Jump to content

Doug Frerichs

Basic Member
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Doug Frerichs

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Cinematographer
  • Location
    Los Angeles

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.dougfrerichs.com
  1. Thanks for posting that article!
  2. Have most of Anderson's films been shot on 35?
  3. Why do you get better results with 16 and 35? Is it because they are better at recording detail, so the results are better since there is more detail there to be had?
  4. A friend of mine has a belief that you get better results pushing 35mm than you do with 16 (and 16 better than 8, for which he says you don't get much results at all) because 35 has more image area/surface area. To me, this did not make sense, since it is the same stock, just a smaller portion of it, so why would that make a difference? Anyhow, if he is in fact right, could someone explain more in depth why? Thanks
  5. Thanks for the great explanation, Phil. Really made it clear and understandable
  6. Would you say that bigger budget films would be the ones that most commonly still do it chemically? Like I just read in the AC article about "Super 8" that the night footage was pushed a stop, so do you think those were most likely done chemically since it was a big budget film?
  7. I understand push processing and how it works, but ever since a friend of mine that was about to shoot a student short mentioned that he thought of "pushing a stop in post," I've wondered if pushing is still done chemically or if it is processed normally and then the imaged raised digitally after. I assume it is still done chemically, but part of me is curious.
  8. Use "SUPERIMPOSE:" example: SUPERIMPOSE: Seattle, WA
  9. I saw this one awhile ago: Not as long but still so many. I can't imagine how they even get all of these together
  10. I've made a cage of sort made out of wire that fit around the light, to which I would put the gel around, saving it from touching the light and melting. Kind of a pain to make, and they're pretty jerry rigged, but once they're made and put into place they do the job pretty well.
  11. I know the book "New Cinematographers" has alot of behind the scenes pics and lighting diagrams. I ordered it like in february but it's on backorder so it hasn't come yet but it looked pretty legit.
  12. I saw this film at the Palm Springs International Film Festival this year and I have to agree with you concerning the cinematography. It is stellar and I couldn't stop thinking about it leaving the theatre. I thought it was very interesting and it left a strong impression on me.. It's both at times odd and awesome. I thought it was particularly interesting how a lot of times it looked almost as if the characters were on a stage, with a spotlight-like key on them. That type of lighting is also seen in Kamikaze Girls, but not so much with the stage-like feel to it. The slow-motion was also a great aspect of it, it being intercut with normal speed shots throughout entire scenes. Not only are these shots beautiful, but they strongly contribute to the themes of the movie and of each scene specifically. I would definitely recommend to see this movie, I wish I could watch it again on the big-screen.
  13. Hi all, I was wondering, for someone trying to go down the road to becoming a cinematographer, would it be better when working on sets to be part of the camera team or the lighting team? Knowledge of both is important, so should one work on camera on some sets and then lighting on others? Do most DPs start out on either one of the teams? Opinions or personal stories would be great thanks!
  14. I was working on a student film this last weekend and the weekend before, and me and the dp would often use his dslr to get an idea of the color of the lighting and would double check the reading the light meter was giving us to see if that was indeed the exposure that we wanted to get-- we used it in general to get a preview of what it would look like on the film. I was just wondering if this is a "safe" thing to do, as in, will the images we're getting on the dslr be similar to what it will turn out on film? Is it okay to use a dslr as an exposure check (we of course set it to the same iso and shutter speed) and to test how it will look color wise? Should I be wary about using this technique in the future? Thanks in advanced.
×
×
  • Create New...