Mr. 3,000

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

No, not the Bernie Mac film.

I decided to go low key for my 3,000th post and keep it 'in the family' in the Cinematography forum. I was hoping to have some badass video of me riding down on a large crane turret, leaning on a Panavision Millennium package and doing a Wes Anderson American Express style walk and talk as I casually bark orders at hustling crew members. Sadly I miscalculated the time it would take to reach that point in my career in accordance to when the next 1,000 post mark would arrive. Hopefully that can be post 4,000? haha.

So it's been about 13 months since the big 2,000th . Since that time I've left Panavision and have been working as a freelance director of photography or camera assistant. I shot my first feature length documentary, currently in post, which was an eight week adventure in rural England. Countless short films, commercials, and student films later, I'm still having a blast in this crazy city of Los Angeles. My goal for the end of 2010, is to get some solid and well funded feature length narratives, shoot some higher profile music videos, and join the electricians union (long story).

Anyway, just like last year, there isn't a video... however I will not leave you empty handed, and this time it is more then my photograph/autograph :happy:.

I am currently writing a near impossible venture to express my ideas and approaches to lighting. It is a never ending, constantly overlapping art with billions of possibilites all hinging on the context of the scene. :shocked: I'm doing a decent job.

I have 'finished' the first three parts of the series, which I have titled "Why We Need Light". I am making them available to you guys before I publish on my site. Think of it as a test screening. Feel free to read the three articles and leave feedback. Of course I'll be inevitably going back and revising these first articles, but I'm hoping they will lay the ground work for the others that are currently being molded into something acceptable.

The first article is Why We Need Light: The Introduction
The second article is Why We Need Light: Shape and Depth
The third article is Why We Need Light: Direct Attention

When I launch them on my website (when there is a proper link posted) I will have made the file sizes smaller. For now you'll have to put up with 15-20mb files.

Feel free to leave any comments, suggestions, or etc about what you think I did right, wrong, or completely forgot.

Thanks guys.

The future articles are not fully organized yet, but it will discuss the other uses light has to story. Those include subjects such as revealing character, revealing state of mind, emphasizing motion, creating mood, arcing within story, and more. I'm tired so I can't list or remember all the aesthetic uses of lighting off the top of the noggin.

So thank you everyone who visits the cinematography boards. It's been a great 3,000 posts, and I apologize for perhaps bombing this section on a daily basis.... considering I spend about 2/3rds of my posts here in the Cinematography section and 1/3 in the cafe! I rarely even venture out of this area anymore.

Best,

- Ryan

 

[notharrylume]

Ryan:

Thanks very much for this. Clearly a lot of work, but very much worth the effort. I enjoyed every page.

I especially liked the screen grabs, which were very clear and properly contrasty, and illustrated your points well. It was great to see such a variety of eras represented, showing that good photography never goes out of style.

I have one small criticism. I think you contradicted yourself with the Garden State example. You imply a preference to the second image whereas I think that the first image is far superior, and probably serves the story better. It is a visual pun in which the character literally blends into the wallpaper, creating a trenchant characterization, that is lost when the image is made prettier and more graphic, demonstrating, as you said yourself, that sometimes uglier is better.

Thanks again for your work. I look forward to seeing additional chapters.

Dennis Roth

 

[ZazaCast]

Oh... 3000th gets a special post too? I guess I missed that one....tell you what, in honor of your 3000th post, lets say you give me that geared head you have for sale?:happy:
Call it a donation and you can write it off.... just a thought. (that thing is awesome)

Congrats on your 3000th!

 

[Marc Villafan]

Call it a donation and you can write it off.... just a thought. (that thing is awesome)
Congrats on your 3000th!

That thing definitely is a beast. I think I can play with it for hours on end, haha. :cheesy:

So silky smooth, mmm.
Congrats on your 3k!

PS: I was wondering when you would add more articles to your site/blog, loved the black and white, and the color temperature articles you have up now. Going to start reading these now, the description you gave sounds great.

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

Ryan:

Thanks very much for this. Clearly a lot of work, but very much worth the effort. I enjoyed every page.

I especially liked the screen grabs, which were very clear and properly contrasty, and illustrated your points well. It was great to see such a variety of eras represented, showing that good photography never goes out of style.

I have one small criticism. I think you contradicted yourself with the Garden State example. You imply a preference to the second image whereas I think that the first image is far superior, and probably serves the story better. It is a visual pun in which the character literally blends into the wallpaper, creating a trenchant characterization, that is lost when the image is made prettier and more graphic, demonstrating, as you said yourself, that sometimes uglier is better.

Thanks again for your work. I look forward to seeing additional chapters.

Dennis Roth

I understand where you are coming from. I'll reword it. I wasn't trying to say the image with separation was 'better', but simply using a flat low contrast image to show what contrast via lighting in layers can do to help not make it low contrast.
I was just using it as a lab rat, not necessarily implying it would benefit from additional contrast. I try to sprinkle in reminders that with every technique the opposite is just as viable.

I reread what I wrote and perhaps it could use some clarification as it does seem I'm 'improving' it. I also realized the articles are still riddled with typos and errors. Guess I didn't proof read it enough at 3am. Gotta take care of those before they go on the site.

Thanks guys!

 

[dadoboy]

You're postings are always informative Ryan.
It's been a slow year in terms of well budgeted indie features, so moving up to the next level for you this year was probably more difficult than other years. It's all cyclical, so it's just a matter of time before you're shooting the bigger budget pics.