Abuse Standards 6.2 – Operation Manual

When it comes to sex and nudity, Facebook is strictly PG-13, according to the guidelines. Obvious sexual activity, even clothed, is deleted, as are “naked ‘private parts’ including female nipple bulges and naked butt cracks.” But “male nipples are OK.” Foreplay is allowed, “even for same sex (man-man/woman-woman)” Even the gays can grope each other on Facebook.

Facebook is more lenient when it comes to violence. Gory pictures are allowed, as long somebody’s guts aren’t spilling out. “Crushed heads, limbs etc are OK as long as no insides are showing,” reads one guideline. “Deep flesh wounds are ok to show; excessive blood is ok to show.”

Drugs are a mixed bag. Pictures of marijuana are explicitly allowed, though images of other illegal drugs “not in the context of medical, academic or scientific study” are deleted. As long as it doesn’t appear you’re a dealer, you can post as many pictures of your stash as you want.

Under “hate content,” the guidelines specifically ban “Versus photos… photos comparing two people side by side,” which is ironic considering Mark Zuckerberg’s first hit, FaceSmash, ranked the attractiveness of female Harvard students.

Some types of content are judged highly on context. For example, school fight videos are deleted only if “the video has been posted to continue tormenting the person targeted in the video.” Hate speech is allowed in the case of a joke, and animal abuse videos can stay only if it’s clear the user doesn’t approve of it.

Gawker | Read the Full Article

Newer Posts
Older Posts