Search Results for 'no'

[James Parsons]

I notice it’s more common to add a mild softening filter for an actress’s closeup than to change the lighting, but then I work a lot on TV where that’s just a faster “solution” to something that should probably not be described as a “problem.”

[James Parsons]

Not Roger, but I liked it very much. If I were to offer a first impression suggestion, I missed a rim light to separate your subject’s dark hair from the background and more define her shape in that space.

[James Parsons]

No film school experience here, just one night school class a decade after my undergrad degree in English. I interned, then PA’d, then eventually joined the union as an AC, all while shooting or assisting on any project that would have me (student, corporate, advertising, music video, whatever).

About half my colleagues are film school grads, half had family or family friends in the business, and half came from theater or music or event production or a zillion other similar but not quite the same fields. I know that’s 3 halves, but hey.

Your enthusiasm, spirit, attentiveness, dedication are all much more valuable than any “expertise” when you’re starting out. Be willing to take on (and learn from) ANY job on any set, but once you’re on set (and killing it) at whatever starting position you find, don’t be afraid to introduce yourself to the people doing what you really want to do.

[Max A.]

If I can write something, I understand what Vaniyann says in terms of a giant source of pieces of information.
As an assiduous frequenter of the forum (I check at least 2 times a day if there are new posts for 4 years, I would like to create many for the numerous questions and for the thirst for interest and admiration I have towards Mr. Deakins but I limit myself) I am still shaken by the idea that all those years of interesting questions and just as many interesting answers have vanished.

However, I understand that it is a delicate and complicated matter and that Mr. Deakins and Ms. James are obviously very busy given their prestige (due to their talent and dedication to work and disseminating information to us all) so we can only hope.
I “know” Vaniyann as a user, since I have often read posts by him on this forum and he often specified that some messages from him could be misunderstood since English is not his native language (like me after all). He is not a disrespectful user, he always thanked and always addressed Mr. Deakins as a teacher.

We all love what Mr. Deakins and Mrs. James have done, are doing, and will do and we will never dream of being disrespectful to a figure who is almost a god to us.

We just have to hope for the recovery of the whole forum or otherwise enjoy what has been through the years and maybe generate new potentially interesting content on this fantastic platform.

I wish you a peaceful day everyone.
Max.

[rama lingam]

Mr. Frank bear in mind english is not my mother tongue. May be my language would be not grammatical. But I never disrespect to Roger and James. I learnt lot. I posted more than 300 questions in this forum. I don’t recollect all questions. It’s all important to me. Not important you. I don’t know where I could find those answers again. So only i requesting continuously regarding old forum recovery related questions. Thanks for misunderstood me. Roger and James please take my apology if i disappointed you. Thanks for your great sharing knowledge.

[rama lingam]

Me Frank i am not disrespectful to anybody. This is not disrespect. Don’t exaggerated anything. My lot’s of important posts  after 2019 years. Still most of the 2015 forums don’t work properly. You are alo one of the participants. please don’t act like web admin yourself. If they feel i am disrespectful i will ask heartfelt apologies to James and Roger. I have great respect for both of them.

[Frank]

The repeated disrespect for working professionals offering their knowledge for free during their own leisure time is immensely disappointing to me. I can’t think of something that would be less incentivizing to getting what you want than expressing ingratitude and entitlement. Furthermore, you are on a private website that the Deakins’ pay for themselves and which they can administrate however they wish.

If you want to read old posts the links I gave previously in this thread will allow you to access many of them. I see now that the 2015 web capture has many broken webpages, so here is the most recent version I could find that seems to be in working order https://web.archive.org/web/20150813085239/http://www.deakinsonline.com/forum2/index.php

[Mike]

Vanniyan,

Well done Sir, you may get an answer but probably not.

Btw, over the years, you were the most consistent member of the forum, you have been extremely loyal as with many other members who sadly have now disappeared.

Thank God we live in a democratic world where we enjoy freedom of speech.

[Al Duffield]

Ah yes, this comes up rather frequently and poor David keeps getting stuck answering it.

I think what’s being confused here is field of view and focal length. focal length is an absolute and fixed attribute of a lens (assuming we’re talking about primes). Field of view is derived from focal length and sensor/film/gate dimensions.

From a practical standpoint, we could imagine using FOV instead of focal length during a shoot, but that would necessitate the AC’s determining and labelling each lens during prep based on the camera being used, and then the Cinematographer would then need to memorise the particular FOVs in order to get the right lens… all rather convoluted.

We could talk in full frame equivalents, but that too would require the AC’s to determine that, label up all the lenses and then refer to them as that equivalent focal length for the duration of the shoot.. again, a bit convoluted.

Instead, we are responsible for asking for the correct lens based on our knowledge of the resulting field of view for the camera we’re using. Sure Cinematographers are required to know the camera they’re using enough to know what a 35mm looks like on it, but that’s not much of a burden and it removes complications for the rest of the crew.

[quijotesco24]

To add another layer of interest I would suggest you stop thinking about focal lengths and Lenses, in my opinion it doesn’t help to understand how images are created. Here is an idea: Think more about distances, the distance camera to subject, the distance subject to background, the distance between subjects.

[oneroundjack]

Hi Roger, James,

I’m doing some work on British cinematographer Jack Cox (aka John J. Cox), who worked on a number of Alfred Hitchcock films (Blackmail, The Manxman, The Lady Vanishes) at British International Pictures and Gainsborough.

I don’t suppose his work has ever made an impression on you? If so, what would you say he does well? Was he an innovator, would you say?

All thoughts welcome! Thank you!

[dmullenasc]

The majority of cinema has been shot on standard 35mm for a century, not Full Frame. So there is no reason for filmmakers to always convert the focal lengths they are using to Full Frame equivalents in terms of field of view when discussing their movie. When we talk about Orson Welles’ use of the 24mm on “Citizen Kane” or the 18.5mm on “Touch of Evil”, we don’t convert those numbers to Full Frame equivalents.

[dmullenasc]

“A 35mm lens on a Full Frame camera is around 27,5mm on a Super 35.”

No, a 35mm lens on a Full Frame camera is 35mm on Super 35. The format doesn’t change the focal length of the lens.

[Roger Deakins]

I have used long lenses and also a zoom on a few occasions. I am not a fan of keeping a zoom on the camera as a standard lens but I wouldn’t say I am not a fan of long lenses. i don’t see how that follows. It makes sense why Conrad used long lenses for ‘Without Limits’. If a project came along that felt like a ‘long lens’ film and that was the effect the director was after, then I don’t see why I would say no.

[Roger Deakins]

I rarely soften the sun with diffusion. The problem with doing that, unless you have a large crane and lots of time and money, is the source then becomes close to the subject and ‘wraps’ around too much. I will very occasionally use a net to take down the strength of the sun for a close shot.
As for bounce sources, I would rarely put something in direct opposition to the backlight. Here I might use a small bounce card, maybe a silver reflector, to light from below a subject. But I also might use an array of large unbleached muslin. So many variations and so many different situations. There is no one way to do anything when it comes to lighting.