Eric Steelberg ASC

And there it is. This is what the business is...relationships. I am very loyal to my vendors, not becuase of the specs of the gear but because of the relationships. And if I'm critical about something they just spent a million doing R&D on, they will listen to what I have to say. After all I will be the one ordering it...or not. Like David said, it's the hypercritical eyes of the working cinematographers whom RED should want to impress the most. So accepting their doubt and citicism over something as potentially groundbreaking as RED may be seems like a small inconvenience to deal with. I see no point in bickering back and forth. If you know your product is good then why even bother arguing? Let the product speak for itself. And keep in mind that as cinematographers we also care about more than just the image. At this point digital aquisition still benefits post people the most. I don't know many DPs who have shot a film digitally who prefer the myraid of cables and support gear to a 1000' mag of film and a lightmeter. What's the benefit of new technology if it slows us down on set, or makes our lives harder by involving us in more post we're already not paid for because we're the only ones who understand the workflow and technology? Delivering an image is only part of our job. We also have a schedule to adhere to and various management duties to take care of during production. We want our tools to just work. And new untested technology can threaten that. So if DPs want to keep asking the hard questions, let them or I suspect you'll see a backlash.

12 days left... I'm not going to be able to post stills, wish I could so everyone would have a better idea of what I've been talking about. There's nothing really new to talk about. I shot some of the most dramatic scenes in the script in the last 2 weeks...scenes I purposely chose 5229 for. These scenes are pretty warm and underexposed. Typically, as with 5218, I've found that skin will get a little too red/pink for my taste but the lower saturation of the 29 renders the same thing just right...warmth the way I imagine it in my head...without the reddish hue. On a non technical note...the actors are so good and so prepared. Our lead Ellen Page is such a pleasure to work with. This woman has one of the most beautiful faces I've ever lit...and I'm sure you'll all agree once the movie comes out. When an actor shows up and can do a 5-6 page scene in one take without missing lines, I find it boosts crew morale cause they know the actors are serious about their roles and likewise want to work hard. Jennifer Garner is the ultimate professional and also very lovely to light. We had a freak snowstorm up here 10 days ago...got about 4 inches in the neighborhood we were shooting in. The next day we cancelled our indoor schedule, set up a 2nd unit, and had both units shooting snow exteriors. This film goes through all the seasons and up until our snowstorm we had been planning on spending quite a bit on snow f/x for winter. Nature helped us out big time and we got wide shots we never planned or expected to get. Gotta catch up on some rest...

To de-tune the zoom involved re-spacing some elements in the focusing group of the lens, lowering the contrast. It took a while to get the same results at the wide end as well as the long end of the lens. I'm shooting everything at 2.8~3 but I did a location with night interiors in Juno's house all at a 2 and kept my key at about 1.7-1.8. Using the lenses this wide open resulted in some nice 'natural' diffusion. I'll see if I can get permission to post stills of my lighting setups. The studio is fanatical about images being released that show too much of the story even if through the set. But I'll try.

I'm going to attempt an update. I confess I'm very bad about updates, blogging, etc... I've just completed the first to weeks of principal photography. I came up on January 17th to start prep prior to that. A few things have changed since then. I lost my gaffer but was able to replace him with an equally qualified and talented one named John Dekker. I also have an amazing key grip David Askey. Names you should remember if you ever shoot up here. We ended up sticking with 4 perf 1.85. A DI still isn't guaranteed and that's why we did not go super 35. That being the case, I'm shooting as if doing a photochemical finish. During prep I shot exhaustive tests with the lenses and Kodak emulsions and even filters...something like 20,000' worth. I mentioned I had a special set of lenses put together for this show from Panavision. I worked with Dan Sasaki on this starting back in December. I wanted a set of primes and zooms that were as sharp as possible without the usual accompanied high contrast. We put together a set of primes (Panavision SS, SZ, UZ) that were nicely matched. The primes provide a beautiful roundness to the plane of focus, and fall of nicely. To that we found a Cooke 5-1 that matched and we de-tuned an Primo 11-1 for longer lens shots and where I needed a little more stop than the Cooke provides. They have named our set of lenses the "Junos." I settled on 2 stocks, 5229 and 5217. The Expression is such a gorgeous stock for this project. It's pastel rendition and contrast really is pleasing to my eye and have never been so excited about a film stock. I shot it before on a music video and liked it but never got to print it. I've found I need to print it in the low 30s to get good blacks so I've been rating it at 400. The 17 I've been rating normally. I've been fortunate to have the budget to print about 1000' of dailies per day and this came from the producers! It's refreshing to see producers recognizing the importance of prints. So at the end of every day I select takes from certain scenes to be printed. I got the best compliment maybe ever on Friday night...one of the producers said she got a call from the studio (Fox Searchlight) head saying "dailies look really great" and the producer was waiting for the "but" and it never came. The head of the studio called just to say how great the dailies look. The producer said she has never gotten a call from a studio head calling just to say that. Good feeling, the positive reinforcement helps. The shoot is difficult. We're 30 days total but locked into 12 hour days. The script is 120 pages. We're going so fast I find that I'm not "thinking" on how to light the scenes, but rather just going on instinct and emotion built up during prep. I cannot emphasize how important prep is on a big feature. If I didn't know every scene inside out I'd be dead. I've lit a couple scenes so far and had the gaffer say "this is exactly how Chris Menges does it" which is funny cause I thought Notes On A Scandal is brilliantly shot and the director and I have thought this film has a kind of British film aesthetic. My favorite lighting I've done so far is where I stapled a string of lights with clear bulbs to the ceiling of an eating area in a tiny kitchen, dimmed down to about 40%...really warm...and hid an MR16 in the practical over the table to shine down and provide a little fill off the surface of the table. I've had a bunch of night exteriors too that I'm overjoyed with. I will try and post stills of the lighting. I've been shooting stills to email to the lab and colorist at night. It's really an invaluable tool. I'm not using any kind of preview system to do so...I looked at Kodak's and Gamma & Density's but realized I just don't have the time to use it. Like I said, we're flying along. From my film tests I have a pretty accurate idea of how the film stocks "see" so I'm able to process the shots in Photoshop and that's working well. What else...I shot filter tests but so far have not shot any scenes I want to use them in. I settled on Classic Softs and Black Diffusion FX. I liked the Glimmer Glass as well but thought there was just a little more halation than the BDFX. I LOVE the look of the BDFX, but you need to see it projected to appreciate it...as with all filters. There were some interesting ones we tested. I literally pulled every kind of diffusion filter out of Panavision's drawers to shoot. I also discovered I will never ever use a white promist. Just not my style. I know a lot of guys like using a light grade of one and perhaps it's different when finishing to tape where you can adjust for the change in contrast, but projected I just can't stand it. That's about all I can think of for now unless unless anyone wants to know something more specific. Oh, coupe of interesting side notes...my Sundance film "Quinceañera" won the John Cassevetes Award for the best feature under $500k yesterday that the Independent Spirit Awards. Jason Reitman, the director on this, also won for Best Screenplay. I also ran into John Bailey, ASC and Ernest Dickerson, ASC lat night here in the hotel bar. Had a nice brief chat with them. Tomorrow begins 10 days of scenes with Jason Bateman and Jennifer Garner. Should be exciting...

Karl, HD was mandated by the agency as a requirement. They said it's Wal*Mart's new policy. It's strange since the year before I did a couple other spots for them and were quite happy shooting film. I have since heard from other people doing Wal*Mart commercials that they are shooting film. So who knows. The spot in the theater is no longer airing since it was for christmas, but a couple others still are but on tv. One involves a wife taking a family photo and picking up the pics at the store, the other involves a little boy buying some stuff at a register with a gift card.

You may want to try talking about other films that you like and why you think they could be a good reference for the one you're interviewing for. If the director has similar sensibilities, it may lead to a fruitful 'interview.' In my opinion, the more questions that are asked, the worse it ends up. The most successful interviews 've had are the ones that just end up being conversation about their film, films in general, personal stories, etc.

FYI.. "Quinceañera" is now out on dvd! This is the low budget HD film I shot two years ago that won Sundance '06. I just got my copy and there is even some interviews with us on it. Enjoy! Side note: There is a trailer for "The Quiet" on the dvd, another small HD film shot by Mr. David Mullen. Small town...

Regarding gate flare with anamorphic, I wondered that too but I suspect it may have to do with the optics of the anamorphic lens, though it doesn't make sense why that would be. I like that there is a little bit of voodoo and magic to shooting. (voodoo and magic = things I don't understand, can also refer to happy accidents)

Keep in mind though that if you use common top in 3 perf you have a higher likelihood to be a victim of gate flare...light boucing off the inside of the gate and hitting the film, resulting in small vertical flares entering the top of frame. It happened to me more than a few times on my last feature and you don't know it's happening until you see dailies.

On QUINCEAÑERA the Keys were paid $175/day. There were many people at $125-$150. It was just the way it had to be. They only had so much money so they couldn't afford to pay any more. As David mentioned it gets sucked up by many different parts of the production. The only people with experience making a feature were thee Directors, myself, Gaffer, Production Designers. Everyone else, inlcluding the actors, were 1st timers. Experience may have been scarce, but I had never seen people work so hard and enthusiastically. That $300k film went on to win Sundance. There will always be people to work for the rate especially in competive markets like LA. And don't discount the project just because they rates aren't "normal". The first consideration should always be your interest in the project. If you like it, only then should you see if you can "afford" to do it. You'd be amazed what you can "afford" to do if you truly love the material.

Gorgeous. Well Done. Any more? What was the setup you used on the camera? Diffusion on the lens or applied in post?

I'd say you also have to consider the delivery format. Is this destined for a filmout to theaters or is it most likely going to be a TV/DVD sale? If you don't need to filmout, you definitely don't need to record to disk. If I were in this situation I'd get as many Varicams as I could to increase coverage and put whatever money was leftover into an extra grip or electric to help you move along as fast as possible.

Thanks for the love Danielle... BUT I was careful when I said art "CAN bring people together"...I didn't say it always does or has. I took history classes too. What was on my mind specifically was modern cinema and the social aspect of a theater. When I typed "if employees don't like it they can quit or get degree and become a professional" I didn't say that was my opinion. I said it was another side of the argument I had heard. Poor attitude? C'mon...

Right...which is why I posted in the first place...to talk about the commercial. There are many who think it's a bit strange that they won't let their employees unionize yet spend millions on union produced advertising. There are even a few crew who turned down the work based on that. I've heard others say "Wal*Mart is doing nothing wrong. If employees don't like it they can quit or get degree and become a professional." Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, including you, and including myself. I appreciate your praise wholeheartedly. My last comment though was a response to the fact that these forums have been straying furhter and further away from Cinematography in the last year and that holds less interest for me. I don't think politics has any place here. One of the greatest things about art is that it can bring people together and be enjoyed by those who are otherwise separated by poilitics, religion, etc.

I knew there was a reason I didn't post for a couple of months...

Saw it last night. I can't remember being so impressed technically and artistically. Not only was I completely sucked into the narrative and direction, but Lubezki's work was stellar. The print I saw might also be one of the best prints I've seen of any film ever. The DI was insanely sharp and grain free. Operating superb, production design best I've seen in a long time. Let's not forget all the work that went in to creating amazing sets and locations that they could shoot.

Wow, all I said was "Wal*Mart" and it's become a Michael Moore documentary.

There have been many posts on this topic if you search this site. But, I reaffirm what David said. If you have to ask then there probably is no good reason to join right now. I joined in Feb this year as a DP and it cost me over $11k all said and done. I did it because I had worked too many union commercials as a non-union member and the 600 sent me a letter...and a bill, no kidding. It worked out well though as I had also just been offered my first union feature. It wasn't till October when I finally qualified for benefits. One common misconception is that joining automatically gives you benefits...NO! You need to have 600 hours in 12 months to qualify initially. Anything more than that is not carried over. Once you have qualified, you need 300 hours every 6 months. Anything over that is carried over and 'banked.' Absolutely no point in joining unless you are passing up union jobs.

Umm, yea. There were some crew members that also had 'opinions' which they kept to themselves. Nevertheless, they gave the director tremendous trust and creative control. The director and I also did last year's theater spot for Wal*Mart. It's great to do work for a company who can afford to air it to mass audiences. So frequently in commercials companies will spend all this money on fantastic spots but not be able to afford to air them very often.

Yes, that's the one. It's called "12 Minutes." Glad you liked it!

I've actually had this up since September, but it's hasn't been complete. There are still a few things left to do but for the most part it's finished. I also have a blog on it that I'm trying out, accesibe via the "News" page. Enjoy (or not) link below in signature

Not sure if it's playing past christmas, but I just found out that one of my Wal*Mart commercials has been airing in theaters. It involved a guy rushing to a Wal*Mart at the last minute to buy a gift after he shows up at a christmas party giftless. Anyway, I have no idea how it came out as I was not involved in any pat of post. It should look pretty good as we shot it on HD framed for 2:40. If anyone saw it let me know!

Our gaffer is going to be Steve Jackson. I don't know anything about Vancouver vs Toronto, but my experience on this and previous jobs up there has been very favorable when comparing Vancouver to LA crews. One of the 'conditions' of me doing this film was working with local crews so I am not able to bring anyone up.

Yes, it's IA signatory. It looks like I'm getting the best Vancouver has to offer...really talented, even overqualified, guys.

Anamorphic won't be an option. Jason was very put off of it on "Smoking" due to limitations in wide focal lengths. Furthermore, we're leaning in the direction of 1:85. I just returned froma week of location scouting and found some wonderful places to shoot. The weather was predictably bad with constant rain and overcast, but we're determined to weave it into the story as to be unnoticeable. I also spent a few hours at the end of every day interviewing crew and found some fantastic keyes. It will be my pleasure to work with them on this. Also on board are some alumni from "Smoking," the AD and PD, both of whom I've worked with on commercials.