Video producers, please use more light

[knudus]

What a lot of tickling clips need are more light! So modern cameras can produce pics in low and natural light, but the result are dull, grey and lifeless.

For good lightning check chezhticklishgirls and see the vibrant color, texture and details.

Back in the days of film it was hard to set light right, it stiil is ofcourse but it has become a lot easier when you can check the result right away.

It seems a shame not to invest in decent lightning when it relatively easy can add production value to your clips,

 

[LD_Tickler]

So true.

 

[SoleSearcher]

Unfortunately, in order for the lighting to really make a difference you can't really buy "crap lights" and expect them to look much better. Not saying it can't be done, but may as well buy some lights that will give you a few good years out of if you're gonna do it.

We're looking at investing in new light boxes/umbrellas over this next month too...so I totally hear what you guys are saying. But the old saying really does ring true; you get what you pay for. LOL! 😉

 

[The Last Laugh]

Customers, please understand that not all producers have the same means

Well sure, you can get good lighting if you have the means to invest in high-quality lighting kits. But we don't all have that kind of money. You have to realize that most people who sell tickling clips barely make any profits, if at all. Also, it helps if you shoot in a place that's well lit to begin with. My living room, which is the most convenient room to shoot in, is very poorly lit. It doesn't even have a ceiling lamp. If I make the light too bright with my lighting kits, the picture just gets overexposed, which isn't much better than underlit. There's very little I can do about it, even by adjusting my camcorder's settings. Believe me, in many cases, if the lighting isn't that good, it's not because we don't wish we could do better. It's because we just don't have the equipment or money, or the technical knowledge to make the best out of what little we have. It's certainly my case. If you're willing to send some money my way, I'll definitely do what I can to improve my lighting conditions.

Czeckticklishgirls are obviously much more successful than the vast majority of producers. They're one of the market leaders. Yes, the picture quality of their clips is very impressive, but then again, they can afford it. I also think the places they shoot in tend to lend themselves to good quality lighting, though I may be wrong. It's also quite probable that whoever does the filming is a better videographer that most people to begin with. Personally, I'm still just an amateur, with no formal video training at all, and my business is only a minor sideline that I do in my spare time. So of course I don't get the very best quality.

 

[marcusb]

This is totally false. If you want an even, well lit scene, you must use big, bright studio lights to make things look good. They cost money... but they are totally worth it.

That is true. I've seen some amazing videos simply demolished because the camera is put in an odd spot or the lighting is rather poor. Considering how much money they pay to create these videos, I wouldn't imagine a $10 stand up lamp from walmart would dent their budget much >_>

 

[The Last Laugh]

They cost money... but they are totally worth it.

Sure they're worth it, if you happen to have the money.

 

[knudus]

Naaah I don't think it has to be that expensive. I seem to remember from a long time ago that 2 or 3 times 1000W would do okay. There are quite a lot of videos on youtube on how to light for video - also on low budget.

 

[The Last Laugh]

Naaah I don't think it has to be that expensive. I seem to remember from a long time ago that 2 or 3 times 1000W would do okay. There are quite a lot of videos on youtube on how to light for video - also on low budget.

What is your definition of "low budget"? Because the setup you're mentioning should cost several hundred dollars (and man, must it ever get hot!) Not everyone can afford that. Don't forget that a lot of producers don't make a single dime with their videos.

 

[marcusb]

Even 500-1000W quartz shop lights you can buy and Home Depot or Lowes work well. Just don't aim them straight at the subject or you'll get really harsh shadows off them.

Those lights can usually be picked up for under $50. Key here you you must correctly set the camera white balance or the video colors will be off.

Work Lights

Real studio lights with softbox heads are better but, of course, more spendy.

What is your definition of "low budget"? Because the setup you're mentioning should cost several hundred dollars (and man, must it ever get hot!) Not everyone can afford that. Don't forget that a lot of producers don't make a single dime with their videos.

 

[The Last Laugh]

Even 500-1000W quartz shop lights you can buy and Home Depot or Lowes work well. Just don't aim them straight at the subject or you'll get really harsh shadows off them.

Those lights can usually be picked up for under $50. Key here you you must correctly set the camera white balance or the video colors will be off.

Work Lights

Real studio lights with softbox heads are better but, of course, more spendy.

It seems like the light from those things would be way too harsh, even if you aimed away from the subjects. I get very poor results when I do the same with much softer and less powerful 300W bulbs if I don't use diffusion (I do use it, normally).

Of course you can get some lights for relatively cheap. But you get what you pay for. I don't think the results would be up to knudus' standards. Harsh light can be just as bad as not enough light. Maybe even worse, since there's very little you can do about post-production correction. The details are simply lost. Without some kind of decent quality diffusion system, like softboxes, you don't usually get very good results. And those things can be costly.

The question isn't whether one can get stronger lighting for cheap. It's whether one can get good quality stronger lighting for cheap. And I'm somewhat skeptical about that.

 

[marcusb]

Yes, the work lights are harsh... you'd have to bounce them off the ceiling or wall to light the room without hard shadows. I used them way back when with decent results.

I use lights similar to the SB 800 Cool Light with the Softbox. My exact model isn't made anymore but these replaced mine.

http://www.briteklighting.com/cool-fluorescent-lights.html

It seems like the light from those things would be way too harsh, even if you aimed away from the subjects. I get very poor results when I do the same with much softer and less powerful 300W bulbs if I don't use diffusion (I do use it, normally).

Of course you can get some lights for relatively cheap. But you get what you pay for. I don't think the results would be up to knudus' standards. Harsh light can be just as bad as not enough light. Maybe even worse, since there's very little you can do about post-production correction. The details are simply lost. Without some kind of decent quality diffusion system, like softboxes, you don't usually get very good results. And those things can be costly.

The question isn't whether one can get stronger lighting for cheap. It's whether one can get good quality stronger lighting for cheap. And I'm somewhat skeptical about that.