Realistic lighting is the most difficult element to achieve. I'm 81 and I was shooting film in 1970 and I'm still trying to learn how to master lighting.

24fps was actually not an esthetic decision, not in the beginning. The original engineering was centered on minimizing film cost. Thomas Edison did the initial research and determined that 16fps was sufficient to trick the brain into seeing continuous motion, but 16 fps was not sufficient to overcome the eye's biological/chemical reaction to light, called persistence of vision. Edison determined that the strobing action of light inherent in projection required 48 flashes of light per second in order for persistence of vision to be overcome and for the eye to perceive continuous light with no flicker. The solution was to place a shutter in projectors, like a spinning pinwheel with 3 vanes, so that each frame filmed at 16fps was flashed on the screen 3 times -- thus achieving 48 flashes of light per second while consuming only 16 fps of precious film stock -- a huge savings considering the economics of motion picture reproduction and distribution. While 16fps was standard for silent movies, 24fps emerged as the standard with the arrival of talkies. When sound was incorporated into motion pictures, it was eventually standardized to an optical track, where an actual visible audio waveform was printed on one edge of the movie film alongside the sequence of images. For this, 16fps proved to be unsuitable due to poor audio quality, but increasing the frame rate to 24fps gave the desired audio resolution and fidelity. I don't dispute aesthetic arguments about 24fps providing more "cinematic" results because higher frame rates inherently compromise motion blur. And there may be codec advantages also when fewer frames are compressed, allowing more image data to be allocated for any given data maximum data rate that a given storage system is capable of. It is not inappropriate to discuss esthetics of frame rate, and there has been a long history of experimental work, notably Douglas Trumbull who tried to market a special theater concept called Showscan, if I recall. Personally, I'm grateful for this conversation here because I am personally about to standardize on a frame rate thanks to the fact that I have just purchased 6 Tentacle Sync Track E Mk II timecode clocks, and from this day forward all my cameras will be locked down to a standard configuration. We've avoided a huge discussion of fractional frame rates here, something that evolved in the analog era to accommodate color in much the same way that 24fps replaced 16fps to accommodate optical sound. Edison's original research still holds, and all filmmakers would do well to be grounded in basic principles of continuous motion and perception of vision. Not only for esthetics, but also to understand the interaction between camera sensor scanning and various non-continuous light sources such as rasterized screens, fluorescent lighting, and LED sources.

“Cinematic“ is used so often and for so long that any video with that word in the title is usually something I skip over. You put out such good work that I wanted to see what your take on it was, and I’m glad I did. I really appreciate your definition and objective take on it rather than leaving it as some nebulous term. Lots of good info all around. Thanks for posting quality stuff!

3:46 - "this is called depth of field"; this is called *use of* depth of field; 4:11 to 4:29 - please clarify that the *numerically* smaller numbers (f/1.2, 1.4, 2, etc) are, in fact, the lenses' *maximum* aperture, its' *largest* aperture, where the lens is wide open; 4:40 - when you say, "wide angle lenses have less dof than telephoto lenses.." - wide angle lenses have *more* dof than longer lenses. DOF is the distance in front of and behind the plane of focus where sharpness is acceptable; 4:45-4:51 - an f/4 kit lens at 24mm, will have *more* dof than a 50mm lens at f/4 [everything else being the same - same camera-to-subject distance]; *DOF* is not *blur*, it's the distance in front of and behind the plane of focus where sharpness is acceptable; you can choose a (numerically smaller, physically larger) particular fstop, particular focal length, + distance from camera to *get* less dof for a blurred background & foreground, isolating the subject nicely, but people are going to think "DOF is blur".

When considering how to make your work LOOK more cinematic you should also consider the sound. Choose an editor who knows how to cut scenes to look more "natural." That means giving the subjects a chance to consider, understand, and react emotionally. First rule: Talking subjects need oxygen. Tell your editor to give plenty of pauses so that both the speaker and the viewer have that extra 1/2 second to hear and react. No motormouth editing! The real action in human speech occurs BETWEEN the words. Give your actors a pause to inhale. The best professional speakers, actors, and narrators know that cutting out all of the pauses in the narrators speech will make your work look like a KZfaq video. Give your subjects the respect they deserve. This is a vital factor if you want your work to "look" cinematic.

Luc great videos! However it seems like you're confusing what depth of field really means. Depth of field is not how blurry the background is, it's how wide or narrow your plane of focus is. In other words, MORE depth of field means wider focus depth, the background is more in focus. LESS depth of field means shallower focus depth, meaning blurrier backgrounds. Also "smaller" aperture means the lens is closed down, as in using f16 of f22. Wider apertures are the ones you were referring to, ie 1.4 or 2.8.

7:20 a cameraman I worked with when I caught my break producing a television doc style show always use to say this. "Move your feet." It's the reason I loved editing what he shot and didn't enjoy some of the footage from other shooters. I will say though - boy, do I love a good crash zoom, even in docs.

2:03 shows a "difference" in 24 FPS. Genius.

I don't think cinematic is just framerates and filters. There are moments in big movies that seem odd and moments with cheap cameras that are packed with emotions. And then I remember Kurosawa speaking about a moment he filmed that was real cinematic. If there is a big moment that make us feel the scene, that is cinematic. And big cinematigraphers just figured it out what and how to present.

That was a great. Tips are quick, useful, concise. Most of this stuff I already knew but it helped me clear my head for an upcoming shoot where I feel like I'm overthinking. I'm a fan of this man. Can't wait to watch more.

Mindset, hustle and cinematic are my favourite words who give me goosebumps. I feel like they’re often overseen.

*maximum aperture* is printed on the lens for the given focal length. The f-number is inversely proportional to the size of the aperture

2:25 The answer is not really the frame rate but the scanning method. Since the beginning of cinema, movies are being shot progressively, that is one frame after another. Broadcast, on the other hand, uses the interlaced scan which gives an illusion of 60fps in USA and 50fps in Europe. Most people say that interlaced is obsolete whereas it is still used to this day and the finest example is the news broadcast. Also, TV cameras use 2/3-inch and 1/2-inch sensors that aren't the best option for shallow depth of field and are actually meant to make everything as sharp as possible.

What you have hit on here is essentially the difference between cinematography and videography. Yes, I agree with your assessment 100%. You always seem to have a lot of very useful information in your posts. Thanks, Luc.

First time I’ve heard the word “cinematic” without cringing super hard. Kudos on the excellent video!

Thanks for the advice. Really appreciate these videos. Best channel for filmmakers by far.

That Variable Prime idea is gold. Solid info and well organized!

This is a great video in cinematography. I simplified the meaning to take the complexity out of it. Videographer: Knows how to run the tool/s. Cinematographer: Controls of the entirety of the LOOK and FEEL of the scene/shot/atmosphere. Like musicians, some people are great, strictly the instrument alone, then you have the composer/writer who brings the musicians altogether to create the feel/atmosphere of the SONG. That is similar to a cinematographer. Being a photographer prior to a videographer I realized I am on already on the path of cinematography always achieving the '' look '' and '' feel '' of what I'm shooting.

I think the depth of field concept is sometimes framed as “looking cool and cinematic” when it should better be used as “control of information”. Sometimes it’s a “hey, pay attention to this” or even sometimes a manipulation to purposely obscure information from your audience. I think most people don’t think about it because it’s difficult to achieve properly especially when you don’t have a focus puller. I feel like the difference between videographer and cinematographer is about 5-10 years of extra experience, knowledge, and experimentation.

You’re gifted, thanks for sharing your gifts with the world

Awesome tips, Luc. Thanks!

Amazing videos this is like my 5th video binge watching lol all of them have brought really good value ! I love how you’re not beating around the bush and you’re straight forward with your points !

Honestly… I feel you so much when it comes to enhancing the light of the spaces that you’re in. That’s truly the difference between between something that was shot “in the moment” by a “videographer” vs a film that was truly meant to be viewed in a cinema/festival/high art context. I’d love to hear more about, and see demos of, how you transitioned from dealing with what was there to setting up more lighting to create more intentional storytelling. I think, at this point, I’m a really competent videographer. Using light for talking heads and everything else is second nature. As a solo shooter I’m curious as to how you’re able to keep your attention to what’s happening, and capturing the moment and the story, whilst also being able to rig lights and frame it well. Maybe the answer is… I stop shooting solo if I want to be creating this kind of work 😂 but I feel like there’s a huge leap in the workflow and approach from solo creator to high level documentary filmmaker that I’m trying to figure out.

this is worth to watch, thank you for your work!

Back lighting might require slightly more discussion. A dim light in the background is an interesting visual complement to good frontal lighting. If you're going to shoot a subject against a bright back light (sun, giant window, etc...) you better have a fill light or reflector in front of the subject so the subject isn't just a silhouette or the back light isn't completely blown out while adjusting exposure for the subject.

Thanks for the vid. This is a lot of help. Especially the crash zoom I often did that. The light also a lit tip. 👍

It’s about story and motivation. A camera move should appear motivated by either the story (as in django) or by other elements in the scene. For example handheld to emphasise the uneasiness or tension in a scene. Lighting is no different, it looks “cinematic” if it feels motivated. For example if a subject is lit in a scene where the viewer can imply the light is coming from a nearby window or street lamp, etc then it feels like the subject was in a real place. All of these exist to help the viewer forget there’s a camera, pointing at an actor, with a team of people lighting and directing the scene. They’re just tools to support the story. I didn’t write a comment intending to criticise the creator of this video, but I do feel he’s missed far more elements personally. The stuff he’s covered I’ve often found in other KZfaq videos and it’s missing the point imo.

Wonderful tips! Thanks!

Love this! Very useful advice! Thanks!

Great practical advice,thanks for sharing.You are an inspiration for young documentary producers.

Super helpful stuff man I appreciate you putting this together

Wow! So much great info in so short a time! Thanks!

Loved this video. Incredible simple but practical advice. You have a new sub.

This is gold. Thank you, Sir!

Great video Luc, thanks for sharing a lot of interesting knowledge. Although I must mention a confusion in terms. ”Depth of field” is not a phenomenon but a measure: the distance between the nearest and the furthest objects that are in focus. Consequently, ”the news” (i.e. the old video image used in television) has MORE depth of field, and usually cinema has LESS. Wide angle lenses have increased depth of field (the image is in focus on a greater interval) and telephoto lenses have shallower (reduced) depth of field. There's no doubt in my mind that you know all these effects but you used the terms somehow confusing manner. (ex: 4:34 and following)

On point! Sharing this with my film students 🤘

Fantastic info in this vid!

Brilliant video, Luc - thank you.

Great great tips... Thanks!!!

Thank you!!

Great topic and explanation. Thanks!

That was superb! Thx!

Awesome video! Thank you for all the tips

This is a great video. I hope young filmmakers also remember that all 5 of those tips can be reversed or broken with equal success. your point about intention was was supreme.

Extremely valuable content, thank you very much for this information.

Found your channel tonight. Excellent content. Thank you for sharing your knowledge with us.

That was a great video. Thank you so much

Subbed! Your channel is super helpful! Keep making great stuff!

Dude your eyelashes are so pretty!

Quick hit of wisdom. Appreciate!

tbh the light tipps were great, thanks!

Great info, and thanks for sharing.

wow.. straight to the point.. thanks man! please share more

Amazing video man!

I very much enjoyed the content of this video as much as knowing your work. Im glad i ran into this. Subscribed❤

Thank you, excellent points, and whatever setup you've used for this studio video looks fantastic. When you talk about lens aperture, though, for example, 1.4, I think you mean maximum aperture, not minimum. Yes, minimum numerically, but maximum optically, providing a shallow depth of field.

Great suggestions… every one of them applicable

A very good video, concise and well thought out. I hope to apply what I learned here today.

Back lighting! Thanks for the tip.

Solid Gold video my man. Thank you!

Great info. Thanks for sharing. Subscribed

Happy Wednesday all! So excited for Wednesday but more importantly I am happy that Luc started uploading. You are great and you have so much more to experience within the world of youtube.

Excellent tips, thank you

2:23 I totally agree ! Great point .

Awesome video man thank you... Subbed!

Good information, motivational too.

I mostly shoot 24fps, but was impressed with some of Griffin Hammond's mini docs, and he does a really good job with 4K 60fps. So it's sometimes good to mess about with different frame rates, without them being too sharp.

Great information, so well thought out and shared!!! Thanks!

Great video but you speak of depth of field backwards. More depth of field means more is in focus. Less DOF means less (shallower). The “cinematic look” has less depth of field, not more.

Great advice, love your content👍

Just came across your youtube. I learnt something new. Thank you this is an eye opener. 😊

This really broke it down. Great tips. Thx

Such good valuable information. Glad to have found your channel. Thanks!

Thank you for this. Just in time for our new project. Subscribing now.

Thanks for the video, good information. God bless you! 👍🏼🔥

I think I'm going to send this video to all cam ops on my future docs. Easy description of my thought process here!

Hey man I'm just starting out trying to build a second career with a Sony FS5 mk2 and some other second hand gear and your videos have really helped show what's possible, from the 'gear you don't need' to seasoned advice like this. You're videos are really helpful, many thanks!

rotated two's instead of fives? nice. Great advice overall. I think we are often tempted to use all the amazing technical solutions thus losing focus on more important things, like story, content, etc.

I’ve never heard the “use zoom lenses as a variable prime” advice before. I often have to cut out the crash zooms, but if I had just moved closer even the moving footage could be useable. 👍

Very interesting info. Thank you

Thanks: nice. Especially liked the detail on lighting. Subscribed.

brilliant video! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

Finally some 1 addressed it "Cinematic" i never believed in it coz i believe in Cinema and Film thats all, appreciate your video brav... new subscriber

Thank you!

Excellent episode great explanation 👍🏼. Subscribed 🇦🇺

This is amazing, thanks

I've always thought of the term "cinematic" to be a way of using each frame to tell the story. Using layers within the frame to aid with context. Think about all those amazing westerns that have deep depth of field but still look cinematic as you feel like you're there and can see clearly what the characters are doing. Blurring everything out means you lose a sense of place and the intention of the shot. 'Joker' manages to throw a lot out of focus but with lighting and layering you always know what's going on.

Thank you, Luc. A really thoughtful discussion. Your videos always overdeliver on the premise.

Great content, great presentation, great production. Kudos. Liked and subscribed.

Bokeh, my new favorite word as i've been trying to obtain this from upgrading my gear for my reels. Now i can go drive my wife crazy with this exact terminology thank you so much.

Thanks man I watched this a few months ago and got a few prime lenses and took these tips into consideration and my latest music video came out even better than the one I paid for previously. I also have shot over 10 music videos for other artists and created another stream of income appreciate it!!!

Great Work!

i dont know but . i watch this video again and again. something i learnd again & again.. as a beginner

Hands down an amazing video very informative

So glad I found your channel - great info - I like that you are teaching what you know - awesome thx for sharing!

Great video, thanks!

Great Tips!

What great suggestions - thank you!!

You make really great videos 👍🏻 I'm learning so much, thanks a lot for sharing ⭐️

Thank you for the information, I learned a lot!