Tension Between DP and Director

Re: Tension Between DP and Director

Again, Walter, I find nothing that we disagree on when reading your response, so I suspect I'm just not communicating my point clearly.

This isn't about a flow chart of order or anything like that. I wouldn't suggest the director is like a pit boss on set. I'm very very well acquainted with the duties, culture and responsibilities of the AD department, as well as the general order of professional shoots of all levels.

I agree with everything you're saying, but I'm not suggesting that there's some hierarchal flow of orders that drips down from the director to the lowly PA.

What I'm saying is that there are simple creative discussions between the director and DP that result in creative decisions. At some point when there is not a creative agreement, the directors decisions are followed...plain and simple. You could say that this makes the Director the ultimate arbiter of creative decisions, and you could also say that puts the DP in a service/client relationship with the Director...both are true, if perhaps crude by the word.

What I suggest is that the DP and Director are not true equals, and thus the DP should not learn to approach all situations as such. Even if the Director dictates no creation to the Cinematographer, there is still the understanding that when the directors whims lie contrary to the cinematographers creative design, it is the director's will that must be appeased.

Again, when it comes back to the original post (which keeps getting lost in this thread), the question is about a working relationship between a director and a DP.

Realistically, what more can you say when there is a creative impasse between a director and a DP? If you don't want to put things in terms of "boss" and "employee" relationships (again, a fault of my choice of words), then let us address the issue in specifics.

If this specific DP can't get his creative wishes on screen and the Director is not interested in accepting his viewpoint, what are the options available to him? How should he deal with the director and the crew? What happens if he walks off the project? What happens if he stays?

I assume you’re reading things into my posts that I haven't intended, as I don’t disagree with your responses.
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

I' m not reading into what you are saying simply responding partially to one statement you made:

"The DP is a really a service position, not an artists position.  You're there to service the director's wishes, not to make your art.  Don't forget that."

I don't find that to be true in the films I work on. So we have some differences from experience. Looks like we will not be working on this film together :) None of our expereinces are right and none are wrong. My other comments are to others who also made some statements. Basically I respond to lots of posts in one thought that folks often take as if I am responding to them, directly, which I am not.  

>If this specific DP can't get his creative wishes on screen and the Director is not interested in accepting his viewpoint, what are the options available to him?  

1. Suck it up and do the job at hand
2. question the reasons until there is a compromise
3. leave

>How should he deal with the director and the crew?  

Tell the crew he is leaving, tell the director what he already knows, this is not working out, then leave.

>What happens if he walks off the project?  

He sleeps better at night and perhaps someone who fits the insecure directors level is put in his place. Usually you would suggest a replacement.  

>What happens if he stays?

The impass is met again and again and a lot of tension arises.
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

I think I can safely retitle this thread--Tension Between Walter Graff and J_Barnes ;D ;D Seriously, you've both made your points and I can see the two of you getting along famously over a pint (really).

As far as walking off a project--indie short films are a different breed. A very short production schedule, mostly volunteer--people are crewing for the fun and experience. Walking off over 'creative differences' is just not cool when you've committed to the production. It's one thing if you're being mistreated or jerked around, or if there are safety issues, but otherwise stick with the production. If you don't explicitly agree on your duties *before* the production, then you're signed on to do whatever the director asks. And how else do you accumulate great 'war stories'? ;D
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

Grit your teeth, state your case and above all finish the project. (don't get the reputation of quitting) You can always take your name off the project and if you're lucky you can
salvage a little footage for your reel.
To reiterate Barry, make sure to set up a meeting with the director prior to shooting and find out if you're even on the same page creatively.
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

Oh Barry, I don't think there was any tension betwixt us! I just wanted to make sure that he was understanding what I was trying to say because I expected that when taken out of context, my statements might be offensive to people (and perhaps him directly).

If we shadows have offended, think but this, and all is mended, that you have but slumber'd here while these visions did appear.
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

I understand I just got off a film shoot with a director that to me didn't know what the F*ck he was doing. Every scene was bad.. so bad the actors started to talk while in front of the crew and Director.

So what I'm telling you is just do your job and the people around you will see the problems.

Rob

P.S Man do you have a reel I'm looking for a D.P for a short in LA
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

You could save yourselves (DP's) alot of wasted time, energy and sanity by taking several meetings with the never worked with before director prior to shooting. This might give you an oppurtunity to see if the two of you are on the same page creatively, and then it might not. Roll the dice, anyone? :o
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

Just do the best job you can... and on the next one ask for double the pay. ;D
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

[quote author=sojrn link=board=news;num=1101047693;start=15#27 date=11/27/04 at 15:11:47]You could save yourselves (DP's) alot of wasted time, energy and sanity by taking several meetings with the never worked with before director prior to shooting.  This might give you an oppurtunity to see if the two of you are on the same page creatively, and then it might not.  Roll the dice, anyone?   :o[/quote]

Yes pre-production is the key to every thing. I find that most trouble arises because of poor planning. They should have worked most of these problems out before they got onto the set.

The dp is there to make the director's vision happen. It is a team effort. I guess I've been lucky I've found a dp that I work with that brings my vision to the screen and I trust his judgment if he has an idea.

But of course I being the director have the final say and some times it doesn't hurt to shoot both versions. Then when you're cutting then you can decide.
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

I personally let DP's interpret within my wide guidelines.  Great lighting can't save a poor script, director or actor.  But a good script, director or actor can shine through poor lighting. :)
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

[quote author=sojrn link=board=news;num=1101047693;start=30#30 date=11/28/04 at 00:24:01].  Great lighting can't save a poor script, director or actor.  But a good script, director or actor can shine through poor lighting.  :)[/quote]

Sometimes.  Maybe..  Barely.
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

I'm just saying that a poorly lit (shot, recorded, etc) film can be a chore to watch. Even if an actor puts in a great perfomrmance or there is a great story, the distraction of bad technical applications can be too much for the viewer. If I had to choose, I'd take the great performance and story. But I'd rather not have to choose because most of the people in the audience won't tolerate something that looks crappy long enough to see a good story or great performance.
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

I agree with Jim on this one. Too often it is said that a great story and solid acting will save a crappy looking film, but even if that is true in the extremely rare case when it is proven, it's still not something that should be actively encouraged as a "rule of filmmaking".

Without intending any offense to the many people on this board who have professed this opinion (and there have been many, so understand that this isn't directed at all towards sojrn), I really think it is aiming low to state that a great story will shine through a crappy presentation.

If you're going to do your best with a story, if you're going to ask the best of your actors, you should probably bother to make the best looking film you can to support those other two noble goals. What is the point in stopping short of doing your all-around best? Story is great, but the fact is that presentation still counts for something, and if you can't personally provide the technical needs of your picture, then there's little excuse not to find those people who can provide those services for you.

As a filmmaker you are so reliant on the skills and talent of others to make a good looking, good sounding film. As so much less of the burden of production is directly upon your shoulders, there's really no excuse for making a bad-looking film. A cinematographer can't make your story better. A sound mixer can't make your actors more believable. Acting and story are the job of a filmmaker, and no one has more direct impact upon them then the filmmaker. Lighting, sound, camera, etc. are all parts of presentation that require a team of talented craftsment to accomplish skillfully. As a filmmaker, you should be able to find people who light well. As a filmmaker, you should be able to find people who are skilled and talented at their jobs. As a filmmaker, if you don't have the abilities to make a good looking picture, you should be able to recruit those that can help you.

Again, not intending any offense to anyone, but if you can't make a good looking picture either through your direct action or through the skillful implementation of the talents of others, you might not have the abilities to make a great story in the first place. I say this not because I think that people who have this opinion are incapable, I say this because I expect that they are probably capable of much more.

Sometimes ambition is enough to make you do more, and conversely, sometimes a lack of it is enough to make you do less then you are able.

Even if it's not your intention to make a bad looking film, saying that the presentation is of lesser importance might encourage you to aim lower then you might be able to achieve.

War and peace is a great work of story, but when it's written on a bathroom wall in sharpie, it loses a little bit of prestige.
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

Actually, I am one of the people who has expressed that opinion in the past, and J_Barnes post is very similar to the one he replied to my comment with, lo those many eons ago. It's not that often that I change my mind on something, but obviously this time was an exception. I'd still take the great story and performance first, but I agree that for me, there is no excuse anymore for a bad-looking film. It might not look magnificent, but it shouldn't be so bad that it distracts the viewer.
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

Yeah, I think that some films can get away with being bad looking, but it's rare. It might be kinda rude to say this, but I think it's a total cop-out to not place importance on the visual presentation of your story...especially when it's something you can effectively outsource to capable people.

That doesn't mean you need to aspire to production values of a hollywood caliber, it just means that you should probably be aspiring to something at the very least.

If you're going to create something you can be proud of, you should probably make effort to present it in a way you can be proud of as well. That's all.
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

It's simplistic defining the look of a film as bad or good. Of course no one needs to tolerate a BAD looking film, but what does that really tell us? Are Dogma's films bad (or crappy) looking? Can't we make good looking films that does not resemble "Singing in the Rain"? Aesthecis aside, the look of a film is something that should be worked on, and that should be in favour of the film, no matter how many (or few) relectors you manage to rent. How many people take super 8 handheld images and see them as good loking, even though they were originally conceived as "crappy"? Is a video camera handheld image shot by a bystander of the sept/11 a crappy image? Not inside Michael Moore's documentary. Well, I guess even people that didn't like it can get the picture...
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

you mean propagandamentary...

anyway, I agree that it can be about context. Still, If you are going to put the effort into a great story, you owe your project the respect to put the same effort into learning the rudimentary methods of creating a visual presentation that does not detract from that story.
 
Re: Tension Between DP and Director

Exactly jimbo...

Outwardly it may be simplistic to lump a bunch of stuff into good or bad catagories, but there are a few simple things that can be said to be "bad looking" on camera or when projected. Bad audio is bad audio. Dim grainy images are generally not very attractive...on occasion they can certainly be compelling, but as a rule do they hold the same appeal universal as a well exposed, well composed shot? Not really.

I agree that it is very simplistic to lump everything into two catagories, and I believe Andrew Laszlo said it best in his book "Every Frame a Rembrandt" that there is such a thing as Bad/good cinematgraphy...that being camerawork that does not hold to the polished ideals of typical hollywood, yet serves the picture and story well.

I think what I'm talking about isn't simply a matter of taste or effort, it's a matter of caring. It's in some bizzare sense of the word, a matter of self-respect, or at least respect for the story.

Again, I'm not advocating the notion that people need to strive towards some "singing in the rain" asthetic, just that they not give up entirely on the technical details of a film in the hopes that their story is enough to shine through.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top