Wetlook World Forum

Current time: Fri 26/04/24 22:03:03 GMT

Translate page FROM -> TO

Translate page TO <- FROM

Message # 2794.3.1.1.1

Subject: Re: Re: easier said than done

Date: Thu 20/03/03 06:45:08 GMT

Name: Kev

Email: kev.styx@ntlworld.com

Website:

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help
with running costs: (you can change amount)

Absolutely right, although often my good friend, Biggles, helps me out on shoots- he's certainly good at carrying big batteries : )

Often when shooting outdoors, you try to be away from the public gaze so it means a lot of walking between the car and the location- hence you have to travel light. However when shooting I almost almost always use some sort of fill in light to help the contrast- unfortunately you do sometimes get beaten by the conditions.

Also, as with Jim's comments, we are often dealing with either ordinary girls or models, not actresses. So often they fluff what you ask then to do, or you have to direct them so closely that you have to strip away the sound track completely. Few actresses can hit a scene in a single take, models stand little chance. When you have a situation where a girl is half wet you can't go back and say, "it's OK, dry off and we'll start again" you just have to run with it. On outdoor work I've had them wandering into dark shadow areas or brightly lit areas, where the camera cannot cope. It's "sod's law" that some of the best wetlook scenes are often produced then!

The more I hear from people concerning wetlook, the more difficult I find it is to shoot! In such a narrow theme the variations and permutations are almost endless and it appears good wetlook is achieved more by luck than judgement : ) For every person you delight another will comment "great wetlook, except it would have been better if......" you can then perm any one of several hundred different ideas : )

Some like the polished look- "wet and wild" but with clothes, others prefer a raw edged amateur look. I used to shoot more amateur style, but have found (rather like Jim) that being a professional photographer it doesn't sit too well with me and I'm gradually trying to up the quality and production values to something I feel more comfortable with. Personally I rather like the dreamy, romantic, sensuous style compared to the "here's a girl getting wet" style, but I've found that if you can think of 100 ways of shooting a scene, someone will come along with the 101st :)

One thing I found found is that many people like extreme close ups (they like to see water soaking through every thread) coupled with full length footage and this is now what I try to bring to my material, stills and video. This means having two cameras on a shoot (and hence an extra pair of hands) is vitally important.

In reply to Message (2794.3.1.1)

Re: easier said than done

By MK - wamtec@compuserve.com Thu 20/03/03 03:16:50 GMT

Website:

Very true....most producers know what they would love to be able to do....if they lived in an ideal world.

The simplest of all devices to have with you is "an extra pair of hands" ...i.e. a friend to come along and help you...i.e. somebody to hold a portable reflector board for you...to drill light onto the subject for you. However...many of us work alone...so for many of our shoots there is nobody to even hold a reflector board for you...and forget about setting one up on a stand if you are filming in a public place...you will attract too much attention and you end up being questioned by cops asking to see a copy of your film permit (which in most cases...most of us shoot on the fly and don't have the time to get one).

Correct me if I am wrong....but I don't think the majority of wetlook fans are looking for "high art" and for things to be filmed in a Penthouse way (i.e. diffused lighted). The entire wetlook genre (as I see it) is NOT about sophisticated artsy lighting ....it is really all about "harsh" lighting...i.e. more harsh the lighting is...the better the wetlook effects art. This is why I do not find any of the Japanese "idol" pics very interesting or satisyfing....because they are all shot in a soft focus and very artsy way...which is very nice as a piece of art...but that kind of diffused lighting does nothing for me personally.

I agree with what the poster says though...i.e. backlit or badly lit scenes are useless too. You don't have to be a great photographer or cameraman in the world to shoot good wetlook...cos this is not about "art"...all you have to do is remember not to shoot into the sun...

In reply to Message (2794.3.1)

easier said than done

By Kev - kev.styx@ntlworld.com Thu 20/03/03 01:32:10 GMT

Website:

I think many people are under the impression that producers have the resources of Steven Spielberg to produce their material. We don't have crews of people to lug stuff around.

Styx's outdoor and underwater lighting comes from three 135 amp hour batteries (about double the weight of a normal car battery). Try lifting one, let alone carrying three on location! Even then you get barely one hour of decent lighting, before you have to spend two days re-charging them. Generator? even a a 1 kilowatt generator is hardly portable, then you need to convert to DC current.

I dare say all the producers would like to have hollywood style set ups- are you guys prepared to pay for it? because it gets added to the cost of the material we produce. If you sell 50 tapes and add on $10 per tape for equipment- you don't get much for $500, equipment wise.

Polarisers are great- but they work best at 90 degrees to the light source- however if you reduce the angle the effect reduces, eventually to nothing. They also reduce the amount of light, so you have to double or quadruple the lighting (volunteers to carry 12 135 amp hour batteries? plus 3 weeks charging between shoots) In addition, as the subject moves you have to physically rotate the filter to get the polarising effect, thus missing the action. You can only use them with fairly stationary subjects- unless of course you can afford a "focus puller" to do it for you- back to having Hollywood Epic crew sizes again :)

Most producers work miracles when you look at the budget they have to work with- feature films work on budgets of maybe $50,000,000- wetlook producers have to do it for $2,000 (including the cost of their equipment)

In reply to Message (2794.3)

Re: ? for wetlook & underwater video producers

By soggybottom - Wed 19/03/03 23:14:44 GMT

Website:

Whatever is used they neel a hell of a lot more light and polarized filters.

The arguement I have with some of these productions is that the forget to shoot on the LIGHTED side of the model. So many beauitful shots are ruined because of shadow or insufficient lighting.

Next is GLARE. When you shoot wet things with enough light to properly expose them you get glare. A polarizer cuts the glare and shows texture and color.

OK, OK! Off the soap box.

In reply to Message (2794)

? for wetlook & underwater video producers

By Getwet - Wed 19/03/03 12:13:30 GMT

Website:

Just curious to know what type camcorders & cameras are used. From what I've seen of most producers videos the quality's great! Thanks!

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs: (you can change amount)