Search Results for 'no'

[dharmawanwilly]

Dear Sir Roger Deakins,

I just noticed the look of “The Company Men” on Amazon Prime is quite different from the ones published by Blu-ray. Here is the picture attached, taken from trailer and screenshots provided by them; the Blu-ray ones have “Blu-ray” watermark on it.

I’m curious about which one was your intended look for the movie; the neutral look of Amazon Prime or the seemingly colder look by Blu-ray?

[Tapuz]

Ah! Thanks a lot. Fantastic webpage. I did heard about Mr.Deakins customizing his own set of lenses, but I thought they were normal non-stylish lenses and I never knew they were used in that film. Anyways, this looks really interesting.

[neeraj.jain]

There’s a few times this has been brought up and you can search for it in the forums.

It’s now called “The Deakinizer” – https://theasc.com/blog/shot-craft/lens-test-deakinizers

[Magneticat]

Hello Roger and staff,

happy new year to all of you.

I wanted to ask if there are news about recovering the information in the old forums.

I also wanted to offer my help in case it were needed – I recovered dozens of forums and websites that seemed irreparably lost, and would be willing to help with this if needed, at no costs for the community. Can point to my LinkedIn page if needed.

The information posted in these forums over the past 10 years is just invaluable – for those interested in cinematography, for those making movies, and for those who just love cinema.

[Nicolas LP]

Dear mister Deakins,

I am contacting you regarding my final thesis I am writing on the subject of the aesthetics of lenses used in cinema. The thesis covers the photography director’s choices and how different lenses can be chosen and used for different effects thus explaining how and why they make their choices.

It would be a great honor to have your short or long testimony in my final thesis because I admire you for your work and what you have made. You are an exemple for us, students and maybe future filmmakers.

So, the questions are :

1st Question :

What process do you follow to pick your lenses ? What are the steps you follow ?

 

2nd Question :

Are you using the different optical aberrations that exist like an aspect of aesthetic ?

 

3rd Questions :

Would you rather chose a spherical or anamorphic lense ? What is yout favourite one ?

 

4th Question :

Do you personalize your lenses through renters or manufacturers ?

 

5th Question :

Do you have a favorite lense manufacturer ? (like Cooke, Zeiss, Angénieux,…)

 

6th Question :

Do you have a ritual to try out new lenses ? If so what do you do ?

 

7th Question :

What is your relationship with directors like ? Because of your experience, what is the implication of the different directors when it comes to the choice of lenses ?

 

8th Question :

Do you have an anecdote or something to tell about movies you worked on ?

 

Thank you so much for your consideration !

 

Nicolas.

[Baudelaire]

Stalker is one of my favourite films. It occurred to me some years ago that is a film where nothing actually happens (aside from the the brief chase in the beginning) It is is just 3 old men talking about and fearing some existential event,  that is for over an hour almost about to happen any second. Genius!!!!. Even the main protagonists interactions with his family are veiled references to things that have already happened or will probably happen again. In many ways it is what last of the summer wine could have been.

[Frank]

What I would submit is that filmmaking is a technical medium and being able to answers these questions by definition implies a base of practical knowledge and skill. Somebody like Pier Pasolini would have very strong opinions about what makes an image resonate, but on his first film his cinematographer, Tonino Delli Colli, claimed that he still had to explain to Pasolini what a ‘lens’ even was. If Pasolini had remained ignorant of something as basic as focal lengths ‘Accattone’ would not have the same expressive power.

[bscofano88]

Tarkovsky passed away exactly 36 years ago today (Dec 29th).

I absolutely love to hear and read Master Deakins commenting on Tarkovsky. Makes me appreciate Andrei’s work even more.

Not one of the previously mentioned films, but I found the final scene of “Nostalgia” to be one of the most beautiful and meaningful I have ever seen.

[Stip]

Intuition is the greatest ‘fundamental’ that I have, but it took decades for me to understand that and even longer to fully trust it.

As to camera knowledge, I think knowing how to best expose it is critical.

[dmullenasc]

What I mean by fundamentals is that you aren’t relying on someone else to expose the shot for you. There are basic aspects to photography like f-stop, shutter speed, ISO, frame rate for example that I think any cinematographer has to understand the principles of or else they are lost.  But does a cinematographer have to know the data rate of ProRes 444HQ at 3.2K, 24 fps? Do they have to know the chemicals in ECN2 color negative processing? Do they have to identify all the elements in a Cooke prime lens? Probably not.

I think Gordon Willis said to the effect that if you don’t how to achieve an idea, then you’re in trouble — but if you don’t have any ideas, you’re really in trouble.

[GianniRanzuglia]

This conversation reminds me of one of Albert Einstein’s quotes: “Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.”

As a former film school student, I found the rules or ‘fundamentals,’ a great help because they set boundaries and restrictions that helped me progress with my learning. But as I improved and grew stronger as a filmmaker, I required them much less to guide me because I found something else. I developed my personal taste and character, and still am developing it.

 

[Roger Deakins]

Most certainly! Exposure is obviously important, just as is knowing how depth of field works or the inverse square law, but is it really ‘fundamental’. When  you ‘know’ all these techniques what is left? What makes an image resonate? What makes an image reveal more than a word on a page?

[Roger Deakins]

Maybe I have only see ‘Stalker’ 20 times. The most memorable screening I ever attended was in Brisbane where they showed a pristine new print struck off the original negative.

What Tarkovsky could do was create something that was more than the sum of it’s parts. ‘Stalker’ becomes a reflection, not to put too finer point on it, on human existence but, unlike most contemporary products, it is not manipulative or showy and it doesn’t shout out how clever it is or tell you exactly what to think. I don’t see the look of the film as either beautiful or as ugly. It just feels true, at one with all the other elements that combine to create the whole. A brilliant marvel of a film.

I don’t know if you have seen Tarkovsky’s first film, ‘Ivan’s Childhood’. That too is an exercise in ‘more than the sum of its parts’. In his book, ‘Sculpting in Time’, Tarkovsky talks about the scenes that he was advised to shoot in a certain way and that he, too late, considered a mistake. For him the scenes didn’t feel ‘true’. Watch it and see how much of a perfectionist he must have been!

[Frank]

Roger, I remember in one of the podcast episodes you and James expressed surprise that a lot of the film students you talk to now don’t seem to know much about exposure. Surely something as essential to cinematography as knowing how to get the exposure you want is a ‘fundamental’.

[quijotesco24]

Andrew C wrote:

Thank you. Do you have a standard process then, when exposing film, like taking multiple readings around the set and setting the lens to an average of those, depending on what you would like? Would I expose skin tones similarity to how I would digitally? Or should I mostly stick to slightly overexposing?

Before thinking about exposure you need to test your meters, making sure they are not off. So test camera, lenses, light meters and check the results from the lab and then recalibrate your meter accordingly. On reversal when something is 1/3 off you can tell. So also make sure even the iris on each lens is not off.
But I haven’t shot reversal for 20 years and even then I tried to run away from it. But once you know all your available dynamic range after testing you will be able to determine how to expose and to where put faces, windows, shadows, etc for your liking.