Fluorescent lights+Historical Films: Something's wrong here

Post Reply New Topic

I'm not sure if this bothers anyone else, but I have to say, it really, really annoys me.
I've noticed that in a lot of films and TV series, and, yes, even animated films/series that have historical settings, the lighting used on the sets is, well.... wrong.
In Rurouni Kenshin, an anime with a pre-electric historical setting, most of the indoor lighting looks like it relies on fluorescents.
In "I, Claudius," another TV series (in this case live-action) with an historical setting, what's obviously electric lighting is used frequently.
It's pretty much the same with movies like "The Ten Commandments", "Ben-Hur", and several other films I've forgotten the names of.
After all, aren't those movies supposed to be set before electricity was invented?
Yet they're using what's obviously electric lighting.
Either electric lighting was invented -way- earlier than I thought,
or
the people who made those movies are stupid.
Personally, I'm willing to bet on the latter.

It's a cliche that historical dramas are rife with historical inaccuracies. The most recent example I saw was in a rerun of The Legend of Zorro starring Antonio Banderas, where two kids high-five each other after Zorro foils a villain.

There are several reasons I can think of. Cinematographers might feel that fluorescence is more effective for set lighting. Also, fluorescent lights would be relatively safer to use than arc lights, which have been traditionally used to light movie sets. I suspect that the prevalence of digital video to shoot TV shows and movies is also a factor.

The primary hidden factor, I think, is the increasing prevalence of fluorescence in the workplace and now at home. It bugs me too. It heartened me that, when my friend Jennifyr asked her neurologist about using Ott lights--fluorescent lights that supposedly come closest to simulating sunlight--he told her she needed to get more natural sunlight.

Well, what can ya do? If you're shooting in interiors you need artificial light, preferably cheap. I've seen a few things shot in replica lighting, like just lotsa candelabras and it is VERY dark.

Candelight is cheap, if not the safest thing, and that would actually be historically accurate.
Or they could use a typical bedside lamp (or several typical bedside lamps), which are closer to natural fire than fluorescents ever will be.
I duno, seeing Caesar or whoever going about in a Roman palace that looks more like a school cafeteria than anything.... well, that just murders it for me.

I think it was Kubrick's 'Barry Lyndon' that tried the replica candlelight for some interior scenes, so if you want to have a look at that you'll see how dark, but sort of intimate the scenes are. I don't think you can see much in the backgrounds at all.

but yeah, I take your point, most TV/film lighting is ugly. I guess one just gets used to the poor quality of light in most visual media. It's nice that people still notice how 'wrong' it is.

I think Lars Von Trier and his whole 'school' of filmakers (I forget what they're called) attempt to use natural/existing lighting as much as possible.