Jump to content

Blog on why you don't always need a DP on a feature


Karel Bata

Recommended Posts

Numerous? Please cite one specific example of me being publicly "critical" and/or 'abusive' of Anna and I will most certainly address it, and if valid most definitely apologise, as that has never ever been my intent, quite the opposite.

 

Regards

Dan

 

Well I just mentioned the matter of you referring to Anna as being unprofessional but again you have not adressed this.

 

Also....waaayyyy back I posted this quote which you have also not addressed:

 

I hesitate to add this, but it seems relevant -and with all due respect to the fulltime DoP who worked hard- the shots where people have commented on the good lighting, were in fact not shot by the fulltime DoP....

 

So it really comes down to, as you say, not what you've got (or who you are), but what you do with it that counts!

 

 

So thats two specific examples! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I just mentioned the matter of you referring to Anna as being unprofessional but again you have not adressed this.

Also....waaayyyy back I posted this quote which you have also not addressed: So thats two specific examples! ;)

 

Freya -You do seem to have a rather short term memory. 'Disloyal' 'unappreciative' and 'abused' are your very own words, just look a few posts above, they are not my words at all.

 

I will specifically address the two 'examples':

 

1. "unprofessional" -I actually wrote "probably unprofessional" in reference to both Anna and I commenting publicly on production matters using inaccurate information. I don't think anyone would disagree with that being 'probably unprofessional'. And this was only a few posts ago.... several days after you used the words Disloyal' 'unappreciative' and 'abused'. So this most definitely does not equate to being 'abusive' whatever way you look at it.

 

2. Your quote from one of my comments on the blog (note: not in the blog itself) can hardly be described as critical. Anna herself has said to me that some of the shots we DoPed without her were in fact very good. Does that make the shots she DoPed by default poor and/or bad? No, it does not! Not unless you read that into the sentence with a negative frame of mind. And please also note this sentence references her hard work on set as well.

 

Freya, you are really clutching at straws if that is all you have to offer of my 'abuse'. I am most thankful for Anna's work on the film and I am not sure why you are unwilling to accept that.

 

The facts have already been clearly established. So please let's stop wasting everyone's precious time with these fruitless and negative arguments.

 

Regards

Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Freya -You do seem to have a rather short term memory. 'Disloyal' 'unappreciative' and 'abused' are your very own words, just look a few posts above, they are not my words at all.

I did but they were your words originally which was the point I was making.

In any case...

 

The facts have already been clearly established. So please let's stop wasting everyone's precious time with these fruitless and negative arguments.

 

In fact I would add pointless if Anna is now okay with everything as you have suggested.

 

This seems like fantastically good advice! So I will do just that I think.

Thankyou! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

No, in my opinion a DP is absolutely necessary at all times on a shoot. Fact: In our case we had a dedicated DoP for key scenes. For the supplmentary scenes the camera team and director DPed, just as lighting cameramen often do.

So I guess for everything but key scenes a DP wasn't "absolutely necessary", otherwise you would have continued to have a DP there.

I'm guessing you were the producer on this project Dan? You sure talk like a low budget producer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Oh jeez, we're going to get into this whole PC thing about why there are less women in the film industry again?

I don't think your post was aimed at me, but just in case it was....

My response to this comment: "What really keeps women out of the business is that in the past they had to operate these heavy cameras. Nowadays more cameras are designed to be light so that attracts more woman camera operaters."

First of all, the weight of the cameras never kept anyone out of the business, woman or man. That's just an uninformed and silly comment that has no bearing on anything. Second, cameras nowadays aren't designed ANY lighter at all for the most part. Most of the cameras I work with are just as heavy or heavier than they were in the past twenty years, with the exception of maybe one or two film cameras. The digital cameras (the professional ones at least) we use are more often heavier than the cameras we were using ten years ago. So to say that weight had any bearing on anything concerning women camera operators is just silly, and I wanted to point that out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good grief, you turn away from your computer for one moment and……. Dan Parkes and myself have been communicating via email privately about this matter and he assures me that I need not be upset nor offended by his Ambleton Delight blog. It was not written to insult me or other DOP’s and is merely suggestion into lighting kit available to hire. The main points that I was offended with were that I thought he had named the blog “http://bit.ly/noDPhere” when in fact he hadn’t…the link to the blog is actually named “http://bit.ly/bwtl2w” another comment that I was unhappy about was quickly removed from the blog by the moderator, as was my retort. Dan Parkes has since made it clear as to my role on the production: “The key scenes of the film were lit by a professional and dedicated (not to mention hard working) DP, Anna Carrington. Some secondary and supplmentary scenes were DPed by myself and the camera team (including two lighting cameramen) mainly due to budgetry reasons. Anna advised us on this and even provided some materials (gels).

The blog is not about Anna, the DP, but about our experience with lighting those secondary scenes ourselves.”

 

Parkes Productions recently stated on Shootingpeople:

 

“The quote you take from the blog regarding "several different Directors of Photography" was definitely not referring to the film in question but over the course of various previous productions -from short films to corporate- during which we have worked with several different DoPs. There was, as you know, only one dedicated DoP on this film, who, as has been stated so many times, lit the main key scenes, while a scaled down version of the camera team lit smaller and second unit footage (two of whom were lighting cameraman, so this was never going to be a huge stretch) upon whose experiences the blog was based. We maintained continuity, stayed on schedule and almost on budget and received very positive feedback on the look of the film, so I would say this was a success.”

 

“You mention the deleting of comments on the blog -and yes this is unfortunately true, as the blog is moderated. There have been some offensive comments posted, and also some insensitive and unprofessional remarks, including one from the director, that had to be removed as we insist on a high standard of behaviour at all times.”

 

I feel that these statements draw a line under the matte. Neither myself nor Dan Parkes wishes to carry on casting a negative light on the production. The shoot itself was great fun and a positive experience. The film has already won a number of awards at film festivals and I hope that DVD sales are high when it is released later on in the year.

 

Anna Carrington

DOP on Ambleton Delight

www.annacarrington.co.uk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I guess for everything but key scenes a DP wasn't "absolutely necessary", otherwise you would have continued to have a DP there.

I'm guessing you were the producer on this project Dan? You sure talk like a low budget producer.

 

Brad -I would rather credit you with more intelligence than that, as the answer is in what you have just quoted. The supplementary scenes were all DPed. There was a DP for the supplementary scenes. The supplementary scenes were lit by a DP. But it was someone different from the dedicated DP. Surely this is not too difficult to understand? No DP = No film. What you might be trying to say is that you disagree with having more than one DP on a shoot, or do not like the idea of a director who also DPs?

 

I assume that when you describe me as talking "like a low budget producer" that is not supposed to be a compliment. But in fact it should be. If a producer can successfully produce a film on a low budget then chances are they can do a lot more with a larger budget. Our motto was 'Low budget does not mean low quality' and I can say we stuck by that. However, I was primarily the director, although since I waived my fee, I'm also on the production team. The primary producers were Itsuka Yamasaki and Sinéad Ferguson, who were tough but great to work with, and ultimately the secret to the success of the project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel that these statements draw a line under the matte. Neither myself nor Dan Parkes wishes to carry on casting a negative light on the production. The shoot itself was great fun and a positive experience. The film has already won a number of awards at film festivals and I hope that DVD sales are high when it is released later on in the year.

Anna Carrington

 

Thanks Anna for clearing it up, I appreciate that. As you say the shoot was great fun and a positive experience and I for one am very proud of what the entire cast and crew have achieved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My two cents on the "Women in the Camera Department" thing....

 

One of the best Focus Pullers I've worked under so far, Kim Vinegrad, had to lug a Viper Filmstream up and down hills (that may aswell have been mountains they were so steep) for 2 months on the job we did together. At no point did she falter, even if the Operator himself found it taxing. Those Cameras are not light, especially when mounted with a Zeiss DigiPrime! Further to that She could be more macho than the men in the crew if needed!

 

I've worked under two exceptional female Focus Pullers now, Kim included, who either gave me A. a good kick up the arse or B. better training/advice than many male counterparts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an outsider reading both this thread and the blog(s) in question, this is my 2cents.

 

1. I really enjoyed reading through Dan Parke's blogs.

 

2. It appears a sincere attempt to share his experiences producing a low budget feature with other budding low budget filmmakers. Unfortunately, the first paragraph of the blog in question used ambiguous language which could be perceived as insulting to the production's DP.

 

3. Based on what I read before the changes, he definitely needed to talk to his DP and smooth the waters. It seems that he has and deserves a break at this point. He meant well, made a mistake with some poor communication and has since apologized and did what he had to do to reconcile with his DP.

 

I don't see any point in carrying on in this manner and thank you to Dan for sharing your experiences with other filmmakers. Just be careful in the future. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Pat, glad you are enjoying the blog.

 

I have certainly learned a lot from what happened, although in all honesty most of the negativity is based on the misleading title and tone of this thread, and also the same author's misleading post on the UK version of Shooting People (which afterward seemed inclined to live up to its name!) rather than the original blog in question.

 

But I have compiled my lessons learned into a new blog entitled 'Dark arts?': The Great DoP Debate which covers such issues as whether there can be two DPs on set, and if directors can also DP.

 

The link is: http://bit.ly/DPhere

 

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reply posted on Dan's blog: http://bit.ly/complete_IDIOT_here

 

Nice! Your above link and post unfortunately reveals the truth of the situation and I rest my case. Karel -instead of belitting the efforts of others and all the unnecessary vitriol wouldn't your energy be better spent on some positive, constructive, creative outlet.... such as the art of filmmaking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Kevin Thomas

Correct me if I am wrong but even Ed Wood jr only wrote/directed/produced but needed a DOP.

 

According to the crew list the talented Dan Parkes http://www.ambletondelight.co.uk/crew.html was Writer/Director/Editor and from his blog it appears he lit the best shots in the film, well the shots the garnered the best comments.

 

I would applaud him as a major UK talent but competition is fierce over here and Marc Price shot his zombie film for £45 and found a cinema distributor and didn't need a DoP.

 

In this wonderfully modern technological world I am afraid poor Dan needs to stretch his talents further, perhaps compose the music for his next film, after all it is just a question of putting notes in the right order.

 

As for the "feature" in question when will we seeing it in a cinema near us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I am wrong but even Ed Wood jr only wrote/directed/produced but needed a DOP.

 

According to the crew list the talented Dan Parkes http://www.ambletondelight.co.uk/crew.html was Writer/Director/Editor and from his blog it appears he lit the best shots in the film, well the shots the garnered the best comments.

 

I would applaud him as a major UK talent but competition is fierce over here and Marc Price shot his zombie film for £45 and found a cinema distributor and didn't need a DoP.

 

In this wonderfully modern technological world I am afraid poor Dan needs to stretch his talents further, perhaps compose the music for his next film, after all it is just a question of putting notes in the right order.

 

As for the "feature" in question when will we seeing it in a cinema near us?

 

Thanks Kevin, I think you are right about Ed Wood jr, but not completely sure of its relevance here. As in the blog (http://bit.ly/DPhere) I go on to list 16 directors known to simultaneously direct and DP. Not that I am recommending this particular Auteur option; as it says in the blog I personally would rather work alongside a fulltime dedicated DoP.

 

Regarding Marc Price's £45 "Colin" -yes, no DP and yet 9 make-up artists! But you cannot deny that it worked for them, no matter how good or bad the film was. Zombie films are an easy pick for low-to-no-budget productions such as ours; however our film is based around small village politics and hence the production values had to be a lot higher. The producer's motto was "Low budget does not mean low quality" and I think we can say we were successful on that front.

 

As for your comment about stretching talents to include music... as an interesting side point I actually did compose some music for this film, as I in my earlier days I was a restaurant pianist/composer and since the film is told through the eyes of a restaurant pianist it was logical to include two of my compositions in the film. It is always an economical option to get original music rather than clear copyrighted material and this film in fact has a wealth of original British band music from jazz to heavy metal.

 

But I disagree with your evaluation that it is just "putting notes in the right order". Having scored 40 minutes worth of underscore for an earlier feature film all I can say is that it is extremely hard work and I personally believe that directors, just as with DoPs, should not do both as it often requires a separate pair of eyes to provide the depth of emotion. In our case composer Iain Cameron did a brilliant job with his score to Ambleton (he got nominated for an award).

 

As for the feature film itself it has been on the festival circuit for the last year, has picked up some awards (including 2 Best Film awards and one Best Actor) and we are now responding to distribution enquiries. Will see how it goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Kevin Thomas

Thank you Dan for your reply - the music quip was meant sarcastically - I just hope your music didn't have too many notes (You have seen "Amadeus"?)

 

In reading your responses over the original post you make lots of valid points but I don't feel that you address the main issue of the original blog that caused me to take issue with you.

 

"It sometimes seems the art of 'painting with light' requires membership of a secret circle in which few ever devulge their secrets. Or so I thought after working with several different Directors of Photography who seemed disinclined to describe in simple or practical terms how they light a scene."

 

I just do not think this is remotely accurate, there are plenty of example of a DoP sharing their knowledge, one would be Roger Deakin's site, Geoff Bolyes site, this site, the ASC site and magazines and the list could go on and on.

 

Nor do I see how a DoP could be hiding their lighting techniques from you unless they are locking you in a shed with a monitor before lighting the scene?

 

For your statement to have any credulity you must have made some serious errors in your choice of DoPs. Reading your subsequent posts I tend to think your original blog does not accurately reflect your opinion of DoPs. Although reading them I am reminded of the French saying, "Better a quick apology rather than a poor excuse".

 

No matter how strongly I disagree with your choice of words I wish your film success but more than anything I wish Anna Carrington well in her career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Kevin

 

Thanks for that. Actually, I think my problem was the music did not have enough notes.....! :)

 

Anyway, in regard to the beginning of the original blog that you took exception to, you actually answered the question in your post when you wrote "you must have made some serious errors in your choice of DoPs" which actually hits the nail on the head. I don't want to dwell on the names or situations etc but prior to shooting Ambleton we had several bad experiences with DPs who were at best non-communicative and hence gave me the impression of some mystery. It was more likely due to inability, but I would never want to accuse anyone of that, so hence just labelled it somewhat humorously 'a mystery'. I know I am not alone in this phenomena. But note that I was here discussing personal experience and not DoPs in general as I know that this is certainly not the case on a higher and more professional level. I have several books on Cinematography (including David Mullen's incidentally) and often pop into Deakin's site and this forum, so in practice it is clearly not secretive. And I have had a great admiration for DoPs (more than directors) since a very young age and could read Dean Cundey's name in the credits....

 

So ultimately yes you are right that the original blog does not accurately reflect my opinion of DoPs simply because it never intended to....but it does accurately reflect my personal experience and the fact that I also DPed sections of the feature myself. The blog is primarily about the lighting equipment; it was only Karel's misleading blog here that unfortunately gave it any other impression and released a proverbial lynch mob....

 

Anyway, thanks again Kevin, hope that clears things up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...