Angeliki Makraki Posted February 13, 2007 Share Posted February 13, 2007 I noticed that in the new Anthony Minghella film, Breaking and Entering, there were three still photographers. One guy, one woman and a Special Still photographer. Now how do you suppose this came about ? I try to get on films with one stills photographer without any luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Borowski Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 One's shooting ECN-2, the other is shooting C-41, and the third is shooting E-6 ;-) No wait, now it's JPEG, TIF, and RAW. Sorry, this is no help at all. To be serious, I'd assume if they can afford to shoot with 10 cameras rolling at once (not commenting on this particular film, just certain stereotypical big-budget Hollywood movies), they can probably afford the union hourly rate of 3 set photographers. Did you also consider that perhaps one or two were on assignment for papers or magazines and only the other(s) were working for the film itself? It's kinda like asking how the NFL can afford to hire so many photographers to shoot at the Superbowl ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angeliki Makraki Posted February 15, 2007 Author Share Posted February 15, 2007 One's shooting ECN-2, the other is shooting C-41, and the third is shooting E-6 ;-) No wait, now it's JPEG, TIF, and RAW. Sorry, this is no help at all. To be serious, I'd assume if they can afford to shoot with 10 cameras rolling at once (not commenting on this particular film, just certain stereotypical big-budget Hollywood movies), they can probably afford the union hourly rate of 3 set photographers. Did you also consider that perhaps one or two were on assignment for papers or magazines and only the other(s) were working for the film itself? It's kinda like asking how the NFL can afford to hire so many photographers to shoot at the Superbowl ;-) EXACTLY...then why do most big productions only have one stillman ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Max Jacoby Posted February 15, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted February 15, 2007 You can bet that these people where not all hired at the same time. 3 stills photographers just doesn't make any sense at all and no producer in his/her right mind would hire more than one for the whole duration of the shoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Salzmann Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I'll second that. Unless they are super-pro, stills people seem to have a real knack for getting in the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angeliki Makraki Posted February 15, 2007 Author Share Posted February 15, 2007 You can bet that these people where not all hired at the same time. 3 stills photographers just doesn't make any sense at all and no producer in his/her right mind would hire more than one for the whole duration of the shoot. Why not ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Salzmann Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Because it makes no sense from a production standpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Brad Grimmett Posted February 16, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted February 16, 2007 I would guess that one photographer was shooting on set candid shots on a day to day basis, and another one was brought in to shoot portraits from time to time. The third photographer was probably just filling in when one of the others left the show. I could be wrong, but this makes sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angeliki Makraki Posted February 16, 2007 Author Share Posted February 16, 2007 I would guess that one photographer was shooting on set candid shots on a day to day basis, and another one was brought in to shoot portraits from time to time. The third photographer was probably just filling in when one of the others left the show. I could be wrong, but this makes sense to me. and how do you suppose they got there ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Borowski Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 I'll second that. Unless they are super-pro, stills people seem to have a real knack for getting in the way. Hey Dan, not all still photographers are paparazzi, you know. From their perspective, a camera crew with a Panavision probably gets a lot more in the way of their shots than vice versa, don't you think? If I were shooting a model in a studio and a video crew were there, I don't think I'd be able to work at all with such a huge distraction to the model and myself. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Brad Grimmett Posted February 16, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted February 16, 2007 and how do you suppose they got there ? Um.....they probably drove a car.... Am I missing something in this question? Hey Dan, not all still photographers are paparazzi, you know. From their perspective, a camera crew with a Panavision probably gets a lot more in the way of their shots than vice versa, don't you think? I often joke with still photographers on set. "How do you find the still photographer on set?" "Look through the lens." But truthfully, the majority of them are really good about staying out of the way and still managing to get the shots they need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Smith Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 I personally don't mind stills photographers, just feels a bit funny knowing that they're taking pictures of you without you knowing. Makes me act different for some reason, then again I act different infront of any camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now