"If lens are a way of capturing the world, then 'which lens' you choose says a lot about the kind world you are trying to capture" is going to be my next tattoo, might go for the neck this time.
This is actually a very informative video on cinematography for new filmmakers,but minor correction:Fallen angels was shot mostly on a Kinoptik Tegea 9.8mm rectilinear lens with an adapter that turns it into a 6.8mm lens,it is not fisheye.
I loved the comparison of Heavens Know What to Fallen Angels. Both do a lot of closeups, but in a very different way, this was a perfect illustration. Thank you!
Man your channel once again blows me away. Other cinema topical channels made me aware of storytelling techniques in the past, but you have opened my eyes towards cinematography like no one else ever did. Really, fantastic job.
I love you so much. Thank you for making this so calming and easy to listen to. It takes what could be a daunting subject and makes it clean and clear to understand.
Awesome! Thank you so much for including Fallen Angels in this. I really love every single frame in that movie and never understand why it is not used as reference more often!
Awesome work man. I know how much effort and time it takes to make a video like this. I appreciate this a lot. Thank you and Good luck with your endeavors.
Please do make a video on Satyajit Ray . The way you explain everything is great and very helpful and it seems that you will do justice to Mr. Ray's films too. I hope you recognize him. Greetings from Calcutta,India.
Very informative video 👌. Thanks for making it. Is it safe to assume that one can identify the lens used (wide or long) in an image by looking at the depth of field and amount distortion in it?
Right, those are two factors which can be used to identify a focal length. I'd say another important factor in identifying a focal length is in how the background of an image is compressed. In a film like The Revenant you see a lot of the background, even in close ups, which means it was shot on a wide lens. In a close up where the background is more compressed (you see less background width) it was shot on a longer lens.
@@InDepthCine Right👍. I didn't find the image that distorted even when they went close with wide lens. Is it because of the camera they used. I'm curious to know your thoughts on how they achieved it.
@@bhargavvramm I've thought about the case of The Revenant a lot over the years as the apparent lack of distortion puzzled me too. I think the eye is adapting to the distortion and accepting it because it's always present. Certainly there is a great deal of 'massive front shoulder' effect in the closer shots. By and large, faces are kept near the centre of the frame which makes the distortion less obvious but look at still frames and you'll really see it. The use of the wide lenses in The Revenant is a topic all in itself.
@@Tom_RUclips_stole_my_handle The Revenant used a 24mm lens on the Alexa 65. On 35 a 12mm lens has the same AOV... 18mm on a VistaVision camera. So the lens is wide, but not too wide. A 12mm on VistaVision would show considerably more perspective distortion for example.
There is a school that does not agree with your analysis in the opening section of the video. The position of the camera vs the subject defines most of the look and feel. The lens choice drives the FOV, no more. As you touch on later If you want for example to feel intimate you might place the camera at 3 feet from the subject, this may then drive you to choose a 16.. but it might not. The three foot is what drives the intimacy. Again be 100foot back and the shot will feel 'remote' even if you fill the frame with a 500mm.
Do you plan to make a video about the cinematographer Benoît Debie ? If not, it would be very great to consider it, thank you ! 😁 Very interesting channel
This video is quite confusing. Sometimes you're talking about specific lenses and their actual physical focal length and other times it sounds like you're talking about full frame equivalency. You said 50mm looks natural and close to how the human eye sees, but that's only on full frame (it's actually closer to 40mm if I'm not mistaken). On Super35 that would more be something in the range of 28-35mm.
Is that compression effect also equivalent to equivalent focal lengths when it comes to smaller sensors? For example, my point and shoot has a 8-132mm lens, but is equivalent to 24-360 due to its smaller sensor. Would the compression at 132/360mm be equivalent to a 360mm full size lens, or a 132mm one?
Yes, in terms of "the portion of image that will get in the sensor". But not regarding the depth of field. Depth of field will be shallower on the full frame camera, for the same aperture.
"Compression" is entirely to do with your field of view and distance to your subject, as such you just always compare equivalent focal lengths. A 25mm M4/3, ~33mm APS-C/Super35, and 50mm Full Frame all have approximately the same "compression", don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
Loved this, just what i was looking for, but i need more. Is there a book that teaches cinematorgraphy techniques this way? I would like to learn the standard techniques, when to use which lens and WHY. For example, the shot of Gene Hackman in this video using a long zoom lens, it makes us feel as if we are spying on our subject - i get it, but is there a book that covers these concepts? A lot of books are about how, but the books that tell you WHY are very scarce. Sorry about the long-winded question, just trying to teach myself cinematography :) Cheers!
I think the human eye (using a 35mm full frame sensor size) is something like 17mm in focal length, but I'm not sure whether that factors in what our binocular vision looks like or if that's monocular.
That interlacing in every second clip killed the atmosphere for me. I guess I'm too visually focussed, but this also is a video about visuals. Personally, I'd appreciate some deinterlacing next time to get rid if the arctifacts. Let interlacing die :P
Please clear my doubt 🙋 IMAX movies are usually 16:9 aspect ratio so do they use a spherical lens or do they use an anamorphic with a wider FOV and crop from that ?
Haha. The 24-290 has been a workhorse zoom in the film industry for years. It's still an amazing piece of glass. Remember that these lenses are rented out for the shoot, not purchased. But yes, cinema lenses are far from cheap.
Wait so does this mean that all slow zooms (not push ins) or crash zooms in cinema are done either in post or with a zoom lens? I mean I see zooming in and out when it’s talking about fixed/prime lenses, so I’m confused.
@In Depth Cine , given that many cameras shoot with super 35 sized sensors, is there a crop factor applied for cinema cameras like there is with a "full frame" DSLR lens mounted on a stills camera with an APS-C sensor? If I put a Cooke 50mm lens on a super 35 camera, is my FOV really that of a 75mm lens or so? Thanks!
my question is, if you are not aware of these reasons do you as a viewer notice what the director/dp was trying to portray? what if the choice of lens was all that they could afford and not some deep meaning behind it?
![Ultimate Guide to Camera Lenses - Every Type of Camera Lens Explained [Shot List Ep. 7]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/uSsIqR3DuK8/mqdefault.jpg)
I studied cinema for 3 years now and yet, reminding myself those basic notions really help me a lot!
Is Good to start and build it Up from basic
I would watch this channel any day any where any time. Much more better than film school. Love from Nepal 🇳🇵
"If lens are a way of capturing the world, then 'which lens' you choose says a lot about the kind world you are trying to capture" is going to be my next tattoo, might go for the neck this time.
This video is too good, quality, background music, everything is impressive
Yes! I thought the same thing. The background music carried the mood, unlike most other videos where the music is too loud and distracting.
thanks for doing this video! i'm learning a lot about cinema
Lesser views on a technical film video means that you've made a great no non-sense, purely educational video! Thanks for this.
This is actually a very informative video on cinematography for new filmmakers,but minor correction:Fallen angels was shot mostly on a Kinoptik Tegea 9.8mm rectilinear lens with an adapter that turns it into a 6.8mm lens,it is not fisheye.
Fisheye would have looked extremely distorted and compressed,wider too to the point where faces are all stretched out weirdly
Yes it’s a great video
thats rather disputed, on point about it not being fisheye
To note as well. It was shot on 16mm. This will scale differently per camera film stock or sensor size.
That last quote is dope 💯🫡
I loved the comparison of Heavens Know What to Fallen Angels. Both do a lot of closeups, but in a very different way, this was a perfect illustration. Thank you!
Bro! I just want to say a huge thank you for your work and this channel. Thanks to your work, I'm obsessed with learning about film making now.
Had to use this video because the links my professor gives sometimes just don't even work. Thanks though I definitely learned a lot from this video!
You have such a calming voice - great video!
This is my new favorite RUclips channel
Thanks, I didn't understand the way my film textbook explained it, you cleared this up for me.
Bro you just made me realise I can do so much more with my camera now. Thankyou very much 🫂
Simply a great explanatory video, hats off!
So well done! As a beginner filmmaker, this is really helpful and inspiring. Thank you!
Your videos are super helpful. Thanks for making them!
Thanks for watching them!
Man your channel once again blows me away. Other cinema topical channels made me aware of storytelling techniques in the past, but you have opened my eyes towards cinematography like no one else ever did. Really, fantastic job.
This is my new favourite channel. Love your work!
I love you so much. Thank you for making this so calming and easy to listen to. It takes what could be a daunting subject and makes it clean and clear to understand.
cool video! roger deakins would be a great cinematographer to do a video on
🙏
great video!
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it.
Awesome! Thank you so much for including Fallen Angels in this. I really love every single frame in that movie and never understand why it is not used as reference more often!
I’d like a video on focal lengths used for specific shots- like what people shoot a mid shot on or a close up for instance
This was beautiful man
great episode! love your channel, man.
Thanks for watching. Hope it was informative.
Thank you for this video! So much insight that finally clicked for me!
This is a great video. Like the pace.
This video's been curated super well
Glad I stumbled upon this - can't wait to see the rest of your channel. Greetings from a fellow South African :)
Also found this recently. It's always great to see the South African RUclips community grow! 🇿🇦
Lovely, as always. Thanks for creating.
Awesome work man. I know how much effort and time it takes to make a video like this. I appreciate this a lot. Thank you and Good luck with your endeavors.
Awesome, awesome video. Thank you.
Could you do a video comparing Panavision, Arri, Cooke and Leica lenses?
Superb video! You have a great and engaging teaching manner.
your channel is golden
love this video!!!!!! Thank you.
Love your videos! Can we lover the music volume so we can hear more of your voice? Keep up the good work
Strange I actually love the background music and didn’t find it to be too loud. That’s just me tho
The music is lovely but is definitely too loud (or the voice is too quiet. He does sound like he's speaking very quietly into the mic)
Great as always
Brillant intro to the basics of cinematography. Perfectly clear and clever!
These are stuff I never thought about, when watching a movie. It's kinda fascinating, really. Subscribed! ^_^
What an incredible video. I learned a few things and I have become inspired. Thanks, man.
Elaborate and entertaining! Thank you so much
Please do make a video on Satyajit Ray . The way you explain everything is great and very helpful and it seems that you will do justice to Mr. Ray's films too. I hope you recognize him. Greetings from Calcutta,India.
Of course I enjoyed the video! Thank you so much.
Excellent video
Excellent video! Thank you for making this!
Pleasure. Thanks for watching.
Love your channel.
Really great videos, thanks for taking the time and sharing.
Wonderful breakdown! Thank you!
I do like to see one video on *Wally pfister* as he is award winning cinematographer.
Thanks for the suggestion. I'll feature Wally Pfister in a future Cinematography Style video at some point.
@@InDepthCine 🙏🏻
Great chanel!! Thank you so much for doing this videos!
awesome man!
Subbed! Looking forward to more!
beautiful video
Amazing channel, thank you
Genial as usual. Thanks a lot.
Very informative video 👌. Thanks for making it. Is it safe to assume that one can identify the lens used (wide or long) in an image by looking at the depth of field and amount distortion in it?
Right, those are two factors which can be used to identify a focal length. I'd say another important factor in identifying a focal length is in how the background of an image is compressed. In a film like The Revenant you see a lot of the background, even in close ups, which means it was shot on a wide lens. In a close up where the background is more compressed (you see less background width) it was shot on a longer lens.
@@InDepthCine Right👍.
I didn't find the image that distorted even when they went close with wide lens. Is it because of the camera they used. I'm curious to know your thoughts on how they achieved it.
@@bhargavvramm I've thought about the case of The Revenant a lot over the years as the apparent lack of distortion puzzled me too. I think the eye is adapting to the distortion and accepting it because it's always present. Certainly there is a great deal of 'massive front shoulder' effect in the closer shots. By and large, faces are kept near the centre of the frame which makes the distortion less obvious but look at still frames and you'll really see it. The use of the wide lenses in The Revenant is a topic all in itself.
@@Tom_RUclips_stole_my_handle The Revenant used a 24mm lens on the Alexa 65. On 35 a 12mm lens has the same AOV... 18mm on a VistaVision camera. So the lens is wide, but not too wide. A 12mm on VistaVision would show considerably more perspective distortion for example.
@@flyingfox2005 Thank you Daniel, that makes sense.
recently subscribed really concise explanation's and great examples.
I would like to see you do a video on darius khondji's cinematography style
Could you make a few more videos on lighting and talking about bounce and diffusion and things like that?
Please do a video on Christopher Doyle sometime! I love his work
Awsome Knowledge this is Azlan Arain khan cinematographer Bollywood in Indian Cinema.
thank you
RUclips University does it again.
I love your videos.
35 & 50mm distinction was confusing to me until you placed 50mm in a “natural” classification
Great video
You're South African. Also great vide. Was really informative
Don't usually comment but. Fucking hell thank you - you'll grow big one day. Keep going
Thanks 🙏
Very informative, thanks! =)
There is a school that does not agree with your analysis in the opening section of the video. The position of the camera vs the subject defines most of the look and feel. The lens choice drives the FOV, no more. As you touch on later If you want for example to feel intimate you might place the camera at 3 feet from the subject, this may then drive you to choose a 16.. but it might not. The three foot is what drives the intimacy. Again be 100foot back and the shot will feel 'remote' even if you fill the frame with a 500mm.
Thank you for your work. :)
Great review!
What is the name of the music track used?
Great video! Could you link the specific track you used at 4:08 ?
Do you plan to make a video about the cinematographer Benoît Debie ?
If not, it would be very great to consider it, thank you ! 😁
Very interesting channel
Definitely at some stage. Hopefully in the near future.
Sorry I'm an amateur / beginner. Do all of the focal length mentioned here are in full frame 35mm equivalent or...?
Post some Cinematography of christopher doyle please.
Dope vid
what's the song you use at the beginning of the video until 2:20? :)
Hey fallen angels wasn’t shot on a 6.5 it was filmed on Kinoptik 9.8 like Kubricks wides. However angels used a .71 century wide lens adapter.
Memories of muder shooted at which mm lens ?
This video is quite confusing. Sometimes you're talking about specific lenses and their actual physical focal length and other times it sounds like you're talking about full frame equivalency.
You said 50mm looks natural and close to how the human eye sees, but that's only on full frame (it's actually closer to 40mm if I'm not mistaken). On Super35 that would more be something in the range of 28-35mm.
same, I was lost the whole time
What lenses were used in the 50s…any idea…I mean which were the brands…back then…for example what 50 mm lens would Ozu use in his films…
Is that compression effect also equivalent to equivalent focal lengths when it comes to smaller sensors? For example, my point and shoot has a 8-132mm lens, but is equivalent to 24-360 due to its smaller sensor. Would the compression at 132/360mm be equivalent to a 360mm full size lens, or a 132mm one?
Yes, in terms of "the portion of image that will get in the sensor".
But not regarding the depth of field. Depth of field will be shallower on the full frame camera, for the same aperture.
"Compression" is entirely to do with your field of view and distance to your subject, as such you just always compare equivalent focal lengths. A 25mm M4/3, ~33mm APS-C/Super35, and 50mm Full Frame all have approximately the same "compression", don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
Loved this, just what i was looking for, but i need more. Is there a book that teaches cinematorgraphy techniques this way? I would like to learn the standard techniques, when to use which lens and WHY. For example, the shot of Gene Hackman in this video using a long zoom lens, it makes us feel as if we are spying on our subject - i get it, but is there a book that covers these concepts? A lot of books are about how, but the books that tell you WHY are very scarce. Sorry about the long-winded question, just trying to teach myself cinematography :)
Cheers!
Just about any photography or cinematography text book has a chapter about how focal length affects the perception of the subject.
No idea where to start. I guess I'll use wide for wides and 50mm for everything els.e
These are apsc or full frame?
Very nice content and good explanations!
But for a video about films and filmmaking there is a lot of terrible deinterlacing on some of the shots...
I think the human eye (using a 35mm full frame sensor size) is something like 17mm in focal length, but I'm not sure whether that factors in what our binocular vision looks like or if that's monocular.
That interlacing in every second clip killed the atmosphere for me. I guess I'm too visually focussed, but this also is a video about visuals. Personally, I'd appreciate some deinterlacing next time to get rid if the arctifacts. Let interlacing die :P
Same. Felt like I was watching 1080i
I think the whold video is interlaced, it's not just the clips.
Please clear my doubt 🙋
IMAX movies are usually 16:9 aspect ratio so do they use a spherical lens or do they use an anamorphic with a wider FOV and crop from that ?
Let your eyes be the judge
what is the background music?
4:00
What movie is this?
Wow. The Angenieux with 24-290mm. That is literally insane. Just like its price point! haha
Haha. The 24-290 has been a workhorse zoom in the film industry for years. It's still an amazing piece of glass.
Remember that these lenses are rented out for the shoot, not purchased. But yes, cinema lenses are far from cheap.
make a video about movies that are shot with dslr / mirrorles cameras
Wait so does this mean that all slow zooms (not push ins) or crash zooms in cinema are done either in post or with a zoom lens? I mean I see zooming in and out when it’s talking about fixed/prime lenses, so I’m confused.
Hey Brother.
Where in SA are you from?
@In Depth Cine , given that many cameras shoot with super 35 sized sensors, is there a crop factor applied for cinema cameras like there is with a "full frame" DSLR lens mounted on a stills camera with an APS-C sensor? If I put a Cooke 50mm lens on a super 35 camera, is my FOV really that of a 75mm lens or so? Thanks!
This dude needs to watch a video on deinterlacing.
my question is, if you are not aware of these reasons do you as a viewer notice what the director/dp was trying to portray? what if the choice of lens was all that they could afford and not some deep meaning behind it?