We say Conrad Hall & Greg Tolland were the best...

[Boone Hudgins]

Not neccesarily look up to them, but respect them more. Their work is amazing, if it wasn't they wouldn't be doing videos for some of the biggest rock bands around.

 

I mean, could anyone on this board actually do work like that?

Nobody's disrespecting these cinematographers. Quite a few music videos look great. You're the one disrespecting the work of people who paved the way for them. The people that, no doubt, most modern cinematographers look up to.

 

And yeah, there are people on this board that could do work like that. The aforementioned Claudio Miranda. Check Adam Frisch's website, he rocks. David Mullen probably could if he felt like it. In fact, I think most feature film cinematographers could do amazing work on a music video if they wanted to work on one. Didn't Allen Daviau do that A Perfect Circle video "Judith" with David Fincher? Better than most of those kind of videos.

 

Most of the interesting videos right now are ones that are more subdued, in my opinion. Take, for example, a video for the song "Telescope Eyes," by Eisley. Pretty video, not a lot of tricks. http://www.eisley.com/videos.php?video=2 (and if not for the work of people like Hall, this style of lighting may not exist)

 

I mean, creating original work is about the easiest damn thing to do!

Tell that to the many people around the world with writer's block.

 

Now it just seems like you're calling these people bad cinematographers. As if you're saying "Sure, they were innovators, but they innovated crappy ideas." But the cinematographers you mentioned were among the founders of quite a few of the techniques cinematographer's use today. If you use hard light and deep focus, thank Tolland. If you enjoy soft, naturalistic photography and shallow focus, thank Conrad Hall. Not only did they help define these styles, but they showed people how to do them right.

[David Mullen ASC]

If you want to know why someone is good, study who they learned from. Go to the source. You want to understand Spielberg and how to direct like him, study the people HE learned from, like Michael Curtiz or John Frankenheimer or Alfred Hitchcock. You want to learn how the current great DP's work, study who inspired them in the first place. If you admire some music video DP and he tells you "Gordon Willis was my biggest influence" or "I watched everything Storaro ever shot" then that must mean something, like you should respect their opinion if you respect their work. And then study Storaro. And then study Storaro's influences, like DiVenanzo or Toland. Then study Toland's influences, like George Barnes...

 

Go to the sources, study the history of the artform, or else all you will be doing is blindly copying something currently trendy without any depth to your work...

[Max Jacoby]

I find it strange how people say cinematographers like Conrad L. Hall are so great because they *created* a whole new look, or whatever. I mean, it's not exactly difficult to create something original, but when creating original work you're limited to creating *good original work*, unless you want to create something that's totally weird and annoying to watch.

 

To be honest Daniel, and I am not alone in thinking this, you really should learn to think things over before you open your mouth. Because most of your statements end up reflecting very badly on you.

[Jonathan Spear]

""To be honest Daniel, and I am not alone in thinking this, you really should learn to think things over before you open your mouth. Because most of your statements end up reflecting very badly on you""

 

No they don't.

He's a newbie, like myself and many others on this board.

It's threads like these that yeild the best answers and most interesting opinions.

 

Besides, who the hell are you to judge anyone?

Edited April 24, 2005 by TSM

[Max Jacoby]

No they don't.

Yes they do. Just read the answers that Daniel has been getting to his statments. And quite frankly if I were a producer or director looking for a Dop and I came accross his comments, then I'd wouldn't even think of hiring him.

 

Besides, who the hell are you to judge anyone?

I am just pointing out the obvious.

[Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith]

We must watch completely different music channels. Every RnB and Hip Hop act have the exact same video

Rap videos are probably the same, most likely because all rap sounds the same. But rock videos vary so much.

 

If I may completely ignore any points of argument in your post and just refute one simple fact: there was a movie in the 1950s based on some Raymond Chandler book that was shot subjectively from the protagonist's POV. I saw some of it but I have forgotten what it was called.

Well, not that it's a good idea atall, but I thought of that idea without copying anything and in the space of a minute, literally.

 

Our society is being geared to the really really young & inexperienced...

And what they usually like is crap (because they've not experience anything

and what can you expect from folks who haven't even graduated HS)

& so what the rest of us get to see is crap

Actually if you started creating movies for the older generation, you'd destroy cinema. The average movie go-ers are young, it's young people that fund your movies. If you suddenly only started showing films for the older generation, the younger generation would get bored and stop going to the cinemas. And considering most adults don't have time to go to the cinemas anyway, that's cinema gone and finished. So, can't say I like that idea.

 

{Pardon my harsh opinions but I really think most of the stuff on MTV is crap

as is The Fast & the Furious, Charlie's Angel, Triple X, The Ring 2 etc...}

Most of the stuff.. cinematography wise? Because the fast and the furious was actually a well shot film believe it or not, I think what your saying is that you hate the film because it's aimed at a young audience, so therefore you hate anything about it. Personally I didn't like any of the films in that list that I had watched, but that's because I don't like a lot of modern cinema. Not neccesarily because they are bad films. But on the other hand, a lot of modern cinema beats any of the older films by far. I mean, just look at:

 

Road to Perdition

Titanic

Gladiator

The Pianist

The Aviator

Lemony Snickets A Series of Unfortunate Events

Saving Private Ryan

 

I mean, cinemas never been so good! Unless you want to disagree of course and say those films were *crap* just because they are modern. I mean, films like Road to Perdition and Gladiator are considered to be some of the greatest films ever made!

 

What I'm saying is that just because something is popular or makes a lot of money does not mean its the best, it just means that many people have bad taste, or the capitalist system has managed to market the hell out of something that isn't that good.

Ok, so your saying that because *you* don't think Titanic is a good film, that everyone else has bad taste? Titanic was actually very good film, like it or not, and just wonder WHY it was so popular. It appealed to so many people, that's why it got so popular. Are you saying we should all make films that are good, but don't appeal to a viewing public atall? It's like suicide!

 

To be honest Daniel, and I am not alone in thinking this, you really should learn to think things over before you open your mouth. Because most of your statements end up reflecting very badly on you.

Well atleast you didn't give me your trademark "You don't know what you are talking about" statement. Reflecting bad on me? At the end of the day, this is a discussion, I'm not asking for help, so that's why I'm putting my opinion in. If I was asking for help obviously I'd do it with more respect and I'd leave opinions out of it, but considering this is a debate, you post whatever your opinion is. I mean, it doesn't seem like it, but all were having is a civilised debate.

[Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith]

Yes they do. Just read the answers that Daniel has been getting to his statments. And quite frankly if I were a producer or director looking for a Dop and I came accross his comments, then I'd wouldn't even think of hiring him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeh well whats the chances of that, besides, as soon as I start getting some descent sized jobs I'll most likely start this account again and delete all the messages.

[Sam Wells]

I mean, creating original work is about the easiest damn thing to do! If you're willing to take a risk that is. Here?s an idea, why not shoot the whole movie from a subjective view from the protagonist? That would be blowing the hell out of shot conformity! No ones ever done that before!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This has been done in experimental cinema by various people for the last 50 years.

 

Before you reply with a diatribe about avant-garde/experimental film make sure you're aware how that history permeates a history of commercial filmmaking (absoluetly including MTV).

 

-Sam

[Sam Wells]

If you want to know why someone is good, study who they learned from.

...

 

Go to the sources, study the history of the artform, or else all you will be doing is blindly copying something currently trendy without any depth to your work...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Or to paraphrase T.S. Eliot "if we can know more than them it's because THEY are what we know"

 

-Sam

[Stuart Brereton]

...I find it strange how people say cinematographers like Conrad L. Hall are so great because they *created* a whole new look....

 

...I mean, creating original work is about the easiest damn thing to do!

 

...As far as I'm concerned feature film DP's copy music video DP's...

 

...never have I seen two music videos that look the same.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Please, somebody tell me he's winding us up...Please.

[Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith]

It's not about creating new styles e.t.c. it's about creating good looking shots that show meaning.

 

As far as I'm concerned, that's what makes a great DP. I mean, in my film career, I don't exactly intend on creating any new styles, I might or might not, but mainly I just want to create stunning shots that gets everyones attention.

[Max Jacoby]

I mean, films like Road to Perdition and Gladiator are considered to be some of the greatest films ever made!

 

I think this statement pretty much says it all. Considered by whom? Empire

Magazine? The Daily Mail? 'Road to Perdition' is not even Sam Mendes' best film. And as an interesting director that he is, he is never even mentioned in the same breath as Tarkovsky, Kubrick, Bresson, Ozu, Renoir, Welles, etc...

 

Great films have been made for over a century already, not just the last five years. This really is like listening to a teenager trying to argue that Jay Z is a better musician than Mozart. You just hope that one day they'll come to realize themselves how uninformed they were.

[Max Jacoby]

Yeh well whats the chances of that, besides, as soon as I start getting some descent sized jobs I'll most likely start this account again and delete all the messages.

 

So you don't even stand by your opinions? Do you think your messages might be embarrassing in the future?

[Alessandro Machi]

This is going to be a 7 page thread.

 

Said on page one, well done!

 

Most of what some people, hopefully not you, might construe as "good cinematography" in music videos is post-production effects. 

 

Excellent point.

[Stuart Brereton]

It's not about creating new styles e.t.c. it's about creating good looking shots that show meaning.

 

As far as I'm concerned, that's what makes a great DP.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Creating good looking shots and conveying meaning are part of the job description. If you can't do that, you aren't a DP at all.

 

For a DP, greatness comes from innovation and daring, and from moving the art onwards from it's current state. That's what separates DPs like Conrad Hall and Greg Tolland from the rest of us.

[Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith]

Great films have been made for over a century already, not just the last five years. This really is like listening to a teenager trying to argue that Jay Z is a better musician than Mozart. You just hope that one day they'll come to realize themselves how uninformed they were.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

SOME, great films have been made over the last century. Nothing really sticks out like those films though. Even Citizen Kane, apparently the greatest film ever made, it didn't appeal to audiences enough to be recognized by most people around today. People will remember Titanic for years to come.

 

People on here can believe that a great film consists of new styles e.t.c. Personally I believe in making films that entertain audiences. Exactly the reason why I'd rather sit here and watch Die Hard 3 rather than Citizen Kane.

 

I don't want to be sitting in a cinema going "wow, I wonder how they did that shot, thats groundbreaking cinematography that is e.t.c. e.t.c.", I'd rather be in a cinema watching Shrek 2 with some friends having fun.

 

It's the reason why I'm even going into the film industry, to make great films that people like to watch. Isn't that the whole POINT of films? Unless you disagree of course, I'd love to hear the reason for it.

 

 

So you don't even stand by your opinions? Do you think your messages might be embarrassing in the future?

Well I'm no professional and obviously get things wrong, so, yes they might be embarasing in the future.

 

Creating good looking shots and conveying meaning are part of the job description. If you can't do that, you aren't a DP at all.

Yeh but it depends "how" good looking the shots are. Anyone can shoot a 35mm film, but can they judge perfectly how much DOF to use, or where to place the camera e.t.c. Or how to light for that matter.

Edited April 24, 2005 by Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

[Stuart Brereton]

I don't want to be sitting in a cinema going "wow, I wonder how they did that shot, thats groundbreaking cinematography that is e.t.c. e.t.c.", I'd rather be in a cinema watching Shrek 2 with some friends having fun.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Are you absolutely sure that you want to be a DP?

 

Cinematography is a demanding vocation. It requires both technical knowledge and artistic appreciation. It requires an understanding of narrative. It needs a familiarity with the work that has gone before. It requires a HELL of a lot of hard work and dedication.

 

If your statement above is true, perhaps you should look elsewhere.

 

It's interesting that the film you say you'd rather be watching, didn't require a DP....

Edited April 24, 2005 by Stuart Brereton

[Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith]

Are you absolutely sure that you want to be a DP?

I've been thinking about it, I think that I may be better off a director.

 

I've directed all the films I've done before, although I've also DP'd them. So it's hard to know what field I really want to go into. Even the film I'm doing this summer, I'm directing AND DP'ing it. (Aswell as acting in and producing it, and worst of all.. FUNDING IT....)

 

Being a DP just seems like an obvious career for me though. I've always felt confident I could do it because I know how to shoot a scene in my head and how I want it to look, exactly. If my ideas for my summer film came out on tape then it would look pucker, but if theres one thing I've learn't, it's that things NEVER come out the way you imagined them to.

 

DP or director. Either one for me.

 

Reason I like DP'ing: Creating good looking shots.

Reason I like directing: I practically make the movie, I tell everyone exactly how I want a scene to look, how the actors should say lines e.t.c. And plus the fact that I am an actor anyway kind of helps.

 

Either way I'm willing to 100% dedicate myself to it and work my a*s off. IMAO I mean I've already worked quite hard on some of the projects I've done, not long ago I was shooting what was going to be a TV series, I had to take weeks off college to do it, as soon I got back at midnight I would have to catch up on college work, by 4 I would have 2 hours sleep, get up at 6 and be on my way down to London again. Trouble is I started to get really stressed out with filming towards the end, I wasn't having fun like on most films, I just didn't seem to get along 100% with the cast and crew. (No offense but most of them were gay and their sense of humour was just not funny)

Edited April 24, 2005 by Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

[Max Jacoby]

SOME, great films have been made over the last century. Nothing really sticks out like those films though. Even Citizen Kane, apparently the greatest film ever made, it didn't appeal to audiences enough to be recognized by most people around today. People will remember Titanic for years to come.

 

This really is a kid arguying that Jay Z is better than Mozart! Daniel, you are so going to regret these statements in the future.

 

We've had this discussion before, but to sum it up, you simply have not yet seen enough films to know what a really good film is. You are still in your 'films are there to entertain' phase, which everyone goes through when they are young mind you. Hopefully you will grow out of it and realize that cinema can reach further than just pure entertainment. That the quality of a film is not determined by the amount of money that it grosses or the amount of sequels that get made from it.

[Jonathan Spear]

""That's what separates DPs like Conrad Hall and Greg Tolland from the rest of us.""

 

===========

 

We're all potential Hall's and Toland's.

 

It boils down to talent, determination, motivation, inspiration, creativity and personal style.

 

I.E - How much you care about what you're doing, how much effort you put into it and the distance you're willing to go versus the risks you take to get there.

Some blind luck won't hurt either.

 

===========

 

""For a DP, greatness comes from innovation and daring, and from moving the art onwards from it's current state.""

 

===========

 

Exactly.

 

And that's what Dan is doing.

He's questioning what may very well be outdated opinions and standards.

 

I think it's safe to say that Hollywood has changed a lot throughout the decades.

Filmmakers have changed. Styles have changed.

Casablanca and Citizen Kane, to many in our generation, are no longer what CASABLANCA and CITIZEN KANE were to my parent's generation.

And yes, I've seen them both.

 

There are OTHER more recent films which have set DIFFERENT standards.

If you think 'different' is a swear word - stop living in the past.

 

Road to Perdition and Gladiator were tremendous acheivements in their own right.

 

It's funny that you can notice that in older films but refuse to see it anywhere else.

Have you seen the live action Peter Pan movie that came out a few years ago (or was it last year? eh. da-n weed.) I saw something new and inspiring in the color pallete the filmmaker's chose as well as the unique angles they used to film a story we've all heard before.

 

Besides, what's wrong with being inspired by music videos?

They're pretty da-n cool.

And that's what it's all about anyways, right?

 

You want to make people feel by showing stories or ideas.

If you're in the business of telling people what to think by forcing "your" opinions on them, you should immediately cease all filmmaking activities and find another profession.

No one likes that.

 

Didn't Darious Kondji come from a commercial/music video background?

[Max Jacoby]

I tell everyone exactly how I want a scene to look, how the actors should say lines e.t.c. And plus the fact that I am an actor anyway kind of helps.

A good director never has to tell his actors how to say a line. He puts them in a position where they come up with the right approach to a piece of dialogue themselves. As an 'actor' you should know that. :D

[Jonathan Spear]

what's wrong, audiris?

 

feeling a bit unsure of yourself at the ol' workplace?

[Max Jacoby]

You obviously don't get the point that I'm arguying.

[Stuart Brereton]

"We're all potential Hall's and Toland's. It boils down to talent, determination, motivation, inspiration, creativity and personal style."

 

You make it sound so easy....

 

"And that's what Dan is doing. He's questioning what may very well be outdated opinions and standards."

 

Why should these opinions be outdated? Is Greg Tollands' contribution to cinema lessened because it happened 60 years ago?

 

By that rationale, Van Gogh, Vermeer, Monet, Caravaggio, and many others painters are now longer 'Great'.

 

"Casablanca and Citizen Kane, to many in our generation, are no longer what CASABLANCA and CITIZEN KANE were to my parent's generation."

 

We're not talking about these films relevancy. We are talking about their Cinematography. That hasn't changed.

 

 

"Road to Perdition and Gladiator were tremendous acheivements in their own right."

 

I agree, however, Road to Perdition is actually one of the films that Daniel originally said that he thought was not as good as some music videos.

 

"Besides, what's wrong with being inspired by music videos? Didn't Darious Kondji come from a commercial/music video background?"

 

Nothing is wrong with being inspired by Promos. The original observation was that the camera work in them is largely derivative, and that many of the "innovative" techniques in them had been 'borrowed' from feature films.

[Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith]

This really is a kid arguying that Jay Z is better than Mozart! Daniel, you are so going to regret these statements in the future.

 

We've had this discussion before, but to sum it up, you simply have not yet seen enough films to know what a really good film is. You are still in your 'films are there to entertain' phase, which everyone goes through when they are young mind you. Hopefully you will grow out of it and realize that cinema can reach further than just pure entertainment. That the quality of a film is not determined by the amount of money that it grosses or the amount of sequels that get made from it.

I'm not arguing that Titanic is a better film, I'm arguing that Titanic, regardless or not if it's a better film cinematography wise or whatever, has attracted a much larger audience and will be remembered unlike Citizen Kane.

 

I completely understand creating films with high qualities e.t.c. but, I'm not interested in it.

 

I like the idea of creating a film with new groundbreaking styles, but I'd rather create something that leave people walking out of the cinemas thinking "Wow, what an amazing film, I've got to see that again".

 

We're all potential Hall's and Toland's.

 

It boils down to talent, determination, motivation, inspiration, creativity and personal style.

Exactly. And considering were young, we've been brought up with a different generation of films, so it's going to be people like us that create the next generation, which could be anything.

 

or was it last year? eh. da-n weed

:lol: I wouldn't worry, that stuff is supposed to make you more creative!

 

A good director never has to tell his actors how to say a line. He puts them in a position where they come up with the right approach to a piece of dialogue themselves. As an 'actor' you should know that.

Ok, Max I have no idea what experience you have, but I've been acting professionally since I was 4, doing all kinds of theatre productions.

 

Sooo.. and I quote this - "I'm sorry but that statement just show that you really have no idea what your talking about".

 

;)

 

On the OTHER hand, I'm not an experienced director. So really you should have said as a "director" you should know this.

 

"We're all potential Hall's and Toland's. It boils down to talent, determination, motivation, inspiration, creativity and personal style."

 

You make it sound so easy....

If your saying all of that is EASY, then you should question yourself why you haven't become and hugely successful film maker, because that's what it takes. And it's NOT easy.

 

I agree, however, Road to Perdition is actually one of the films that Daniel originally said that he thought was not as good as some music videos.

I didn't say it wasn't as good, what I was saying is that a lot of the shots in that film don't seem as complicated as music video setups, so what he did in Road to Perdition wasn't all that hard because music DP's are doing it all the time. On the other hand I was speaking from a shallow opinion, I now know that Road to Perdition is great because Conrad L. Hall created a whole new style of cinematography. Which, *apparently* music DP's don't do, they copy all of their work from feature films. And from all the videos I've seen, I've seen so much unique work that it doesn't begin to correspond to any feature length films.

 

I mean that the video I posted, the first song "Time is Running Out" by MUSE, I've never seen any cinematography like that before! If there IS a film they've copied it from, feel free to mention it, but as far as I know I've never seen any work like it before. Which means it's an original, new style, so therefore they deserve a lot of credit.