Jason Reimer

David, you're right about using that 5k PAR to simulate the sun, that shot coming straight in the window with all the of the flare is beautiful. What were you using for fill? This looks great, I'm looking forward to seeing the whole film.

Hi guys, first question I've posted in ages, but here goes. I have an idea in my head for a shot where I'd like to have a predominantly blue tone, with my subject lit with a few small, snooted lights picking out some contours and details with some slightly warmer than normal, amber to straw-ish light, so that there's a nice contrast of very cool and somewhat warm colors in the frame. Getting the blue is the easy part; if I shoot it digitally, I'd just do something simple like use a tungsten white balance and shoot during the latter part of the day, or better yet have a bit of overcast. If I shot film on one of my medium or large format cameras, I'd just use an 81 filter of some grade to "correct" my daylight-balanced film for tungsten. The part I'm trying to figure out is exactly what to gel the tungsten lights with so that I get the right amount of warmth. What I definitely don't want is anyone looking like they just got a spray-on tan :) So, what would you guys suggest?

I finally got a chance to see this, and loved it! I'm sure some will disagree, but I actually thought the asymmetric compositions served the story very well. To me, they underscored Bertie's discomfort with his surroundings, particularly his discomfort with people. The lighting was beautiful, the writing and the acting were great, and I just ate up those compositions. It was refreshing to see something that was different while at the same time clearly done with the intention of serving the story. If it made people a little ill at ease, then exactly! Welcome to his world. I thought it was brilliantly done. To Mr. Sprung- stutter or not, I'm sure any conversation with you in person would be worth any working or aspiring cinematographer's time; you are definitely an asset to this forum! So thank you for your great input.

David, it sounds like you made the best of the situation, and picked the best tool for the job and the budget,(as usual). Although truth be told, someday I'd like to see you (or someone at your skill level) shoot something in Vista Vision or IMAX on black and white film, really slow film, with the tonal range and clarity that would give us truly the closest thing to an Ansel Adams-quality movie. And then see it projected on a real IMAX projector, not the digital version that pretends to be IMAX... Still dreaming, Jay Reimer :)

I finally remembered to order this on Netflix, and I really, really loved the lighting. Interiors were pretty soft and naturalistic, and the exterior scenes definitely looked lit, but again, in a soft and somewhat naturalistic style. I would agree, it definitely looked like it had a touch of Sven Nyquvist to it, especially those exterior scenes. I'm with you, Georg, I'd like to see something like this shot on actual black and white film, but hey, at least it was presented in black and white! Right before commenting here I was reading David's comments on the Wally Pfister lighting thread, and I thought, I'd love to see Wally's style translated into black and white. There were a few interior scenes in The White Ribbon that had some soft, toppy sources, which is what made me connect the two in my mind. Anyway, the storytelling style of this film might not be everyone's cup of tea, but I really enjoyed the cinematography, and at the very least I think most forum members here would appreciate the lighting. There were several times that I thought, man, I'd like to get ahold of the the negatives and make some prints in the darkroom to hang on my wall. :)

No provocation taken, Chris :) I know what you mean about potentially painting yourself into a corner, and I don't think that's what he's doing here (he said, not having actually seen the movie). I haven't seen Badlands, so I can't comment on that one, but The Thin Red Line and The New World in particular seem to be addressing the whole issue of human depravity and innocence, whereas, at least from the fairly cryptic trailer, it seems like he's moved on to questions about purpose. To fan boys like myself, that's a departure, although I'm sure there are some who would say, why do you have to be so philosophical/theological/poetic all the time, Terry? But I don't think he will ever be able to get that stuff out of his system; afterall, he went far enough down the philosophy road to have nearly completed a PhD at Oxford, and was teaching at MIT. It's in the man's bones, and I think we're all the richer for it (not that you were suggesting otherwise). Granted, I could be biased, since I went and got myself a philosophy degree, too, before bailing on the idea of academia to go do photography :) But look what he's done already; he's got people talking, trying to figure out what to make of it, and hopefully we'll all go see it and be stoked, whatever we might have thought it was going to be about. It's also possible that all of us will be surprised, pleasantly or otherwise; I read an article that one of you guys posted earlier in this thread, and some of the studio people were saying this is going to be his most accessible film yet, so who knows? I'm going to see it either way, though! Haha

I think the voice over in the trailer pretty much tells you what all of the nature and space cutaways are for: Sean Penn's character is going through some crisis that has him wondering what the point of his life is, and he's going all the way back to the origins of life. The voice over says there are two paths, nature or grace. To me, they're setting up nature to be more of the dog-eat-dog, cut-throat, possibly nihilistic, Darwinian view of nature, versus something bigger, like a Creator creating beings with purpose. If he's nothing more than a bag of chemicals, then it doesn't really make any difference what happens to that particular bag of chemicals, whether that bag of chemicals is being thrown under the bus or if it's getting over on other bags of chemicals. If, however, he was made by a Maker for a purpose, then there may be a reason for his suffering, and a reason to go on and to hope. If you look at the arc of his past two movies, the themes of innocence and depravity, of trying to get back to Eden and a state of moral purity, yet always being dogged by something sinister that man seems to carry around with him/her, and then you look at what's going on in the trailer, my money is on the theological and philosophical take. I really hope he's able to keep making movies like this. In the book world, if someone tried that, for instance if you wrote The Brothers Karamazov and tried to get it published today, no one would touch it. Too many big ideas people are wrestling with, blah blah blah, can't we just cut to some sex and a few explosions? I fully expect this movie to make zero money, but as long as someone is willing to keep giving him money to continue doing what he does, that's good enough for now.

Can't wait to see this, The Fountain is one of my favorites. PS- Vincent, maybe you can tell us about the Tree of Life trailer over on the other thread?

I'm kind of a broken record about this subject, but Iraq in Fragments was some of my favorite cinematography of any genre (along with the usual suspects by the likes of Deakins, Lubezsky, etc.) Check it out.

Good to know, I'll be curious to hear the discussion regarding Black Swan's cinematography as well. Anyone know when Tree of Life is going to be released? Thanks for the heads up, Vincent.

I was going to see this anyway, but Stuart when you say it looks like Jesse James and No Country, now I'm probably going to have to see it multiple times in the theater. I'm jealous that you've seen it already! Christmas day is going to be great.

Thanks Vincent!

The theater I saw the Dark Knight in Imax on has since converted to Liemax as well; does anyone know where in Southern California I can still see real 15/70 Imax? I'd like to catch Inception in real Imax if possible, and definitely Tree of Life and the Dark Knight Rises in a couple years. It's so disappointing that as someone like Nolan is just starting to get people interested in a real large format experience, the theaters are pulling the rug out from under him. I remember when TDK came out, all of my friends wanted to know what the big deal was about seeing it in Imax, and why they should pay more. After seeing it, they were blown away and felt like it was money well-spent for an experience that you can't have anywhere else. When some of those same friends (who don't know anything about photography or cinematography), saw Inception with me on the Liemax screen, they all knew that something wasn't right, and when I explained afterwards what they had done to it, they were all pissed. At that point, I would have had just as enjoyable an experience watching it on blu-ray at home, if not better.

Something like this originating on 65mm would be nice. One can dream, I guess. Speaking of dreaming, everytime I hear you guys talk about large-format movies, my mind goes in a completely different direction. I know in the film world 65mm, etc is considered large-format, but coming from a darkroom still background, when I hear large-format films, I immediately start dreaming of a ridiculously huge 4x5 view camera converted to a motion picture camera, or perhaps more realistically, a 4x5 view camera with a digital back that shoots video. With the whole sensor. And a monitor that could actually display it all. Then someone kicks my chair out from under me and I wake up :)

I saw this last week for my birthday, totally looking forward to all of the amazing 15/70 sequences, after having experienced them with The Dark Knight, like many of you. Alas, it was digital IMAX. I was pissed for at least the first 20 minutes of the movie. Everyone there is paying more money and waiting in lines thinking they're getting the old-school IMAX experience they're used to, but then they get this soft digital crap with the occasional aliasing and I too noticed the grainy (actually pretty horrible looking) helicopter shots. Some of my friends who saw it with me and know nothing about photography noticed that it wasn't at all the same experience that we'd had with TDK. Looks like I'm gonna have to make the drive to LA for not just this, but also Tree of Life, whenever that finally makes it out. But you know what guys, brace yourselves for more of this. The sad fact is that it's cheaper to have some pimple-faced kid push a button than it is to pay someone a little more to actually get to know a real projector and take care of it. I don't know about the rest of you, but if they're going to turn the movie-going experience into this weak digital garbage, I'd much rather wait for movies to come out on blu-ray and watch with just my friends on one of the many nice, large home theaters that my friends have. Why bother with a theater at that point?

I'd be curious to know how all of that works, as well. I recall a couple of years ago Walter Graff mentioning something about putting together some sort of primer on the subject of legal video signals, but I'll admit I never did go back and see if he did. You still out there Walter?

Dude, I can totally feel your pain on this one. In the last year, I got fired by my girlfriend/best friend, in the most unsavory of ways (and with some help from a guy I thought was a friend), then a few months back I got outsourced from my job (non-film/photography-related job). I can totally understand where you're at right now, and what you're feeling, that sense of having just driven over one of life's IED's and wondering if you're going to bleed out and die, or ever get up and walk again. And the wondering about what the purpose, your purpose in life is. It can be brutal. Practically speaking, the little things can help keep you going, like the fitness stuff Hal mentioned, and trying to make yourself see it as an opportunity rather than a setback. Those are definitely all true. I'd have to totally agree with Andrew Banks, though; for me as I work at putting the pieces back together and moving forward hopefully to thrive (not just survive), there are inescapable theological implications to deal with. Where does my identity come from- my work, my hobbies, my job, a girl, or is it given to me by Someone bigger than all of that? If my personal plan goes to hell because of circumstances outside my control (in my eyes, anyway), is there a bigger plan or story which it is a part of? I understand we're all going to see this differently, but that's my $.02. I really hope you're doing better, Brian. This reminds me of a line from the Lord of the Rings; Gandalf says something along the lines of "Despair is for those who see the end with certainty. We do not."

I don't doubt that this is how (some) people hash things out, the question is, should they? What I'm suggesting is an alternative to wading through mangrove swamps in rubber boots (good analogy, by the way), an alternative to stuffed shirts and a$$-kissers, and that's just being respectful, whether you're in agreement or you couldn't disagree more. Not that you guys were necessarily suggesting otherwise, but my whole point was to remind people of this alternative, just in case they have forgotten. I don't think such a reminder is out of bounds. But maybe this should be a topic for another thread. Have a great weekend, everyone!

I've been away from the forum for quite a while, and I have to say that I don't miss these threads at all. Bottom line, I enjoy being visually creative, so if I had the opportunity to shoot a documentary on a cheap mini dv camera, but it was a project I believed in, I'd be stoked. I'll take whatever I can get my hands on, and do the best I can with it. As it happens, right now the opportunities and tools I find in front of me happen to be shooting and printing my own personal projects on 35mm film with my old Minolta still camera, a creaky old Omega enlarger, and fiber-based photo paper. And I love it. Do I prefer film? Yes. Is it always a realistic option? No. I wish it were, but I'll also take the challenge to make the best images I can no matter what the medium is. Two of my all-time favorite films are Iraq in Fragments and The New World. One was shot with a DVX, the other with 35 and 65mm film, and you know what, they both look amazing! They're just tools, so use what you've got. Same goes for TV. If it's well-done and compelling, I'll probably watch it. I really do wish that things here could stay a bit more logical, reasonable and civil, though. When things descend into flame throwing and stupid ad hominems, we all lose out because the real pros who actually have something to share and teach will just bail, and there'll be a lot less to be learned, for those of us that still have a lot of learning to do. There are certain guys here that when I see they've posted something, I'll go read it even if it isn't about a topic I was particularly interested in, just because I know that that guy is going to have something good to offer. Conversely, there are some guys that when I see their names next to a topic, I avoid it because it's going to go from zero to mudslinging in 2.3 posts. On the whole, this forum is a goldmine to the motivated student (I personally have gotten a TON from it), so let's keep it that way.

Speaking of the low-light sensitivity of the 5D, I ran across this video on Vimeo recently. All available light, no grading, etc: http://philipbloom.co.uk/2009/05/18/sofias.../#comment-12203 It seems like it's only a matter of time before someone figures out a way to shoot 24p, uncompressed images onto a hard drive with this thing.

Hey Chris, How many points do I get for watching the whole thing? :) I spent 3 years of my childhood in the Central African Republic, so this kind of thing is very close to my heart; if you haven't been there and seen the kind of things people have to do deal with over there, you just won't get it, which is why projects like yours are good for people to see. It can help demystify what it's like to actually go and help. As for the video, I would say cut out a lot of the stuff with the adults talking, and go straight to the kids telling their stories. Some of the stuff the mission workers were saying was good, so you could take some of the shots of the kids from your end sequence and intercut those into some of those interviews, or use them for voiceover with that footageof the kids playing. Also, there were some titles that said something about vocational development, but they weren't up long enough to figure out what that had to do with the immediate context (not that they don't make sense). So I'd either keep them up longer and address them in some way, or take them out. Personally, I'd take them out, because the amount of time you'd have to take to explain them would slow it down too much and you'd lose people. That's more the kind of thing that people can learn about after you've gotten their attention and they want to dig deeper, perhaps on a website or something like that. But the main thing is, it's about the kids, so use them as much as possible, as well as the visuals you have of the work the guys are doing, and the workers' statements explaining what the mission's purpose is. Other than that, my only quibble would be a couple of interviews that could have been exposed a little better. I know how it is in run & gun situations, but sometimes (and maybe you did this) you need to just take a nice, slow walk around with a pen and paper and scout all the locations, take some notes as far as lighting possibilities (even if it's just available light), and what you know you're going to need in the way of interviews, and try to match those up. So for instance, there was one interview with Padraigh where the background was really hot, but for his face to have been bright enough, the background would have blown out. If you'd had a lighting kit of some kind, which it sounds like you didn't, you could have used some light on his face to lower the contrast between face & background, and gotten a better exposure for the face while still holding the background. But lacking some extra lights, I would have looked around for a better spot to place him. (I say this because early on, I made the exact same mistake once.) One other tip for the interviews, if you get the feeling they're going to be really fidgety, try getting them to sit somewhere, even if it's on the ground, where they won't be able to move so much. Another thing I do that seems to work well as far as getting your interviewee to be a little less self-conscious is to have someone they know interview them. Coach them through the questions you're going to want them to ask, explain the process and even how you're going to edit it (things like pauses between question & answer, etc, so that you don't have to make any abrupt cuts that might sound weird). It's really cool to see how people will get into being part of the process and participating, and the person being interviewed often feels much more comfortable. Then you almost feel like you're just the fly on the wall observing. And sometimes that person will know more than you do about the subject, so when they understand what you're trying to get, sometimes that can ask some great questions you might not have thought of on your own. Keep up the good work!

Regardless of what one thinks of the format it was shot on, you have to love the lighting. Yes, I wish it had that film look to go with the lighting (like Phil Meheux did with the first few minutes of Casino Royale), but I'll still go see this, and hopefully Coppola has a good story to tell. I guess I'm hoping when it comes out we'll be talking about those things, the lighting and the story, rather than yet another film vs digital debate. I'm not sure I've seen one of those yet that didn't end up being really polarizing.

You're right, Vince, using local indie music can be a great solution; I've done the same on a few occasions. I use Vegas, which is why I was curious about Cinescore, since it's a Sony product that's designed to work with Vegas. They have a ton of different themes that you can tailor to your project, but I've never actually used it, so I wonder if it's what they advertise. Optimally, I'd be so rich and talented I could use my own music, but who has that much time or money? In the meantime, I guess I should go ahead and write that letter to Sigur Ros and see what they say...

Hey guys, Just saw the trailer for Coppola's new film, and was wondering if anyone has read anything about it yet? Here's the link: http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/tetro/ At the very least, the cinematography looks beautiful. We'll find out for sure next month when it comes out...

Thanks, Eric. I was gonna do some tests anyway, so maybe I'll post the results in the first-time filmmaker's section or something like that. I must say, though, the trailer looks beautiful in full 1080p. Looking forward to it.