FS7: Shane Hurlbut weighs in on the FS7

Nate Weaver said:
I do not know many (if any) working, A-list DPs (and by A-list, I mean guys doing Apple spots, car spots, 50M+ movies) that are really truly up on the tech on why each camera looks like it does. Usually these days it's Alexa, Dragon, or Phantom, end of story. Anything else is left to other folks, unless the issue is pressed.

To be brutally honest, the details we're talking about is the domain of people that have time to do endless research on the internet and testing. These guys are too busy working to really get into it, and frankly most of the jobs they work on they can spec whatever they like. If they need to know how to get the most out of the F5 (or C300, or Blackmagic Pocket, or xxx) for some reason, they lean on their DITs.

So he gets a little bit of a pass in my book, because he knows so very much more about lighting, running camera+G&E depts, and making things look great. I'd give my left you-know-what to be working that consistently and having that many resources on my jobs. He worked to get there, and his knowledge and experience keeps him there. All I know is that the few times I've been given the chance to steer a ship that big [edit: maybe a 1/3rd that size], I learned that it is NOT easy.

Shooting at that level is so much about everything else BESIDES the actual camera and codec and color science, it's impossible to overstate it.

But I'll probably take his camera comments with less than a grain of salt.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. He quite obviously knows what he is doing, but one assumes his judgement on cameras is more along the lines of 'how quickly can my AC have it prepped and how pleasing is that image off the bat' over whether LUTs work in all modes or not.
 
He should have called me for free consult on setting up the cams before shooting. Maybe all he needed was "All Reset" on the F55.

:cheesy:
 
I think it all boils down to him forming an opinion based on a very limited experience with a camera. On a discussion group, someone recently asked him what he thought of the A7S. His comment was, "I shot with it for a day and wanted to throw it under a passing semi". But, he also admitted to not having enough time with it and asked for patience while he further evaluated it. Hurlbut is a Canon and Red Dragon guy with plenty of hands on experience with those cameras so naturally he gets the best results with them. If he ever shot with Sony for any length of time, perhaps he would have a better opinion.
 
Ben Scott said:
Absolutely. He quite obviously knows what he is doing, but one assumes his judgement on cameras is more along the lines of 'how quickly can my AC have it prepped and how pleasing is that image off the bat' over whether LUTs work in all modes or not.
Click to expand...

More or less. LUTs are expected to work in all modes at that level, but then again, the DIT probably has 4+ LUT boxes in his kit ready to work if needed.

Gotta remember, even DITs that work that much are probably not the most up-to-date on each camera. I consistently hear "I don't have the time or inclination for forums"


mainstreetprod said:
I think it all boils down to him forming an opinion based on a very limited experience with a camera.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and probably should be less vocal about tech if the experience is that limited.

mainstreetprod said:
If he ever shot with Sony for any length of time, perhaps he would have a better opinion.
Click to expand...

Funny, the more time I spent with one, the worse my opinion got :-)
 
Shane might not be up to spec on all the latest cameras, but he can run major crews on major features and probably has more set experience than all of us combined.
 
Yes that goes without saying.. and not been questioned.. but he has a history for blurting out stuff about camera,s that he obviously doesn't know about... there are plenty of people on this forum who know more about the F55 than he does.. but wouldn't tell him how to run a camera dept on a big film set.. thats the point..
 
I'm probably going to get flamed crazy for this but really.....who cares what he thinks?
Don't get me wrong, I respect the heck out of the guy. He does awesome work and
is a great DP. But I'm sorry, I'm not a 'follower' like that. I never bought the
basketball shoes that Jordan endorsed either. I actually have my own opinions on
things, and what I like. And often, I actually like different things than the big time
DP's do (as evidenced by my opinions in the big Zacuto camera shootout, I didn't pick
the GH2 as one of my favorites LOL). I'm secure enough with myself that I can have my own
opinions, even if the 'popular set' disagrees with me.

I equate the great work Shane Hurlbut does.......with him, not with Canon.
I know the 'marketers that be' always try to tie great results to their brand.
Then people think if they just buy that brand....they too can get those results.
He thinks Sony's are generally horrible. I could care less.....I like the Sony cameras
I have and the results I get from them, so I guess I'm not going to be joining
the inner circle anytime soon.
 
And yet you seem to be in here talking about it like the rest of us.

I had no problem with him hating Red and I have no problem with him now not liking Sony. It doesn't mean anything. Just like if a race car is sponsored by Coke in one season and Pepsi the next. However, his video on C stands (sponsored by Matthews) is good :)
 
Interesting thread for me to read through. I have had a relationship with Shane going back 15 years, when I started operating for him on features, commercials, promos etc.; we co-DP'd a project and I shot additional photography for him on a few features.

Shane is a bold and creative DP who works tirelessly to give each project its own distinctive feel. When he was shooting film, he was always "torturing" various film stocks, pushing them to their limits to create new looks. When DI's came in, he dove into that with his usual enthusiasm. He spent many weeks working on the color of the ocean for "Into the Blue" until every shot was just right.

He has always been a polarizing character, perhaps because he is himself polarized about his own taste. Either he loves something, or he wants to (to paraphrase one of his old expressions) "douse it in lamp oil and set it on fire". Either end should be taken with a grain of salt. It may seem completely illogical that he eschews the F55 and embraces the FS7, but that's Shane and tomorrow he may reverse position on that after more testing or a different approach.

The main reason to tune in to Shane's blogs, I think, is his sharing of lighting techniques and camera tests, and (especially in the case of the latter) take those as inspiration rather than blindly adhere to his conclusions. I looked at one lens test recently where he swore the different between certain lenses was night and day--for me, it was more like the difference between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m., so I ain't gonna sweat that. His eye is seeing something other than mine, but that's fine because cinematography is at its core an art form; there is no "right" answer and we all do things a little differently.
 
CharlesPapert said:
The main reason to tune in to Shane's blogs, I think, is his sharing of lighting techniques and camera tests, and (especially in the case of the latter) take those as inspiration rather than blindly adhere to his conclusions. I looked at one lens test recently where he swore the different between certain lenses was night and day--for me, it was more like the difference between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m., so I ain't gonna sweat that. His eye is seeing something other than mine, but that's fine because cinematography is at its core an art form; there is no "right" answer and we all do things a little differently.
Click to expand...

I've never met Shane, and he's working on a level I'm entirely jealous of, so I'll stay away from the more personal elements in this thread. But specific to Shane's "Inner Circle" offering... the entire idea of which makes me scratch my head. On one hand, you obviously have an incredibly talented person sharing their knowledge, and on the face it, that's great. And I assure you, if I got a call to go work on one of his films in Camera, Grip, or Electric... I'd definitely take it, and tirelessly work my tail off and try to absorb every thing that I could.

But you know what? The people who get that call, they get cut a check to learn from Shane. The people in Shane's "Inner Circle" cut Shane a check. It's kind of funny. But here's the second half, and why I quoted Charles, who knows Shane professionally - are we supposed to pay to be in Shane's Inner Circle to learn the craft itself, or his personal style and art form? Because, no offense, there's plenty of resources to learn the craft - one of the best is being on set (which, usually you get paid for!)... and as far as the art... no matter how amazing and &*^%ing incredible I may think Shane's work is, I don't want to imitate him. Even if my work is never on his level, even if my art is never as cathartic as his, even if his name is known and mine isn't... I want to be myself as an artist.

So yeah, I respect myself too much to ever pay to be in Shane's "Inner Circle." But I'm also humble enough to jump at the opportunity if I was offered to actually work on one of Shane's sets and be in what I'd consider is the real inner circle.

K, Thanks.
 
I will weigh in on this aspect, James, thank you for bringing it up.

I hear what you are saying: why pay to learn the craft when you can go work on a set and learn it while being paid. I myself quit NYU for exactly this reason and never regretted it. I PA'd for the next two+ years and spent much of time studying the lighting setups and asking the camera team questions.

However, not everyone gets the opportunity to work on jobs for notably skilled DP's, depending on where they live and what level they are working at. These are the people that may benefit from a program such as this. There are indeed many resources available these days, from training videos to short courses, many of which also cost money! But, it's important to look up the work of whoever is doing the teaching because, you know the old adage...

As far as copying someone's work vs being an individual artist: I think the idea of being exposed to how another DP goes about things is to broaden the horizons, learn some tricks to store away and have more tools at your disposal. I'm sure I cobbled some lighting notions from Shane but at this point I can't even remember what they are, they have just become part of what I do in modified form.

I'm not advocating anyone to sign up or not sign up for Shane's Inner Circle but I think that for $18, trying it out for a month and seeing what he's got in there and whether it is helpful isn't going to break the bank.
 
CharlesPapert said:
I will weigh in on this aspect, James, thank you for bringing it up.

I hear what you are saying: why pay to learn the craft when you can go work on a set and learn it while being paid. I myself quit NYU for exactly this reason and never regretted it. I PA'd for the next two+ years and spent much of time studying the lighting setups and asking the camera team questions.

However, not everyone gets the opportunity to work on jobs for notably skilled DP's, depending on where they live and what level they are working at. These are the people that may benefit from a program such as this. There are indeed many resources available these days, from training videos to short courses, many of which also cost money! But, it's important to look up the work of whoever is doing the teaching because, you know the old adage...

As far as copying someone's work vs being an individual artist: I think the idea of being exposed to how another DP goes about things is to broaden the horizons, learn some tricks to store away and have more tools at your disposal. I'm sure I cobbled some lighting notions from Shane but at this point I can't even remember what they are, they have just become part of what I do in modified form.

I'm not advocating anyone to sign up or not sign up for Shane's Inner Circle but I think that for $18, trying it out for a month and seeing what he's got in there and whether it is helpful isn't going to break the bank.
Click to expand...

I definitely agree - $18 doesn't break the bank, and I certainly don't think less of anyone who uses this route to learn. For me, internal to myself, there's a principle though. And for that reason I won't do it personally.

As far as learning tricks from being exposed to other talented artists - just yesterday I worked as a grip on a set, something I rarely ever do anymore, because it was for a well respected DP in town I'd never seen work. And I definitely picked up new tricks yesterday, and I will gladly steal them.

As far as learning the craft costing money - like anything in life, it's a matter of time and money. You can accelerate your learning with money (to an extent!), but even without money, enough time and dedication can get you where you want to be. As far as technical craft elements - you can find them all over the web, but when you pay for a course, you're paying for someone knowledgeable to aggregate it all in one place, to verify it's integrity, and to present it in an orderly manner. If that's a good deal for you, go for it. Some people hate researching and googling, so for them it can be a great value.

As far as not everyone getting the opportunity to work with notable DPs - yes, that's true. But like everything in life it's a matter of priorities. If that is your top priority in life, and you've moved to LA, done the networking, done the learning, etc... then you're probably there. If you've half dreamed it, wished it, but had other pressing priorities in life... then that's that.

Yea. You know what. There's a lot of video courses and seminars out there. Most cost money. And absolutely, a lot of people seem to get value out of them. I guess that's just not how I usually roll. And I don't really begrudge what Shane's selling.. I mean power to him. And he can't really offer it for free - because it takes plenty of time to prepare those resources for the web, time away from his family and the well paid, highly demanding work that he's made his name at. So power to him. It just baffles me that people are willing to pay for it.
 
I for one am not bashing him and I don't think most of the other people on this thread are either. I am bashing something he said about something he clearly does not understand -- and that is different. Anyone who says the FS7 is superior to the F55 is flat out wrong on that point.
 
dustylense said:
I find it funny that people bash him as he is in the upper echelon of the field in filmmaking. It's quite telling actually....
Click to expand...

No one is Bashing the guy.. and everyone knows he is a top "hollywood" guy and all that... but thats also the reason people get a bit peeved when comes out with his "colorful and sweeping statements".. cause people listen to him.. he's in a position that what he says will affect someones choice in camera ..
 
CharlesPapert said:
... As far as copying someone's work vs being an individual artist: I think the idea of being exposed to how another DP goes about things is to broaden the horizons, learn some tricks to store away and have more tools at your disposal. I'm sure I cobbled some lighting notions from Shane but at this point I can't even remember what they are, they have just become part of what I do in modified form...
Click to expand...
FWIW, when I watch "Key and Peele" clips these days, I watch half of it for comedy and half for the "look". And I like the look a whole lot. Recently, I stumbled onto those "Nazi" sketches with Ty Burrell and thought they were just top notch (the jokes run out of steam, as usual, but the look is awesome).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top