Dragon Update

[Elsie N]

Ummm... I guess. But they are the person on a production who I would most credit for the look of a film. But if we're going to go off into left field then you could say "if Epic is good enough for ___insert_favorite_writer___ then it's good enough for me!" After all writers are really important to a film. Perhaps THE most important part of the whole film. But if the subject matter is image, skin tones and color response I'm probably not going to go ask the writer what cameras were used on their best written films.

And not to go off into the weeds too far, I do recommend Epic for most everything I work on. But I also think that Deakin's opinion is spot on, which shouldn't be a surprise since it's his life's work to scrutinize images (unlike Sodenberg et. all).

I think your allusion to a writer of a film and choice of camera is a bit of a stretch for making your point.

And as I said before, Deakins can afford his eccentricities because he's shooting with someone else's money. But a cost concious real-world DP is going to make money choices when confronted with "Camera B gives me a look I prefer in a portrait shot but is probably more costly to the production... or Camera A gives me a perfectly fine look and one that other professionals in my field have no problem with and in many, if not most cases, prefer.

I think people like Soderberg are interested in bringing the attention to the story while Deakins is probably more interested in having the attention directed toward himself, through his work. Nothing wrong with either approach I suppose, but I think the storyteller's work will be remembered by the public, while pixel peepers will be in the self-defined Purist's corner.

And sometimes the two approaches come together in the same movie. '-)

 

[Elsie N]

Then why are you wasting your time on a cinematography forum?

Yikes! Did I get transferred to Cinematography.com? Sorry! I'll try to find my way back to the Dragon Update thread.

 

[Jason Rudd]

I wish people would get off that illusion that the DP is the one person who is most responsible for the look of a movie. The production designer and director are equally if not often more important. Production Designers are often the most influential and yet least lauded and known of this trinity.

Ummm... I guess. But they are the person on a production who I would most credit for the look of a film. But if we're going to go off into left field then you could say "if Epic is good enough for ___insert_favorite_writer___ then it's good enough for me!" After all writers are really important to a film. Perhaps THE most important part of the whole film. But if the subject matter is image, skin tones and color response I'm probably not going to go ask the writer what cameras were used on their best written films.
.

 

[Mark Andersen]

I wish people would get off that illusion that the DP is the one person who is most responsible for the look of a movie. The production designer and director are equally if not often more important. Production Designers are often the most influential and yet least lauded and known of this trinity.

I any AV media the V is only half of it. Lets not forget the importance of the Audio. Of course it has little to do with the look, but a lot to do with the feel of the movie. Ok, let's get back on track. Sorry.

 

[Asif Limbada]

I any AV media the V is only half of it. Lets not forget the importance of the Audio. Of course it has little to do with the look, but a lot to do with the feel of the movie. Ok, let's get back on track. Sorry.

yeah like RED, give us some info on Dragon:willy_nilly:

 

[Peter Moretti]

...
I think people like Soderberg are interested in bringing the attention to the story while Deakins is probably more interested in having the attention directed toward himself, through his work. ...

That's a pretty outrageous thing to say, IMHO.

 

[Paul Harb]

I see outrageous statements like that all the time in these forums....There seems to be a certain hatred towards craftsmen.

That's a pretty outrageous thing to say, IMHO.

 

[Elsie N]

That's a pretty outrageous thing to say, IMHO.

Possibly... I don't know the man personally. Just making my best guess from the info provided.

 

[Brant Hadfield]

Possibly... I don't know the man personally. Just making my best guess from the info provided.

Yeah you're completely wrong on that one. It is story, story, story for him. He actually is quite opposed to the idea of cinematography calling attention to itself for that purpose.

 

[Elsie N]

Yeah you're completely wrong on that one. It is story, story, story for him. He actually is quite opposed to the idea of cinematography calling attention to itself for that purpose.

ITBT then I've totally misjudged the man.

 

[Eryc Tramonn]

I wish people would get off that illusion that the DP is the one person who is most responsible for the look of a movie. The production designer and director are equally if not often more important. Production Designers are often the most influential and yet least lauded and known of this trinity.

Agreed. When it works well...it is a "collaboration" in the truest sense of the word. Auteur theory is passé.

 

[Jeff Brown]

ITBT then I've totally misjudged the man.

What does ITBT mean? Is that internet pirate language? "If that be true?"

 

[Phil Holland]

What does ITBT mean? Is that internet pirate language? "If that be true?"

"If Truth Be Told"

 

[Daniel Pearson]

ITBT then I've totally misjudged the man.

From the few interviews I've read and seen Roger Deakins appears nothing by humble, polite, and entirely caring of the craft of film making.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I wish people would get off that illusion that the DP is the one person who is most responsible for the look of a movie. The production designer and director are equally if not often more important. Production Designers are often the most influential and yet least lauded and known of this trinity.

I'll concede that. Poor choice of words on my part. "Most responsible for the image on a movie". Better? I don't mean the overall style of a film so much as the nitty gritty details of lighting, skin tones, grading etc.

Honestly forget the production designer, director and DP I think the concept artists are often most responsible for the look of a film. *ducks* (Or in the case of Life of Pi, matte painters).

 

[Nook Kim]

I thought this was Dragon thread. Oh, it is..
How's Graeme doing with Dragon color science?

 

[Will Keir]

me too. Keep up the good work team.

Kudos to Red for taking whatever time is necessary to get it right. Perfectly happy shooting Epic-X until then!

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

Yikes! Did I get transferred to Cinematography.com? Sorry! I'll try to find my way back to the Dragon Update thread.

Well, Reduser is not a scriptwriting site. It's a site relating very directly to cinematography.

In Canada they make many dreary, ugly dingy looking films under the notion that "It's the truth about the story that counts." General audiences find these films unwatchable, which is why they need government grants to even exist. Everything matters. Cinematography, set design, makeup too.

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

I see outrageous statements like that all the time in these forums....There seems to be a certain hatred towards craftsmen.

Agreed. I think they come from do-it-all yourself types who don't want to contemplate the possibility that they do not know it all.

 

[Kyle Dones]

I thought this was Dragon thread. Oh, it is..
How's Graeme doing with Dragon color science?

I asked myself this question about 15 times today. I've come to the conclusion I don't want to know. I want to be taken by surprise, yell in excitement upon discovery that footage has been released, over react after my preorder has been processed then brag to my clients they f***ing with dat sh!t.