Cinematography

What a GREAT idea! I wish it was on my list of 2020 priorities. I did use Motion Array for stock material, though... Do you have a preference for where you get your stock footage?

Hey Karen, no real preference but I've used Storyblocks before and I'll have to check out Motion Array too. I know of some DP's that did shoot some footage documenting the cities etc.

My partner and I were considering flying a drone trough downtown in the spring lockdown. But the streets weren't actually empty. Past two months we've got a curfew after 9pm but can't do much in the dark with a drone.

Also there's the issue with flying in urban areas which would actually have been allowed if there were no people until recently.

As for stock sites. I've actually stopped using them because on one hand as a creator of footage or photos you never get paid enough and as a user it can also be not as cost affective. So lately we've been using purposely made footage for a project.

Leya Marincic thats a shame it would have looked amazing. I actually hired a freelancer last year to get the exact footage I wanted.

Ben Patrick Yates yeah but the problem is the streets were always full of vehicles or people or something. So it wasn't much of an option unfortunately.

Hey, Michael Dean Muench! Excited for your journey, sir! Since this is the Cinematography Lounge, I'd like to ask you a cinematography question - what do you like best about filming documentaries? What do you like best about filming narratives? Are you using the same camera for both?

Yes, the Canon 70D is solid and good.

Most reality shows use a ton of gear in different formats, from GoPro to handy cams to full ENG style cameras to cine-style rigged cameras, all for different applications. 8 to 10 cameras would be considered simple coverage for most things. Certainly 3 at an absolute minimum, each assigned to certain people, spaces or anticipated events.

Then there are the wireless mics... dozens...

I am in the same boat as you. I was told that Netflix won't accept anything less than 4k. So, should we all be thinking 4K if we ever want to submit this type of work for consideration even if its not Netflix? For the quick run-and-gun stuff, I was considering a JVC GY-HM170U Ultra 4K HD 4KCAM (approx. $1200) or a Panasonic HC-WXF991K 4K Ultra HD (approx. $900). Anyway...just some thought.

Different exhibitors have different Production and Post-Production requirements. Yes, Netflix is 4K. But not just any 4K. These are their requirements.

https://backlothelp.netflix.com/hc/en-us/articles/217237077-Production-a...

The choice of what to shoot on for anyone else is quite simply one of two choices. Shoot the specific requirements asked for or shoot for the highest standard asked for and it will fit most of the lesser standards.

Of course its always best to start high and be able to downgrade from there. No argument from me.

I really like the Panasonic DVX 200

Here's the last thing I shot with a very noisy Super8: http://theaudienceawards.com/films/theartpatron-5min-mpeg-4-53349

Hi there, we ventured out to develop a prototype digital super8 cartridge, being frustrated the Nolab project never made it. It's a 3D printed cartridge that holds the Ximea Mu9 camera which is triggered to take 1 image each time the claw passes the IR sensor of our own developed shutter sync circuit board. Also developed software and UI to control capture, settings and to process the RAW 16 or 8 bit images, colorgraded them and render 18 or 24 fps video. This solution requires 2 minor and reversible adaptations to your super8 camera. See sample video shot with Nizo 481 at https://youtu.be/HKopM02BBNg 640x480 and 720p at: https://youtu.be/Pf_wWU2wAKE See for more info also: www.twitter.com/super8digital and https://youtu.be/90CD3y4yWoA for explanatory video.

Gene there is not really much in common between a Super 8mm film camera and a Digital 8 electronic camera. The images are very different.

Absolutely test the camera you have first. Shoot some scenes in locations and in set-ups similar to what you think you will be faced with. Cut them together. Does it look the way you think it should to tell your story. The look being what you envision is the first and most important step. Trying what you have just makes sense. See what you can do with it in post. When you watch the edited scenes being honest with yourself will answer your question about using the camera.

Gene Biagio Adesso Andrew Sobkovich It's 5 year old post. Hope you guys noticed. Isn't Kodak Super 8 was about to release last year and now they halted the project. I am still so into those https://www.kodak.com/en/motion/page/super-8-cameraThey still run this https://www2.kodak.com/l/54782/2020-04-13/jpct4jStill have to get my hands on those :-) It really so photography craving camera :-)

Rohit I did see the age of the original thread, however Gene's question was only a few days ago and was worth commenting upon, first on the very slight chance there was any confusion between the Kodak film camera and the Sony Electronic one. But secondly to comment that there are times when the specif style of images a piece of gear makes fit with the storytelling. If that is the case, then who cares what it is, it does the job on screen.

That this is a zombie thread is fine. Zombies are my people so I relate.

Rohit, the series is very effective at creating a cohesive feel and mood to the story. And a great telling of the story from Margaret Atwood’s novel I suggest that watching the episode that the excerpts were taken from would help greatly in putting what Colin discussed into context. Despite the host, Colin is very good at explaining what he was thinking and trying. Take into account this show is part of a series and thus is shot within a significantly different timeframe than most features. Do watch it. If you don’t like it I will gladly buy you a beer and we can talk about what didn’t work for you. Being able to explain what worked for young what didn’t, and why and how it could be changed is what makes for a useful discussion about those critical artistic aspects of our creations.

@Andrew Sobkovich I think you are not understanding what I'm trying to explain I guess. Because I'm not talking about Margaret Atwood's novel's context quality metrics or Colin's approach to explain how he is reaching a specific setup.

What I'm mentioning is trying to bring something new beyond already existing works of other people to make something unique in itself..

For instance, I do fair bit of painting. Each painter every creative person be it Painter, Photographer, even Cinematographer, Director got their own unique style. It's inevitable but it's true that it comes across even if we try not to do that. You take Joseph Zbukvic or any painter or even filmmaker, some sort of, cover it up by many layers of already existing idea of art/visuals just to be grounded and more so connecting to the reality. It shows in films made by, say Abbas Kirostami or Nuri bilge Ceylan or Miyazaki films, it outright shows in their films that uniqueness they are trying. You call them Auteur or whatever, but many do try to bring their own visual idea of what they want to convey or sometimes, they try to bring every person's view points on to the table to survive the movie or art.

Both exists in art I believe. So when you are saying "Cinematographers should not have a specific style", kind of yes, but they will always going to have their own style, but would cover it up with many layers of other inspirations to hide those elements of uniqueness to survive the axe of getting fired. It's natural tendency/itch for every creative artist to try to bring their own nature into whatever they are presenting and sometimes balance it out to embrace say DOP's charging egoistic tantrums or Derector ego or sometimes writer's views into their craft so that it just don't come across like it's fully Cinematographer's work or going just one look as they want.

For example, when I saw this trailer of movie 1917, I instantly told my friends around that this movie is going to reach Oscars, but won't win Oscars. And you see it happened just like that. Because Roger Deakins got his own unique style too.He knows himself, if not others catch it. The whole movie is a presentation of how Roger Deakins style really is. That doesn't equate to like saying Sam Mendis is bad director.. But issue with 1917 story is it didn't raise up the stakes it tries to present and the powerful visual elements of Roger was trying sort of overshadows the story flaws it got and there are many in it..

Similarly is the above case when I can saw the video. I'm not talking about Atwood's story being good or bad or which timeline they are trying to convey in each episode. But the look they are trying to build is more like i said forced imitation of "BEING PRETTY VISUALS PUSHED TO IMPRESS ALL AUDIENCE = Leading to = Pretentiousness" nature because they already have many layers of predefined concept, visual ideas in their own memory of may be filmmakers/cinematographers which they already taken into consideration and that failed to impress me. That's what I'm mentioning.

Let me explain why. You see artists, writers/directors/DOP/Cinematographers/painters/Photographers etc, have this visual memory created by subconscious mind/ derived because of intuition/Dionysian side and there is this working memory because of conscious mind constantly collecting visual information in real world, bring, pushing the Apollonian side.

When we have this experience of watching so many movies, and visuals of many art, it becomes strong conscious mind of pattern of visuals we liked/don't like and so on. And each artist try to dream or think of new visual element which often sparks from their subconscious mind and each one have their unique nature to it, trying to make their own style to bring to the world. But harsh reality of world makes them dip down to survive in the business, they push the conscious mind to show what's already done but slightly twisting it to soothe, relate the audience to what they are trying to convey. That's what you see the color science thrown all over without any purpose. It's because some color theorist said so, some auteurs used it, so lets use it too kind of approach.

So in the above video, the cinematographer is pushing that conscious memory pattern from his working memory, setting it up across, just like you explained why it is so, because even that took to your conscious memory sparking those similar pattern matching and feeling related, accepted and feel it's not going out of context as Atwood too is so and so views..

What I'm saying is, I have seen these so many times and it came across to me as repeated just trying to do the same thing to impress larger audience by making it pretty juggling everything already existing from that working memory.

That's what irritated me or made me sad seeing that. Because cinematographer isn't bringing anything new, and whatever setup he is doing, that's not going to be applicable to every cinematographer. As each one and their setup is different and it's highly impossible to mimic that. Not everyone can avail everything what they got and his suggestion will be counter-intuitive towards pushing away any new cinematographer's potential to bring their true creative self, not letting the sub-conscious mind being the strong aspect to try their own nature to bring what Atwood's novel could be.

For example, watch this video where CinemaTyler channel talks about Andrei Tarkovsky thoughts behind making Stalker and how he at time juggled many DPs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhK7hMBli4s

The youtuber isn't sure why Andrei Tarkovsky kept changing DPs even though the final look was similar as it started at the beginning. The issue is same thing I'm mentioning in here.

Tarkovsky got this visual idea because of his own subconscious mind for the story. And he is trying too hard to convey it to the DP while they aren't unable to decipher what he is trying/wants and each time DP got their own visual working memory of patterns they have done and could only reach to some level which is sort of blocking the way Tarkovsky expects.

Now Tarkovsky probably don't know biology or psychology to that extent to explain this dilemma but I have studied a fair bit of it so explained what was happening to him that time. juggling with so many DPs. Same with 1917 movie failing to impress me and the committee.

Now I'm not discounting Karen "Kay" Ross or your view on saying it's good painting alike or Colin's explanation and thought of how he brought the timeline is good for the novel.

Film making, yes there is a collective work but also there is also a director's /artist's vision kind of work which everyone tries to bring it without letting their individual creative strengths taken over the whole movie team's visual idea. Each film or visual media originates from the way EYES are, so is there is one quote of such nature "Viewer's eyes"

The thought behind is that, Camera to me is like another human being/mostly Director or DP or Cinematographer or even writer at times. How beautiful the eyes of these creative people are, either Director leads it or it comes across like collective vision, but each eye got to find their own pure nature to their own self bringing new element to it. Each eye sees different pattern, visualizes different colors, environment and our visual memory with that often try to fight with the conscious memory we have seeing so many stuff too.

For instance the novelist probably have her own idea of how this timeline story is, which at time counteracts with the visual style of Director or DP, cinematographer here. Same happened to me here, where I have seen stuff which got in my visual memory and I didn't see things which is new beyond what already set the bar. That's the reason I said "Pretentious" . It's not so deadly wrong, just that we got to sometimes stop impressing people and do our own natural thing.

Sorry for long post, Karen "Kay" Ross she knows I write long paragraph trying to explain each bits. Just all these were going back of my mind to comment on that aspect.

Andrew Sobkovich I don't drink Beer or alcohol in general. But thanks for the offer. I do like Wine, and if we ever cross path I would like to have a long discussion with you and Karen on many topics and discuss and have some good wine, may be some Indian food I can cook for you all :-) Thank you all for having patience to read through.

Nicely said Rohit Kumar and I understand what you're saying. Along with photography and cinematography, editing and color, I am also a sculptress and sculpt my own sculptures. In fact an art critic wrote once at one of my first exhibitions that I had developed a unique style that had never been used before and the galerist that actually represents my works chose to work with me because of this same style. No matter how much I try to stray away from my own style of sculpting there is always some kind of reminiscence of it there. I think this is a good thing because it makes a person recognizable.

At the same time I do agree with Andrew Sobkovich, that a DP is supposed to use a visual style that supports the narrative of course. But I do think that there will always be some kind of filter at work. A DP that is comfortable in working within a certain visual style will probably not opt into working in a completely different style since it might not work anyway and they might not be drawn to the project anyway. Unless it is intentionally that way in a sense that they are trying to do something outside their style to create a new visual style that will also be different because of the narrative that calls for this.

Still I have mostly worked with the same team. The director I have worked with mostly is actually my partner and we work great together because he know how I work and what my style is and I understand what he is trying to create also. So in the end everything aligns up most of the time.

In fact this summer we both worked on an outside project where I was actually a camera operator and consulting cinematographer and he was also a camera operator and a consulting director because the director of the project thought that it would be beneficial for us to contribute to the whole project and wanted to color outside the lines.

So to sum it up I do agree that any artist is supposed to be malleable to a degree especially when working in a collaborative process like filmmaking but at the same time the style that they have then coexists with other styles creating a completely unique peace of work in the end. Which is great since there will never be anything like it. But in contrast if everything was flexible there would only be one story and one visual ever created and everything would be bland.

Leya Marincic Thank you for sharing your story and understanding my view. "But in contrast if everything was flexible there would only be one story and one visual ever created and everything would be bland".. Rightly said. That's what I was saying.

If you personally want to know my view on filmmaking, technically one can say it's a collective work. But truly psychologically speaking, Film making, any form of creative work it's very individualistic. So when our approach towards ultimate, epitome of purity in art, we have to face our own ego, thats' when we are forced to work in the society with varying differences to make things work for what we want to show. It's a juggle, struggle like I said about Apollonian trying to overrule us sometimes and Dionysian wanting to be sharp and precise sometimes even making us look like too evil person.

Your story of associating with your partner and that artist, it spark me to remember an interview of a legendary filmmaker Satyajit Ray.

Watch this video, you will get what I'm saying https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aIvizeAHm0&t=847s If you want to jump to straight to the point, check at the time 11:20 min and 13th minute too in the video. In this he talks about how he started to do cinematography himself.

The reason is same what I explained. It's like two lions are brought in the cage to survive. Either both kill each other or sit in opposite ends. Same with creative works too. It's hard to bring best of the best brains to work for us, because it's like going to have conflict one day or other. But yes there is this fine balance which some have like in your case where you figured out a union of some sort which is working in your case. But psychologically speaking, there is a timeframe in which it will work, but a creative person will surely going to try to disassociate and try new things and that union of like minded people too have to find their own creative output and it's necessary for art to survive. Like two or more tigers got to go different paths at one point to make their own new changes brilliance evolution of their own art too. Or else they will lose their mind, feel tired of doing the same thing, as it becomes their part of Working memory like I explained.

So try this process if you like.

Have this union which is great working for you. But also take a break for everyone to find their own creative spark/ void to break and create something new each season. That would help your team to strengthen the bond as well evolve as group or even individually build the team more bigger better too. Or else Art which we call is timeless like you said will turn bland!

Even I'm fiddling to find few people who can collaborate with me, and producers who are interested to fund new projects. And in India finding producers is beep so tough and even if find people it's too hard to keep them together because creative differences rise too quickly pushing the mediocrity working together if we just gang up everyone who wants every different thing done their own way and it's alike recipe for disaster than a success lol. I guess you got what I mean. So keep sculpting and also take break seasonally to bring something new each time , like the saying goes, "Empty your cup". I often like at one point read anything everything and than try to forget everything. :-D So I never like collect it as to flaunt like I READ ALL THESE. Because I Feel it's kind of counterproductive for my own ability to be child again to build the curiosity back to the creative, analytical side of me.. That's the core of creative strength and regroup with different ideas from each person if you all have that rapport built of working together which is hard to come by these days. Ask me I know it, I'm sure you do as well!

Rohit, you said “this cinematography made me feel it's so extremely pretentious … Felt ingenuine. I haven't seen the show. “.

You might find that the opinions about the quality of the cinematography in this series amongst those of us who actually do this, based upon our understanding and actual experience working within the inherent time and budget constraints in doing a scripted series, are decidedly different.

I am looking forward to the next season of intriguing story-telling and the cinematography of this series. Perhaps it will rise to meet your standards should you choose to watch it

Hi, Florin. This is great! Yes, clearly, both the Classical and Renaissance periods are major influences in film and photography. Basic color theory, the Golden rule of ratios and composition, depth of perception, use of chiaroscuro (meaning "light-dark" in Italian; the treatment of light and shading), etc., are integral to film practiced by filmmakers and cinematographers. I'd say Rembrandt, Carravagio, and da Vinci are extremely influential. Plus, filmmakers love American realist artist Edward Hopper, who truly had a cinematic eye. Especially his famous painting of the diner at night titled Nighthawks is a beloved favorite. Something like 20+ movies can be easily seen as direct reminders or influenced by his art, such as Hitchcock films and many more. One modern movie that comes to mind is Equalizer with Denzel Washington. Perfectly staged, there he is sitting in a diner at night with other late-night dwellers, seen through a window from outside, framed by the light from within, all with Nighthawks sulfuric green-and-yellow color scheme. :)

Hello, Beth. I think we can see movies - moving pictures - as moving paintings too and it's a joy when the moving pictures are not only moving pictures, but beautiful moving pictures.

There are some great works of art from the past; we can get inspiration from them and we can bring somehow their style and their beauty into movies.

Love, love, LOVE this! Great information, and fantastic encouragement for indie filmmakers!

Oh, and I love "Every Frame a Painting" 's expansion on Steven Speilberg's owners. SO GOOD!

@Jjm I love your grip truck, I could do with one always on hand. You are spot on that with a rushed time limit, the quick but effective shots add richer layers after a Master. EG “worms eye view” “pull in/out” “zolly” ETC. Time is luxury and on some low budget sets blocking and shot listing is a tiny window of opportunity.

Oh waw thank you for sharing, this was really cool to watch. When we shoot stuff it's always a low budget things and we do things in a very similar way because most of the time we only have the location and crew for a day.

My partner actually wrote a blog about our recent project a couple of weeks ago.

https://www.stage32.com/blog/How-to-Produce-a-TV-Pilot-for-Next-to-Nothing

Like Leya Marincic said this was very interesting. Thank you.

Any time we shoot a narrative project we do extensive preproduction to optimize our time. I've actually created a spreadsheet that let's me calculate how much time we need to shoot something and it's pretty spot on.

I think all 3 roles are crucial to creating an awesome film. The vision from the director, the look of the film to give it an emotion from the audience point of view by the DP, besides the acting. The PD also plays a roll because without a location including small details to create the concept the story would be poorly told.

Corey Robertson Too true. Do you have any suggestions on how a PD and a DP work together?

Honestly, I think the PD role overlooked moreso than any other role, but that may just be a symptom of cost-conscious decision-making. All too often the responsibilities of a PD are put on a director or producer in order to save money (and I've worked on a lot of indie shoots).

What I look for in a Director, I'd say... I look for a passion for film (all film) something similar to my own, and a deep understanding of the story they are about to tell. There have been far too many situations I've been in where the Director is just half baked, and almost always simultaneously being a control freak, and or being downright abusive. This all I think is nothing more than lack of confidence and simply being in far over ones head. It happens too much these days, and many of these projects, including a feature for Blumehouse I shot will likely never be seen by anyone.

Beyond that, I really love it when we can actually collaborate, and develop a shorthand on set that allows us to stay fluid as everything changes around us, but also identify those moments when the film is actually showing itself to us, while we are in the midst of the tempest, tossing us around like rag dolls, we look at each other from across the room in a moment and know, we just got magic, and we are on the right path, regardless of the changes that are happening around us.

Also I love it when a director is adept with the language of color; its many meanings and uses. This is far more important to me, than if they know focal lengths, or camera specifics, etc. Being able to dive deep into the thematics of color and the progression of color through the story in prep, and build many specific looks that we can take with us on the day, and actually proxy out dailies with something so close to the finished look that there is no confusion on anyones part downstream just how any particular scene should look.

LOVE this response, Jorel Odell! Sometimes when you don't know what the outcome will be, it nice to know that the experience is at least enjoyable. Not to say it won't be challenging, but that you feel valued and can contribute in a safe environment. Man, I just love the teamwork aspect of it! That give and take, the back and forth, the whole being more than the sum of its parts - yeah, that's what I live for.

I know this thread has been out for awhile, but I echo all these thoughts. Working as both DP and director I’ve learned much about collaborating and have been blessed to work with amazing people. The combined efforts of a group of talented people with a common creative goal can be spectacular.

Thanks, Willem Lodewijk! Hope to see you around some day!

Good luck Frank. Keep us posted on what you do and learn along the way.

I'm grateful for your encouraging words, Kevin. I will!

Hi @Frank welcome, course sounds cool. Lived Amsterdam years ago, remember stall by bridge that fished herrings out river, gutted them on spot and served with vinegar onions. They probably stopped that now.

Thank you,Debbie. That really sounds like a typical Dutch stall. ;)

Hey, Aaron Marcus! You may get a better response by posting a job listing: https://www.stage32.com/find-jobs/add

Thank you Karen. I really appreciate your comment and suggestion.

Thanks for sharing that. I was surprised; it's a great, flowing look at the wide variety of formats, aspect ratios and creative approaches that make up the very best of the craft today; something in which we can all find inspiration to better our own efforts, whatever the level.

That was cool and inspiring. Made me want to grab my camera this afternoon and shoot something or someone. Thanks.

Ooo, fun! Thanks for sharing! Are you using this for inspiration? What's up next for you?

Not for inspiration really, I've had a love affair with film and photography since childhood. My grand uncle was a portrait photographer with his own studio and I worked as one, for 2 years. But, my passion is writing. My next project for 2021 is, finishing my novel (I'm 1/2 way) that begins in the 1800s to the present (kinda like, Legends of the Fall). It's a family saga about the greed of the Yukon Gold Rush. I was inspired to write it, after working in beautiful, awesome, and amazing, Alaska. And learning about Russian culture up there from my Russian and eastern European colleagues on the cruise ship we worked aboard when I was a photographer. But, I need a more writing-friendly environment. Writing a novel requires a different frame of mind and space, then a screenplay. So, I'm working on greenlighting screenplays I've completed and rewrote in, 2020.