what should i call my self on my card

Cinemotographer, Director of Photography, Camera Operator... or just nothing at all. That way you can do anything you want. Mine is blank as a title right now, as I'm a shooter, editor, producer, graphic designer, etc. I'm thinking about changing it to Cheif Creatologist though...
 
If you are deciding between Cinematographer, Videographer, or Director of Photography... Director of Photography will serve you best.

I was once under the impression that a videographer worked in video (has a slight negative subtext), and a cinematographer worked in film. Although since then I've witnessed many times, the cinematographer title used in video productions but NOT vice versa.

Then I was under the impression the difference between a cinematographer and a DP was that a Cinematographer was both DP and Camera Operator... while the Director of Photography has a separate camera operator, making him the director of photography. But then again Roger Deakins does all of his own operating... So that again was a false distinction.

Recently, I was watching an interview with Steven Poster (see it at FilmNut online series with jeff schubert) and he seems to describe a cinematographer as someone who does commercials and little stuff, not big films. (I am paraphrasing)

So it seems they are rather interchangeable but have strong subtexts and differing meanings from person to person.

In summary and my humble opinion, a videographer is for weddings and low budget video productions. A cinematographer is a name with more class, but nothing can beat the respect or clarity of what the 'Director of Photography' title means.

My 2cents.
 
Last edited:
I have my name and owner/operator under it.

Since my company does a little bit of everything. Basically we are Inverse Paradigm Studios and Visual Effects. But then I started adding other divisions and adding to that company name was a no-go. So I just consolidated to Inverse Paradigm Studios. And my card reflects that I own and operate it. And inherently does most of the work.
 
I've been wondering about this for a while. Thought about having a few different cards, but this seems like the best way to go.
 
'Living Art Treasure' :)

Seriously, Film Maker is probably the simplest cover-all description that will be understood by everyone
 
Yes, but if you are doing commercial work - film maker doesnt really have any meaning.

I use a subtext under my company name to promote what we do and then just my name without title.
 
What is the majority of your work? If you specialize in films (indies, features, etc.) use Film Maker. If more of what you do is commercial work, think about Cinematographer. However if you lead a crew, consider Director of Photography.

Or, go with the British term "Lighting Cameraman". It covers all the bases and sound sort of classy.
 
7/24 said:
What is the majority of your work? If you specialize in films (indies, features, etc.) use Film Maker. If more of what you do is commercial work, think about Cinematographer. However if you lead a crew, consider Director of Photography.

Or, go with the British term "Lighting Cameraman". It covers all the bases and sound sort of classy.
Click to expand...

I think you are trying to give good advice, but you are very incomplete and not concise, leaving your last statement rather vague. The job on your business card should reflect your job. Simple as that. If you are a one man band, use film maker. Otherwise you know what you do, and state it on your card.
-----------------------------------------------------
To continue the thread:

I assumed the person was a cinematographer when I wrote my first response. My assumption was based on the fact that he posted in the "Cinematography" section of DVXuser. Since then, we have heard from a bunch of "one man band" film makers who have simply clarified that they just use the term 'film maker'.

The truth is, if you are truly working on a professional level, most people specialize in one job.

Film Maker, is a great blanket title which will cover all jobs but on the same token is rather vague. You can get clients with the title 'film maker' and impress them, but when working with others in the film industry, they aren't looking for 'film makers'... They are looking for crew members. It is a good idea to have multiple cards. You decide which is most appropriate for each situation.

I have a card that says "Director of Photography". I use this when I meet people who can use a DP of my current caliber. I have another card which reads "Camera Department". I use this card if I meet other great DP's I could learn from or if Steven Spielburg and I are stuck in a broken elevator and I don't want to try and convince him to stop using Janusz Kaminski.

'Film maker' is most appropriate for those who are dealing with others outside the industry (clients, etc).
 
Chances are if you're still thinking of what to write on your card, you don't have enough experience to be called a cinematographer or Director of Photography yet. I don't mean that in a snarky way - you could very well be good enough for those titles. I'm just speaking out of averages here.

Besides, no matter what your card says you are, your reel can say it better (or worse, depending). To add to that, no matter what your card or reel says, other professionals in the business will know with a few minutes of working with you on set whether or not you qualify for that title.

So try out whichever title you think suits you most. If you stop getting jobs, then you're probably overhyping yourself.

All of that non-offensively-intended stuff aside, I have to agree to a degree with Ryan's interpretation of cinematographer vs. Director of Photography.

The Director of Photography indicates that there is a Photography department and that you are capable not only of leading it, but that it is there to begin with. A cameraman on a corporate interview with one grip is not a DP. To most extents, he is not a cinematographer. He is a cameraman, or a lighting cameraman.

I think that until you have a camera/lighting department to direct, you can't be considered a Director of Photography. A lot of commercials have quite a considerable camera/lighting department, so I would consider the DP on a commercial to be just that, a DP.

Incidently, many feature film DPs get their starts in or make layover money with commercial gigs. The two mediums (feature vs. commercial) are only different in their end usage.
 
SeanEmer said:
Chances are if you're still thinking of what to write on your card, you don't have enough experience to be called a cinematographer or Director of Photography yet. I don't mean that in a snarky way - you could very well be good enough for those titles. I'm just speaking out of averages here.

Besides, no matter what your card says you are, your reel can say it better (or worse, depending). To add to that, no matter what your card or reel says, other professionals in the business will know with a few minutes of working with you on set whether or not you qualify for that title.

So try out whichever title you think suits you most. If you stop getting jobs, then you're probably overhyping yourself.

All of that non-offensively-intended stuff aside, I have to agree to a degree with Ryan's interpretation of cinematographer vs. Director of Photography.

The Director of Photography indicates that there is a Photography department and that you are capable not only of leading it, but that it is there to begin with. A cameraman on a corporate interview with one grip is not a DP. To most extents, he is not a cinematographer. He is a cameraman, or a lighting cameraman.

I think that until you have a camera/lighting department to direct, you can't be considered a Director of Photography. A lot of commercials have quite a considerable camera/lighting department, so I would consider the DP on a commercial to be just that, a DP.

Incidently, many feature film DPs get their starts in or make layover money with commercial gigs. The two mediums (feature vs. commercial) are only different in their end usage.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with Sean, some titles are throw around a little to easy. I have been in the business for 15 years and most of those years were spent on very high profile gigs. But I was a cameraman, I started calling myself DoP only 2 years ago. This was from accumulation of respect for the masters of the art and my own judgement of my experience/abilities.

Of course a title that we call ourselves does not get us gigs, pay for gear or generate clientele. It is our experience and knowledge.

I know my way around a DaVinci suite but I would never call myself a colorist.I just dont have the experience. I would recommend a title that you would feel comfortable with professionally and ethically.

I used the term Lighting cameraman for many years. I generally reccomend the same to my younger colleagues.

PS: I do not mean to be disrespectful to anybody, this is purely my opinion.
 
You should call yourself
"Jack Daniel Stanley" and instruct your employers to make checks out to same and send them to a forthcoming Brooklyn address :)

I have "director / writer" on mine and give it out to people for all manner of videography jobs. I mostly shoot people's shorts for them that have no idea how to make a film, or do inner office corporate stuff. I guess I should get a corporate card that says videographer / editor / colorist on it. Probably not best to do it my way, but I don't really want those jobs too much :)

Most of my jobs I get through the internet so I don't use a card that much.
 
Jack Daniel Stanley said:
...I guess I should get a corporate card that says videographer / editor / colorist on it...
Click to expand...
I thought about doing this once before as well. I didn't ever go through with it though because I was worried that some of the people I'd be handing that card over to would be producers or such that might take more notice of a 'writer/director'. I think it was easier to explain and maybe even 'expected' by most people in the industry that "I had larger aspirations" other than whatever it was I was doing for them. That seems to be common with just about everyone in this business.

Even though I may only edit a piece for someone, I think they see you differently if you're listing yourself as a 'writer/director" (which I do on my card). I can see this backfiring as well... Some people want very task specific people working for them. So, maybe they stop calling you or never call you at all because they want an editor, JUST an editor, nothing more. So maybe you lose some work, but then in the end, do you want to be an editor or a writer/director?

I would put whatever you eventually want to become on your card, nothing more. That's why I don't have DP anywhere listed on my card even though I shoot more than anything else. It's a lot of fun and I love shooting. If it eventually becomes my career, so be it, I'll enjoy it tremendously. But it's not my end game and whenever I pull that card, I'm reminded that I need to stay focused to my original goal if I expect to ever make it true.
 
Like many here before me I don't give much attention to titles, but it's important to clearly communicate your skills and responsibilities.
I'm a documentary filmmaker who directs and do most of my own camera work, so director was a given. But I struggled with the Director of Photography or Cinematographer, etc...
I end up with Cinematographer since this is the term that better covers my duties.
You can find precise descriptions and the breakdown of these terms on line.
fyi, Sven Nykvist (probably the best cinematographer ever) always called himself: a cameraman.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top