This area does not yet contain any content.
TWITTER
"There's no point in having sharp images when you've

FUZZY IDEAS" -JLG.

This is my blog. Sometimes it will have news, sometimes it will have thoughts, sometimes I will rant, sometimes I will ramble. Not everything here will be cogent, coherent, true, or even factual; but I promise it will always be honest. These are my fuzzy ideas.

Entries in Cinematography (9)

Monday
Aug082011

World on a Wire

I took in a couple of movies this weekend with my good friend and amazing cinematographer, HutcH. Some good, some bad; but the winner of the weekend was definitely Rainer Werner Fassbinder's science fiction epic, World on a Wire (Welt am Draht; Janus Films).

Made for German television in 1973, this film (actually a 2-part mini-series) - despite moments that may seem cheesy or campy in modern context - was ages ahead of its time and an absolute masterpiece. Artfully shot in 16mm reversal by the great Michael Ballhaus, A.S.C. (The Last Temptation of Christ, Gangs of New York and many, many others), the cinematography was absolutely stunning as you can see from the trailer.

Welt am Draht tells the story of a virtual reality computer engineer who finds himself caught in an intrigue that goes straight to the top and beyond. Part thriller, part love story, part dystopia, World on a Wire is all good. I want to stay away from too many plot details because it's actually fairly easy to figure out what's going on watching it in the year 2011. It's pretty familiar subject matter yet it doesn't disappoint on any level.

The film was until recently considered a "lost film;" nearly impossible to see except in low-grade versions on the Internet. In 2010 it received a new release after an amazing restoration. There's really only 1 shot in the film that looks severely degraded and the color and tone are just phenomenal. I highly recommend this for any cinema lover or lover of classic science fiction. If you're in New York, it's playing the rest of this week at IFC Center; but being a three and a half hour movie there's only one mid-day showing. Personally, I think it's worth taking a day off work for; or you can wait for the DVD.

(or, if you're a real film nerd and have a Region 2 DVD Player you can get the DVD below). 

Friday
Feb182011

The Power of Super 8 Film

Last night I made a trip over to the Kodak screening room for a mini-seminar on "The Power of Super 8," given by Phil Vigeant of Pro8mm (previously Super 8 Sound). I've known of Pro8mm for a few years now, having seen them around on cinematography forums and in magazines, and I've bought and processed a couple of rolls through them. Most recently, I sent the first batch of 52 Weeks Project cartridges to them for processing and transfer because they have quite reasonable prices for HD scans and specialize in the Super 8 format. Most importantly, Phil and company are doing - and have been for years - more than anyone to keep this format alive and champion its viability as a medium. Perhaps their biggest contribution has been repackaging professional motion picture color negative stocks from Kodak and Fuji in the Super 8 format by cutting down and perforating 35mm rolls. Kodak has helped Super 8 quite a bit too, by packaging their current Vision stocks (they've always done black and white and reversal stocks) as Super 8, but the first folks to do this were Phil and Pro8mm and they continue to re-package stocks we want such as the new Fuji Vivid 500 (I can't wait to burn some of this for the 52WP). Pro8mm and its predecessor are responsible for several other innovations in the realm of modern Super 8 film making and they really ought to be praised for it. 

Lately I've noticed that Pro8mm have been kind of vocal in their marketing. There have been seminars around the country, Phil has written a book on the topic, and I've been seeing news about these "Power of Super 8 Film" boot camps. It seems Phil is on a campaign, or, even better, a crusade to further champion the cause of small format cinematography. And why not? Contrary to popular belief, film is still alive and kicking even if its presence isn't felt as strongly in the mainstream as it once was. There are many of us that prefer film, and many more who choose to see the proliferation of digital cinema (and photography) as a widening of the landscape rather than the paradigm shift we're told it is. The rise in Super 8 shooting parallels, I think, what has gone on in the digital world to a certain degree. The digital world is all atwitter with enthusiasm for DSLR cinematography which comes with its share of compromises and weaknesses but produces something of high enough quality to be seen as an acceptable low-cost alternative to shooting with more advanced systems from companies like Arri and Red. Likewise, Super 8 has its share of shortcomings but, as Pro8mm and others have been demonstrating, provides a low-cost yet valid alternative to shooting on Super 16 or Super 35.

So I went to the two-hour seminar last night hoping to learn a thing or two. I'm still honestly a novice with film and with Super 8 and while I understand the fundamentals that I knew would be discussed, I felt I'd get something out of going. I also knew that part of the free presentation would be marketing for the not-quite-so-free weekend-long boot camp. I went in with no more intention than spending a couple hours around like-minded individuals and learning a couple things, but by the end of the night I had my credit card out and was trying to figure out how many pennies I'll have to rub together until they turn into a trip to Los Angeles. I'll be attending the Power of Super 8 Boot Camp the weekend of March 25th and I'd urge anyone interested in analog cinematography at any level to do the same if you can. For my part I just know there's so much I still have to learn - and look forward to learning. I also have to say that I was just incredibly inspired by Phil's enthusiasm for the medium and really blown away by the footage he showed.

I'm excited. There really never has been a better time to be shooting film.

(photo provided via Creative Commons by Flickr user Jovino)

Friday
Oct292010

Introducing The 52 Weeks Project

I've been thinking about some things. For a lone filmmaker, shooting analog can be expensive. I'm not making a general statement that shooting film is too expensive or that digital cinema cuts acquisition costs because on a production of any real budget that's simply not true. But, since my deep preference is to shoot film, it's not so easy to just pick up the camera and go shoot something. At the end of the day, though, I'd rather shoot Super 8 than HD. It's as simple as that. Super 8 film, when you include processing and transfer, still isn't the cheapest thing on the planet, but if you're smart about it you can shoot over two hours for under $2500. Now, a lot of people will look at that and say, "I can get a DSLR for that and shoot two hundred hours, or two thousand." Well, that's a big part of my problem with digital cinematography: people shoot too much. I understand that practice makes perfect, but the more there is of something, the less value it has. Shoot too much, and there's a commoditization effect that begins to creep in that really devalues the work. But, if you can shoot judiciously, deliberately, distilling each moment to your creative will - not whim, but will - then I reckon you're doing something right. So the question becomes, "How do you shoot the least as much as possible?"

The 52 Weeks Project is my challenge for 2011. Each week I intend to produce a  2 - 2 1/2 minute movie. If that sounds suspiciously like the duration of a Super 8 cartridge, well, that's because that's my film budget. How do you make a 150 second movie with 150 seconds of film? You shoot 1:1, in sequence, and edit in camera. So these will be short, concise, and probably very imperfect movies. But they will challenge me to think things through, shoot deliberately, and get to the heart of things in very short order.

The Ground Rules:

 

  • 1 Movie will be shot each week and released as quickly as possible - no excuses
  • Each movie will be no more than 1 cartridge long
  • No chapters - no stringing movies out across multiple cartridges
  • Editing is done in-camera - no cutting
  • Digital post processing such as titles, color grading, and VFX are allowed
  • I will produce, direct, and shoot each movie; but it is acceptable to have other writers
  • I will try to make each movie unique, covering a variety of subjects, genres, styles, etc.
  • I will break all of these rules, including this one, but never more than once in a single movie.

 

That's it. More news and updates will be coming on this blog as I progress towards shooting. I'll release the movies on this website as they complete. And finally, I invite other filmmakers to join me in this challenge. I think it's going to be very difficult and very rewarding.

(Photo courtesy Steven Kamenar, Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution License, http://www.flickr.com/photos/sunroom/with/3277145747/)

Wednesday
Jun302010

The Ingredients of Good Cinema

What makes good cinema? What makes a movie good, bad, flawed, memorable, gimmicky, nostalgic, pertinent, pretty, or any other quality? A lot of people will tell you that it's all about story. While I can't really disagree with that, I'd state it a little differently. And while I can certainly enjoy a well photographed film without much in the way of substance, I appreciate that simple gorgeous imagery doesn't make a good motion picture. At the same time a movie may be technically and fundamentally horrible but speak to me across the years. If such a film inspires something in me despite its flaws can it really be considered a cinematic failure? Here I'd like to describe what I think are really the three ingredients of good cinema.

Humanity

If the most important thing for a movie to have is story, then what makes a character piece so powerful? Certainly the bulk of people appreciate story more, but the most successful stories are those built upon compelling and interesting characters. Neither can a character study be very effective without some semblance of story against which a character is tested. Whether your preference is a thickly plotted story or a deeply intimate examination of character, what is most important is how you, the audience, are able to relate to that. We explore character and story through the lens of our own experiences and conviction; we contrast them against our knowledge and opinions of ourselves. In these terms a successful film is one by which we are able to take measure of our our own lives, goals, values and aspirations.

It is therefore the humanity of a movie that is the most important ingredient. It was this way long before even the invention of the camera. You could throw "Hamlet" up on a stage in front of a cardboard set and, if it was done well, people would love it and remember it because of its humanity and how we relate to it. Neither character nor plot take precedence in humanity. Indeed, sometimes they both conspire to produce a subtext of personal or social commentary that an audience can't help but connect with. Particularly successful examples capture that all too human phenomenon we call the zeitgeist and reflect it off the screen where it finds a special place in our minds and our hearts.

Beauty

Film is a visual art form, and also an auditory one. While a movie must reach out and tickle our humanity, the sound and visuals of the production help it to do so. Music tugs at our heart strings and provides emotional context, giving us clues as to how we should feel. And if one might say such a tactic is a crutch for delivering elements of humanity, one could also argue that any weapon which helps us break down our jaded walls, temporarily forsake everyday life, and suspend disbelief is a good tool to use. Gorgeous cinematography likewise helps draw us into the world created by the movie. It's not so much the believability of an image, but its credibility that is important. Any good chef will tell you that a large part of their work is in the presentation; in not only making something good but making you want to eat it. The image on screen, cast with thoughtful beauty, makes us want to believe what we are seeing. That desire to believe will only enhance the impact of the film's humanity.

Beauty can take the guise of gimmick too. This is especially true of genre or effects-laden films; but also in something as simple as casting a beautiful starlet or an iconic leading man. It is only a crime when done poorly or thoughtlessly. Beauty is a key ingredient of cinema because it should make you want to believe and invest in its humanity. Where beauty fails in this a failure the film suffers. On the other hand where a film lacks humanity, beauty adds little value.

Memory

Cinema is fundamentally an art form made of memory. The frame you see on screen only has value when combined with the memory of the frames before it. But more than that, a film can thrive on its ability either to invoke or to create memory. This can be true of any medium. I recall the first time, as a kid, I listened to the "Seasons in the Abyss" album by Slayer. "Dead Skin Mask," "War Ensemble," and the title track struck me then as being evil. In the early 1990s this was some of the darkest music you could find around and as a teenager raised Catholic, listening to music marketed as satanic with such wicked subjects and dark tones, Slayer's music just seemed evil and spooky. It created a memory for me. Today, that album is a classic and I know that all the imagery is just part of the show. But when I listen to it, it still seems kind of evil; and I'm transported back to being 16 and wondering what people would think if they knew my mind was being invaded by such evil.

Yes, part of it is nostalgia. Perhaps a breakup scene in a movie brings a similar experience back to haunt you. Maybe a war movie reminds you of your days as a G.I. But this is part of the self-examination that hopefully makes us better people. Memory enhances our humanity. Maybe it brings us face to face with values we once held but have now abandoned for better or worse. Better, maybe the memory of a moment in a film will be recalled later in your life during a time of similar context. Even though cinema is a creation, it is one that we experience. If the experience is not memorable it loses value. But the real value of memory is its ability to preserve the humanity of a moment for a time when it may be more significant personally than at the time it was originally experience. Memory thus preserves the value of a film's humanity for posterity, making its influence part of the human experience.

From that posterity - we hope - future filmmakers will draw upon that humanity, combine it with beauty, create memory and the cycle continues. 

Constant Cinema

Thursday
Jun172010

Kodak 1922 Color Film Test

This little gem can be found on Kodak's Youtube feed. It's probably the oldest sample of color cinematography that most of us will ever see. There was plenty of experimentation with color in the early 20th Century, but the first feature-length color movie wasn't released until 1935 - 13 years after this test.

Early color film technology combined just two colors and didn't have anywhere near the range of what we have today but even in this primitive state, the celluloid image has something magical in it. I realize that part of this footage's beauty is in its age and antiquity, but there's something else to it too. There's a warmer, more natural feeling that I don't think you can replicate in digital. Absolutely gorgeous. I particularly love how the reds pop out at you.

Tuesday
May182010

The "House" Season Finale

I spent various parts of the day writing a blog entry about the big win for DSLR cinematography in the form of last night's episode of "House." Unfortunately, the deep ambivalence I feel for these cameras kept creeping through and destroying any coherency in the article. So instead of rambling through a long post, here's the takeaway:

 

  • The bar has officially been lowered in cinematography
  • That lowered bar is pretty good, but please people, aim higher
  • Overall the episode looked pretty good
  • Filmmakers spent 85% of the episode at reasonable DoF
  • The last 5 minutes looked ridiculous with the shallow focus
  • The bokeh sometimes looked like crap, especially during rack focus; the lenses they used were decent so I wonder if it has anything to do with image sampling.
  • Digital noise was more pleasant than I expected but not great
  • Small form factor of the cameras was good for the cramped location, but I don't know why they didn't opt for an A-minima or Ikonoskop, or Hell, even a prototype Epic (sure Jim would have been all over that) which would have looked better.
  • Kudos on the awesome use of primary colors in the art direction
  • Story was good, I wasn't distracted from it until the end
  • Overall, I grade it a B-

And there you go.

Click to read more ...

Thursday
Apr012010

"The Lonely Sound"

The last film project I worked on before leaving Dallas was a short piece by Joe Harris (@joethevisualist), under the working title "Bitch Flick." I blogged about it here. Well, that short finally has a proper name and Joe has posted a bit of a teaser. The teaser is beautiful and is peppered with hints of the fun HutcH (Cinematographer, @MuseLessMime) and I had playing with the Red and Lensbaby. Anyway, please enjoy. I can't wait to see the finished product early this summer.

Tuesday
Mar302010

Another Video SLR Convert

I personally have very mixed feelings about the rise of video DSLR cameras such as the Canon 5D mark II. I can't deny that some of the work being done on these things is amazing, and the Zacuto Shootout that's being released bit-by-bit is clear evidence of the potential of these cameras. This post, though, isn't about my opinions about this trend - that's coming soon. This is about promoting a friend and his work. Richard Crook, a DP from Dallas that I've worked with recently shot a short film on his 5D rig. I saw production stills this morning and while my first thought was "et tu, Richard?" my second thought was "well, it's certainly a step up from his HVX200/Redrock rig (sorry, Rich, you know how I feel about that kit). This afternoon Rich caught me online and sent me a link to a preview of "The Key," and I have to say, it looks fantastic. With some lightweight dolly and crane gear, a good video rig, and a small crew, he shot something that is beautiful, professional looking, and at a value well beyond its budget.



After watching that, I wanted to share Rich's blog on the tools he used to turn his 5D into a real cinematic tool. So, please take the time to check out his "Complete Idiot's Guide to the Canon 5D MkII."
Monday
Mar082010

A Moment of Cognitive Dissonance

My immediate reaction upon learning that Avatar had won the Oscar for best cinematography was frustration. Don't get me wrong. I loved Avatar and and thought it was gorgeous, and though i'm not one of those guys that automatically decries anything that uses digital capture I do have a hard time accepting something with so much CG as a contender for best cinematography. A lot of what's being "shot" just isn't there and so my feeling was that the cinematography on a film like this is a far cry from the traditional direction of motion picture photography.

Or is it?

Click to read more ...

HTML5 Powered with CSS3 / Styling, Multimedia, and Semantics