Liam Howlett

This has been something I've wanted to post for a while, and just share. I was recently watching the 2009 film Armored and I couldn't help but feel this sense of familiarity...in maybe the way it looked, or whatnot. I couldn't quite call it. But I had a feeling that I've seen something like this before, maybe it was the light? maybe it was the production design? I then had this thought that "You know, it feels like Andrzej Sekula shot this or something. He was a DP behind Tarantino's "Reservoir Dogs" and "Pulp Fiction" - I look on IMDb...and I called it. Sekula also shot "Armored" my sense of familiarity with whatever it was that was in fact distinct about the film was correct. There's other DP's out there who just have that "look" or "style" to the way they shoot that can't be missed. I'm going to CHEAT a bit on these next two, but for illustration's sake they're good examples. By cheating I mean that I knew, not guessed, who the DP's were for these films. 1. Jeff Cronenweth. Practically these next three films look and have the same style in light or coloring. Fight Club (desaturated), K-19: The Widowmaker (desaturated, especially noticeable in the first minutes of the film), and Panic Room (also desaturated, a bit) I would show pictures, but I need to find examples first. I'll update this in the next few days or so. 2. Darius Khondji City of Lost Children, Alien Resurrection, Delicatessen (all are Jean-Pierre Jeunet films) I may guess that this is due to the director, but practically all three have the same look. Also Khondji was also an uncredited DP behind Panic Room - and that could also explain why some of Panic Room and Funny Games (US) kind of look a bit alike (the desaturation, especially on skin tone) -------- any takers? PICTURES ARE WELCOME

Yeah I knew about the Panavision being the lenses, but I'd like to know the actual model. Now the C and E series, is that regarding Medicine Man?

does anybody know? Also, since we're talking about McTiernan. Which anamorphic lens was Medicine Man shot on? It has this trademark late 80's early 90's "action" look. The closest other film that I can think of right away that looks the same is Cliffhanger. Here are some screengrabs

Yeah the Iscorama is something I'm probably eventually going to get in the future - money is an issue afterall, i just wanted to know if it wasn't an issue, what adapter/lens I should go with. For now however, I need something cheaper if it exists. I'm talking under 1K, maybe even a few hundred bucks, like I said - if it exists. One thing I don't like about the Sankor/Kowa is that they're tooooooooo wide. I like the 2.35 the most and it seems only Iscorama can produce that, not to mention the flares distortion it produces is quite sick.

Shanksh

I'm looking to get an anamorphic lens or an adapter that can go with my Canon T2i but I'm not acquainted nor know any in the first place. Can anybody here provide a couple of good brand names, and maybe models for some? I saw a video on Vimeo on about an AG-7200 adapter and that looks really good. but then I also discovered about Iscorama 36 1.5x anamorphic adapter here - http://vimeo.com/10175596 and THAT caught my attention as well, but it's a bit pricey. Here's an example of an Iscorama adapter there's also a Sankor/Kowa and those look great too. Anybody in the know have any suggestions on which one to go with? WITH the budget in mind AND second option being without the budget in mind. Thanks, I really appreciate it

I would like to start a thread that hopefully can stand as a guide in the future for anybody who loves and is interested in this craft as anyone who posts on this forum. Let's compile a list of books that are an imperative to read in order to grasp, or further understand some of the craft. And yes, please withdraw your comments that include anything that has "on-set experience is better than a book" or any variation of that phrase. It is common knowledge that "practice makes perfect" but I'd like to focus on reading material and theory here too. So I'll begin with the classic and most obvious one.

that was awesome bro! I mean as far as cinematography goes. Was wondering about the flares myself, which plug in did you guys use to add those to the ad?

very interesting, always wondered about how they did the Star Wars opening titles, and Superman is interesting to. While we're on the topic, I'd like to know how Carpenter's The Thing title was done http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ0Y-eY_ZC0 just go to 1:40 mark

Thats awesome! thanks a lot!

Guys all you need to see is anything from 0:06 mark to 0:12. I see this effect so many times. Usually I see it with old Super 8 footage, or some screen test... that glaring effect between transitions or whenever they happen. In this scenario it's 100% post, I'm sure of it. What I want to know is what software can emulate this effect? Seems like a plug-in

Is anybody here who would like to meet up sometime just hang around dc and talk shop, maybe go for a photography in DC type of deal so we have something to do. I would really like to meet somebody who's into the visual spectrum of film or just photog in general. im 23

Exactly, cause you're almost forced to "copy" which isn't good in itself. Everyone has to have his own eye and develop his own style. I may be wrong in my judgment but to each his own. I personally love cinematography from all eras, but having been of the MTV generation I love more modern cinematography. Of anything from David Fincher for example, and Darius Khondji, Chris Cunningham's music vids. etc

VERY interesting David! with Akeelah screencap, this effect kind of reminds me of the - the term escapes me - effect that DePalma likes to use a lot and of course other filmmakers. Where you have both characters in deep focus. Though something tells me that effect is not achieved with a tilt-shift. Am I correct?

The most prominent example I can think of the moment the term "tilt-shift" comes up is Dominic Sena's "Swordfish" you can see the opening scene here if you aren't familiar with the scene in this instance, it was mostly used for stylistic effect, as the whole film was in itself. MY question is, besides using it for stylistic purposes, when would one use a tilt-shift lens in film? For some reason I think about using this effect as a POV shot, when one is dizzy or trying to focus on something when waking up, etc etc. Besides my own thoughts, are there any kind of standard "rules" for tilt-shift uses in film if any? I would like to know about them. Thanks

Aha! Thank you Adrian and David, that really clears it up for me!

so I was just looking at Matthew Libatique's IMDb page and, yeah - obviously IMDb isn't the most reliable source for information as it is user submitted but something caught my attention that inspired me to ask this question. It says he has majored in Sociology & Communications, and then it says he's got an MFA in Cinematography from AFI. If you already have a major in something else, a Bachelor's lets say in Sociology/Communications - how do you then jump to an MFA in Cinematography. IMDb either does not have his full education info (my guess) or something else. Does that Communications degree (I mean, you do have some video production classes, don't you?) transfer somehow and it allows you to study a Masters in Cinematography? or is there no such thing and somewhere along the line Libatique MUST have had a bachelor's in Film? Somebody knowledgeable or qualified please answer this

You know I was checking up on T2i vs 7D and they both seem to be 18 megapixel with same CMOS sensor...what, then are the differences in quality? less options on the T2i, lesser quality video? (how if 7D and T2i are essentially the same?)

Ok so here's a film me and two other partners shot as a final project for our video production class. We had to take a fairy tale and modernize it. So we took Three Little Pigs and turned it into Three Inglourious Pigs - an obvious inspiration was QT's film. I shot the whole first scene, plus co-shot the rest of the scenes. Music choice and utilization also mine. Hehe, but let's just get to it. I'm aware there are continuity problems and overall a few bad edits, but that is due to us having to turn it in on time and rush the shooting plus editing process. We used a Nikon on this one, and actually used some fill light which helped quite a few times. Overall this was the BEST film out of everyone's there.

we had to have a sort of a theme in our film, so I had come up with numbers, but I had to rush my video, I would've had a lot more shots w/ numbers, etc, etc. But hey. I worked it in with the editing in a way, not obvious but still there. Shot it on an SD Panasonic. Just had a "Koyaanisqatsi / Baraka" in mind when making this, plus experimentalism and editing etc Opinions? I know some of the shots aren't well framed, I was in a hurry actually - not good, but hey.

Oh THANKS for the timely advice! and it's only under 1K as well + 18 megapixel instead of the 10/12 on Nikon! and this video has me convinced as well! http://vimeo.com/9712377 what are your thoughts on Canon 7D ? and was wondering, is there a Nikon equivalent to the T2i?

Very good article, especially the rolling shutter is obvious. I noticed this with our Nikon. However, I think I'm just going to get the Nikon D90 for the time being. I just looked at some vids on Vimeo, from that same article you posted up earlier..and was impressed with the image and how "cinematic" it looked. I guess it's cause of the shallow depth of field. I'm eyeing the Canon XH A1S like mentioned above, as an HD Camera, but seeing the videos from your link I'm pretty convinced that I can do some good shooting with HDSLR, despite the shortcomings, as listed in the article above. Here's the D90 video footage - so cinematic! and here's a Canon 7D both have that 35mm look, which is amazing. The D90 is under 1K

That link is convincing enough to get a dSLR with HD mode. You're spot on. One of the things that has greatly attracted me to the dSLR we shot with was the shallow depth of field. Our film came out to be very "cinematic" and we didn't even need to use telephoto lenses. Does that mean that with a dSLR, when you're shooting HD movie mode, you don't have a lot of control for greater depth of field? I kind of skimmed through the aforementioned site, so I don't know if it answers that question. In essence are there any huge differences in video quality? between HD vs HDSLR

I am at a point where I want to get myself an HD camera. Recently I've had the opportunity to shoot with a Nikon dSLR that had an HD option. We shot a short film with it. Now I don't remember the exact model, but it was NOT the 5D Mark II, I assure you. I was very pleased with the quality of the picture the dSLR was able to capture and the small size of the body. Now I have been eyeing a Canon XH A1S for quite a while, a test footage video I keep rewatching is this one here Where I come to a crossroads with all this is that I really like the fact that the Nikon dSLR has the HD capabilities not to mention it operates as a digital camera for photography in general. I possess a telephoto and a wide angle lens from my D60 and any Nikon lens works with any of the Nikon dSLR's... so I can use a telephoto when I shoot HD movies, and wide angle lenses. with HD camera like Canon XH A1S... I'm not too familiar with at all and I'd like someone to fill me in. One thing I remember from just shooting a standard definition Panasonic camera is that their body lenses could actually go far, so with HD cameras the same kind of applies as they are similar ? Would I be better off spending 3 grand on an HD camera plus extra lenses, or I could just go with a good HD dSLR. Is there noticeable difference in video quality / framerate between the two? Or either one would be safe to go with? Help?

Yeah I was gonna jump on getting a lensbaby right away, but figured I'd rather play around first. Don't really have any old lenses, but I have the Telephoto/Wide angle combo, I can play around with that. Thanks by the way, for the advice. Appreciated.