Matthew W. Phillips

John, the issue here is: why should the DPs have an intrinsic right to determine the end result of the footage? Tradition is one argument but, as David mentioned, color timing was the extent of it back then. Things are different now. So the philosophical question is...who has the right to make the final call on the look of the image? Producer? Director? Grader? DP? Why not just make grading a part of the DP skillset, pay him/her like you would a pro grader, give DPs ultimate control, and be done with it? All interesting possibilities.

That was it! Thank you David. It was driving me crazy trying to remember the name.

Indeed, David. I recall watching a documentary in college about film history where some Cinematographers were upset when talkies came around because they felt it limited their ability to capture certain shots. I wish I could remember what that was called.

This isnt my thinking even as a casual observer. I would much rather watch a crappy image with pristine sound than the inverse. I believe studies support this view as well. Might make for a fun research project?!

I feel that simply renting some lav mics would be far cheaper for an ultra-low budget production (which this was) than bringing back actors in post to ADR. We are not talking wide release films here. We are talking films for the festival circuit from upstarts. Seems to me that "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." But then again "hindsight is 20/20." Not to mention, around these parts, you are fortunate to get actors to come back for ADR because they hate it and most likely have other projects in their schedule. If it isnt part of the initial contract then they have no obligation to do it. David, I realize that I got way too sensitive about the issue last night. We all draw on our own experiences and we all put ourselves into situations when we read stories. My anger should be at the producer in that case. I suppose it is like the older child who always asked his parents for things and never gets them but his younger sibling does. It isnt the young siblings fault, per se, but it becomes normal to resent them when you always see their outcome greater than yours.

Injustice? lol. Okay, Landon. To clarify my point, this is cinematography.com, am I correct? Obviously there is a bias. If you went to a site called SoundOps.com and mentioned the DP friendly viewpoint, you would most likely get a very different response (I dont think its a real site but I am making a point.) And David, as you mentioned, is an accomplished DP. He means well but he is still limited to his own position and experience. I doubt he would claim to truly understand what it feels like to be a sound op or their perspective. Nor more than a Sound Op knows what it is like to be him. And he did say this, if you noticed "And I'm certainly not going to toss out wide shots or deep-focus staging from my cinematic grammar just to make mic placement easier, and no good sound recordist would expect that anyway.." Take it as you wish but, to my eyes, it seems like a thinly veiled put down of my abilities as a sound op. Aside from offering a straw-man argument (i never said wide shots should be thrown out...only that I should be provided appropriate gear for it just like the DP has the wide angle lens), he is making an assumption that he can judge what makes a good sound recordist and that I may not be it since I am complaining about it. It is akin to if he mentioned a time when he was not supported properly on set and I were to say "You know, David, a good DP would never do...blah blah." It would come off wrong, well intentioned or not.

Why do you feel the need to even jump into this? Are you David's publicist? If you really knew as much about my history as you are acting like, you would know that this isnt David and I's first time having disagreements. It isnt the end of the world and David isnt even up here stressing about it so why are you? I realize that David is accomplished because I am not stupid and I have visited this site, off on on for 10 years. Not to mention, I know David mods on RedUser as well where I have also showed up from time to time. He has provided countless tips to me that I take very seriously. The only time him and I have had beef are on things that are more opinional than anything...namely DPs role vs others and, in the past, the digital vs film debate. He knows I have utmost respect for him. I just choose to not take a constant "yes man" approach to his comments and I hope he can respect that. Unless you believe that "might equals right?"

Thanks for he sermon, Landon. But David and Sasuke, accomplished or not, do not have any intrinsic right to denigrate me on a personal level. I do not care who they are. And I never said the yellow label gave me protection. I said it showed I had a commitment to coming here. If Tim wishes to revoke my right to come here then I would be upset but that is life...its his site and his decision. But I would not find it prudent to ban people who have been members for a decade without serious cause. And I have yet to insult anyone on this thread...I am merely pointing out that I do not like personal digs over something that shouldnt be.

I agree Brian. However, the original issue here was that DPs would not accept the same working condition. The whole point is they feel they have an intrinsic right to protect the image even through the grade and should also be paid for it. My whole original point is that they shouldnt feel the need to be involved unless it is asked of them or unless they want to provide it for gratis.

I see. I remember you too...apparently you believe that dissenting from the group opinion means I have no right to be here. I paid for that yellow label like you did, my friend. That means I like to come here and I will continue to as long as I have access. I am sorry if you disapprove. Not everyone has the same experiences or has to agree on everything.

Hey, who needs lav mics when the DP can use a fourth lens in his kit, correct?

No David, I am not upset that he wanted a wide shot. I am upset that he wanted a wide shot and there was no possible way to get good audio in that situation without proper equipment. And I can see that arguing with you is pointless because of what website I am at and who I am talking to. And your subtle implication that i lack skill because I did not get the audio well in that shot is a further low shot of the caliber that I expect of this site whenever someone brings up anecdotal situations where a DP is being accused. Not to patronize you, David, but I didnt think you of all people would resort to those types of subtle jabs to defend a DP you never even met. Edit: On a possibly related note, I notice this site has been...well...let me just say I hear crickets these days.

The ONLY reason I can see is if they are shooting a high ratio. Since raw stock is used for the throw away as well as the kept footage, the feet used would be less for filmout. Sadly, this doesnt save much since filmouts are far more expensive per foot than neg stock and processing.

Well, you were not on those sets so you can hardly comment on whether the "camera department" (which is one guy who is the DP) had anything to do with it or not. Truth is, more times than not, the DP would cry the loudest and get the funding. It was ultimately the Producer's call (who was 99% of the time the Director also) but it doesn't change that the DPs I have worked around had little regard for the audio needs. I even recall one production where I pleaded with the Director to let me get in a bit closer (I didnt want to boom 4 feet from the talent) and the DP complained because he wanted a super wide shot with dialog and guess who got their way? And no, the Director also refused adding lavs to the budget. His mentality was "if you dont bring it, we dont use it." Interesting enough, this wasnt the rule for the DP.

Landon is correct. You really miss the point of my financial situation.

Looking good! I miss Super 8 sometimes...the shaky footage, the retro look. But then I realize it is expensive and not very efficient to shoot a feature on and it makes me sad.

I see what you mean about the actors...fair enough. But I strongly disagree about the sound. Audio tools are as vast and have the same ability to change the recording as any visual. Once you start EQ'ing, bass boost, treble cut, etc you can have a piece of audio that the Op cannot recognize as his/hers.

David, i never meant to imply that my experience was that of everyone. I was only responding to Stuart's assertion that I have an axe to grind. You are used to working in the upper end of film making (whether you consider it upper end is a different matter) but relative to the indie scene here in Northern Cal, you ARE on the upper end. The attitude is no doubt different as the professionalism plays a larger role, the reputation as well. I do not find it odd at all that you are not paid to be there. Unless there is a requirement to be there then why should you be paid if it is your choice? And if DPs prefer to be there because they feel they need to protect the sanctity of their work then that is their decision, not the productions. I just find the DP mentality incredibly odd when compared to other members of cast and crew. I mean, actors get scenes cut all of the time and, regardless of how they feel about what is remaining, they have to deal with it. As a sound operator, I have NEVER been asked or even permitted to go into the studio for the mixdown. Maybe where you are at, this happens. But one can only speak of their own experience. A DP is understood to be the person for whom is responsible for the visual portion of the film during principle photography, I always thought. I never realized it was their problem or duty to see the film through and "protect the image" until opening night?!

What does my past experience have anything to do with this conversation? I have, indeed, dealt with these issues as both a filmmaker on my own projects and as a department head (Production Sound Mixer) on others productions. I do NOT have anything against crew...I have been crew. But, as crew, I have always placed the needs of the production over mine. It has caused frustration since the visual portion of the film ALWAYS gets more recognition than the audio and the DPs always expect more and more while I am lucky to even get a fair wage. I am silent because I do this for the love of it, mostly. DPs expect full rate, lights of choice, lens kit rental, dolly, crane, fancy rigs. If I so much as ask for a decent blimp kit, I am told "don't you own that? Cant you just bring one?" The double standards in film (indie level) are incredible. I cannot help but smile every time a "filmmaker" has a crap product that looks pretty in Charlie Chaplin mode but they are upset at the bad audio. If there is an axe to grind, it is with the DP attitude as both filmmaker and crew and not crew in general. Most other positions have been fantastic to work with on both sides on the Director's Chair. No, I didn't know it because it isn't that way here. I do not feel the need to educate myself on world filmmaking laws when I am a regional filmmaker with limited coverage so far. Nonetheless, what Landon says is correct...contracts can be drawn up to circumvent such usurping of the filmmaker's vision. Non-compliance with contract means you don't get hired.

With all due respect, it gets a little old hearing DPs want to have their cake and eat it too. When it comes to taking a pay cut or working off points, DPs want to take the labor road of "you wouldn't ask your barber to do that." But when it comes to creativity, you want to be a "collaborator." Fact is, you are not a collaborator in the true sense. Collaboration is like a partnership and partners all work together for the common good of the project. A collaborator isnt going to demand their full rate at the expense of the whole production. A collaborator isnt going to try to push the visual agenda at the expense of the audio department. DPs, not all, but many, are just like every other member of the crew who is self serving and is only looking out for themselves and NOT the production. That is NOT collaboration.

You DESERVE to get paid for what was agreed upon. You DESERVE legal and safe working conditions. You do NOT DESERVE anything other than that. You come in, do your work, and move on with life. It isn't your project and you were compensated in a way in which you were agreed to. If you desire to have a say in things then the burden is ON YOU to have this written into your contract prior to the shoot. Good luck getting any work that way though.

I took your advice and purchased CineGrain last night for 16mm. I fell in love with the archival grain. Thank you so much for this tip! Here is a grab with my previous grading style but with the CineGrain 16mm archival grain applied. This is a grab from footage I took of my daughter.

No offense but, compared to what?

Hah, I actually toned that down in grading. My wife is irish/german and she got a bad sunburn the day before.

I am sorry, Tyler, if I came across as rude. It was not my intention and I realize that post came off a bit harsh. All things considered, you did a fantastic job. It is amazing how people expect miracles when we work for them. i could tell you similar horror stories of when I was an audio guy and the director expected perfect sound but didnt want to turn off the ice machine. I so wanted to be credited as "D.B. Fader" on that production, let me tell you.