emretufekci
Well-known member
I don't know if I quite agree that things can happen just as fast and accomplish the same results....If you have someone that's not able to look at just the picture and another to watch only the story, surely things will be skipped over. Not only that, but I feel like while the DP lights the set, it's a good time for the director to prep his actors on the coming scene. I would imagine it would be a bit harder for the director to do that if he's busy lighting the set and thinking about technical problems that could be arising.
I mean, sure it can be done, but I don't know if it's the most efficient. I feel like if you did do that you would probably pass off a lot of your responsibility onto your gaffer, and if you're going to pass that off, then why even be the DP?
I think I can only speak from my experience for why I would choose to DP and Direct and what advantage it may have.I came up through the ranks and have been in the business for nearly 20 years. The technology and workflow is second nature to me and I enjoy the company of exceptional support crew in my productions.If I feel passionate about a project and I would want to be in charge of everything, but because I am also very well experienced as a DP I can run the crews without having to interpret what I want visually to another person.I do not leave my responsibilities to the Gaffer, AC or Camera Op but I cannot do it without their support. I run my crews and they run their departments.Yes there are challenges when I am sitting behind a monitor during a take and I am solely focused in the acting. Sometimes I do get tunnel vision and have to depend on the eyes of the Key grip or AC to ensure nothing went wrong.I am not an advocate of running shows like this, I am just saying there are exceptions. I trust the DP's I hire and enjoy their work but sometimes you want to move thing along a little faster and do it yourself.
I do not:
-Direct and do Steadicam
-Ask the camera person to DP
-Mix UPM with AD jobs