Jump to content

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


Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

Recommended Posts

Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
If one takes the inflation as well as the increase of the size of the population into account, 'Gone with the Wind' is the most succcessful film ever.

Gone with the wind is considered the greatest, I've never seen it myself but it certainly appealed more to people than films like Citizen Kane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 169
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

Just a quick question actually, and no I'm not boasting or anything, I just need to know where I am in the industry.

 

So far I've done 3 projects, first one "God Calling Rachel" as a PA, 2nd, "Bottle" as a 1st AC, 3rd "Red Lion Square" as DOP.

 

Now, I'm honestly not boasting but, IS that actually good for someone of my age or am I just chuggin along like the average 16 year old kid with a dream? I mean, you lot have become pretty succesfull, did you start from an early age?

 

Tnx,

Dan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The greatest moneymaker. Citizen Kane is on all the number one lists. All the ones that The Godfather isn't on. (Generally speaking of course, don't post some 14-year old's top 100 list of movies just to prove me wrong)

 

And again I'll say, we're not the one insulting any cinematographers. You're the one doing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
The greatest moneymaker.  Citizen Kane is on all the number one lists.  All the ones that The Godfather isn't on.  (Generally speaking of course, don't post some 14-year old's top 100 list of movies just to prove me wrong)

 

And again I'll say, we're not the one insulting any cinematographers.  You're the one doing that.

Just tell me how I'm insulting any cinematographers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Just tell me how I'm insulting any cinematographers.

 

By passing uninformed judgements on people who have more knowledge, taste and experience than you. People who see differences that you don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
By passing uninformed judgements on people who have more knowledge, taste and experience than you. People who see differences that you don't.

Such as?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
Just about everyone...

No I meant what uninformed judgements. I mean, if your going to make a statement like that atleast give reason for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Look Daniel what it boils down to is this:

 

From your posts it becomes obvious that you have very little professional work experience, as well as very limited knowledge of cinema. That in itself is not a problem, as you are still young. Indeed it is commendable that you start this early and know where you want to go already.

 

But in addition to that you make very opiniated statments and expect everyone to accept their validity. Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but you must realize that the opinion of an inexperienced 16 year old does count very little compared to those of professionals who have have much more experience and knowledge than you.

 

You seem to believe in your capabilities, which is good. Unfortunately you seem to forget about the one essential quality that one needs to become really good in this field: you are so opiniated that you do not listen to people who have more experience and knowledge than you, people that you could learn a great deal from. You have a huge resource of knowledge at your disposal here, but instead of asking intelligent questions you alienate everyone by making silly statments that only end up reflecting badly on you.

 

To use George Santayna's immortal warning: Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Daniel,

You've flip-flopped so many times with your opinions that you're basically arguing with yourself at this point. You can't continue to turn every statement you make around and try to make yourself look "right" every time you make a new post. I'm done responding to you because you obviously don't care to think about anything anyone else says. Don't ask me to explain this statement, just re-read this whole post and you might be able to figure it out for yourself.

Very experienced people here have tried to have a conversation with you and enlighten you on some things, and you've continued to dismiss everything they've said. It's just silly, and rude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

Ok this is just getting ridiculous now, of course I'll listen, but it's like an experienced food taster telling you bananas taste better than apples, but obviously because they are more experienced in food tasting, they should set the opinion among others?

 

Honestly though, I just read through all the comments in this thread, and apart from saying that creating new styles is easy, I still stand by my comments.

 

It seemed to be the whole Titanic thing that blew this up. All I was saying is that Titanic was a very popular film, and the fact that it went to the top of the charts is evidence in a way, not hard evidence, but certainly a great deal of it. And I still think I'm right in saying that it IS evidence, because if it wasn't a good film then all that hype just wouldn't of happened, even with all the media e.t.c.

 

And in my opinion, I'd rather create something that was popular to billions of people, rather than a work of art that isn't actually that popular, it?s just considered great among film enthusiasts.

 

Now, please tell me I'm allowed to have that opinion. I didn't create this thread for help, I created for a discussion. Open to all opinions. If you don't want to listen to my opinion because I'm a 16 year old indie film maker, then that's fine, but like I said, I'm not asking for help, just having a discussion. If I was asking for help then I'd listen to everyone word you said, but since as this is a *discussion*, it's free for all opinions.

 

I'm a different film maker. I'm a film maker who wants to create something that?s popular, entertaining, and unforgettable. Is that not allowed? Is it not, correct? There is no incorrect or correct, it's just what I want to do. And that's why I liked the cinematography out of music videos better because it looked great, it really caught my eye. My statement saying it was "better", was just from my opinion, I prefer something that looks good, rather than a new style of cinematography, that to me looked fairly mediocre.

 

 

You all seem to get all worked up on the fact that I have my own opinion and whilst I will still respect other people?s opinions, I'm not going to replace them with mine.

Edited by Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you should become a big studio producer...

 

You could have a career getting movies made like

 

Charlie's Angels 3

Three Fast Three Furious

or maybe even--Titanic 2: The Return

 

I'm sure they'd have major box office debuts you could brag about

 

 

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
Maybe you should become a big studio producer...

 

You could have a career getting movies made like

 

Charlie's Angels 3

Three Fast Three Furious

or maybe even--Titanic 2: The Return

 

I'm sure they'd have major box office debuts you could brag about

:)

No because I'm not interested in producing, I'm interested in *making* films, and besides I haven?t even seen Charlie?s angels, the fast and furious was still an entertaining film but it didn't have enough of a story to make it onto my favourite movies list.

 

Is this all because I said I'm not interested in making new styles? I'm just interested in making films that entertain and come from the heart?

 

My favourite film of all time is "Leon". The cinematography wasn't exactly spectacular, but I would rather have made that than Citizen Kane, by a long shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

If your attacking me because I'm not interested as the same things as you, and want to go my own way, then please, tell me that now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
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.

I think this statement sums up everybody?s answers to your observation (not question).

 

At first glance, a still shot of the sun setting behind the Alps (by itself) is probably going to be prettier than a medium shot in a coffee shop of a waitress that just lost her job, but the lighting and composition of the waitress is meant to evoke a specific emotion within the context of a whole scene, within the context of a whole film, whereas the sunset is most likely supposed to look pretty.

 

The beautiful shots in films lie in the storytelling through photography, not necessarily the shot alone, but if you think Greg Tolland and Conrad Hall could have supported the story better if they lit there films like modern music videos is a different discussion. Know what I mean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
The cinematography on Leon was great.  I like Thierry Arbogast.

I just liked it because it's a great film personally, it's an action film, but it's got a descent story behind it, which separates it from films like the fast and furious I think.

 

The beautiful shots in films lie in the storytelling through photography, not necessarily the shot alone, but if you think Greg Tolland and Conrad Hall could have supported the story better if they lit there films like modern music videos is a different discussion. Know what I mean?

My point was that the shots in Road to Perdition e.t.c. looked good, but if you want good looking shots then just look at these music videos. But obviously, I now know that what Conrad did in RTP was great because he invented a new style of cinematography, something that music DP's apparently don't do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that's what makes him a great cinematographer, his inventiveness. What made Road to Perdition such a greatly lit movie, for the most part, is that most of the time you're not sure how he got lights in there.

 

Think of it like this: you don't go around telling electricians that Edison's lightbulb was no big deal because the lightbulbs today are so much brighter. Especially considering that if Edison were still around, you have no idea what kind of bulbs he'd be making.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Just watched Conrad Hall's "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" again, for the upteenth time. (When I worked my way through college as a projectionist, I must have watched it each of the 30 times I screened it). Something new to see and appreciate each time, especially how it broke so much new ground away from the classic western "look" of the day. B)

 

Although I believe that movies are meant to be seen on a big screen in a theatre, the availability of so many "classic" films on DVD today makes it inexcusable to be unaware of (or worse yet, ignore) the great films of the past, and the artists that made them. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
Although I believe that movies are meant to be seen on a big screen in a theatre, the availability of so many "classic" films on DVD today makes it inexcusable to be unaware of (or worse yet, ignore) the great films of the past, and the artists that made them.

I agree there are some great movies on DVD, only trouble is they are all in small DVD shops going for a fiver, so there not exactly popular atall. I mean, Citizen Kane, the greatest movie of all time, on amazon for £4.96.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
I'm not sure what DVD price has to do with anything.  Titanic is only a pound more: £5.99.

My point is that films like Citizen Kane are considered the greatest films of all time, and here they are being sold for next to nothing in private DVD shops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my response to your original post about music videos..

 

seems to me you have a thing about softboxes and neons.

Putting a soft box all around the set is not more or less difficult than putting hard light

 

Just because it looks more fancy doesn't mean it is more difficult

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't believe this has run so long. Dan, you are very resilient. Your persistence in this thread reminds me of the clown toys that you knock down and they get up again. Or of the knight in that Monty Python film who fights on regardless of having arms and legs all chopped off.

 

This would stand you in good stead in your career in the film industry if there was even the slightest evidence that you had ability in anything. Maybe there is, but you (and your assailants in this thread) have drowned it in all the argument.

 

Some of Dan's comments are very refreshing, and have indeed prompted other posters to examine a few assumptions. Nothing very deep there though. Others simply belie immaturity (nothing wrong with that either, so long as you are prepared to listen and learn).

 

Cinematographers who know their filmstocks well, do indeed know, in advance, how every colour and shadow will come out. But it's not knowledge that comes lightly, nor is it easy to do. That is why they are so careful in examining new emulsions, and why some demand that Kodak (& Fuji) continue to manufacture the older versions that they know and love.

 

When you suggest that their skill in that area cannot go beyond remembering what they saw in the viewfinder, and that one stock is grainier than another, you DO insult the craft.

 

When you say that directing is all about telling the actors how to say their lines, you also sell the skills very very short. That one has been answered earlier in this thread.

 

It's like saying that a professional pianist has only to remember the notes, but they can't possibly expect to know what order to play them in every time, so that's not part of the skill set.

 

Or claiming that architecture isn't so hard because you designed and built a dog kennel that doesn't leak, whereas the Sydney Opera House might well do - and besides, it's 30 years old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Forum Sponsors

Metropolis Post

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Film Gears

CINELEASE

BOKEH RENTALS

CineLab

Cinematography Books and Gear



×
×
  • Create New...