Search Results for 'no'

[LucaM]

James wrote:

We would love to do that – it would just have to be arranged.

I hope it will happen then, sooner or later!

By the way, i just noticed that  while the Hachette page is just for US orders, through Amazon the book will be available in Italy too (and, i suppose, in other countries too). So, for readers outside the US perhaps it will be easier to check their country Amazon page to buy the book, at least for pre-orders (i think that with time it will get easily available in many other sellers worldwide).

 

 

[Kami]

Good day, James and Roger,

I would like to propose a guest I’d love to hear more about. His name is André Turpin, and his list of cinematography credits is extensive. He is best known for his work on Incendies (2010) and his long-lasting collaboration with director Xavier Dolan. He’s a Montreal cinematographer who emerged from the same generation as Denis Villeneuve and Jean-Marc Vallée. I believe, he works exclusively in film for his feature projects, and from my own experience, he’s a great person.

[Roger Deakins]

Yes, “Perfect is the enemy of good’ and it is up to the cinematographer to work within the limitations of a production. And its a given that there is never the time or the equipment you might desire. You are not working in an ideal world and you are hired to deliver “a certain level of work”.  But when that level falls below what you can get any satisfaction from – when you feel  you are just working for a paycheck – what then?

[Roger Deakins]

These two cinematographers did projects on which they used quite extreme backlight. It was a style to some extent but also their interpretation of the story.

I don’t remember using backlight on Revolutionary Road in other than a naturalistic way. Sometimes I might enhance an effect if it suits a particular scene but it was not the aesthetic of an overall approach. It was hardly Out of the Past (1947) or  The Spiral Staircase (1946), both of which Musuraca photographed. Neither did those films look anything like The Jack Benny Program, which Musuraca shot in the 1960s.

[sanghamithran]

Thank you Master David and Master Roger, I get what you are saying,It must be hard to have artistic control exactly as intended at home viewing due to the non uniformity of all kinds of displays and formats. But Master Roger Could you pls tell which one you prefer.

I wanted to understand the effect you had in mind atleast when shooting these scenes to learn more about the story telling through exposure.

To know the intend as to whether you wanted the light shining on both the kidnappers face when they are inside the car to be really brighter as in 4k to affect the audience with heat or did you actually intended to expose for that highlight and not go for very strong feel there as it would happen in the 4k version. Same for the interior day shots of the wife character. Did you intended for a strong bouncing daylight outside or a dull much more dim diffuse light happening outside, based on the exposure in these images.

Thank you.

[Roger Deakins]

I once projected a Wendy light through a dense, leaded window. It worked well but we were lucky the lead didn’t melt! But you shouldn’t have a similar problem with HMIs.

The rig of lights you propose would seem to have to occupy a large space, rather than form a point source like the sun. A single ArriMax 18K would give a more defined beam and the lamp could be rigged further from the window. If you wanted even more light, given an LF can be rated at 1600 without noticeable loss, you could overlap two of these lamps and still have a sharp beam. I would have one above the other so the beam is sharpest in the horizontal axis where it would be more apparent.

[Roger Deakins]

There are so many versions of a film out there today I could no longer say which is ‘correct’. I know what I prefer but, even when we have made a new ‘master’, as we did recently with Fargo, it can still skew in many different directions by the time it gets to your eye.

• This reply was modified 4 months, 1 week ago by Roger Deakins.

[CarlZand]

Hello, Anxyk. I am a still photographer with experience mostly in street photo. For me, the soul of cinematography is not about the fancy camera movements or the latest equipment. I´d rather focus on you walking around the place where you live, explore different places to see how light affects the environment at different hours of the day. Is it very sunny? Is it cloudy? Is there a foggy landscape? Is it night, surrounded by all sorts of sources of light, like neon, buildings, lampposts?

It won´t hurt learning the basic technical aspects of photography to know how to control your camera to achieve what you set out to with intention. Experiment and get to know your camera (even if it is the one on you phone); learn every little control in it so when it comes to facing a challenge, you know how to use it like a second language.

Don´t get carried away with videos about the latest gear and expensive or fancy accessories. If you sit in the outdoors regularly, study light; study photographs that you like and why you like them: what do they make you feel… Study paintings by the old masters and figure out the light and how it affects the life in those paintings. Of course, if you love movies, try watching the great old black and white movies, for instance, film noir and old westerns.

Going back to the beginning, speaking about camera movement, ask yourself: do I need to move the camera to tell this particular story and if you do, with what intention? Nowadays, I feel that the visuals are so frenetic: crazy fast edits, extreme camera movement shot from unlikely angles (who´s P.O.V. is this shot?).

I feel that watching silent films, too, is of great value. See how the language evolved.

There is a great documentary that I feel is great: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVns3k-NGAo

Here are a few other conversations that you might find helpful:

The best.

[LucaM]

Did you consider still photography then (unless you have experience with It yet). Even if cinema and photography have of course different approaches and different goals, some of the concepts (exposure, framing, depth of field, etc etc) are more or less the same. Roger published first a still photography book and then an (upcoming) cinematography book, after all.

Another approach to exercise could be to shot just environments and objects like establishing shots or details of an imaginary scene. A shot of a wood for an horror or a comedy are different. A detail of a diary could be a plot twist in a thriller or a melancholic moment in a romantic movie.

[Anxyk]

Right now I’m not thinking about any project. Just individual shots, without actors.

[Anxyk]

At the moment, there’s nothing specific I want to shoot. I just want to do something. Maybe I’ll come up with an idea. Thanks for your help.

[LucaM]

Well, if it’s not your main job at the moment you are free to shot what you want, so take advantage of that. But it depends on what are your expectations and projects. In my case, i’m working on some horror short movies and i’m focusing on that but honestly i don’t hope it will become a real job for me one day: i wrote two scripts that tells the stories i want to tell in the way i want them to be told. You may have different interests (comedy, drama, documentary, etc) but the idea Is the same. When you begin studying the movies and not Just enjoying them for their entertainment value you begin to learn and find suggestions and teachings everywhere. For example, the last three movies i watched are from Ozu, Bresson and Kieślowski and they of course have absolutely nothing to do with horror but still there were a lot of things to learn about the grammar of the cinema and they suggested me some shots and camera movements for my shorts.

 

[LucaM]

Hi! I’m without experience and still learning like you, so i don’t know how useful my thoughts can be, but a thing i noticed (and Roger somehow says it often, in a way or another, but the core of the concept is similar) Is that the tool you use Is less important than how you use it and how you use your brain and instinct to tell the story.

For a little school project i gave to my middle school students a very old and poor camera to shot some shorts. In half an hour they all were not thinking anymore about the camera, they were Just using their instinct to set the lights, direct movements of actors, blocking the scenes, thinking in terms of cuts to be made, without any input by me, in a spontaneous way. They were learning by doing. And i’m doing the same, the more i play with the camera the more i learn. So, being in your same situation i can Say that i’m learning by studying masters’ works (i.e. Watch a lot of good movies and try to understand why they are good) and experiment. Write a nice scene, shot It with whatever you can, learn and have fun.

[Anxyk]

Hi everyone,

I’m really happy to be here and to have the chance to ask questions to people with experience.

I’m completely new to cinematography and just starting out. At the moment, the only equipment I have is my phone.

So my main question is: how do I start learning to shoot using just a phone? I really want to learn but I’m not sure how to approach it.

What should I focus on, what should I pay attention to, and are there any specific exercises or tips you would recommend?

Also, I have a second question: what is cinematography really about? Is it mostly about lighting, emotions, or something else?

To add a bit of context, some of my favorite films for cinematography are both parts of Dune, Dunkirk, and No Country for Old Men.

English is not my first language, so I hope everything is clear.

Lastly, I wasn’t exactly sure which category to post this in, so I chose this one because it seemed the best fit for my questions.

Thanks so much for any advice!

[Mike]

Happy Birthday Roger, another year older but another year wiser! Have a good one.