Why on earth does David Lynch still shoot w/the PD-150

Steven C. Boone · November 22, 2005

for some of his projects when there are now comparable cameras in that class that feature 24p?

His short "Darkened Room" looks like porn, not because of the content but because of the drab dv look.

Now he's doing "Inland Empire" with either the 150 or 170, not sure. Even no-budget 'hood movies are turning up with gorgeous images made by the DVX-100A or the XL2. Why shoot ugly?

Bryan Darling · November 22, 2005

Because it to is an aesthetic.

Brad Grimmett · November 22, 2005

Why shoot ugly?

I guess one man's ugly is another man's beauty. Although, personally I don't think shooting a feature on SD video is a great idea no matter what format, so it's all "ugly" to me. He's a smart enough guy to know what he wants though, and I'm sure he chose the proper format for what he wanted.

Jason Debus · November 22, 2005

Here's some of the quotes from David Lynch on the matter. Personally I think he's sick of companies owning his work. With his web site (and working with DV) he's found that he can be a different kind of director AND own his own work.

"It's about a woman in trouble, and it's a mystery, and that's about all I want to say about it."

"Making a film is a beautiful mystery. You go deep into the wood, and you don't want to come out of that wood, but the time is coming very soon when I will have to."

"I started working in DV for my Web site, and I fell in love with the medium. It's unbelievable, the freedom and the incredible different possibilities it affords, in shooting and in post-production."

"For me, there's no way back to film. I'm done with it. I love abstraction. Film is a beautiful medium, but it's very slow and you don't get a chance to try a lot of different things. With DV, you get those chances. And in post-production, if you can think it, you can do it."

"I'm writing as I go. I believe in the unity of things. When you have one part, and then a second part that doesn't relate to that first part, it's very curious to find that they do relate after all. It's a most beautiful thing."

"When you run out of film, you have to stop and reload, and during that time the heat sometimes goes off. But with this medium you can keep that heat, and it builds, and it's beautiful to see."

"[Laura Dern is] the most incredible actress. Some people get roles and do their thing, but some have a lot more inside and don't usually get the chance to show it."

"[The quality of the DV image] looks different. Some would say it looks bad. But it reminds me of early 35mm, that didn't have that tight grain. When you have a poor image, there's lots more room to dream."

"But I've done tests transferring DV to film, and there are all kinds of controls to dial in the look you want."

Steven C. Boone · November 22, 2005

Here's some of the quotes from David Lynch on the matter. Personally I think he's sick of companies owning his work. With his web site (and working with DV) he's found that he can be a different kind of director AND own his own work.

I hear that, Jason, but my perplexity has to do with his choice of a camera that can't give him 24 progressive frames, not with the low resolution of SD digital video, which I love (Super 8 and 16mm reversal blown up to 35 can be gorgeously grainy, for instance). I am not surprised by his rationale at all, but I think he does lose something by adding those six frames per second.

Matt Pacini · November 23, 2005

This has come up before.

It's been many, many years since David Lynch has made a film that has come close to breaking even.

Frankly, I think nobody is throwing money at him anymore, so he is reduced to shooting cheap.

Even his most critically acclaimed films (like Mulholland Drive) have sucked farts at the box office.

If you don't believe me, go to the link below and type in all the Lynch films you can think of:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/daily/

MP

David Mullen ASC · November 24, 2005

But even if that were true (and I doubt that he can't afford to shoot film), that doesn't explain a preference for the PD150 when there are better video cameras out there. To me, it just shows that the issue ISN'T budget, because if budget were the only thing driving his choice of format, he'd try and use the best video camera he could get his hands on. Clearly it's an aesthetic choice.

Chris Burke · November 24, 2005

This has come up before.

It's been many, many years since David Lynch has made a film that has come close to breaking even.

Frankly, I think nobody is throwing money at him anymore, so he is reduced to shooting cheap.

Even his most critically acclaimed films (like Mulholland Drive) have sucked farts at the box office.

If you don't believe me, go to the link below and type in all the Lynch films you can think of:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/daily/

MP

He is not all that poor though. Most of us on these boards are of modest means, David Lynch's pockets are far deeper than many of us, so my point is, he could have afforded 35mm if he wanted it. He is used to a lot of experimentation, so DV is a logical choice. He has always clashed with hollywood, so to be more self sufficient, as he thinks he is, he is making a rather safe choice. I have a feeling he will shoot film again, just not for a while. It would be cool if he went with Super 8

Steven C. Boone · November 24, 2005

He is not all that poor though. Most of us on these boards are of modest means, David Lynch's pockets are far deeper than many of us, so my point is, he could have afforded 35mm if he wanted it. He is used to a lot of experimentation, so DV is a logical choice. He has always clashed with hollywood, so to be more self sufficient, as he thinks he is, he is making a rather safe choice. I have a feeling he will shoot film again, just not for a while. It would be cool if he went with Super 8

Not to beat a comatose horse, but I would love to see some of these freewheeling auteurs embrace the DVX-100A, which produces some gorgeous images, even in the hands of nobodies like me. Love to see Wong Kar-Wai and Chris Doyle do some run-and-gun stuff with it, for instance...

But in the end it's an aesthetic choice, as David says. Lynch just likes the industrial video/porn look, I supppose. Judging from his previous films, coulda fooled me.

Lars.Erik · December 1, 2005

Hey there. I was a DP on a tv-series this summer. On that series was a operator who worked on the above mentioned Lynch film.

And yes, I also asked: "what is he thinking? shooting on DP-150?"

David said that he had chosen video because:

a) he didn't want the look of the film to overshadow the actors. He wanted to tell a story about people. And letting a camera just be a camera.

B) now, he chose the PD because he liked it. Period. What can one say? He's David Lynch. One of the last TRUE masters. He shot a lot of footage himself, and there was also 2 other operators on it. My operator and one more. Don't know who. So there was a lot of 3 camera setting there.

Saw some stills of the set. The set looks like a Lynch set. I'm looking forward to it. Just because it's Lynch. Hey, if he shot in S-VHS I'd still see it. Becuase it's a Lynch film.

Edited December 1, 2005 by Lars.Erik

Lars.Erik · December 1, 2005

And I have to add, this I'm sorry.

As far as "break even" goes, who the f.... cares? Thank god for Europe. Most of his films are distributed and financed through Europe now. The US has become, sadly, a kind of McDonald's when it comes to movies. Spitting out "blockbuster" after "blockbuster", sure the add looks a bit exciting. Then, when you take a bite at it, man, I get depressed over how much money is spent on making the same crap over and over again. We need people like Lynch. We still need to seee true film once in a while.

Of course, there are good films in the US. And some of the best workers in the world. It's just the system over there now. Hope you can get real film people in executive positions again.

Jaan Shenberger · December 1, 2005

a little off subject, but anyone who thinks of dv as simply a cheap low-res stand in for film should watch godard's "in praise of love" from a few years ago-- by far the best application of dv i've seen yet. he's an old man now, but he's still showing how to approach things in a new way.

joshua gallegos · April 29, 2016

I just saw the short and thought it was incredible. I don't like how almost all cinematographers are conditioned to create impeccable images that look pristine with no visible grain, etc. in a way cinematographers can be pretty snobbish when it comes to creating images. I like cinematographers like Gregg Toland who were more about composition and movement, image size. If you listen to David Lynch speak in certain interviews, he's not zoned in on narrow-minded thinking, but he uses anything within his disposal to be creative, whether it be using a DV camera to continue making his great work.

Landon D. Parks · April 30, 2016

David Lynch a bit weird to me... But as for his choice of Camera - probably because he likes the look of interlaced SD. Someone with his money could certainly afford a few grand to get a pretty nice 4k progressive camera. Since he does not, I assume he shoots on it because he likes the way it handles and looks.

That is just my assumption though.

Edited April 30, 2016 by Landon D. Parks

Brian Drysdale · April 30, 2016

This thread was started in 2005, so shooting with a PD 150 would've been in fashion then. The only 4k camera around at roughly that time would be the DALSA.

joshua gallegos · April 30, 2016

He also used it to film Inland Empire and also served as his own cinematographer. that just shows me this whole "prestige" in moviemaking doesn't come from pretty images, a lot of cinematographers are obsessed with getting the cleanest image possible. I've never really liked that, it shouldn't have to be that way all the time. David is just a great reminder that cinema is anything that you want it to be.

Edited April 30, 2016 by joshua gallegos

Manu Delpech · May 1, 2016

You guys do know he's going back to film with Twin Peaks?

joshua gallegos · May 1, 2016

It says he's filming digital on imdb. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4093826/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec

Landon D. Parks · May 2, 2016

You guys do know he's going back to film with Twin Peaks?

As Joshua said, Twin Peaks will be digitally shot.

Source: http://welcometotwinpeaks.com/news/new-twin-peaks-digital/

Manu Delpech · May 2, 2016

Booooooooooooooo, he changed his tune.

joshua gallegos · May 2, 2016

I can't argue that 'Mulholland Drive' is one of the greatest movies ever made on film, but David's work shines through on any given format. The man can make a movie on a VHS camera and make it art. David actually champions the digital format as it allows him to express himself even more freely. He's quickly becoming my favorite filmmaker of all time, because he is a rare artist who doesn't give in to the masses, even if his films weren't commercially successful, he still remains true to his vision. I think 'Mulholland Drive' will become a very important film as time goes by. What amazes me the most is his film structure, it's unlike anything I've ever seen, his movies are abstract, but at the same time very comprehensible. And his transitions are absolutely gorgeous, I've never seen a dissolve or fade to black quite like he does it. For those who are accustomed to mainstream American cinema, his films may seem "weird", but David is a true poet of the movies, it's a shame he hasn't received the proper respect. Perhaps 'Mulholland Drive' will become the next 'Citizen Kane' or 'Vertigo' many decades from now, it's ahead of its time!

Edited May 2, 2016 by joshua gallegos