Do You Present Yourself as a Cinematographer?

[snowleopard]

This is not a baiting question. I was just pondering if/how the term has perhaps changed in the last few years with the plethora of digital video productions, and infusion of multi-skilled filmmakers out there.

In a sense, a decade ago you didn't dare call yourself a cinematographer (or director of photography) unless you had done that for years on big film or TV sets. But things are rapidly changing, and modern digital video equipment has allowed average people to learn a great deal on their own, perhaps even all the way up to putting together a fairly impressive reel, and calling one's self a cinematographer, and not needing to be shy about that.

 

[taormina]

Well, the word Cinema comes from the Greek word Kinema...which means motion. So a cinematographer is one who records motion. You could do it on a PD150, or you could do it on a Genesis, or you could do it on an Arri 535.

Realistically though, a cinematographer is one who has climbed the ranks of the camera department. He was a gofer on set. then he became a 2nd AC. Then a 1st AC. Then finally got his big break to DP his first flick.

A DP is an expert on cameras, lenses, lighting, and shot composition. He may not know how to use every last gadget, but he knows how to accomplish the director's goals and paint with light.

If all you've done is wedding videos, then I'm sorry, you're not a DP (in my book).

In order for you to call yourself a cinematographer you should've done dozens of quality shorts, music vids, commercials, and maybe a feature or two. Ideally you should be familiar with both digital and film. This is a journeyman title and your resume ought to show it.

I shoot all the time. I own a 3 ton lighting and grip package. A camera, 35mm adapter and a set of primes. I have shot tv pilots, music vids, tons of shorts and will shoot my first feature this winter, and......I am not a Cinematographer. I refuse to call myself a cinematographer or DP. I'm just not ready for that moniker. It's THAT heavy to me.....

 

[snowleopard]

I'm a little long in the tooth, so I tend to find myself thinking the way you do. I have a really hard time calling myself a camera op, even though that's what I do for a living (if barely scraping by), because I'm not a camera op that can shoot all cameras blindfolded. Heck, I haven't handled a film camera in a few years, and even then didn't have them figured out. So I'm shy about that term (my business card has no title). But this may because I'm somewhat old school.

However, here's an example of what I mean. Take a look at the film Imprint, by Aravance. It was a runner up in the SpyFest, Directed by Van Blumreich and shot by Josh Reese. I think it's a great looking short film. If Josh could repeat this style of work, or equal it in other styles, and presented himself as a modern digital cinematographer specializing in short works like this, I guess I wouldn't really have a problem with him calling himself that.

Ten years ago, if he would have said that he would have been laughed out of town. Now days, not really so me thinks.

(I should note I used Josh as an example because I do not know him, at all. Zero. Never once even exchanged random thoughts on message boards, let alone PM's or e-mail, or Van. I actually had to look up their names before this post).

 

[puredrifting]

Hi Snow:

I totally agree with Adam. In my IMDB credits, I have a ton as a cinematographer, but I didn't submit most of those, the producers did. I am a producer who learned how to light from cinematographers I hire. I have always been into still photography, love to light and know how to setup good looking shots but I have huge, gaping holes in my knowledge.

I do shoot and light for other producers though. I am currently working on a theatrical doc about the life, music and times of a major rock star. This will be in theaters as well as TV and DVD eventually so I have been thinking of having a credit as the Brits do of "lighting cameraman" because I feel that is a better description of what I do. I mostly work alone, I rarely have a crew of grips and gaffers and I light everything myself. So to me, it seems a bit pretentious to be "director of photography". Since it's a doc, it consists of interviews, b-roll of rehearsals, tabletop. No acting, no actors, it's not a narrative film.

Tough call these days. But no, I don't consider myself a DP, I consider myself a cameraman who knows how to light and does it all himself usually.

Dan

 

[snowleopard]

Yes, it's an interesting quandary of sorts. For example, I feel somewhat comfortable saying I can work grip on a big set. But I wouldn't for a second call myself a gaffer.

But when you get to where we're headed in the world with HD and computers and the net and such, with more and more quality productions made on a very low budget, when do you get to the point where the title of your work isn't solely determined by your work on large, professional productions?

Perhaps another thing I'm getting at, is that there's this old school creed that says you become job X by spending years in the system working your way up. You know, go to film school, then work as a PA for a year, then a grip for a year, then a second AC for two years, then a focus puller for three years, then a camera op for four years. Then you can start offering your skills as a cinematographer.

But digital video is turning that all out of whack. While people still work their way up the system, more and more people jump in, and learn it all on the fly, producing good results, and this is all they'll try to do. They won't ever try to work their way through the system, ever. And with the way the world is changing, what do they call themselves in the context with which they work? It's a bit puzzling to me, which is why I brought up cinematographer, because it's one of the most sacred titles, of sorts.

A corollary may be this: If you score small, good quality films using Garage Band, Acid, CinemaScore and Sonicfire, and are good at it, but can't play an instrument nor understand music theory, do you call yourself a composer or offer your skills as such on small productions if that's all you seek to do?