Micah Fernandez

What do you guys think- is it a derth of good material or a derth of interest in good cinema? Because I've certainly had heard my fair share of (mostly young American) opinions that are absolutely closed to the idea of going beyond Hollywood (I have absolutely nothing against Hollywood, just its current state) for movies. Then again, studios surely don't pick up crap scripts and say "Aha! I think we need another bad and formulaic movie. Get me Adam Sandler on the phone." Maybe this (the lineup of movies) really is the best that writers have to offer. I feel there's a deeper socio-cultural reason behind it, but I'm interested in other opinions.. :)

Sorry, I thought I did. Yes, Arris. :)

I've never done interviews before. I have a choice between a Lowel 3 piece kit and the good ol' 1k fresnels. Lowel kit costs twice as much to rent. Given budget as the most pressing concern, what should I use?

Is renting out of the question? It will save a lot of headache and will channel your energy into actually lighting the scene properly as opposed to making them function like a professional light.

This is actually the movie that made me focus my attention on the cinematography of a movie (I'm a late bloomer when it comes to film ). I watched again recently and just marveled at how close Serra got it to look like a Vermeer, who is, incidentally, one of my favorite painters. Does anyone have any technical info for the way it was shot? Lenses used, lighting methods especially for the exteriors and the studio scenes, if there was any grading involved?

Hahahaha. Definitely the culmination of the lame escapes. "We're trapped!" "Oh, we just so happen to have an escape plan." "We're trapped again!" ...and so on....

Mr. Ryan, I think your contrast is set way too high. ;)

Fruit Chan, Chan Wook Park and Takashi Miike did the pieces on the Three Extremes. Doyle has incredible work there (Fruit Chan's segment)

Movies, as another form of the ritual of storytelling, naturally elicit emotional reactions. I'm surprised that in a forum of cinematographers, people who use visual imagery to further skew human psyche into thinking/feeling what they (or their directors) intend, some are actually aversed to "manipulating" the audience that way. I understand that it could be taken to unhealthy extremes, as with the propoganda movies of the Nazi movement, but protesting to it is much like protesting the wetness of water? by its very nature, movies (and music, since that is the topic at hand) or any artform for that matter stir the soul, ergo emotion. For beautiful examples of "silent" (near score-less) movies look to the east, particularly Japan.

The movie Hero, after Tony Leung has his way with foxy Zhang Zi Yi and before Maggie Cheung runs her sword through him.

No. I have been intending to though. :) It's not that I have anything against zooming per se, it just didn't feel like it fit with the movie. The zooming lent it a certain shock/surprise value which I thought wasn't really necessary.

Did the zooming get on anyone else's nerves?

That was my first idea, but since the AD isn't interested in helping me out I guess I'll try to source it on my own. It's very difficult to find here. I've been using all sorts of alternatives to little effect. I usually bounce the lights on an illustration board or a styrofoam reflector. What is a bead board and how will it be different? Thanks for the tips.

I'm sure several of you at one point or another have worked with those rectangular halogen tungsten lights that are used to light up garden exteriors. They dissapate an ungodly amount of heat, melting brand new gels in mere minutes. Anyway, I've been using 5 of these units (one 1kW, 4 500W) in a short I'm shooting for a friend. They're incredibly difficult to control; it's either they give off too much light or none at all and they spill all over the place. Because of this, I'm always afraid of ending up too flat, or not having enough light at all. Maybe I'm just not flagging right...anyway, does anyone have any advice, flagging tips, emulating barndoors, ways to make the light fixtures more "spot"....anything. It's quite a bother, and it doesn't help that the location we're using has an incredibly reflective orange floor (skin tones and white walls on daylight balance are freakishly red) Thanks. Hoping to hear great advice as usual. :)

In the early days of filmmaking, an apprenticeship was the ONLY way one could learn the trade. I believe that tradition still continues until today, though less emphasis is placed on it because of the existence of film schools. All of the professional DPs I have had the pleasure of meeting have been extremely generous with their knowledge and experience, even those from this very message board. At my disposal, a phone call or a text message away, are two of my country's most sought after commercial directors slash feature film DPs, as well as the most fantastic camera crew who don't mind taking a few minutes off their time off to help out some kid who wishes to follow in their footsteps. Just two days ago, a very experienced and seasoned gaffer came on set where I was DPing (all by my lonesome, I might add) and just gave me that much-needed second wind to finish the shoot with my sanity intact. With him around, things got accomplished much faster. And though I am pretty secure in my knowledge of the nature of light (at least the basics of it), he unselfishly explained better ways to execute my ideas with the limited equipment we had (a single 1k, 4 500w tungsten halogen garden lights). End result: images that I EXACTLY had in mind were produced, and a boatload of new tricks up my sleeve. At the end of the day, the director-producer was about to hand him an honorarium, to which he politely declined saying, "It's alright, as long as it's you guys." (In the end, he accepted the pay because we wouldn't let him get away without some form of thanks) You could say that connections are everything. They help, but you also have to invest in your relationships with the people. That way, they will suffer any questions or requests you have for them. Get as close as you can to the people, and they will give you access to their mind.

I've had my Athlon 1600 for almost 3 years and haven't had any major problems with it. AMD processors are just as reliable as Intel processors.

I may not agree with all the dirt-digging, but I do understand the concern that motivates doing it. This is supposed to be a professional forum where industry people come to share helpful advice, tips and stories about their work in the filmmaking industry. I, for one, did not join up to seek counsel from some random kid in Indiana whose experience is more than questionable. The advice he dispenses is often misleading and could be dangerous to an unsuspecting newbie.

My friend purchased a book that provides plans for homemade camera rigs. Sample footage can be viewed at www.dvcamerarigs.com. The movies look pretty good, but the resolution is too small to make a sound judgement. I was wondering if anyone here has already built/used any of the rigs featured in the book, and whether it's worth the trouble of constructing. Also, any tips for contructing homemade dollys, cranes, or camera stabilizers are welcome. ;)

Hmm...mind if I ask you for some sample footage, John? I recently worked on a digital feature using that rig (an XL2 was mounted) and I too, wasn't that impressed, though it seemed decent enough for me to consider purchasing.

It's true that you don't HAVE to study the past, as if it's a rule or something, but you will circumvent so many pitfalls by doing so. Ignoring what paths have been forged by the great directors only assures that you'll be hacking your way through a jungle, and in the end you'll find that you're gonna end up in the same place anyway. But if you're set on being 'original', good luck reinventing the wheel.

I caught a couple minutes of Armaggedon the other day. The camera wouldn't stop moving! You definitely don't want that for your films, unless it's supposed to be the POV of a camera operator who rides cranes everywhere.

Around a minute to a minute and a half per page is a pretty accurate average.

Well, if you haven't seen any good indies, you most likely haven't seen as much as you think you have! ;) The reason is simple: there are NUMEROUS films that you might consider to be "artistic" that are incredible not only in terms of entertainment value, but emotional, social and yes, spiritual impact as well. A laundry list of some of Asia's finest directors should immediately dispell that misconception. A few other things: - A few posters seem to be confusing obscurity with quality. They have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Non-mainstream films simply are not backed by the marketing budget like studio releases are. That doesn't automatically make them bad, but it doesn't automatically make them good either. Alternately, studios release masterpieces as well as complete doozies. In the recent years, studios have been understaking "safer" projects, those that are almost guaranteed to rake in big bucks, and promote the soul out of them. That pushes a lot of more complex dramas, scripts that feature controversial topics...anything that would be considered a daring venture, to the sidelines for the indie directors to take helm. It should already be understood that the further you deviate from mainstream, the smaller your audience will be. People in general don't like digging deeper than the advertisments that are presented to them! But that in no way means that there is a dirth of good "artistic" films...in fact, I believe it is the other way around. A cursory look at the list of movies released at the big cinemas this 2005 should prove me right. - It's only natural for someone with a more extensive library of movies to have a more mature and diversified palate. I agree that film snobs can be a bit much, but it's not like Hollywood has had much to offer to fill the vacuum of good stories. Again, there are good stories and bad stories on both sides of the fence, though I must say I would much rather watch a bad blockbuster than sit through the most banal art film.....bad art films are simply torturous. - If all film ever did was entertain, period, it probably would have died off a long time ago, like the hula-hoop, the yo-yo and 80s fashion. Spending millions and millions of dollars for temporary pleasure seems like futile exercise, doesn't it? Movies have the most potential to impact lives, thanks to the camera lens' ability to be just about ANYWHERE, and therefore it is the most versatile and effective medium for storytelling. It has so much more power than just keeping you occupied for two hours, and as filmmakers we are tasked to use wield that power responsibly: to tell stories that make tell the audience a little bit more about what it means to be human. The laughter, crying and all-around enjoyment will follow.

I know that video's latitude and sensitivity is still far inferior to film's, but is pushing and pulling done on video, with more or less the same effect as it has on film?

We must have the same mentor, or at the very least, our teachers were spawned from the very same school of thought. :)