Which is more challenging ? Being a DP or a Director

Well...

I've never been a DP, but in my experience the only person who is never bored and can constantly have fun on set is the director.
But then, I guess that wasn't the question.
 
I'd say a director, because he has more responsibility and is required to be knowledgable about more aspects of production.
 
A director is there from (pretty much) the start to the finish. The DP seldom plays much part in post, and not as much in pre. And as noted above, the director bears responsibilty for the whole project.

Both are very challenging, though.
 
No doubt in my mind - the DP. He needs to know optics, physics, chemistry, geometry, solar charts, meteorology, color dynamics and theory, electrical engineering, camera equipment mechanicals and more. He can't bullshit his way through the shoot. The footage tells the whole story. The director can hide behind a myriad of excuses -" it was the talent's fault", "it was a problem with the script", "I purposely made it to be boring - convoluted - sophomoric", "if only we had more money", etc. My vote goes to the DP every time.
 
There is no correct answer to this question

because every production has different challenges, different mountains to overcome, different rules, different pressures.
 
Batutta said:
I'd say a director, because he has more responsibility and is required to be knowledgable about more aspects of production.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. I disagree about the last part of that statement.

What do you mean by 'production'? Perhaps I misunderstand you. The director is responsible for vision, story, acting, etc. They guide everyone along in the same direction. They are a huge creative force. They are required to deal mainly in aesthetics and design versus technical. They can say what they want and approve and disapprove, but they are not involved nor should they be expected nor concerned with the many aspects of production... they should know what they want and simply think of just simply the production. Those who are technical, say Cameron or Kubrick, perhaps are the exception, but mainly not the average director. I don't expect them to know more aspects of production than a DP. I expect them to know story, what they want, and how to communicate that to the delegated departments who specialize in those aspects.

This objection was simply to that statement.

As to the OP, when you ask what is more challenging or harder.... I'd say both are tremendous undertakings, and they work so close together the overlapping area of responsibility turns into a collaborative effort and a gray area. But at the end of the day, the director takes the credit, and he/she is more responsible for the final product. Thus, a cinematographer can do an amazing job, but if the story is garbage, the acting bad, and etc... the director takes the hit. As important as a DP is, and as indispensable as he/she is, the buck stops at the director, and there it is.

I'm not sure if any of it is more or less challenging... think of sports. Some jobs have more responsibility, but I wouldn't say the running back is any less challenged by his job than the QB is.

If you have many talented people in all departments, ala director, DP, production design and etc... you'll find the collaboration will equal greater than the sum of the individual talents. I'd say the most challenging position would be the one you find yourself in when you are not surrounded by other talented people.
 
Last edited:
That's like asking; "What's more challenging - Being a Bird or a Fish?"


A Director is a Creative Strategist and a DP is a Creative Scientist. If either one sucks, the film sucks.

Or "What's more challenging - Being a husband or a Wife?" - Marriage don't work unless both are operating at 100%!
 
There's no cut-and-dry answer here since the Director's and DP's roles are fairly symbiotic. For instance, working with a bad director can cause the stress level of the DP to rise exponentially (and vice-versa I'd imagine).
 
Wilbur Eddings said:
That's like asking; "What's more challenging - Being a Bird or a Fish?"


A Director is a Creative Strategist and a DP is a Creative Scientist. If either one sucks, the film sucks.

Or "What's more challenging - Being a husband or a Wife?" - Marriage don't work unless both are operating at 100%!
Click to expand...

Hot damn, good response.
 
If you have a bad director, its stressfull for the DOP (Canadians add the O)
And if you have a DOP its stessfull for the director.
It's always a team operation.
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
Absolutely not. I disagree about the last part of that statement.

What do you mean by 'production'? Perhaps I misunderstand you. The director is responsible for vision, story, acting, etc. They guide everyone along in the same direction. They are a huge creative force. They are required to deal mainly in aesthetics and design versus technical. They can say what they want and approve and disapprove, but they are not involved nor should they be expected nor concerned with the many aspects of production... they should know what they want and simply think of just simply the production. Those who are technical, say Cameron or Kubrick, perhaps are the exception, but mainly not the average director. I don't expect them to know more aspects of production than a DP. I expect them to know story, what they want, and how to communicate that to the delegated departments who specialize in those aspects.

This objection was simply to that statement.
Click to expand...

I said knowledgable, I didn't say he had to DO all those jobs. A DP is a specialist, focused only one aspect. A director has to have an opinion about nearly every aspect of production. If he or she is a GOOD director, they have some knowledge of them all. I don't know why you're so offended. I didn't say a DP's job is easy. But if I'm forced to say which is more challenging, I'd say the director.
 
This is fun. And since I seem to be in the minority voting for the DP, I'll take it to another level. I find that good directors usually have an innate ability regarding recognizing and achieving good performances. They feel it inside themselves. It's like breathing to them; good directing isn't learned. You "know" it because you feel it. (Although there is a learning curve in communicating it.) Not so with photography. You can study and learn it. Which is a challenge (which is the topic of this thread). The challenge being 'learning it'.
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
Absolutely not. I disagree about the last part of that statement.

What do you mean by 'production'? Perhaps I misunderstand you. The director is responsible for vision, story, acting, etc. They guide everyone along in the same direction. They are a huge creative force. They are required to deal mainly in aesthetics and design versus technical. They can say what they want and approve and disapprove, but they are not involved nor should they be expected nor concerned with the many aspects of production... they should know what they want and simply think of just simply the production. Those who are technical, say Cameron or Kubrick, perhaps are the exception, but mainly not the average director. I don't expect them to know more aspects of production than a DP. I expect them to know story, what they want, and how to communicate that to the delegated departments who specialize in those aspects.
Click to expand...
The director is absolutely responsible for the whole production, except the actual money.

The reason for this is that when the film is successful, the Director gets all the glory. When it fails, he takes all the heat.
That includes the jobs he didn't do himself, like screenplay, cinematography, casting and acting.
 
I have been a DP all this while and while it is challenging at this NO MONEY INDIE level, but it is more akin to a math problem, where there is a solution to make the "lighting from that angle" looks good. However, none of all tht matters if the director doesnt have a good vision on how the "FINAL FILM" is gonna look like or feel like. Another example, yes it is tough for the engineer to come up with the IPAD but none of that matters if Steve Job doesnt have the overall strategy and plan to market that thing.

I have just directed, DP and Edit my own first short film and boy do I learned a lot from the experience of being the Director.
 
Isaac_Brody said:
Being a producer.
Click to expand...
Producers can't get enough cred. I mean that.
I hate producing but do it out of necessity because finding a good one is hard as hell. It's a tough ****ing job and they deserve all the money they get.

LuckyStudio 13 said:
yes it is tough for the engineer to come up with the IPAD but none of that matters if Steve Job doesnt have the overall strategy and plan to market that thing.
Click to expand...
It's a good thing it wasn't created and released with the plan of letting the users figure out what to do with it.

Oh wait.
 
I find the art of cinematography too be just that; an art, a god given talent and something that can be taken to the highest expression ....

But, I find Directing to take the nod on which one being most challenging.

I do agree for the most part with Ryan and Wilbur, but can name tons of films that had subpar cinematography but wonderful directing. If the directing sucks and the DP skilly is solid, you get a very pretty piece of ****; but you can't polish a turd, right ? If the DP Skilly is sucky, and you get awesome directing ? You still can get art out of it
 
This question is so off in numerous ways i can't seem to find a way to pinch in with whatever worthless piece of opinion i have -but- since i am at the airport, and i do miss the time i spent on these boards years ago, i'll have to say something!! :)

There are times when i can take a nap on set as of how bored i am as a director, and the dp is going crazy: pack shots for instance... And when things are aren't working on the 20th take, the production manager is yelling at you to end the day, and the dp is texting to his wife about what's for dinner. They are different jobs, and i guess the challenge is the same for everybody.

The dp has some luxury tough, if he ends the day on time and it looks good he's set. The director has to make sure the piece works, and deal with all the people who are paying for the film, so that's why their rates are higher...

But in the end the challenge turns out to being good, and that challenge is pretty much the same whatever it is that you do for a living...
 
How can one learn and progress towards being a better director ? How do u "see" the final film before you even shkt your first frame ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top