cinematographer to director

Steve Laramie

Steve Laramie

Veteran
Im about half way through high school and Iv had my heart set on being a DP the whole time. I did 3 farely major films and a bunch of smaller ones. I wanted to get more into directing so I can shoot a feature before I go to film school. Anyone have any recommendations on how to transition. My concern is that I would be to focused on the cinematography and not be an actors director.
 
You don't have a thing to worry about. You aren't even finished high school and you're wondering if you can make the transition? You've got time on your side, it's up to you what you do with it.

Your concern about you being too focused on the DP side of things is your choice - you can choose to be more focused on actors, or better yet - even things out. I recommend the book Directing Actors by Judith Weston (http://www.amazon.com/Directing-Actors-Memorable-Performances-Television/dp/0941188248). It will give you a great starting point, I just finished this book recently and it is very interesting to read! Of course there are some other great books as well, which you can find by doing a search here.

So there's really nothing to worry about in terms of making a transition, in fact, I wouldn't even think of it that way - as a director you need a certain amount of skills in many areas. Some are more technical than others. So it's more just building skills in those different areas. Sounds like so far most of your time has been spent on the cinematography side of things, which is important for any director, so now it's just time to slowly work on the other areas. Start working with some actors. Talk to them.

I also wouldn't be too caught up in trying to make a feature before you go to film school, if that's what you decide. It's better to make 10 really solid short films than 1 ultra low budget mediocre feature in these early stages.
 
Last edited:
If you are still in high school, I would strongly recommend joining your school's drama club if you haven't already. The best way to learn how to direct actors is to act yourself, and know what kind of direction has worked the best for you. I can't believe how many directors have never acted before. I feel it should be a necessity.
 
ChrisHurn said:
You don't have a thing to worry about. You aren't even finished high school and you're wondering if you can make the transition? You've got time on your side, it's up to you what you do with it.

Your concern about you being too focused on the DP side of things is your choice - you can choose to be more focused on actors, or better yet - even things out. I recommend the book Directing Actors by Judith Weston (http://www.amazon.com/Directing-Actors-Memorable-Performances-Television/dp/0941188248). It will give you a great starting point, I just finished this book recently and it is very interesting to read! Of course there are some other great books as well, which you can find by doing a search here.

So there's really nothing to worry about in terms of making a transition, in fact, I wouldn't even think of it that way - as a director you need a certain amount of skills in many areas. Some are more technical than others. So it's more just building skills in those different areas. Sounds like so far most of your time has been spent on the cinematography side of things, which is important for any director, so now it's just time to slowly work on the other areas. Start working with some actors. Talk to them.

I also wouldn't be too caught up in trying to make a feature before you go to film school, if that's what you decide. It's better to make 10 really solid short films than 1 ultra low budget mediocre feature in these early stages.
Click to expand...

Directing Actors is a strongly recommended book in any film circle in general, so take Chris's advice. I have the book myself and it's a good read.

Some directors are more on the technical side, some more on the theatrical side. Old school directors were more focused on the performances and the story, like a theatrical production, while new school directors are stereotypically more focused on technical and camera details. Neither is wrong, but ideally you should have both in mind and try to pay equal attention to them both. If you have no technical or aesthetic drives, in today's industry it's very hard to make an impact. It's a lot about style and visual panache, and as a cinematographer you hopefully bring that to the table as a director, so that's a good thing not a bad thing. Directing actors and getting credible performances is especially important at low budget levels.

A book I was reading recently was talking about this. Essentially, if you're a major director, you would be better suited to have tons of technical knowledge and understanding of how to make a great shot than you would lots of theatrical knowledge of how to get a great performance. The math is simple -- if you have great style, the money is there to do all kinds of "cool" stuff, and more than that, you're going to be working with nothing short of B-list actors, probably high B-listers, up-and-comers, and A-listers. They already know how to act, you don't have to teach them. So, sure, if you're not an actors director, the performances may be passable or good instead of very good to great, but that doesn't affect whether the film is good entertainment and makes money nearly as much as its visual style. That may irk some old school directors, but it's the truth of the industry. That being said, how many of us are directing major features? Nobody I know here. So we have to rely on a great story and great acting. Mediocre acting or bad acting will kill our films. All we have to offer that Hollywood might not be able to compete with is our great storytelling, which depends on believable, emotionally invested actors. So for the beginning director I would say you need more like 75% ability to work with actors and 25% technical skills (you can hire people who can make sure your product looks polished and professional, but you don't need too badly to show how "different" and amazing visually you are, as long as you can show you can tell a story and so with SOME sense of style, at least).
 
I'd pretty much echo what everyone else has said. Filmmaking is a journey that takes in pretty much every other art, every other discpline. Writing, Photography, Music etc

As a Director you ideally need to be a very rounded individual, who is aware of a great many things.

There is no set way to get there though. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses andit's all about playing to your strengths and improving weaknesses over time, or getting people in who can instantly correct those perceived weaknesses. In truth, you can make a good, perhaps even great film without a particularly "great" Director.

One of the things to look out for from a Directing point of view, is that you are trying to tell a story. The emotional aspects of the film are more important in that aspect that the film quality. Some people say you should never edit a film that you shot yourself. I don't ever talk in absolute terms when it comes to filmmaking, but it's something to bear in mind.

Cinematographers take great pleasure in beautiful shots, many times more than they do with performances. The audience are different. If they are involved in the story, they won't notice (or care) about a slight mistake incontinuity of lighting or a mistake in the camera movement.
 
Stick to cinematography! I was liking where you were going, Steve. :(

"I don't really like directing. I've had a good relationship with actors, but I can do what I do and back off. I don't want that much romancing. I don't want them to call me up at two in the morning saying, 'I don't know who I am." -Gordon Willis, ASC
Click to expand...
 
lairhair said:
ryans probably right. I am still thinking. Has anyone done both? Anyone as in famous.
Click to expand...

Don't worry if anyone has done it before. You can do both if you wanted to, and then when somebody asks that very same question, we can use your name as an example.
 
wow. I could lay out a severely long winded answer but I'll try and keep it simple.

I think the best way to go (and this is only IMHO) is...

writer ---> DP ---> Director

because if you consider yourself a storyteller (writer) 1st, then the story, the characters are going to be paramount... then learn the technical grit (DOF, lighting, composition, etc) study art and cinema religiously.... then directing becomes almost easy.... a director is more like a maestro thats around to keep the wheels turning and the production moving along... the writer and the technicians do all the leg work, so to speak (a generality of course)

so to me being a Director means being a writer/cinematographer
 
I started my career as a still photographer. My entrance into the film realm was convoluted.

Photographer for a professional magazine.
Writer for same magazine.
Videographer for Paintcheck Productions - Personal Endeavor
Then I got out of the paintball industry and got into theatre.

Lighting designer for two different productions. Worked on acting, as my ex was a self-entitled "triple threat" Honestly, she could sing, that's it...but I digress.

Hated acting and sucked at it. So I started shooting again. Decided one day to make a short film. Which I shot. And we really didn't direct. It just happened.

Then I went to film school. Realized I was a good DP. Then realized I didn't like shooting. Since there was never any creative freedom in shot selection or anything. I just made the shot on paper look pretty and happen. Unfortunately I am trained in large budget production stuff. So doing it with limited equipment was a challenge.

I tried my hand at producing. And I dropped the project almost immediately. Bad experience. All the while I was working as an Assistant Director.

Eventually I started working with actors again in the underground theatre. Realized I was good at it. And realized I loved it. The first film I directed failed epically on the technical end. But the acting was great. I then figured - this is what I want to do.

I have the creative control I want, and I can really make the film happen. The transition occurs when you actually do it. You don't know what you are good at until you try. I am arguably one of the better DoP's here at my school - not to make it sound like I have an ego - but I can deliver a product that stands up, and people like my work. Which is why I am called out to so many films. Which is also why I pass on most of them. Because I don't like it.

I don't get to direct as many projects as I would like. They are mostly my own I direct. But it is a process. There is no set way to get into directing. It just happens. And you are either good at it, or you suck at it. Or you are okay at it. Give a try at it with a short. And see what happens.

Either way, you aren't going to learn how to direct by reading a book. It helps, but it is the practical experience that really teaches you what works and what doesn't. And what works with someone might not work with another person. Just know that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top