Cinematography

Well I've done a couple of music videos and it's funny because around here the leading point with artists making a music video is if they can do it for cheap or even less. On the other end music producers try to exploit you and try and talk you into working for free because it's good for your career. I've had this happen.

But the funniest thing last year was when music producer and manager of a band tried to tell me that I'm looking at the music video too much as a movie. That I don't need to spend so much time thinking about how to tell the story around it but just shoot a bunch of stuff and then just edit it. He was saying basically the exact opposite of what they said in this video.

In the last music video that we shot (which is not out yet) I wanted to try some new things one was a camera movement that I've been itching to try and I'm glad it worked out great and the other was something that a bunch of people told me that I shouldn't do because it's not going to work and it will come out bad. The thing was I wanted to tell the story in a non linear way so that the the middle of the story showed up at the beginning and then the beginning of the story showed up somewhere in the last two thirds of the video. I'm really happy both of these two things worked out.

I think their final result at around 10:10 is fairly impressive but still looks super fake, like a sitcom car scene. And it's an expensive process (huge white cyc you can back a car into, a bunch of lights, and a decent-size crew). Likely whether this is useful all depends on the size of the film you're making. Obviously on a huge movie where you tow the car with one of those specialized trailers, doing tons of takes with expensive actors... yeah, I can see a rear-projection thing being a more affordable, more controlled option. But I think on small indie budget, I'd rather invest in a car mount and tow the car with my trunk. It just all depends on scale.

Frank Romano Agreed. You'd have to run the numbers to confirm whether or not it's worth it, but I can imagine if you're trying to avoid a company move, location permits, or other security issues with being on-site, this could be an excellent solution. Not to mention - getting to play with fun toys! LOL!

There's actually a Stage 32 member who's been doing green screen solo work - I wonder if he's don this. I'll send Leslie the link for him to comment!

The seemingly handheld shot of streetlights being reflected in the car's surfaces that is completely out of sync with the movement in the rest of the shot utterly ruins the effect. Too bad the execution falls so short of the well established concept.

This is a good idea that is easy to execute and can give wonderful results.

Jorel Odell not sure our budget can swing a thousand a day, but I know you get what you pay for. I appreciate your input especially from a DP's perspective. Looks like we'll start somewhere between 500 and 700 and see who is interested.

Great advice Jorel Odell! I would second this and equally - don't skimp on an audio engineer, either!

Real rates start at a minimum $1000 per day for a real DP. Separate the person from the equipment, they are different and if you are not treating them differently there are other issues. There are lots of equipment rental companies to choose from. Different cameras have different looks so should be chosen based upon the needs of the project not what someone owns and then mistakenly applies to every project.

It is possible to get people on projects for less. Be honest about how much money you have available tot he project. If you lie, we will know and that doesn’t end well. Best is to be good friends with a DP. I’ve done a number of free/extremely low budget short projects for friends. Next would be if the content of the project is near and dear to the person you want. Much can be done for various reasons. There is also the meet and be a thoughtful real person, that has more impact than many think if can. I’ve agreed to projects I was prepared to say no to, just on the basis of meeting and talking to those involved. Meeting in person is worth vastly more than resumes and reels, it is an opportunity to explore aspects of each other and come away KNOWING whether the other person and you are a good fit. Try to arrange an in person meeting, then be yourself. It works very well for both people involved.

Andrew Sobkovich Thanks for these thoughts and insights. I really appreciate your input especially around the personal meetups and your experience there. unfortunately I know we cannot afford 1K a day for anyone, not sure how many short films can, but not this one. I do hope to find someone also passionate about the project, for sure. We haven't officially started our search, but when we do, I'll keep your advice in mind. Best regards,

Joe

Joe look for recommendations from people you know. Once you get names, arrange an intro as it is better than a cold-call. Meet the people. Since you don't have a lot of money, the person you want is someone who is interested in more than money. Pitch yourself and your story honestly. Many of us have said yes during such approaches for many reasons. People may say no for many reasons, some not always obvious. But if you don't ask they cannot possibly say yes. There is a basic approach in low budget work of throwing creativity at a problem instead of throwing money. Finding a DP is just another problem.

One of my favorite videos in defense of black and white films: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B13r456NUy0

“Looks cinematic” is one of those phrases that comes from very personal interpretations of images. It’s a valid comment but trying to put an exact meaning on it can be a little frustrating. Pictures shot on film with lights that are full spectrum do have a different look than some of the current pictures. The inherent look and response of the film stocks, combined with full spectrum lighting makes a huge difference in the final product. Changes in art direction as a a reflection of cultural norms at different times and in different places obviously have a major effect upon the look. Disney “magic” look? Please do elaborate on that one.

Contrast is a major component when determining the effective clarity of human vision. The older B&W film stocks did not have the ability to resolve anywhere near what current top level digital cameras can. Add to this the far less sharp lenses of the period and the MTF of the film/lens system is significantly less than what we have available currently. There are some chemical interactions in film processing between highly exposed and slightly exposed parts of an image that give an enhanced boundary between he two called the adjacency effect. There is a somewhat similar effect in electronic imaging with edge enhancement. It looks sharper, sort of. “Fool the eye” is a useful guideline here.

When comparing B&W to color for sharpness remember that the B&W film is just reproducing tones, whereas the colour images we currently have from digital are almost exclusively derived from single sensors using a Bayer Pattern of filtration and the resulting reduced resolution of the individual colour channels. So something that is red can only be 1/4 the sharpness of the available resolution. The emulsion layers in film stock actually yield somewhat similar results to Bayer Pattern sensors in this area.

Your observations and questions are to the point, but now think of how to apply contrast and visual acuity to the images you create.

Such a beautiful reflection on a great artist. It just goes to show - as a director, it is totally worth it to become a fan of the work of your teammates. Thank you for sharing!

Donate to a local film school or to a sound stage like Kaufman studios. They got flatbed trucks to pickup.

There are no schools in the NYC area (that I know of) where the students shoot anything on film. Kaufman would have no use for it, they aren't an editing house. Calling DuArt would be longshot.

JD Hartman My film school has hundreds of 16mm movies in their vaults and I know other film schools have 16mm libraries. Having a steenbeck is one way to view them.

Thank you to all who have made suggestions! I’m following all the positive ones. I know there is a place for it.

I cut on a Steenbeck in the late 90’s in film school. That’s the best way to learn because it forces the student to think twice, cut once. Sadly, the only steenbeck remaining at UT is a display piece. If I had brick & mortar location and deeper pockets for shipping/maintenance, I’d buy it... but I don’t.

Are you looking for student cinematographers? Will you be directing or producing? What is the film about?

Hi Karen. I am Directing and Producing this film. I'm looking for film students that want to be a cinematographer and/or sound mixer for this Indie short film. It's a romance story about a man that reconnects with his wife after being apart for many years. That's about it. Thanks for reaching out.

Jeff

Hi Jeffrey, I'm Morvarid, i'm rally interest on become a Cinematography myself, I'm on this path for a few years now, I'm currently in LA. It will be nice to connect and see what is your film about, I'll appreciate the opportunity. You can check my web site for more info, www.morfilms.net I'm from Irán and Directed and Cinematography my first film in Thailand call Bangkok's fear, you can check the trailer on my site, I'm doing some projects in LA at this moment, but it will be good to connect by mail mor@morfilms.net. Thanks, have a good day!

Awesome, thanks for sharing! Is this an on-going podcast? What was your big take-away from this interview?

It is ongoing.... This is the second time I've spoken to Larry on my podcast ... He's very generous sharing his lessons learned and extensive experience

479 Episodes in my archive https://soundcloud.com/stuart-wright-3

Purely from a technical position, there is zero reason to give camera direction. On the set, the camera people are going to shoot from various angles to give enough coverage to the editor. Wide establishing shots, medium shots, close ups for people speaking, and b-roll so there are cut away shots for the editor. Many camera people are going handheld these days, working all sorts of tricks. So, to write CU on on some actor talking doesn’t add anything.

Christopher Phillips Duly noted! Thank you.

Vincent Turner shots are planned during storyboarding.

Great question and discussion. Ready for one of my lengthy humble opinion diatribes? There are countless long standing rules in film making. Some will argue they can be broken at will, or in some circumstances. Here is a fact: If a writer wants to work effectively with experienced crew, circulate their script to people who have seen and used scripts before, and be taken seriously, they do not put camera angles in a script. NONE. The script is action and dialogue and description of important story elements to be depicted. It is not a shot list or a storyboard. The reasons for this approach are many, but 3 stand out. First, (and this also ties to the 2nd and 3rd reasons ) script format does not have a provision for shots. There is no graceful or useful way to put shots in a script when writing it. Not only that, script format does allow for it once the script is completed and printed; 1 of the 2 reasons there is so much room on a script page is so that anyone holding said script can make copious margin notes of their own. TONS of notes. But later. The second reason there is no shot listed is that the shot list will change. A writer has a movie in their head. That's not the same movie the director or DP have. But even if writer is certain they will personally direct and shoot the script on their own, once they tech scout the location and breakdown the script to a schedule, shots WILL change. The saying "Get everyone on the same page" is never more true than with a script. If you plant the visuals in people's heads in the script, you will create confusion later. The third reason for never putting shots in a script is timing. If you format your script correctly, each page will average 60 seconds on screen and are divided by calculation into 1/8ths of a page ( FWIW, 1/2 a page is still called 4/8ths). Adding unneeded info like shots makes the job of the script supervisor, AD and UPM particularly more difficult. How exactly does one go through the script to schedule a 2 -3/8, 1 -4/8ths and two 1/8th of a page scenes? You can't. If someone handed me a script with shots burned into, respectfully, I would hand it back. You can write : "We see" such and such, then " Another angle " of such and such if and when there is good reason. That's about it.

Rather than describing shots from the perspective of the DP describe what the audience sees. Read scripts of movies you love to see how this is done professionally. Here are the first lines of the script for Denis Villeneuve's movie The Arrival:

FADE IN: EXT. LAKE HOUSE - SUNSET

The sky is a shimmering expanse of stars, packed together.

You see how nobody tells the DP how to shoot it? Just as briefly as possible describe what we see while maintaining a literary tone.