Brian Dzyak

Wordplayer.com is primarily a website for writers, however there is information in there that every Director should know. I'd start there.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/06/picture-of-the-day-union-actors-in-targets-anti-union-video/240593/

Sometimes, "throw away" movies say more than we realize behind their Playskool colors. For instance, every time I watch the Pixar movies "CARS" I see something deeper that speaks to issues of fate and purpose. Point being, we can be beat over the head with "importance" by "foreign" movies or be willing to look deeper into movies that just seem to be mere entertainment on the surface.

Film. For longevity, definitely use film. Look at it this way. In one hundred years, a person picking up a DVD or a harddrive most likely won't be able to "read" any of the information on it. But in a hundred years, you'll still likely be able to pick up a strip of film and see pictures.

"Super 8" - Digital Presentation ... Does anyone else find it ironic that you can see a movie called "Super 8" projected digitally?

Well, you wanted tax incentives to bring foreign Corporations to your nation. This is part of the price you'll pay. Either REJECT foreign Corporate projects to prop up your own native industry or accept foreign money and everything that comes with it. Otherwise, I don't quite comprehend the whining. :huh:

Your first camera should be what your CLIENTS ask for, not what your purchasing budget allows. EVERY job will require a different set of specifications from the camera format to lights and sound and everything else that a production requires. To that end, why would you saddle yourself with a specific piece of equipment that has specific limitations? Why not, instead, seek out PROJECTS, and THEN RENT the required equipment on an as-needed basis as practically EVERY professional production does? The "top" camera you buy today (within your budget, of course) will likely be old news within months, yet you'll still be paying for it long afterwards. The key to building and maintaining a career is to sell YOURSELF and your skills regardless of any gear you happen to own. Plus, owning gear tends to push you towards projects that will use your gear instead of allowing you the freedom to choose projects regardless of your personal investments. My advice is to forget the alphabet soup of cameras and formats and instead focus on selling YOU and what YOU can do with ANY camera or format or genre. Save your money for living expenses so that you are free to take ANY opportunity that comes along or that you create.

Welcome to "globalization," what CONs like Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan really wanted for the planet. It reminds me of a great line in the movie "Gross Point Blanke." MARTIN I was, but no... yes... I was before, but now I'm not. It's irrelevant, really. The idea of governments, nations, it's mostly a public relations theory at this point, anyway. We're living in a Corporate world now. People are not allowed to cross borders for work, but Corporations and their money can with no boundaries. That's the unfair part and the lie of the so-called "Free Market." It's anything but "free" when Corporations are able to use national borders and currency differences to their advantage. Anyway, that said, it's true that it may be more difficult for some people to "get into" the industry than others, but it certainly isn't impossible. An aspiring "filmmaker" just needs to learn what the parameters are and learn to work within them. So, yeah, maybe the indigenous film industry in any given nation isn't robust. So? You go work on productions from nations that ARE robust. I don't know Phil, but in his recent post, a couple of key phrases stuck out which give some indication of his own prejudices which may be part of the issue he's discussing: I've been made acutely aware that working on upscale narrative productions is hell. Anyone who's seeking work on big American shows had better be careful what they wish for. Or even big BBC stuff - we've heard here recently that Lark Rise was miserable. For the record, folks, working on indie crap is often more fun than working on Harry Potter 17. The indie crap experience is often much closer to the ideal you had when you thought filmmaking looked like fun. It's interesting in that while he seems to long for the opportunity to work on larger movies (because he calls indie and low-budget productions "crap"), he follows up by lambasting the large budget production as being "hell." I'm not sure what the "ideal" for Phil actually is, but a lot of people rather enjoy working on large budget productions and consider the low-budget experience to be the "hell." Are there some difficult days on large productions? OF COURSE! Nights aren't my favorite and I'm not sure that anyone enjoys working in the rain or cold. But that's filmmaking no matter what the budget is. If a person wants to do this for a living, then those are some of the things you deal with and they happen on both big and small budget productions. And for most people, they'd prefer to get paid a whole lot more for it on a big "American production" than slogging away for a flat rate on a small "intimate" indie film. In any case, the movie industry is out there in many parts of the world. It just matters how much you really want it.

I disagree. If all a kid ever saw was a parent sitting at home, instead of being out in the world accomplishing things, then what has that kid learned? What will that child be able to look up to the parent for? There are only so many board-games you can play.

Those are questions that plague almost everyone at one point or another. The truth is that because of the demands of establishing and maintaining a career, you will generally find more success when you are free to take ANY opportunity that comes along and to pursue new ones at your own discretion. Adding "obstacles" to your life, such as a spouse, children, credit card debt, a mortgage, car payments... frankly just do get in the way of being 100% free to pursue every possible opportunity. So, if you make the choice to get married or have children or take on lots of debt, just know that those things require attention too which will take attention away from the career aspirations. How much of your time to dedicate to each element of your life is dependent upon what kind of person you are. This isn't to suggest that you give up the career if and when it takes you away from family. A friend of mine told me a couple summers ago, "Well, somebody has to buy the bat!" after I was lamenting that both he and I missed watching our sons hit home-runs at their little league games. I get to all the games and events the kids have that I can, but they know that my work does often take me away for days or months at a time. Is it ideal? No, but I also think that there is no "ideal." You just do what is right for YOU and let that be okay. I suppose IDEALLY, we'd all be Billionaires and could just stay home and be full-time parents. But unless you're a banker or a Koch Brother, that's not likely so we have to work. But that's not necessarily a bad thing either, for your kids to grow up seeing their daddy achieving something that he and they can be proud of. Sitting at home being a parent isn't very inspiring to anyone.

Stay away from Craft Service. :) No, really. It's easy to over-eat when things get slow on set and there are so many yummy things at craftie and from the caterers in the morning and at lunch. Unless you're digging ditches all day long, you really don't need that many calories so being disciplined in what you eat on and off set is a very vital part of staying in shape. Also, working in film and TV is not conducive to maintaining a regular workout regimen. It's one thing for office-jockys to hit the gym every morning or evening but they don't do the hours we do with the inconsistent calltimes and lengths of days. But you workout when you can... even in your hotel room if need be with something like P90x to motivate. It's often the last thing you want to do, but it's just about dedication and maintenance. It's way easier to STAY in shape and maintain that, then to let yourself go and try to fight back, particularly as age kills the metabolism. I've seen a number of people use their lunchbreaks to go run or to a gym on a studio lot. You just "do it" when you can.

It was only scary sharp because you're so good at what you do! :)

I am planning to do a coast-to-coast drive and want to shoot timelapse of the trip using my GoPro. I need to be able to power the camera independently of the internal battery. Is there a cable available from GoPro or elsewhere that will allow me to power the GoPro using a vehicle cigarette lighter or a transformer in a vehicle?

A 1K isn't that big. Something like this will be more than adequate and doesn't weigh a ton: http://www.filmtools.com/msekitlihetr.html I typically use the normal stands that come with the ARRI kits with absolutely no problem. (like this http://www.filmtools.com/arlitminkit5.html )

True, but can you make a phonecall with it too?

Paramounts stages are almost always busy anytime I'm on that lot. Universal went through a slow period, but they seem to be hopping lately too. Warner Bros, next door to Universal seems to be busy often as well. Raleigh, just across the street from Paramount stays fairly busy as does the Manhattan Beach location. Sometimes it's a shame when we go to shoot in some old warehouse in some random "tax incentive" city when all of the specific infrastructure for making movies is all right here for the asking.

That's not entirely correct. "Film" is not a static entity. Not only does the hardware change constantly, but so do the capabilities and limitations of filmstocks. Just as a "digital" Cameraman has to keep up with the constantly changing hardware of the electronic arena, so too do "Film" Cameramen who are offered new cameras and new filmstocks. The basics of photography do not change, but the methods and tools available to capture images do whether a Cameraman is using film or electronic means. Film isn't the foundation. The box with the hole in it is.

My advice, for what it's worth, is to EDIT a lot. Once you see how shots are edited together and which shots go well together, then you can do your work as a Cameraman much better, in terms of shot choices, angles, lenses, and blocking. As far as lighting goes, you can learn a lot by watching what other Cameramen do and have done, so study other movies and commercials and try to figure out how YOU would create that same look. This forum has a lot of wonderful advice in the archives so search through often. Also, look at cinematography.net for more advice from working professionals and look through the resources listed on the forums at www.realfilmcareer.com.

The basics of photography are the same no matter what the acquisition media is, film or videotape or harddrives. A camera works the same today as it did a hundred years ago. You have a box with a hole in it. A lens goes in front of it. A shutter moves. The iris adjusts how much light gets through the hole. Something on the other side of the hole "captures" the image. You can learn all of that equally well whether you're using film or "video" cameras. Now, once you know the basics, there are some differences in the variety of capture media available and the cameras the do it. And different kinds of projects will demand that you know one camera or capture media over another, so the more you know about ALL OF THEM, the more marketable you can make yourself. The important thing to know is that no matter what anyone says, film is not somehow inherently "Better!" than video or any other capture media. It's just different with different parameters and different results which can be construed subjectively as "better" or not. Cameras are just tools and just as much lousy looking junk can be shot with film as can video. The difference is in the hands of the Cameraman who knows his tools and knows how to properly light and stage action with the proper lenses and exposures and settings to capture the desired images.

It's the modern version of Hollywood Squares, Love Boat, and Fantasy Island.

It's the modern version of Hollywood Squares, Love Boat, and Fantasy Island.

I think both are right, but if I relied on the monitor then I wouldn't be working as much as I do. I have to walk onto a location and KNOW without a lens or monitor what I need, where to put it, and what it'll likely look like BEFORE anything comes out of case. Of course the viewfinder (and monitor) are necessary once the setup is being built, but in most cases, if I waited for a lens to be up to look through before I decided how to light, I could never set up in time. The viewfinder and/or monitor are wonderful tools, but they really should just be there to confirm and fine-tune. The broad strokes of lighting and lensing really have to be known by the Cameraman sooner.

While it IS difficult, it is not impossible. My own story is semi-proof of it. I say "semi" because I didn't know anyone in the professional film industry, yet I managed to build a career anyway, first as a Camera Assistant and now as a Cameraman shooting behind-the-scenes (mostly). The "semi" part comes in because while this is fun and all, I've not yet achieved what I set out to achieve. But, despite the odds, I didn't have to turn my car around and go back home in disgrace because I couldn't hack it. Difficult? Yes. Impossible? Not even close. If you really want it, that is.

You're not really disagreeing with me. I've said all of that in one way or another. Yes, there are likely far more aspiring DPs than there are working ones and the ones who are successfully working more than likely DO know what they are doing by the time they get there. Sure, to "get there" they likely had to lean on their departments more than someone else who rises through the ranks, but I'd wager that you'd find more working DPs who made the choice to just "jump in" than wait decades in the "moving up the ranks" process. This would be an interesting poll (of working DPs) if someone could figure out how to get them to participate. :)

Hi Joe! The first thing to figure out is which job you want to do professionally for a living: cinematography or directing? Those are two distinctly different jobs with VERY different paths and requirements so the sooner you figure out which one you want to pursue, the better off you'll be. Technology-wise, volumes have been written about "film" and "digital" and it would be nearly impossible to impart everything you need to know in this forum thread. In general, though, the basics of photography don't really change whether you're using a camera that uses film or a "digital" camera. You still need to understand basics of lenses, shutter, aperture, ASA/ISO.... and LIGHTING! In any case, you'll find a treasure trove of information scattered throughout the archives of this forum. I also HIGHLY recommend that you read the following resources as soon as possible as they will provide you a picture of how this all works. Using THAT information, you'll be able to make wiser choices about what you really want to do and will know what it is you need to learn more about to get there: www.wordplayer.com : an EXCELLENT source for aspiring Writers and Directors. I HIGHLY recommend that you read EVERY PAGE. There is a lot, but it is free and invaluable. http://www.randomhouse.com/book/44440/what-i-really-want-to-do-on-set-in-hollywood-by-brian-dzyak/9780823099535/ - Disclaimer that I wrote this book, but I wrote it precisely for aspiring "filmmakers" like you. Of course I recommend it! It WILL give you the information you're looking for as to what your life will be like working in the professional film industry and how to get there. The first five chapters are critical and then read as much of the rest of it as you can to get the fullest picture of what you're getting yourself into. Also, go to www.realfilmcareer.com and in the FORUMS section, you'll find countless additional resources and articles and editorials that have been meticulously consolidated for your convenience.