True Digital

[John Brawley]

I have just learned that our ACS guild here in Australia will not accept in their awards any film which is 100% digital. In other words, there has to be some kind of live action component. And they will only judge or look at the live action component.

 

Now, I've been involved with a project that is totally 100% animated. I'll be getting a DOP credit on the film. Im framing all the shots, designing all the actual camera moves, and then lighting it. (all in Maya)

 

Cinematography is writing with light. To me, this should be as eligible for consideration and should in fact be considered as genuine cinematography.

 

Just wondering if the situation is different elsewhere, and if anyone thinks it ISN"T cinematography. I think this is going to happen more and more often. Another fellow DP has just done the same thing. I think is work is amazing on the short and he should be able to at least be recognised for it.

 

jb

[Phil Rhodes]

I'm entirely happy with the idea that it's cinematography.

 

Even more outlandishly, we currently have people doing both production design and lighting on computer games, which is even harder, since you don't necessarily control the camera angles to more than a fairly general degree. I think it's all worthy of recognition.

 

Phil

[David Mullen ASC]

Well, if there's enough CGI movies made a year, there could be a "Best Cinematography for Computer Animation" award given.

 

While it's true that you could simply alter the rules to allow CGI movies to be considered for live-action cinematography awards, odds are high that it would never get nominated when having to compete against a glut of live-action movies released that year, not when the nominating process is run by live-action cinematographers. So it would be a symbolic rule change that wouldn't help the CGI cinematographer much.

 

By the way, over at the ASC, we have had "digital" cinematographers (the term is confusing because it sounds like someone shooting with a digital camera) over for presentations to the members.

[David Auner aac]

Hi,

 

I'm absolutely convinced that CG cinematography is just that, writing with motion. But I concur with David's idea of having an award Best Cinematography (Live) And Best Cinematography (CG) because I'd find it difficult to objectively compare a live action movie to a CG one. After all you face different production problems (e.g. there's no weather in CG but the given limitations of your software to work around). So from my point of view it would be unfair to both if they'd have to compete in the same category. That doesn't imply that either is more "cinematographical" or should be regarded more or less highly.

 

Regards, Dave

[Dominic Case]

Clearly you'd have to have different categories for CGI: the toolsets, the mode of work, the challenges are so entirely different for CGI and for live action, even though the goals of creating images that tell the story are the same.

 

But that immediately brings up all sorts of demarcation issues. As just one example, which category would motion capture work go in?

 

And given that the ACS has nearly 20 different categories of award now, (Documentary, dramatised documentary, current affairs, commercials, fictional shorts, features etc etc), there would have to be several CGI categories. You couldn't dump all CGI-based work together, you'd at least need shorts, commercials, features categories (though I don't envisage a CGI/ News category any time soon!).

[John Brawley]

Clearly you'd have to have different categories for CGI: the toolsets, the mode of work, the challenges are so entirely different for CGI and for live action, even though the goals of creating images that tell the story are the same.

 

But that immediately brings up all sorts of demarcation issues. As just one example, which category would motion capture work go in?

 

And given that the ACS has nearly 20 different categories of award now, (Documentary, dramatised documentary, current affairs, commercials, fictional shorts, features etc etc), there would have to be several CGI categories. You couldn't dump all CGI-based work together, you'd at least need shorts, commercials, features categories (though I don't envisage a CGI/ News category any time soon!).

 

 

It is interesting. Ive always wondered about what the actual differences are in the ACS award categories such as Single camera news gathering, Multi camera news gathering, News Magazine, TV magazine, and Current Affairs ?????

 

To me they are all very close. Certainly news magazine, TV magazine and current affairs...??? I think that CGI and motion capture work should be at lease eligible under the specialised and experimental category.

 

And I don't know that motion capture work is worthy of recognition in itself ? Sure, as part of a larger project, but how do you judge that one motion capture cinematography example is better than another ? And it could already be entered under the Specialised and experimental category for example. Because it is a form of live action.

 

At the moment 100% CG cinematography is a rarity. I think in the interim we should at least be allowed to enter *a* category. As the body of work and practitioners increase, as it inevitably will, then open up some other categories ?

 

jb