cal bickford

5 Favs? Impossible to list. But here goes 5 that have to be in my top 15. I'm going to eliminate kubrick from contention otherwise there wouldn't be anyone else's movies up here : ) The Long Goodbye Images Gallipoli The Last Wave If.... Britannia Hospital Invasion of The Body Snatchers (Kaufman's '78 remake) Don't Look Now The Conversation Blow Out Blow Up Sword of Doom Samurai Assassin Harikiri Night Moves The Passenger Klute oops... sorry I can't help it, I've got twenty-seven fingers on each hand...

It was most noticable in wide and medium two shots where the actors were equidistant from the camera and distinctly seperated on opposite sides of the frame and with no camera movement. This is why I thought maybe it was intentional as it was supposed to be indicative of some kind of distinction between the two characters. Most shots however didn't display this "tilt focus" so I presumed it wasn't the projector. But then again, I can't claim that I have any real cinemagraphic experience or that refined of an eye so maybe I'm just imaging things and it was the projector, but it was definitely there. If anyone out there reads this then goes and sees the movie watch out for it and let us know if you see it too. David - This movie has has a unique look to it that I've noticed in Elswit's other recent movie Michael Clayton, as well as Deakin's No Country and Assassination of Jesse James. This "look" seems most apparent in exterior day scenes and I'd describe it (maybe not so aptly...) as a kind of low contrast and soft feel. There seems to be a very subtle yet very white light that washes over the image - if that makes sense. I'd be very interested to know if you understand what I'm talking about and how you might think this is achieved. Is this all just color manipulation done in post? Are these guys using huge bounce boards or something? In fact, thats how I might best describe it - it looks like what Imagine a bunch of bounced OVERCAST daylight would look like or maybe like their throwing a bunch of 6500ishK diffused light on the actors, even in non-cloudy daylight. I don't know if I'm making any sense lol but i guess thats the only way I know how to describe it.

thats interesting, I wasn't aware that a tilted focus plane was posible. How exactly is this achieved?

I don't think it was the projection lens as the focus was only "thrown off" in certain shots. Furthermore, if the lens was misaligned than I would think that the critical focus on the right side of the frame would be shifted somewhat also and this was definitely not the case. A misaligned projection lens would also dramatically affect vertical lines in the image if I'm thinking about it correctly, so I don't think that was it.

Ok so I just saw There Will Be Blood and besides noticing that it was an absolutely amazing film and probably the best movie I've ever seen in an actual theatre, I also noticed a very peculiar characteristic relating to the focus in certain shots. I realize that shooting in anamorphic presents some DOF issues etc but in many shots throughout the movie the objects/people on the left side of the screen are significantly out of focus while objects/people on the right side of the frame AND at the exact same distance from the lens are in sharp focus. This didn't persist in every shot so it wasn't a smudge on the projection lens or something like that. How can this be? I understand how anamorphic lenses work (at least i think i do) but I don't understand how they can create a non-perpendicular focal plane.

Brian - thanks, that's great! David - very informative, was kodak the main 35mm stock used back then or were here other brands available?

wow, those are exactly the type of answers i was looking for. Thanks for the help!

What were the most widely used color neg 35mm stocks in the 1970s? I'm interested in manipulating hd video to mimic a film stock from this period and am looking for information - gamma curves, histograms, and basically any other kind of spectrographic data I can find to use as reference. Anyone know any good sources for this kind of data? From digging through kodaks website i've come up with 5247 and 5254, neither of which I can find much information about. Did stock back then show an increased/decreased sensitivity to certain colors? etc. etc. Any information is greatly appreciated.

I'm an aspiring filmaker trying to learn the craft and I was wondering how often you guys WB for color fidelity vs neutrality. In other words, do you guys always try to "neutralize" the light? - as in correcting to make a white card appear white even though its under an orange lamp. Or is manipulating the white balance of the film/video for color fidelity (white card looks orange like the cast of the light) more common? For instance, would white balancing to "neutrality" for an interior shot w/ tungsten light be typical practice on a motion picture shoot, or would most directors/cinematographers prefer to capture the natural red cast of the tungsten to mimic interior practicals etc. I understand completely how the physical process of white balancing works, but from what I read it seems like it is fairly typical practice - I just don't understand (aside from dealing with tricky lights like flourescents, shooting legal depositions, etc) why you would want to "neutralized" the light all the time... Am I missing something here?

hi all, I'm an aspiring filmmaker trying to teach myself about lighting right now. I've been snooping around the internet trying to find out about 1970s cinematography but to no avail. I love movies from the seventies and I'm trying to figure out what makes them so beatiful. Why are movies like The Long Goodbye, Network, Invasion of The Body Snatchers, Dirty Harry, Klute, All the President's Men, etc etc so much more beatiful than todays pictures (I know some of you might disagree with this)? Mainly I'm interested in the types of lighting setups that were used as I think I've got a pretty good idea of the other factors. A lot of it is probably the actual content of the image and the aesthetic of the time (brown El Caminos driven by men in cream sports jackets etc). Poorer lens and film stock resolution (+ more makeup though this has more to do w/ lights probably) result in a more illustrated and unnatural look, almost animated if you will. But the lighting seems much more naturalistic to me (with the exception of overlighting in lowlight situations in response to filmstock's reduced sensitivity). In other words, if you go watch a (IMO) piece of crap like bourne ultimatum every scene someone is lit with an orange gel from one side and a blue one from the other. Whereas, a lot of the 70s (and earlier) films seem to have a much more "white" light. So after all this rambling I guess what I'm wondering is: A)what types of lighting systems did they use back then? And what are the primary differences from now? B)Does anybody know any good sources of information on the subject? (I've listened to all the director commentaries on the dvds but they never mention anything about the types of lighting used. FYI the best commentaries are by altman and kaufman talking about Long Goodbye's post-flashing and Body Snatcher's use of colors etc respectively.)

Thanks so far guys, this is exactly the type of stuff I'm looking for. You're right chris, being able to recognize the difference between a 32mm and 35mm is probably both impossible and useless. But I do think that being able to recognize the difference betwenn say a 28mm and a 40mm will help my visualization process immensly. I also think it will help me understand different directors' processes - why they go from one lens to another and when, etc. I know there's no correct method to lens choice but the more I understand about other peoples' work the more comfortable and prepared i think i'll be when i finally get my shot. I can definitely tell a wide shot from a telephoto shot from an ultra-wide shot but thats about it at this point. I'm really interested in hearing examples of specific focal lengths such that I can get a feel for the difference between a 24mm and a 35mm etc. A cheap 35mm still camera is a good idea to study the "scope" of a particular focal length, but I'm also interested in the lens's treatment of motion (both objects/characters through the frame and motion of the camera) and the director's process (why/when they use different lenses). Thanks for all the info so far, any more guys?

Hi I'm trying to practice recognizing focal lengths used in movies so that I can better envision a shot and since I don't have access to a 35mm camera and lenses, watching movies is the only way to do it. I was wondering this: do you guys have any screenshots that you know were shot with a certain focal length or know of any movies that used only one or two lenses such that i might be able to pick them out while watching etc? or any other resources or ideas? thanks.