Cinematographer vs. Producer

It's not the producers who would say that. They don't care what it's shot on, and might not even be able to name a camera in the first place.

In fact, it's far more likely to be a noob cinematographer or director to say all that.
 
They obviously haven't heard about LIKE CRAZY, which recently won Sundance and sold for 4 million.

Great film, wonderful performances.

Oh, and it was shot on the 7D.

We mainly shoot Red Mx but for learning filmmaking and no-budget movies, DSLRs are great.

Put one on a glidecam and say hello to perfectly smooth footage. Don't shoot bricks ot striped shirts, use a tripod and dolly instead of handheld, and transcode to a 422 or preferably 444 codec and you can grade and chroma to your heart's content.

Sure, DSLRs are a step-down in quality from higher-end cams, but most of the audience won't notice, and if it means some good low budget films like LIKE CRAZY wouldn't get made without them, we should be encouraging more productions with them.

BTW, HOUSE was shot on the 5Dmkii, not the 7D.
 
no need to explain this like that,even if people want to shoot feature film with cellphones - let them.Its the story that matters,audience dont care about dynamic range,resolved detail or aliasing,they care about story,ive seen terrible opies of movies on my vhs tapes and i watched them till the very end without complaints ,causr i liked the movie ,so... this vid is just some noob whining and trying to be funny.
And DSLRs can look amazing in good hands.
 
Yeah the idea that the *audience* will resent a movie being shot on a 7d is fantasy. It's only other pros that will care in the least.
 
bwwd said:
no need to explain this like that,even if people want to shoot feature film with cellphones - let them.Its the story that matters,audience dont care about dynamic range,resolved detail or aliasing,they care about story,ive seen terrible opies of movies on my vhs tapes and i watched them till the very end without complaints ,causr i liked the movie ,so... this vid is just some noob whining and trying to be funny.
And DSLRs can look amazing in good hands.
Click to expand...

I don't think many people understand our job. Our job is to use technology to tell the story... the audience will not notice the DR, DoF, and other things overtly, but the visual language supports mood, character and emotion.

So shoot a feature film with cellphones and you'll be taking the skills of the cinematographer and dedicating them to damage control and workarounds versus keeping his/her focus on enhancing the story with visuals... visuals the audience will feel, but perhaps not see. Our job is to give the story mood, feeling, character and more. Our work translates into emotion and we can change a scene by lighting and lensing. Our job is plenty important, and which camera is used does not necessarily effect the audience/story directly but helps limit or free the cinematographer to do his job. If the cinematographer is free to do his job with great and flexible tools, he can really focus on the art. If he has poor, or cheap tools, he'll have to focus much of his attention to technically achieving things that other cameras can do out of the box, and then if there is time, focus on the true art.

He Is A True Artist​
Amid the strange ingredients of Hollywood — a world typified by the human swarm and the artistic abstraction — there is a figure unknown to the chants of promoters and glorifiers. His hand has rarely held the scepter of public acclaim, his brow is not crowned with the envied olive leaf which so often settles upon the lordly producer and queens of beauty. This figure, a giant in his industry, is the cameraman — the sine qua non of a profession which often boasts that no one in its ranks is indispensable. No one, I say, save the cameraman.


I believe this is why:
He is the custodian of the heart of filmmaking as the writers are of its soul …
His tool is a box with a glass window, lifeless until he breathes into it his creative spirit and injects into its steel veins the plasma of his imagination …
The product of his camera, and therefore of his magic, means many things to many persons — fulfillment of an idea, an ambition ... realization of dreams …
He is the judge who applies the laws of dramatic effect in complete coordination and fellowship with the director who interprets those laws …
Light, composition, treatment are his instruments of power, which he wields with intelligence and sensitiveness to bring to full bloom the meaning of his art …
His versatile management of an intricate mechanism yields astonishing results in mood, emotion, dramatic effect …
A slanting shadow becomes a shattering portent of doom …
A lifeless chair instills the feeling of infinite sorrow …
A dead wall awakens a foreboding of plunging terror …
A flash of a man’s face rises to the grandeur of drama, inspiring and ennobling …
Before his wizardry, wrinkles fade from the faces of Hollywood’s ageless, imperishable beauties … chins take on lovely contours … years melt away ….
Yes, the technique of the cameraman is the technique of artistic vivisection that lays bare the inner workings of our profession. If art can be said to be the expression of beauty in form, color, sound, shape or movement, then it must be said that same art is the art of the cameraman — expressed in the boundless reaches of his imagination.
For his patience and singleness of purpose in a most arduous work, he is eminently deserving of that which is justly said of few men: “He is a true artist.”


— Cecil B. DeMille​
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Well , if movie aims at "cellphone" feel, then you can shoot on cellphone, but for 35mm film quality ,imo DSLR's are cheapest closest thing right now,hey even 35mm adapters and minidv cam would be good enough to make some quality stuff,that could be even cheaper.
I agree with some cameraas its easier to get some quality shots wile with others you have to try harder.
I think if people work with better and better cams they tend to forget how it was with 0 budget and they think " how people can shoot with something like this".They have right to do so ,they work for big money now ,but some people are still with 0 budget.
 
No matter how many times this comes up, it's always a good read, especially when someone can have a sense of humor about it! It's good to see the sides fight for what they believe in. That's the sign of caring about what you do(for the most part). I think that a lot of folks tend to forget their past when they look to the future though. Some of it's ego too though. You have a lot of guys with the "how can you use something like this" attitude but then you also have dudes that have their pick of the camera litter and still go back and use cheap cameras just because they want to see if they can.

I'm now a DSLR guy but I remember my HV20 fondly, I also remember VHS fondly too. I'll never go back and use either one though. My GHx cameras just do things too well for me to go back. Maybe in the future, IF I can get to a place to have the decision to do so, I'll spring for something bigger and better. Until then, I spend my money on better sets, better lighting, better locations, better food for the talent, and so forth. The DSLRs are good enough for what I do now and what I think I'll be doing in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top