We say Conrad Hall & Greg Tolland were the best...

[Shaun Joye]

Since when did Toland and Hall become outdated? Besides any educational or historical significance, their work is simply beautiful and the passage of time won't change that. I agree we're still in the shadow of Carvaggio, and we'll always be in the shadow of Toland and Hall as well.

 

Dan, you're entitled to your own opinion, but Jurassic Park? I mean, I respect your views and all, but JURASSIC PARK? I agree that there are interesting things done with music video, but being a cinematographer is much more than making pretty pictures.

 

Ever notice how the soundtrack in a film can make cuts look smoother? Or how editing can make acting seem more real? Or how art direction can make lighting look better? All the aspects of filmmaking depend on each other and its all about making a film that draws the audience in. Conrad Hall was a great cinematographer because he helped tell the story, and he did so with a level of skill that, in my opinion, is simply unmatched.

 

I don't see what the problem is with looking up to people like Hall or Toland. None of us are going to immitate them, I don't think any of us really could. They were masters of the art, and it is constantly changing, and there are those who will become masters and do new and amazing things in the future. However, from a personal standpoint, I'd consider myself lucky if I ever got close to where either of them were proffessionally and artistically. And if I'm at the top of my game in my seventies I'll be a very happy man.

[David Mullen ASC]

You can't really compare the cinematography of a 30 second commercial or 3 minute music video to a 2 hour movie.

 

For one thing, the average commercial or music video has a lot more time to shoot compared to the final running time (a commercial shooting perhaps 1/8 of a page per day versus three to five pages of script per day for a feature) plus the goals are generally different: cinematography in a feature is there to SUPPORT the story and acting, not dominate it. In commercials and music videos, the visuals are front and center usually. It's got nothing to do with being a "better" DP because you can create more striking images -- maybe a better commercial or music video DP... but that's not what makes a great feature film DP.

 

Also you have to consider that the average feature may well be made up of over 1000 shots, done over a couple of months in a wide variety of conditions, often shot out-of-sequence, yet the final result has to look fairly consistent. Consistency is harder than creating some great shots.

 

I'd suggest that anyone who thinks that what Hall or Toland has done as being relatively easy to accomplish FIRST go out and accomplish it themselves before stating so. I mean, you can look at a Van Gogh painting and also think it's relatively easy to accomplish but that doesn't mean you're as great an artist as Van Gogh.

 

Great cinematography has little to do with how hard it was to set-up anyway -- in fact, often the best cinematography is quite simple technically. But that doesn't mean it isn't hard to think it up artistically. Gordon Willis lit many scenes in "The Godfather" with a soft box over the center of the set -- doing that wasn't hard to accomplish, but THINKING UP how to treat that film visually using such techniques was an act of genius.

[Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith]

I don't think anybody's getting all over you that you want to make blockbuster's Daniel, it's just a little worrisome that you limit yourself so much. Many of these "blockbuster" filmmakers were inspired by movies of a completely different nature. Steven Spielberg's favorite director is David Lean, and though I doubt he'd make a movie about genetically recreated dinosaurs, it makes sense that Spielberg would love somebody that had such a huge scope in his movies. His first movie, Sugar Land Express, wasn't exactly action packed (it's a great little movie; wonderful night scenes...anybody know how Vilmos did some of that stuff?)

Perhaps from the influence of these blockbusters I'll create something completely different.

 

Besides by blockbusters I don't mean all out 100% action, I like something with a bit of story to it. For instance my favourite film is Leon, it's based around an action film but it also has a very complex story behind it.

 

For that reason I never really liked films like the Fast and Furious e.t.c.

 

 

Dan, you're entitled to your own opinion, but Jurassic Park? I mean, I respect your views and all, but JURASSIC PARK? I agree that there are interesting things done with music video, but being a cinematographer is much more than making pretty pictures.

I'm speaking more from a director?s point of view. The cinematography in Jurassic Park was pretty good I thought, but it was mainly the film, it had such a huge storyline, it certainly kept me in the cinema. (Well actually I saw Jurassic Park in the cinemas when I was younger and apparently I was screaming my head off :blink: ) But, I liked it when I got older. And to this day I'd still rather watch that than Citizen Kane, which I watched and thought was ok, but I didn't turn the TV off at the end of it saying "Wow, what a great film". But on the other hand I still gave Citizen Kane the respect it deserves, but as a viewer it didn't really appeal to me greatly, I mean it was ok, but not *that* great.

 

You can't really compare the cinematography of a 30 second commercial or 3 minute music video to a 2 hour movie.

I realise that now, two different mediums anyway.

[Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith]

One music video thar really did get my attention was "My Immortal" by Evanescence.

 

Video

 

I have yet to see cinematography in any feature length film as good as this!

 

I just honestly don't think these music video DP's get the credit they deserve. Everyone is on about Greg Tolland e.t.c. but everyone seems to forget the other fantastic DP's out there.

Edited April 22, 2005 by Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

[Ilmari Reitmaa]

I have yet to see cinematography in any feature length film as good as this!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Apart from the incessant camera movement and overall softness, resemblance to Robert Krasker's work on The Third Man is at times quite uncanny; hard light and cast shadows, not mentioning old city exteriors and withering leaves..

[Rik Andino]

I'd suggest that anyone who thinks that what Hall or Toland has done as being relatively easy to accomplish FIRST go out and accomplish it themselves before stating so.  I mean, you can look at a Van Gogh painting and also think it's relatively easy to accomplish but that doesn't mean you're as great an artist as Van Gogh.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I recently saw some Van Gogh paintings...

And anyone who says they're easy to accomplish hasn't seriously seen a Van Gogh

 

The same way anyone who negates the skill that Hall and Toland have

Hasn't really seen any of their movies...

 

The more you practice and learn about these things

The more admiration you have for the people who have done it

It ain't as easy as every idiot think it is--there is actually some skill involved.

[Boone Hudgins]

It's one thing to reproduce the works of Toland, Hall, Willis, Van Gogh, but remember that they created them.

 

I do think that video is neat, Daniel, (it's the only Evanesence song, and video, I like) but I've seen plenty of black and white movies that were as good, and a lot that were better. Better music videos, too. I'm not sure what you're trying to prove. It's like saying that you don't see what the big deal about The Great Gatsby is because Michael Crichton's Timline is such a better book. Even if you like Timeline better, you can't dismiss the former as being considered the great American novel. So many people are influenced by these cinematographers, it's a bit odd for you to dismiss them as "no big deal." Especially when you compare them to people who are probably close to the same age as the cinematographers that post on here. They're classics, don't fight that.

 

But I stand by the fact that if all you watch are those big movies, you're only limiting your scope of influence, and for a while at least it will border on imitation. If you want to start a rock band and you only listen to Blink-182, what do you think you're going to sound like?

[Dominic Case]

It's one thing to reproduce the works of Toland, Hall, Willis, Van Gogh

<snip>

Especially when you compare them to people who are probably close to the same age as the cinematographers that post on here.

 

Wow!

 

Conrad Hall would have been 79 this year: Gregg Toland 101.

 

Not many of the cinematographers on this list are very close to that age.

 

Most could add Boone's AND Daniel's ages on to their own and still get in underneath.

 

Still, I guess over 40 is over the hill from somebody's point of view. (sigh!)

[Boone Hudgins]

I meant to say that he was saying that younger cinematographers are better, and for some reason you guys should look up to them more (apparently), even though you are their peers. I was comparing you guys to the young bucks!

[Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith]

and for some reason you guys should look up to them more (apparently)

Not neccesarily look up to them, but respect them more. Their work is amazing, if it wasn't they wouldn't be doing videos for some of the biggest rock bands around.

 

I mean, could anyone on this board actually do work like that?

[jon w]

i kinda see music video cinematography similar to still photography, individual shots. dont get me wrong, a lot of it is beautiful!, its just that for the most part you dont have to worry about lighting continuity, eyelines matching, if shots will cut togeather nicely.

 

its just constant visual stimulation... i couldnt imagine trying to sit through a feature shot like this.

[Robert Hughes]

... it's like saying you don't see what's the big deal with good wine because crack is so much more exciting!

[Gordon Highland]

its just constant visual stimulation... i couldnt imagine trying to sit through a feature shot like this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

you mean like the Charlie's Angels movies? [shudder] sure, they're kind of interesting to look at for four minutes, but the number of excuse-to-use-a-pop-song montages and excessive star-mugging makes me ill. pure sugar. this is a guy who makes music videos, and should stick to what he does well.

[Rik Andino]

Not neccesarily look up to them, but respect them more. Their work is amazing, if it wasn't they wouldn't be doing videos for some of the biggest rock bands around.

 

I mean, could anyone on this board actually do work like that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm sure a bunch of cinematographers here

Have shot Music Videos for big Rock bands...

 

And besides getting work on music videos sometimes is more about politics

And less about skill--I've seen very mediocre DP's get big video work

Because of who they know or how they present themselves to certain folks.

 

 

I don't know if you've talked to many DPs

Especially those who mostly do Music Videos

Ask them: "Who do they respect & admire?"

And they'll probably tell you

All those old feature film DP's you're not so impressed by

 

Then ask them: "What would they like to do?"

And they'll mostly tell you: "They want to DP a feature film..."

Music Videos are fun and all but they're not as great as doing a feature film

Everyone (or at least almost everyone) wants to DP a feature film

 

So yes I do respect cinematographers who shoot videos & I do admire their work

I respect most cinematographers...

But I respect the cinematographers who shoot features the most

Because a feature film is alot harder than doing a video.

Edited April 23, 2005 by Rik Andino

[Guest Tim van der Linden]

I mean, could anyone on this board actually do work like that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

www.claudiomiranda.com

[Brad Grimmett]

Not neccesarily look up to them, but respect them more. Their work is amazing, if it wasn't they wouldn't be doing videos for some of the biggest rock bands around.

 

I mean, could anyone on this board actually do work like that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm certainly not trying to knock music video DP's, since I've worked with some really good ones, but music videos are where many DP's cut their teeth. It's a nice start. Most of them tire of shooting videos very quickly and yearn to shoot bigger and longer projects. Many of them move from videos to commercials and on to features. And many of the videos you see are actually shot by feature DP's that shoot videos when they're not doing features. Do you think that all these DP's do is shoot videos? If so, you're wrong for the most part.

[Adam Frisch FSF]

I started with videos and I'm still doing them, but more and more reluctantly. It's just not very satisfying anymore, because 99% of the ones you do are poop and even if they were good, they never get seen, never have an impact, never really say anything. I actually cringe today when I see yet another low, wide-angle "music video" shot with flares, bling-bling and debuting artists riding million dollar cars (who can not have made their money yet to show such affluence) with booty-girls in them. It's f***ing bullshit. With crap like that, record labels deserve to loose money.

 

For every good Björk-video, there's a thousand crap ones. I know, I know, I'm getting grumpy. But flashy visuals, cool Technocrane moves a la Bay or any other of those crappy calling-attention-to themselves shots just leaves me cold today. I'm getting very conservative when it comes to fashy stuff - it just doesn't interest me as it did some years ago.

 

I'm turning into the Gordon Willis school of restriction - he famously questioned Coppola's top shot when the Don gets shot and the oranges spill out on the street with a: "Well, who's point of view is that?". In this case he was wrong and Coppola was right, but it was a justified question. The shot does kind of stick out from the restrained compositions of the rest of the film.

 

Darius Khondji pretty much also sums it up in the article on The Interpreter in this months AC:

 

"Why try to find clever camera angles when you have actors like that? Just put the camera there and record, like you're going to film an anthropology study. I went in with a lot of ideas about remote angles and so forth, each one more clever than the last, but ultimately, I cleaned everything off".

 

I'm going to continue doing music videos, but honestly, I hope to soon be in the position where I can turn some of the most uninspiring down.

 

Less really is more.

[Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith]

I find it strange how people say cinematographers like Conrad L. Hall are so great because they *created* a whole new look, or whatever. I mean, it's not exactly difficult to create something original, but when creating original work you're limited to creating *good original work*, unless you want to create something that's totally weird and annoying to watch.

 

You can only go so far when creating new styles e.t.c. I mean, at the end of the day, your lighting a scene which corresponds to the atmosphere e.t.c.

 

Just say for example I thought up of some shots for my film, but without knowing it, they were actually very similar to Conrad?s work in Road to Perdition. Typically people would think I'm copying automatically, but since as I didn't actually copy, I've created some of the greatest work in film history. So just because someone else created it first, doesn't 100% mean it's theirs, what have they patented it or something? Obviously if someone has copied it straight, then that's a different case.

 

I mean, creating original work is about the easiest damn thing to do! If you're willing to take a risk that is. Here?s an idea, why not shoot the whole movie from a subjective view from the protagonist? That would be blowing the hell out of shot conformity! No ones ever done that before!

 

I mean, if creating original work is what makes you so great, then I should be doing well, because I've planned all the lighting and shots out for my film without copying anything.

 

As far as I'm concerned feature film DP's copy music video DP's, I mean just look at all the creativity and originality in music videos, and then compare them to feature length films. When I look at films I can usually see a resemblance between it and another film, never have I seen two music videos that look the same. People say it's because of those feature films that music video DP'd have done those kinds of shots, I think thats goong a bit too far, I'd say more encouraged them.

Edited April 24, 2005 by Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

[Adam Frisch FSF]

As far as I'm concerned feature film DP's copy music video DP's, I mean just look at all the creativity and originality in music videos, and then compare them to feature length films. When I look at films I can usually see a resemblance between it and another film, never have I seen two music videos that look the same. People say it's because of those feature films that music video DP'd have done those kinds of shots, I think thats goong a bit too far, I'd say more encouraged them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

We must watch completely different music channels. Every RnB and Hip Hop act have the exact same video - they're interchangeable. When was the last time you saw a Popstar-dropouts video that was any good? When was the last time you saw an R.Kelly video that was any good? JLo? Mary J. Blige? Beyonce? Eve? Pink? The list can be made endless.

 

Once in a while a good music video comes along. But they're as far and few between as a really good feature and often even more generic. Many DP's come from that background in music videos - Mathison, Acord, Khondji, Cronenweth and so on, so of course they influence films. But the exact opposite is also true - can't count how many times I've seen a MV that steals the whole look, concept and idea from a feature.

[Louis]

If I may completely ignore any points of argument in your post and just refute one simple fact: there was a movie in the 1950s based on some Raymond Chandler book that was shot subjectively from the protagonist's POV. I saw some of it but I have forgotten what it was called.

 

I have enjoyed reading this thread.

[Josh Bass]

There might be more than one, but apparently "Lady of the Lake" was done like that, with the first person all the way through.

 

I don't want anyone to think I'm well versed in film history; I got that out of the "5 C's of Cinematograpy."

 

So there you go, NOT an original idea, been done. See? Not so easy, is it?

 

Yes, this thread continues to amuse me.

[Louis]

There might be more than one, but apparently "Lady of the Lake" was done like that, with the first person all the way through.

 

I don't want anyone to think I'm well versed in film history; I got that out of the "5 C's of Cinematograpy."

 

So there you go, NOT an original idea, been done. See? Not so easy, is it?

 

Yes, this thread continues to amuse me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah, that was the one I was thinking of.

[Rik Andino]

I'm one of these kids sitting at home watching these music videos and films, I was honestly more impressed with the cinematography in the music videos. And when you think about it, in a way (and forgive me, I feel realy arrogant saying this) but it's actually my opinion that counts overall, considering I'm pretty much an average consumer of this work. And as an average consumer I thought that the music videos looked better.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Wait! Now I get it! :)

 

This is the reason why most of the movies in the cineplex suck

Because they're gear to the youth--and the youth like stuff like these Music Videos

 

See the problem here is not Dan's opinions...

It's that his young opinions are now becoming society's standard.

 

Our society is being geared to the really really young & inexperienced...

And what they usually like is crap (because they've not experience anything

and what can you expect from folks who haven't even graduated HS)

& so what the rest of us get to see is crap

 

{Pardon my harsh opinions but I really think most of the stuff on MTV is crap

as is The Fast & the Furious, Charlie's Angel, Triple X, The Ring 2 etc...}

 

And when one of us oldtimers (and I'm just in my mid-20's)

Mentions that someone some 20 years ago did something good

Everyone groans and complains about how it's just archiac or outdated

 

We should really be angry with the studio producers and network execs...

That just cater to the youth and tell the rest of us to "f*#k off & die"

It's thems who are ruining our already ruined society...

 

Okay so I said my piece and that's it.

 

Hope I didn't offend any young peopl who like to watch MTV

And crummy cineplex blockbuster films.

[Rik Andino]

This is going to be a 7 page thread.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Give us three more days we'll probably beat that projection... :)

[Shaun Joye]

So its your opinion that matters because your the average consumer, eh?

 

Do you know what the highest grossing movie of all time, worldwide was?

 

Titanic

 

... Now ask yourself was Titanic the greatest movie ever made? Does McDonalds make the best cheeseburger? Does Coca Cola, taste significantly better than any generic brand?

 

What I'm saying is that just because something is popular or makes a lot of money does not mean its the best, it just means that many people have bad taste, or the capitalist system has managed to market the hell out of something that isn't that good.