Joe Cooper

OK... It gets better. The script sup in question is editing the film.

Well... yeah, there is that whole "not what you expect" aspect here... And I certainly can see the value in that and I'm definitely not one for the cliches. But, I suppose I could by the look better if the story was written and directed differently.

I just bought this film on DVD and I wasn't too crazy about the overly commercial look. I can certainly appreciate it, but I would have approached it a different way. I think not only is the direction a bit heavy handed but the film looks overlit to me. That story needed a more moody look not unlike the house interiors in Matchstick Men in my opinion.

HAHA I think the situation will in effect do that for me, since I quit. I heard the crew hates her, and she had a meltdown on set a few days into the final group of days they shot scenes without me. That director traded an artist for a secretary so really, he needs to be bitch slapped too.

Totally agree. In the last few years, I have been hard pressed to find something worth paying $10. to see in a theatre. Instead, I've been buying used DVD's of good films. I think I might have gone to the theatre to see a film maybe 10 times in the last few years. It seems most filmmakers (and of course the studios) are more intent on making money than anything else. If I see one more script that looks like all the other scripts, I think I'm gonna puke. I think it's hilarious that as soon as something "different" comes along that blows up, Hollywood spews out a spate of similar films.

Well... you are trying to compare $10K+ worth of hardware with $1K worth of hardware?!! I own an M2 and have used it A LOT. I'm well aware of it's technical shortcomings, one of which is an upside down image. Also, the M2 if not used right, can give very slight vignetting and soft edges. I have not used a P+S, but I have to think that the optics are a LOT better than the M2. It's just a hunch though...

I forgot about that article. I actually have that issue, and thanks. That really helps. I'm concerned about the footage not matching, that's why I mention the Panasonic units in regard to the Varicam. I expect they have similar signal processing, so then the thought is the footage would or could be made to match closely. However, I'm leaning towards using 2 HD-10's with lens adapters. I just need to see some footage made with that camera.

All three mentioned record HDV or HD... Oooh. That helps. Thanks.

I'm wondering if anyone has an experience using the Varicam as an A camera with an HDV camera as a B camera. Say for example, the HVX200 or an Andromeda DVX100B? How close would the images match, especially if the cameras were set up to be close?

The AC is solely responsible for making sure the camera is functioning properly. End of story. AC's generally charge a full day to check out a camera package, and if production is too cheap to pay for a proper camera checkout, the blame will probably fall on the DP if there's a problem. As DP, you have to insist that the camera package get a proper checkout, AND you have to insist that you have an experienced FIRST AC running the camera on shoot days. I work on a lot of low budget projects and have been burned and narrowly escaped being burned because of corners that were cut in regard to hiring an AC or camera tech. NEVER AGAIN. Of course, even a full check out and a seemingly functional camera CAN have problems that inflict damage on footage that isn't discovered until after a shoot day. At that point I'd say the rental house, the AC, or the lab, OR even the manufacturer of the film stock could be to blame.

Yeah, really. I have NO intention of recommending her or getting her on any film jobs ever again. She's an example of a crew member who has experience shooting, editing, and directing, who just can't help herself when it comes to commenting on stuff other than continuity. I find this to be very UN-professional. I have worked in just about every crew position there is, and I'm real careful about telling any crew how to do their job, especially the keys.

I am the same way in regard to avoiding certain types. Don't get me wrong, I have a natural tendency to teach, but when I sense that a particular first time director doesn't really watch movies, or isn't really a visual director, I'd just rather do what I feel is right in terms of the cinematography and let them direct actors. The other issue is, there isn't really a lot of time during a shooting day to be teaching a first timer about the science and art of motion pictures... BINGO! I had a few "discussions" with our former script sup about "crossing the line," and informed this person that she was being waaayy to literal about the "line." Then of course, it gets into the "let's just shoot it both ways" bullsh!t. I was shooting coverage on 2 actors in a room, and our script sup ran out and swore I had the eyeline wrong and produced some diagram that for the life of me, just made no sense, so I told her so. It's one thing to be sitting there drawing little diagrams at the monitor, and quite another to be standing there in the room with the actors and the camera. The other aspect of this conflict is the fact that we are both editors, she being an editor of mainly documentary stuff... I'm just glad this film is getting close to being over, because I feel that my "vision" has been tainted by our script sup and the fact that the director, for whatever reason, just took her word over mine that a shot would or wouldn't work. I would also sometimes shoot with loose focus hand held and of course our script sup would continually make comments about it. I've found that in my neck of the woods, a small city, people tend to not understand certain stylistic approaches to shooting scenes. If I hear one more time, while framing a BCU, that they want more headroom, I'm gonna lose it. HAHAHA. I like that. The funny thing is, our illustrious opinionated script sup DID overlook a wardrobe chage and we shot maybe 500' of film with the wrong wardrobe on an actress! Maybe if the script sup was paying 100% attention to continuity, instead of worrying about my cinematography, we might not have wasted $150. worth of film and 40 minutes of our day.

Yeah, I understand that and certainly do that. But if I'm not working with a director who KNOWS what they are looking at (often), what's the point? I'm not there to give the director an education in filmmaking. It's amazing how many "directors" I get involved with that don't even watch movies. If they're first timers or inexperienced (often), I would rather just take the ball and run with it. When I do get the chance to work with an experienced director who KNOWS what they want, I LOVE collaborating with them. Otherwise, I'd rather just keep them at the monitor. Well... the script sup is a woman, and I can be a little intimidating, expecially since I KNOW what I'm doing. I'm always open to discussion with the director, but he's gotta come to me, not the script sup. That just pisses me off. Things are different now, since the director has seen 12 days of my footage, and since I told him he has to let me do my job.

Why would you want that?!?! You're right about people thinking they are experts. I don't give a rat's ass if it's a member of the crew or just a friend of the directors, I don't want anyone questioning my meter readings, framing, or whatever. In this case, we had a script sup who had mucho experience in many things, and hence could not help interjecting about framing, lighting, camera moves, etc. Currently, the director is considering losing me in order to keep the script sup...

I definitely felt creatively distracted so I informed the director that I will not be working on the remainder of this film if that script sup is on it. It's hard enough shooting in locations that I've never seen before with less than enough time.