Chris Graham

Bill Holm, Westford MA: "You should warn your viewers about movies like this. They should be rated MS, for motion sickness." lol. i told you guys. i wasn't jokin! blame it on Traffic! people wanting to copy Soderberg and MTV esque

lol. i thought this thread was going to be about something like the great "Mexican Golden Era" or Golden Era in general, and the type of film production involved

and then this trend will influence indie kats to only do digital =P

ah, you bring me back to film school! =) you sound like a strict instructor =P

i have two grunts. the front row seating in the film industry, and the "jerkycam" movement relating to that in particular! again, this goes back to architectural cutoff of seating and being smart. all i'm saying is that you're going to do this sort of stuff for a blockbuster just please think about the front people. static images aren't so bad, but ughhh i'm pretty sure most get the point. that's not fair. on the upside when the film is release for dvd it becomes a totally different scenario.

well if you notice my initial post refers to the initial showing, hence, the screen! the thEEathA! =) not home watching where there are more variables at hand such as distance from the screen and the many marketed sizes. my ARGUMENT is that it's a stupid technique not well thought out. in fact its just as stupid as the whole idea of front row seating. why? because filmmaking isn't like theatre plays, which films so immaturely adapted. of course side viewing of seats of plays, in akward spots, isn't even comparable to a film screen which by sideview or up close and personal becomes distorted!!!! how can any front row viewer enjoy that type of fast handheld jittery stuff when their field of vision is already horrible. i don't know anybody that enjoys seating at the front. if you have to then you have to for the fact that the individual bought the tickets. this doesn't apply to all film theatres, but most do this, and so fu**ing stupid! why? because the theatre didn't think right, doesn't care about distorted vision, but knows that $$$$$$$$$$$ is better than anything. front row seating to a certain point should be eliminated and replanned upon building new theatres. geez, there's needs to be a freaking cut off! that's my rant. and you don't get that whole idea, well then in all honesty you really don't know the entertainment of a good film. architects wake the f*ck up

imo steadicam's justification and introduction was more flexibility to shooting, and the blatant stability of an image within a frame. i'm not a cinematographer. my concentration was in directing. one can't obviously blame a cinematographer since shots are made by executive (direct) decision or instruction. i guess in the end it's all about preference. i will say that if a director decides to go with fast paced "shakycam," only use a little...i guess. one did mention a good point about depth of field compensation...moreso the zoom effect. the more the zoom the more potential for jiggle. but every pro cinematographer knows this. my theory is that in this late period, 24p, digital, light weightness, easy accessibility, mtv... sorry for the rant fellas. maybe the bourne ultimatum was just bad that i jump into a tangent. i prefer steady framing because I KNOW for a FACT that many many individuals DO get dizzy with fast camera movement and imo that's not fair. you want your viewer to enjoy every part of the picture and not have them turn away. as another individual mentioned what may seem cool within a small screen edit vs. a theatre are two totally different proportions.

Hey, fellas hope all is well. Ok, I think after Traffic (imo) things have been really geared toward a new sloppy or two quick hand-held style without proper moderation of steady-cam. From Amorres Perros, to 21 Grams, Crash, Babel, Bourne Identity, etc.. Just finished watching the Bourne Ultimatum, and with my unlucky seat aisle, i was dead center, but not too close to the screen, so it wasn't too bad. throughout the film I couldn't imagine what the side viewers or very front row viewers were going through. i could see several people turn away during crazy shot edited scenes or during the general and wild "real-world" era of filmming. for far viewers or the good seated people this isn't so much of a problem. during film school in the late 90s to early 00s I never took to heart what my instructors had said regarding hand held shooting. now i'm saying this style is fairly new, no not all, but imo I'm tired of it! How can this trendy style have any significance to making a film good? Shame on a Director who wants this or "oh but it gives a sense of realism!" c'mon, this is filmmaking. The real challenge is doing what others can't do, or rather just being different. Anybody can shoot hand held imo... I blame MTV and these new era realists.. or reality tv shows. man get this hand held crap out of true movie making please!! Anybody else agree? Geez, when I look back at the classics no Director or cinematographer would sell themselves short for that! For indies, sure why not, not like they can afford the best cranes, jibs, setups... The Bourne Ultimatum was a real bore imo. Hand held fastness and cuts doesn't create suspense, it creates cheap and dull work. end of rant..

R2-Demon-2 ! lol

Well I guess in 30+ years to come someone will remake Star Wars again. Not a bad idea. so then that would mean this whole thread was paradoxical!! :ph34r:

Not really, but I understand you. I'm into classic Japanese cinema and that of Samurai flicks. What other country was doing epics of Samurai stories before the Japanese? who copied who? Samurai Rebellion is not even in Kurosawa esque, one of Mifune's best performances. most Jedi close-ups that come in with the dolly were inspired by that one Mifune shot. it's greatly introduced in Phantom Menace. I will add that Phantom Menace is breathtaking even with the score. I guess it's not bad to continue traditional styles out of respect, but again, camera movement should be the biggest challenge for any cinematographer, and should have heavy responsibility in telling the Director, "well let me suggest this." that's where a cinematographer embraces his style. There are plenty of Cinematographers that care less, and you get that from the root of film school and how they worked. Those habits and traits continue, and therefore the one's that win awards are the ones who were outstanding achievers in school, or the unique individuals. maybe i'm just in a weird mood lately. maybe you guys can give me ten great reasons as to why Star Wars is the bomb! technical and story reasons. I need to get back into Lucas mode, and no I'm not a hypocrite! lol

Well, I just referenced LOA as a dune influence. I do recall in Film school that being called "reflexibility" it's ongoing and common practice. regarding the shot you mentioned, that's what I was referring to, a seemless transition of one continued shot (w/out special effects) to another establishment. it was brilliant. been a while since i've seen the film, but it's a shot you don't forget!

as the British say, "you missed be taking the piss!" it's not like i'm comparing books here. lol

which shot you referring to? i feel like poppin in LOA for a reminder. longshot masters if you ask me. anyhow, i do recall a scene where the camera is facing up, i think it's a ms or cu of lawrence and some arab guy, then when they leave the shot it tilts down to a longshot. freaking awesome technique. two great shots for the price of one! lol

Ben-Hur is a very dark film, darker than Star Wars. 11 oscar's in a sitting. i know ben-hur is a remake, any director can die happy with 11 oscars achieved for one film, even if the revenue isn't as big as Lucasfilm! i'm willing to bet his video game market over 15+ has made more than his films. lucky guy nonetheless, and i do love Lucas' work don't get me wrong, it's just pure revelation after watching the classics more and more

i will do admit that Lucas transcends epic to newly creative art. however, without a doubt, Hollywood for the longest has been culturally biased to its Jewish background and people who run it. there's a lot of significance within that statement when you think about it. probably another reason why most islamic radicals hate American culture. can't blame them. oh my god how can I forget Willow!!!!!! there wouldn't be a Lord Of The Rings without Willow! ILM at the time was way ahead of its time. i'd like to see the new prints to Blu-Ray! regarding LOTR, yeah I know it's based on the book, but again we're going back to originality. I think it's time for Ridley Scott to do some magic again like when he did that film with Cruise. i forgot the name

i've never even followed up on most documentation. i'm just thinking as a cinematography forum, i guess depending on how you observe frame content & establishment, it's not hard to miss. yeah i have Laurence of Arabia as well. sand is a definite influence to Lucas. like I said and mentioned, Seven Samurai would part of a Kurosawa classic!!!!! wouldn't you think what i meant by Howard The Duck or Indy is that there were no films before those! c'mon, most films are adaptations from a source, particular a novel why do you think we're in an age for pure indie dramas? btw, another guy that urks me is Tarantino. no different than Lucas. Kill Bill is a blatant spaghetti western rip stylee from the original Kill starring Tatsuya Nakadai i think a lot of pictures need to go back to the art of true dolly shooting and strategic camera movement. this whole cgi convenience is just fake. i do like Michael Ballhaus' work, or i guess if directed right

however, i will add that Juda Ben Hur's new gf when hanging out in Rome, that woman is a freaking stunning-gorgeous English chick!

imo, it's a blatant rip from Ben-Hur & the Kurosawa classics. i guess most of you know this as nothing new. i guess at least Lucas does admit adapting. jesus christ! i mean Juda Ben Hur is Luke Skywalker and the general is Darth Vader. "please, let me die" or "leave me." like Luke or Juda, they discover dark secrets. i mean films that progress greatly give off foreshadowing so easily. Without a doubt Ben Hur is culturally biased...with analogies to the Nazis. which again is Star Wars. pretty obvious in clothing that the enemies wear German outfitting whereas the good guys tend to wear traditional Jewish clothing with a mixture of English culture or even more noticeable, Samurai clothing. all mixed. i think even the direction when Juda meets his long time friend is sooooo similar to when Han Solo meets Lando. "old buddies." shoot, i can think of MANY things that'll have this discussion hitting 20 pages easily. i don't know anymore. I love the Star Wars series, but Lucas is completely unoriginal! except maybe for Indiana Jones and Howard the Duck! lol

that's the one. thanks! btw, were these all done on S8 strictly?

can't find it.

Hello people. :) I'm helping with some side editing, and what was invested was a Pyro A/V Link by ADS Tech. It's pretty good for what it is, since I'm capturing off some old hi-8 camera and a library of tapes. Anyhow, I'm only charging for the hour, and the client doesn't want to spend on anything extra, just what's given. So, I have a G4 Powerbook hooked up; two USB (2.0) 120GB hard drives. one is an iomega HDD 120gb on one USB port, and the other port a WD USB (2.0) 120GB hard drive. i'm not familiar with this setup since most of my captures is on a single 300+ SCSI harddrive on a dual G5 setup. but anyways... so i'm scratching audio and render to one hard drive, and the other for video. when i capture the allocation to disc space is on hold, so i can't see the capture in real-time. should i not be doing this way? is FW the standard? perhaps I should just shoot for one drive? hmmm thanks

well, there's a scene in that video where a candle gets cut in slow motion, and that smoothness usually comes from film cameras. i'm thinking s16 then! and I say that because you mention HD. I'd really like to know because I'd want to tackle a project like that but on S8 with a really good transfer to a non-compressed drive here are some stills

That video came out in 1998! The single came out in '97.

music video called "Ni Ten Ichi Ryu" by electronic music producer Photek. Can't make out if it was done initially in B&W or a post effect. i know it's a dojo and it's supposed be dark and all, but I think lighting could've been better, especially on the main character's face at least! Doesn't seem like any effects were applied in post, like a dry cut. Well anyways, I'm thinking with a good B&W stock and a Canon 1014 would be even better. only in the exterior shots where they're fighting makes me believe that it doesn't have a crystal motor. What do you guys recon?