Master lighting

Master lighting is the first step in a broader approach to lighting a short. My thinking here is:

• Master lighting (this demo) -  Lighting the whole scene.
• Focus on intensity, contrast and color. 
• You might refine slightly according to your establishing shot, but not too specific.
• If you can't use something for a majority of your sequence, don't do it here. (ie. light linking)
• Key lighting - Lighting unique and iconic shots.
• Focus on shaping and pushing your lighting.
• Bring in your master lighting and refine it.
• Throw away unnecessary lights
• Get more specific.  Add lights where necessary.
• Work out technical issues here (shadow res, sampling, GI settings, artifacts, etc)
• Be mindful of continuity among other keys in the sequence
• The aforementioned establishing shot, used in master lighting, would be treated as a key.
• Shot lighting - Lighting derivatives (same-as, close ups and one-off shots)
• Focus on consistency and technical issues.
• Should be minimal need to adjust lights beyond technical needs (shadow res, framing, etc)

If you're expecting anything extravagant in this demo, you will probably be very disappointed.  I am simply blocking in the master lighting, talking about what I'm doing and why.  Make sure you've watched my preview two videos on lighting, "Thoughts on lighting," and "How I use reference."  They are instrumental to my thought process in this one.

• Master lighting (1 hour)

The compression hurts the saturation and contrast, unfortunately, but it should still work to illustrate what I'm talking about.  As usual, feel free to ask any questions.

I hope these are useful.  I might do a few more of these.  I was thinking one for key lighting, another for tips and tricks, and a lastly, one focused on compositing.  I'll skip "shot lighting" because it's technical and case-by-case so it wouldn't be much use.  Good luck!

How I use reference

Part two in my demo.

I think reference is so important to the learning process that I recorded it's own part just to discuss it.  Perhaps it's obvious information to some, yet I'm frequently surprised how often people try to invent their lighting from nothing; often hurting the quality and believability of their lighting.

For a more thorough understanding, be sure to watch my "Thoughts on lighting" video before this one:

• How I use reference

Thoughts on lighting

This is the first part of a lecture/demo on lighting.

I'm simply talking about basic things to consider in this one.  I have part two and part three, a talk about reference and an actual demo in maya, already recorded.  I still need to convert and upload them, which I will try to do this evening.

On that note, this was a rushed recording and conversion.  If the audio is not clear or understandable, please let me know and I will see what I can do.  I think you can even comment on the video - feel free to ask questions or get clarification on anything.  I hope it helps.

• Thoughts on lighting
• "Good Lighting" powerpoint

LWF

I've tried understanding linear workflow before, but never seemed to get over the hump. I think I'm finally grasping why people use this technique.

maya/renderman

It really bothered me that textures never render quite the same as I had painted them. I also use to wonder why using lights with linear decay looked better than lights with a physically accurate inverse^2 (quadratic) decay. Who knew I was just texturing and rendering incorrectly for the past 4 years- and why didn't they tell me? Now that I know, it's hard to sleep. I don't know if it's cause I'm excited or upset- or maybe it's just cause summer's quickly coming to an end :P

ps. coincidentally I used the same wood texture in this test as I used (incorrectly) for my floor in the previous post.