Robert Lachenay

My bad....I only have a tiny book of his stuff that my grandma has at her house. It doesn't say anythign and the pictures are like sort of glued in. So...as I said, I know very little about photographers. I know a lot about directors, painters and composers (and even some cinematographers)...not as much as I should about photographers. I only know of the ones whose work I enjoy looking at.

I like Wynn Bullock's eye...she was pretty legit...as was Gordon Parks, Russel Lee and Daido Moriyama. But I'm pretty young yet, so I haven't studied photography as much as most of you guys.

anyone??

But during preproduction...and even in say meetings prior to the film being really concieved...if a director was completely aware of how he wanted it to look, what visual style it would follow, etc....and the two really collaborated on it... ...would you say that it's all good in that sort of scenario? If you develop a trust together, creatively, and collaborate extensively...it'd be all good?

I also posted this on the first time filmmakers forum, but.... I'm wondering how experienced DOP's feel about extensive collaboration with a director who isn't as proficient in cinematography knowledge, to create the look that director is looking for. Is it somewhat of a nuisance? Does the lack of extiensive, technical photographic knowledge on the director's part steal from his credibility in your eyes (even though he may be a very capable director)? Or do experienced DOP's like this sort of collaboration and established trusts/freedom? I guess what I am trying to ask is whether or not working with a director who hasn't worked through film before, but can direct actors well and has a specific, concrete vision of how they would like each shot of their film to look, but doesn't have extiensive, technical photographic knowledge (though isn?t completely inept....knows enough about angles and lenses and film types) because they didn't attend film school, would seem be a nuisance, or could some sort of strong collaboration and trust be met to make it work? ...if that made any sense.

I'm wondering how experienced DOP's feel about extensive collaboration with a director who isn't as proficient in cinematography knowledge, to create the look that director is looking for. Is it somewhat of a nuisance? Does the lack of extiensive, technical photographic knowledge on the director's part steal from his credibility in your eyes (even though he may be a very capable director)? Or do experienced DOP's like this sort of collaboration and established trusts/freedom? I guess what I am trying to ask is whether or not working with a director who hasn't worked through film before, but can direct actors well and has a specific, concrete vision of how they would like each shot of their film to look, but doesn't have extiensive, technical photographic knowledge (though isn?t completely inept....knows enough about angles and lenses and film types) because they didn't attend film school, would seem be a nuisance, or could some sort of strong collaboration and trust be met to make it work? ...if that made any sense.