Gavin Greenwalt
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2006
- Messages
- 7,614
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 36
- Age
- 40
I'm not a DIT but I do work in post and do VFX supervision and I can easily explain $1,000 a day and it comes down to one reason: scarcity. People in the film industry are some of the most creative and resourceful people I've ever met. When it comes to creative problem solving from directors, editors, DPs, grips, colorists and electricians down to PAs and producers--what an average film crew accomplishes on a daily basis is extraordinary.. BUT... they're generally Luddites (you knew I was buttering you up for something didn't you? 
).
Even in the post industry most people learn *how* something works but not *why* something works. How works great when you are doing the same task over and over again. "How do you assemble this dolly?" But that's not what you pay a grip for, you pay a grip to understand *why* you setup a dolly a certain way. So when you hand them something completely new, some new fangled piece of rigging equipment they can go "Oh, I get it, this acts like the _____ so if I _____ it will ______." When someone can take a process they understand and apply it in a new situation that's when you know they understand the inner workings. Digital is still in the how. There is so much though now to digital capture and it's changing so fast that a really good DIT should understand everything from sensors, to codecs, to programming, to IT, editng, to networking, to colorspaces, to grading, to storage, to.... etc etc etc. It's like the difference between a mechanic who can fix a 93 Honda because they were trained on how to fix a 93 honda vs a mechanic who understands the principles and can fix anything.
How does compression work? When do you need lower compression? When can you get away with higher compression? What's the difference between linear and log? In essence a good DIT in my opinion should be an on-set knowledge base for people who don't understand anything about the technical process and that is whyy..... they're hanging out with the director, they're hanging out with the producer, they're hanging out with the DP, they're chatting up the camera assistants. It's the same reason the VFX supervisor is often in the same situation and it usually makes me kind of uncomfortable but it's also unavoidable. The director will call you over and ask if it's ok to frame a shot like this and you have to walk that fine line between "Well, if you shot a little wide we can crop it down in post but it would give us more tracking information." The producer wants to know how much the director's shot list is going to cost for post. The DP wants to know if you're happy with the levels on the green screen, and you diplomatically ask if they would be willing to change the exposure slightly for a better key, the camera assistant has meta data that you need etc etc etc... That's all the rationalization for the '20 something' 'overpaid' technician floating around set in the case of a VFX supervisor but a good DIT should be answering similar questions and interacting with all of the decision heads. Maybe you can recommend to the DP that they could use HDRx, but what is HDRx? Are there any sacrifices? The producers want to know if the doubled data rate is worth the time/cost etc. The DP wants to see the shot with a one-light pass, but they have no idea what REDCine is nor have they have touched it, maybe is an F65 shoot and they've never used Sony's raw processor. Everything is interconnected. There are very few people I know of who can reliably answer just about any question about all of the camera systems. There are tons of people who can operate. Supply and demand. Lots of DPs and directors who know nothing about technology and very few people who are familiar all the facets of digital production means a pool of DITs who can charge high rates.
I love film making and I love directing, shooting and all of the creative positions but I also recognize that every position is a unique talent; very few directors, DPs or other crew really have a strong grasp of all this new fangled technology--nor should they necessarily have to, that's why you pay consultants. I don't expect directors to understand all of the post ramifications of their decisions when I'm VFX supervising. But I'm happy to give them perspective if they ask (or to subtly let the producer know that their directors' decisions are going to cost them $30,000 to shoot that sequence handheld instead of locked off) and to try and provide solutions to any obstacles the technology creates "That specifically wouldn't work, but you could accomplish something very similar by ______" . It's not their job to know or care but a smart Creative will lean on their post people to make better informed creative decisions. Their job on set that day is to direct, light, act, produce etc. A good onset post artist should let a DP worry about lighting but be a resource to help them understand what their decisions will look like in post. They're a translator between someone's vision and the computers which make it real.
As to them being a douchebag? Well, some people are just douchebags.
). Even in the post industry most people learn *how* something works but not *why* something works. How works great when you are doing the same task over and over again. "How do you assemble this dolly?" But that's not what you pay a grip for, you pay a grip to understand *why* you setup a dolly a certain way. So when you hand them something completely new, some new fangled piece of rigging equipment they can go "Oh, I get it, this acts like the _____ so if I _____ it will ______." When someone can take a process they understand and apply it in a new situation that's when you know they understand the inner workings. Digital is still in the how. There is so much though now to digital capture and it's changing so fast that a really good DIT should understand everything from sensors, to codecs, to programming, to IT, editng, to networking, to colorspaces, to grading, to storage, to.... etc etc etc. It's like the difference between a mechanic who can fix a 93 Honda because they were trained on how to fix a 93 honda vs a mechanic who understands the principles and can fix anything.
How does compression work? When do you need lower compression? When can you get away with higher compression? What's the difference between linear and log? In essence a good DIT in my opinion should be an on-set knowledge base for people who don't understand anything about the technical process and that is whyy..... they're hanging out with the director, they're hanging out with the producer, they're hanging out with the DP, they're chatting up the camera assistants. It's the same reason the VFX supervisor is often in the same situation and it usually makes me kind of uncomfortable but it's also unavoidable. The director will call you over and ask if it's ok to frame a shot like this and you have to walk that fine line between "Well, if you shot a little wide we can crop it down in post but it would give us more tracking information." The producer wants to know how much the director's shot list is going to cost for post. The DP wants to know if you're happy with the levels on the green screen, and you diplomatically ask if they would be willing to change the exposure slightly for a better key, the camera assistant has meta data that you need etc etc etc... That's all the rationalization for the '20 something' 'overpaid' technician floating around set in the case of a VFX supervisor but a good DIT should be answering similar questions and interacting with all of the decision heads. Maybe you can recommend to the DP that they could use HDRx, but what is HDRx? Are there any sacrifices? The producers want to know if the doubled data rate is worth the time/cost etc. The DP wants to see the shot with a one-light pass, but they have no idea what REDCine is nor have they have touched it, maybe is an F65 shoot and they've never used Sony's raw processor. Everything is interconnected. There are very few people I know of who can reliably answer just about any question about all of the camera systems. There are tons of people who can operate. Supply and demand. Lots of DPs and directors who know nothing about technology and very few people who are familiar all the facets of digital production means a pool of DITs who can charge high rates.
I love film making and I love directing, shooting and all of the creative positions but I also recognize that every position is a unique talent; very few directors, DPs or other crew really have a strong grasp of all this new fangled technology--nor should they necessarily have to, that's why you pay consultants. I don't expect directors to understand all of the post ramifications of their decisions when I'm VFX supervising. But I'm happy to give them perspective if they ask (or to subtly let the producer know that their directors' decisions are going to cost them $30,000 to shoot that sequence handheld instead of locked off) and to try and provide solutions to any obstacles the technology creates "That specifically wouldn't work, but you could accomplish something very similar by ______" . It's not their job to know or care but a smart Creative will lean on their post people to make better informed creative decisions. Their job on set that day is to direct, light, act, produce etc. A good onset post artist should let a DP worry about lighting but be a resource to help them understand what their decisions will look like in post. They're a translator between someone's vision and the computers which make it real.
As to them being a douchebag? Well, some people are just douchebags.
