going big time: the DI game

Michael Most · August 1, 2006

If I'm not taught at least the basics about these tools, how am I possibly going to be able to work on films that require it.

Do you really expect "to be taught" everything you're going to run into in your professional life? If you do, you're not being realistic about what you should be getting out of all of this. It's not about covering all bases. It's about learning generalized approaches, enough so that you can exercise your own intellect and talent to fill in the gaps. More importantly, it's about using a unique time in your life - when you have relatively few life responsibilities, and yet are old enough to have a modicum of life experience - to enrich your understanding of the world around you in a way you might not have time for later, and with little pressure in terms of success or failure on any given day. What you seem to be alluding to would be a trade school approach. That's not what it sounds like this program is designed for.

Are we to ignore the DI technology as well?

No, and I didn't say that. What I said was that if you are going to use such an approach, you'll learn a lot more about it by experiencing a mini-real-world situation than by setting up millions of dollars worth of equipment, only to have it driven by someone who is inexperienced. The nature of the DI world is that it hasn't existed for very long, at least not in the sense of doing electronic color correction in a theatrical projection environment. The methods and systems are still being refined and developed. It's rather presumptuous of a school to think that they can present it to their students any better than the existing facilities can, and even more presumptuous to think they can get someone to drive it that is anywhere near as skilled as those doing it professionally. In other words, my feeling is that in an educational environment, you're better off not doing things if you can't do them very well. It's not a question of throwing money at equipment manufacturers, and it's not a question of making a PR splash. It's a question of priorities.

One of the concerns I have, and I'm surprised that no one else has mentioned this yet, is that by keeping everything in house at the school, the students are missing out on a very important part of the filmmaking process. That is, establishing relationships with colorists, equipment houses, facilities etc.

You're also not getting the opinions or expertise of anyone other than those connected with the school. Not that those are inexperienced people - in this case, quite the opposite - but being told things are done a certain way leads you to actually believe it, and to be quite surprised when you enter the real world and discover that what you were told is not always the case. You'll have plenty of time in your working life to establish relationships and collaborators, you don't need to do that when you're a student. But specifically in the case of digital intermediate work, it remains my opinion that do that in house at this point in time is a serious waste of money, and will likely not be as worthwhile in terms of educational benefit as hooking up with existing facilities would be, particularly if, as you say, it's not going to be used for all projects.

Roberflowers · August 1, 2006

I think we are in agreement on a lot things mmost. I don't anticipate learning everything to there is know in film school. I think that kind of thinking is shortsighted, unrealistic, and an unhealthy approach to not only film to but to life in general.

The generalized approaches you speak of are what I am talking about. And quite honestly, you learn more in school by making all the films you can, and working on as many sets as you can, than you do in the class room. I know some professors may not like to hear that, but it is true. Alot of the learning is indirect, its from your peers, its from screwing up and making mistakes, its from watching professionals who have been doing it for a lot longer than a student has. All these things contribute to our learning and continue to do so.

I don't presume to come out of school knowing everything. It's quite the opposite in fact, I know some things (like these general approaches.) But I think what an exciting time it is to be doing this, because there is so much to learn... I've been very fortunate in my life so far to see a lot of places, meet a lot of different people, and experience a lot things. Because of that, I know there is so much to learn about a great deal of things, and that you can never stop learning.

I'm sure things will become much clearer at school once the semester gets rolling and they tell us what their plan is going to be for the workflow.( maybe I'm too optimistic) And I'm sure I will be contacting professional post houses and such, asking for their input. I may even drop you a question or two, mmost.

Michael Most · August 2, 2006

I may even drop you a question or two, mmost.

And I'll certainly try to answer them. You seem to have a really good head on your shoulders, and a good sense of proportions about all of this. Best of luck in the future.

Michael Collier · August 2, 2006

It seems like giving a high school biology class a gene sequencer device.

Actually, I have 3 of those in my garage. Bought them to see if I could decode the human genome before scientists could. Instead I ended up buying a bunch of lawn nomes and named them after the alphabet. (get it, a,b,c,d,e,f...G-nome! hahaha oh, now I know why they say he who would pun would pick a pocket.)

Chris Pritzlaff · August 5, 2006

Hello,
Chapman University is just opening its new film school and we just got a DI system. I wanted to know if anybody has used a DI system and what to expect? What to look for and how I should adjust my telecine sessions to accomidate for the best look in DI? Also and tips and or tricks that you have personally learned from going through the DI process.

Eric - look at what you started.....again. Hope you continue to post on the forum despite the debates that your posts seem to always cause.

EricUlbrich · August 7, 2006

To present the issue in a different light:

EVERY FILM SCHOOL HAS PROBLEMS!! if they didnt it wouldnt match hollywood. There are still politics, there is still the same old BS that we have to deal with on a day to day basis. Guerrmo Del Torro (think thats how its spelled) put the film life in some of the best words I have heard in a long time: "filmmaking is like eating a poop-sandwitch, you sometimes get more bread, you sometimes get less bread, but you always get poop!" So we have a 4k DI system, as a cinematographer, I am going to try my hardest to not shoot for the DI suite, and not end up like lucas, directing around the movie and shooting for the edit. I think often times people sell film students (especially chapman students) short, thinking that we are suddenly going to develop big heads, and forget the creative art of storytelling. I must that that the day this happens to me or any of my friends, I am going to hang my meters up and call it quits. Personally, I am excited to get our new suite, I think its a great tool, but thats just what it is, a tool. Originally, I had made the post to get a general understanding of the DI process in a more complex and detailed manner other than "well there is a machine that scans the film," and apparently this thread has proved nothing at all, other than the fact that people, especially cinematographers, read way far into things. So what we still only shoot 16mm and not 35mm, is doing a DI on a good 16mm film such a waste? And what about the future, as technology improves, the cost and quality of DI goes down and up respectivley. So we may not use DI for another 40 years, we may never use it again, but at least for now we get to use it. People get so caught up with the medium that they forget about the content. forget the medium, just shoot for the story and if you really care about it, it doesnt matter who finances it, and it doesnt matter who teaches you, if you care, it will show.