Jon Amerikaner

As a cameraman working overseas I can tell you that, with few exceptions, the days of the international jet setting travel/wildlife photographer are over. It's just cheaper to higher a local pro. Now don't let that discourage you. It means you have to work damn hard to achieve your dream. And the harder you work, the better you become and maybe you will become one of the few in-demand photographers asked to fly here and there. As for your camera package. Yes it's true that a lot of people want to hire photographers with packages (to simplify the pricing). These are people who know less about photography than you. And they assume any HD camera is right for any project. I am a big advocate of renting, which is what you would do anyway on your international photography trips. Find out how much an HD package is at your local rental house, and price yourself to that package. No one is going to care if you rent as long as the price is right and your deliver great results. And you can rent far superior equipment than you can ever buy starting out.

I want to know people's thoughts on building lasting relationships with a director(s) and on becoming a long-term collaborator. I keep filming for different directors. And my work is very good, getting better each time. But no one seems to be interested in asking me back for their next film. What can I do to make myself the guy people want to work with time and again? Thanks

Thanks, I forgot to change my profile. I was a student. Now I'm a Digital Restoration Artist and Projectionist at a major post shop (as well as an indie DP). From the Restoration to the Projection I have a view of the entire process and I am in daily contact with many experienced post people. I'm offering to help find answers to questions posted here by bringing them directly to the people who know how to answer them but do not have the time or inclination to use the great resource which is this bulletin board.

I work at a major post-house in Hollywood. And I have access to all kinds of experienced people and technology. The one thing we all agree on is that more filmmakers, especially DP's, need to know what can and cannot be done in post. So if you have any questions about post send them to me and I'll do my best to find you some answers. All the best and happy shooting.

Yes, the director must know what shots are necessary for full flexibility in editing. It depends, of course, on what the intent of the scene is and how much room for experimentation you want in the edit bay. Any editor will tell you the horrors of cutting a scene with too few shots. But too many can cost more time (and money) in photography and editing. Eventually you will have to come to a happy medium. With time, you will learn which shots are necessary and which are not for each moment of your film. Some directors can get so good at their craft that they edit the film (in their heads) before shooting and shoot only the specific shots they need. No more no less. Yes, the director needs to concentrate on the emotion, actors, and performance. That's why it is essential he or she knows which shots are necessary before beginning the day. That way he or she can concentrate on performance with the confidence that he or she will have every shot needed. Yes, the DP can SUGGEST how to cover the scene. Especially if the director asks. This is the give and take of collaboration. Many times the director has a very specific shot in mind. Other times, he or she asks the DP what's the best shot. Of course much of the conversation should happen prior to photography, so not to waste time. But many of us have shot in situations where we did not plan enough and came up with shots on the fly. This is why it's important for the director and DP to know how to edit. That way, at least, you can tell each other, well we will cover the shot in a long-shot (master), medium, and close-ups, and know it will edit together. I like to think of the director as a creative funnel. Through which, many complimentary and opposing ideas, techniques and systems flow, to produce a singular and when best, coherent and unique vision.

I'm only speaking for myself: I do NOT want my director to be the cinematographer. One time I worked with a director who, once on set, told my crew exactly where to place the lights. I asked him, "what do you want me here for if you are going to light the shot yourself?" The only exception to this (and this is my own personal feeling) would be if the director had a very specific story point for requesting a specific light. But even then, the director should be asking or recommending (not ordering) what light he or she wants in the shot to achieve the desired effect. As in: ?What?s the best light to show the character?s sadness in this shot?? or ?I think a Kinoflo gelled blue would make the scene look more depressing. What do you think?? Same goes for any of the hundreds of choices a DP must make. I do WANT a director who is open-minded and considerate. It's essential for the director to know what he or she wants and needs. But they must be open to any number ideas on how to get there. They should be open for alternate ideas. I might have a different suggestion for a shot or light. It might be better or it might not be. But hear me out first before making any decision. I can handle any number of "no's" if I know that my suggestion or request was heard and considered. If we (director and DP) have a disagreement, please keep it away from the rest of the crew. If you're unhappy with what I'm doing, talk to me in private. It is my personal opinion and experience that if the crew sees and hears the DP and director arguing, morale and enthusiasm drops. Basically the feeling among the crew, and I felt this way when I was working crews, was that if the director and DP aren't getting along, the day isn't going to go well, and the film as a whole won't go well. It doesn't always happen. But keeping disagreements in private is always a good idea.

I want to applaud you for wanting to encourage your son. My parents both encourage me to follow my dreams of being a filmmaker. And with their support I know I'll make it. My father always reminds me that if his father had encouraged him, he would have gone on to far greater things. I think its great your son has found something he loves. Too often these days kids are being deprived of art and other hands on activities. Out here in CA shop, auto, and art classes are being replaced by computer and test prep courses. I'm not a father myself. But I would advise you to continue encouraging your son, but without spoiling him. I think it would be appropriate to get him a very inexpensive digital video camera. But make him earn it. Tell him to save his money, or do chores, or that you will buy half the camera for him, etc. Or if you don't feel comfortable with a camcorder, a still camera might satisfy his thirst. For me, once I was exposed to photography at summer camp, I was hooked. My dad dug out his old camera from the garage and gave it to me. Once I moved on to videography, my parents helped me buy a video camera. As for your fear that your son is not participating in normal activities, well ask yourself what is normal? Many kids today sit down and watch TV, surf the internet, and play videogames as their ?normal? activities. I think if your son starts making films, he will turn off the TV, game console, and computer to go outside and make films! You might also encourage him to participate in other events and bring his camera to record them. As long as your son is having fun and is filming safely, then I think everything is great. When your son is 25, just directed his first blockbuster film, and has bought dad and mom that perfect house for retirement, you?ll be proud of everything you?ve done for him. Happy Dad?s Day!

We get a lot of questions on this board about what are the best cameras and equipment to buy. I am of the mind set that there is no "best." Because every project is different I feel one should pick equipment based on the needs of the specific project. Therefore I am an advocate of renting. Why buy a camera that is ideal for one project but inadequate for the next? Why not rent the right gear for each project for a fraction of the purchase cost? This goes for newbies as well as vets. I'll give you an example from my own experience. I was the DP for a student short. We had six days to cover 15 pages: days, nights, interiors, and exteriors. No problem. My producer/director said we had about 5k for a budget. So he asked what camera could we buy. I responded well for 5k we can buy camera A, B, or C. But we won't have any left for lights, grip, sound, and food. I asked if he would consider renting. I contacted several rental houses, was quoted several camera, light, grip, and sound packages (all discounted), and returned to the director. We found one package with a camera that was superior to A, B, and C, and would have cost twice our budget to buy. In the end we secured the camera, lights, grip, sound, and insurance for six days for $1,200.00. Now that?s a deal! What are your feelings on this subject? When would you suggest a rental over purchase and vice versa? Thanks all.

We get a lot of questions on this board about what are the best cameras and equipment to buy. I am of the mind set that there is no "best." Because every project is different I feel one should pick equipment based on the needs of the specific project. Therefore I am an advocate of renting. Why buy a camera that is ideal for one project but inadequate for the next? Why not rent the right gear for each project for a fraction of the purchase cost? This goes for newbies as well as vets. I'll give you an example from my own experience. I was the DP for a student short. We had six days to cover 15 pages: days, nights, interiors, and exteriors. No problem. My producer/director said we had about 5k for a budget. So he asked what camera could we buy. I responded well for 5k we can buy camera A, B, or C. But we won't have any left for lights, grip, sound, and food. I asked if he would consider renting. I contacted several rental houses, was quoted several camera, light, grip, and sound packages (all discounted), and returned to the director. We found one package with a camera that was superior to A, B, and C, and would have cost twice our budget to buy. In the end we secured the camera, lights, grip, sound, and insurance for six days for $1,200.00. Now that?s a deal! What are your feelings on this subject? When would you suggest a rental over purchase and vice versa? Thanks all.

Hi I shot and edited for CBS News for nearly three years. I shot many interviews, lit and not, among many other things. The best thing for a traditional sit down interview is a lavaliere microphone. The key to recording good audio is to constantly monitor your sound. Don't assume the camera will get it. Have headphones and always listen to the sound. You don't want to find out after the interview is over that your audio is not usable. As for lighting, you will want at least two lights: a key light and a backlight. Place the backlight behind your subject and your key in-front of your subject. You will have to adjust depending on your situation. Make sure you evaluate your lighting through the viewfinder. A third light, the fill light, would be optimal especially if you want your background to be visible, if it's not already. Lights can be expensive. Because this is a test project I would suggest renting a light kit. You should be able to get one for a day for a few dozen dollars. In fact you could rent everything: the camera, lights, and microphone for a couple of hundred dollars. You can probably rent better equipment then you can afford to buy for a fraction of the cost. That way you can get a great camera and if you?re not completely happy with it you won't be stuck with it.

I think David really hit on some important points. I can't really add much but I suggest viewing some noir films to really get a sense of what the cinematographers accomplished. Any one of us would be hard pressed to recreate the kind of imagery John Alton ASC and Stanley Cortez ASC, et al, were so deft at. Noir is not just a style of lighting. Noir also describes the thematic material of the films, which are usually dark, mysterious, suspenseful, and evil. (For example: the man wrongly accused, the crooked cop, the escaped con, and the double-crossing woman) All of which are reflected in the lighting and compositional choices of the cinematographers. The challenge is to have your cinematography evoke the story and emotions. It is fine if you want your images to be high contrast and low-key, in the style of noir films. But it has to work for the story.

Check out B&H Video they carry everything: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/ For your purposes I would suggest buying a camera in the $500.00-$600.00 range and spending the rest on a tripod and microphone. There is not much difference between a $1,000.00 camera and a $500.00 camera. The biggest problems with most of these cameras are that they are too small to be held with any stability. Buy a fluid head tripod designed for the weight of your camera. In my humble opinion, using a tripod is the first step to establishing a professional look with these cameras. The built-in camera microphones are omni-directional and pick-up every noise within earshot. I would suggest purchasing two additional microphones, one on-camera shotgun microphone for general recording and a unidirectional microphone and cable for more isolated and distanced (from the camera) recordings. The camera, tripod, and microphones should give you the flexibility to shoot many different things with better quality results.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe at one time there was an entire union of projectionists. At any rate, theaters used to have dedicated projectionists (my grandfather was one). All they did was project the films. They stayed in the booth the whole time (to switch reels) and took pride in correctly projecting and handling film. Alas, this is no more. Theaters today save money by having theater managers and assistants run the projectors. They have other work to do, so once they start the film they run off. I actually asked two ASC cinematographers if they would go see their films at local theaters. One said he rarely does because he knows it would only annoy him. The other recounted how early in his career he went to see his films in as many different theaters as possible. I believe he did this out of pride, not for quality control. Anyway, as digital projection increases and international standards remain elusive, problems with projection will only continue. Imagine a world where no one has to enter the theater in order to start a film.

While no relationship is perfect, I believe it is important for the two of you to be passionate about the project. Like directors, we also attempt to work on projects that we can feel good about. It doesn't always happen. But if I can work on a film that encourages me to achieve my best and pushes me into new or different directions, it's something I can be passionate about. I also look for projects that reflect my own life experiences. Films that have something I can connect with. That way my contribution to the project can be informed by my experiences that will in turn help me to create unique images.

There's no online database (that I know of) per say. Both American Cinematographer (AC) and the International Cinematographer's Guild (ICG) Magazine post some articles on line: www.theasc.com www.cameraguild.com

Saw Sith in DLP. Not sure of the resolution. Definitely missing all the general film print artifacts. But it was like watching the film on a giant TV. The pixels were more than evident and diagonals suffer. Reading this post brings to mind, yet again, the argument for unified standards for digital projection. Although I've come to accept that every time my images are shown they will look different. I will still fight for a system that works to preserve our original intentions. (As a digital cinematographer I've had moments where the image in my viewfinder was different from the one on my flip out screen, different from the on-set monitor, and still different from the monitor in the edit bay.) I think the biggest reason for the lack of standards in theaters is the loss of dedicated projectionists. Men and women who understood how to care for and show a film and who actually stayed in the booth to ensure a successful screening (and to switch reels). I'm sorry, but teenage theater managers who start the film and run to do other work are just not the same. And I'm afraid as digital projection increases, even these theater managers won't be needed.

In no particular order: "Baraka" (although I'm not sure that much of it is lit since it's a non-fiction film). "Never Cry Wolf" Hiro Narita ASC (probably the best wilderness movie survival not seen by many people). "Derzu Uzala" directed by Akira Kurosawa (one of his bests, sadly little seen by anyone but the most devout fans). "Border Incident" and "Devil's Doorway" John Alton ASC (cinema's greatest noir cinematographer shot some westerns late in his career. The best day for night photography I've ever seen). "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" Roger Deakins ASC, BSC (sumptuous colors thanks to a carefully used DI) "Cool Hand Luke" and "Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid" Conrad L. Hall ASC (you've seen them, what more is there to say) ?The Fellowship of The Ring? Andrew Lesnie ACS (my favorite of the trilogy, although there?s great work throughout). J

I wish. Someone at Fox probably determined there wasn't a market for the film. It makes me wonder why they bothered with it at all? I had to buy three other Fox Classics to get my copy. Not a big deal, because they are all wonderful films. I just wish they would make Sunrise available to all. I'm also curious to people's thoughts on the film. In my opinion, it?s the greatest American silent film still in existence, one of the best silent films ever made, and one of the greatest films of all time.

Check out http://ftv.chapman.edu/ for all the details. The website says they have 900 film students, 700 undergrads and 200 graduates. They do have a lot of equipment but the number of students probably means that there is a healthy competition to get your hands on it. I'm told that graduates have priority but getting the right equipment probably requires careful and early planning on your part. I'm not sure what 24p cameras they have, probably Panasonic. I was also accepted to AFI. Before Chapman, AFI was the only place a dedicated cinematographer would go for a specialized education. It was a terrible decision to decide between the two. But I've had several current AFI students tell me that they would probably choose Chapman too. The biggest reason: Bill Dill. Almost all his students I've talked to say they learned so much from him. And it doesn't matter where I go as long as I'm learning from him. Dill was still teaching at AFI this year but he is unsure if he will be back. He will be at Chapman as a long as he wants.

One of the greatest films of all time, Sunrise (1927), was part of one of the greatest tragedies of DVD marketing. Fox, that bastion of free thought and free commerce, restored Sunrise and placed it on a limited edition DVD. They only way you could get it was by buying three other Fox Studio Classic DVDs and sending away for your free copy of Sunrise. That offer has since been rescinded and I'm sorry to say not even the rental giants of Netflix and Blockbuster carry it. I'm curious to know if anyone here shelled out the cash to get it? I was working at the time so I did. It was worth it, but I think it's high time Fox put this film on the market for actual retail. But what can we do? Anyone who has seen Sunrise can attest to its beauty. It truly remains the high point of silent cinema and visual storytelling. I think it is a crime to keep this film out of stores and out of your DVD library.

Here's a new one for you: Sunrise (1927) directed by F.W. Murnau and shot by Karl Struss ASC and Charles Rosher ASC. There's a shot early in the film when the man (the characters are only given these ambiguous titles and are not named, but its part of the film's genius) is walking through a marsh to meet his secret lover the city woman. The camera follows him as he moves through the foliage, hops a fence, and eventually the camera moves away from him to find the city woman waiting impatiently for his arrival. It's a long shot done with a dolly track placed on the ceiling of the stage. Pretty impressive stuff considering it's only 1927! The film is a must see for every cinematographer. Fox has restored it and put it on DVD. In the past the only way you could get it was by buying three other Fox Studio Classics and send away for your free copy of Sunrise. I'm not sure why, maybe they ran out of copies, but sadly it is no longer available. (Heck, not even Netflix has it.) It's a shame because the film is marvelous. They did an excellent job on the restoration. And they even tapped John Bailey ASC to give an insightful commentary.

Yes, rent! No reason to buy unless you're going to use it a lot. And I mean a lot! The biggest problem with homemade dollies like wheelchairs and skateboards is that they amplify any bumps on the ground and are nearly impossible to control for identical takes. If you use a chair or board try buying some PVC pipe and cutting it in half to use as a track for the wheels. But the pipe needs to be off the ground a bit so you need to secure it to some boards. Like railroad tracks! If you have the resources you could also hire a Steadicam owner/operator for a day. Or, try a slow steady zoom. It won't look the same as a dolly but you can keep your subject framed in a similar composition as they move towards or away from the camera. If the action is moving parallel to the frame, the zoom method will work only if the camera is a significant distance from your subject. But you need to ask, "is this the right way to handle the shot?" I've worked with a few directors who want every shot moving because they think it looks cool, not because its right for the moment. Definitely consider the content of the scene and what you want to communicate to the audience. Sometimes a rock steady camera and some careful blocking can work much better than any long tracking shot ever could. PS When renting, ask for a discount! Unless your Steve Spielberg or little Georgie Lucas, they probably won't mind.

I'm starting at Chapman this fall so only time will tell. But one of the biggest reasons I'm going to Chapman is because of Bill Dill, ASC. He was the cinematography chair at AFI and is now at Chapman. By many accounts, he is the best cinematography teacher there is. Chapman also has John Badham leading their directing program and Larry Paull leading production design. Paull was also a past production design chair at AFI. Badham's and Paull's credits speak for themselves. All three have lifetime positions and are at the center of Chapman's new graduate conservatory. I would also like to shoot 35mm. I asked Professor Dill about it when I visited Chapman in March. His response was that students needed to learn to walk before we can run. However, there are several Chapman films that get shot on 35mm. It's up to the students to raise the funds and secure the equipment. I know that last winter, during their interterm classes, one of the cinematography teachers, Mark Parry, ran a class on 35mm cinematography, so they must have rented one for the three week session. Hopefully, he will offer it again. When I get there I'm going to do whatever I can to get a 35mm camera there. But if you want to get some 35mm experience without the commitment of film school then check out UCLA Extension, USC, and Rockport Photographic Institute summer programs. All are very expensive, but probably worth it. In fact I spent one evening on the set of Rent, being shot by Stephen Goldblatt ASC, and was talking to his Steadicam/B-camera operator who learned to operate at the Rockport workshops.

DOF on video is notoriously deep. To get a smaller DOF, more film like, you need to shoot wide open. This will probably mean using the high-speed shutter and or ND filters for daytime photography. Furthermore, this won't visibly affect the DOF on wide shots. You must zoom in (or use longer lenses) to compress the background and foreground to really see the DOF. And since you're zoomed in, be sure to have a tripod to steady your shots.

I shot and edited for CBS news for three years so I constantly had to deal with this problem. As a journalist I would use the shutter all the time to get an acceptable depth of field. But it does affect movement. I think it is a little different than the effect you would get on film when using a shutter angle (what was used on Gladiator and Saving Private Ryan), but it's definitely noticeable with any kind of motion. Faster shutters tend to make movements skip as if they missed every other frame. If this displeases you, you would want to use ND filters to get the proper exposure. Unfortunately this doesn't really tackle the main issue which is the lack of latitude in video. It is difficult to get details in the highlights and shadows (at the same time without adding fill) of an image shot on a bright sunny day. You could experiment with some graduated NDs. But when shooting on a bright day with video part of the image is going to be too dark or too bright. It's up to you as a DP to decide which you would prefer and which is more important for your audience to see.