Lighting chat...
- Amanda Riddell
.jpg/v1/fill/w_320,h_320/file.jpg)
- 2 hours ago
- 1 min read
Regarding my film of the Palestine rally in December 2025, that's a pure assembly. R100 with no grading; every piece of footage that I shot. AMPP is largely assemblies, though the hīkoi film was cut. The new Canon cameras are amazing; we're going to use them in the Beatles film. NZ has harsh light, and I think they got my note about that. - With the Wellington Triptych, Andre and Aaron were excellent lighting experts. My version of Portrait of a Knight's colour grade was more saturated, but Andre dismissed it as LUT grading. His version was sculpted in China on his laptop. My belief is that LED panels are the main contributor to shit lighting. I used one in Te Whakaahua, but only one. Andre created a sepia-toned grade. Dave preferred my one; it made his clothes pop. My training with Paul Wolffram (the real reason Rachel's mentor is called Paul) was about using one light. I describe my approach as Soderbergh-esque. LED panels might be a bit low-grade for a big film, but streaming shows use them. Real films might use real lights, but with huge diffusion boxes. It's very similar. - Flat lighting is an American problem. Europeans have mastered digital grading. Like, think about Two Days, One Night. That's natural light, but looks beautiful. Portrait of a Knight had a camera team from New Zealand, France and Argentina. In New Zealand, we have FilmConvert. It's a local thing, but it really works. My brother swore by it for his music videos.
With LED panels, the lighting is flat, but dramatic shows invent lighting in post. I saw one from a Lost writer that was obviously done that way.