-
Blind cameraman??? I need some advice please…
-
I think they should hire me to reshoot it.
Steve Wargo
Tempe, ArizonaIt’s a dry heat!
-
[David Roth Weiss] “After viewing nearly ten hours of dailies, its quite obvious that everything is weighted very heavily toward the top of the frame”
Is the story about heaven, or thoughts, or something else…so that the extra head room is a metaphor?
RH
-
David,
My advice to you would be to let the whole issue go and just edit the picture to the best of your ability.
The director and the producer(s) clearly chose the camera person and seem to be satisfied with the photography. Why make them doubt? If you bring up the subject (without being asked) you will put yourself at risk to be replaced. If they are happy with the pictures, than someone will be wrong in this discussion, and it will be you.
As a camera operator of many years, I’ve been asked to make many compositions I did not care for. Many times I’ve heard “too much head room” and later “don’t cut off the hair!”. “Stop centerpunching!” and “Why do you frame so far to one side?”. It never really ends when everyone sees the image live in video village and many think they can do it better themselves. “How much skill can it take to pan and tilt?”
I guess my point is that there are many different views on what proper or even, “normal” composition should be. Every individual might have their own set of rules. Personally, I wouldn’t rock this boat. Just my 2 cents.
-bruce
-
A couple of years ago I was DP on a short for a couple of film students at a famous film school. I set up a MCU shot with what I would consider standard framing. The director wanted me to tilt down and cut off the top of the head. I argued my case, we had a couple of tense words, and I basically said “we can do it your way, but I think it’s wrong”. He caved, and we shot it with my framing, but I wonder…..
Since then I’ve noticed many shots in features with little or no head room. It bugs me a little, but if it’s consistant can it be considered a technique and not a mistake? You can frame things oddly to increase mystery or tension or suspense. I would be interested in hearing the French cameraman’s defence of his framing. Maybe “standard framing” is evolving as we speak. If the director and producer are happy with the footage then that’s what matters.
You can have footage that’s shaky, out of focus, skewed blue, and wierdly composed and it might be art. I’m not saying it is, but it might be.
-
Peter,
The reason I titled this “blind cameraman” is because this guy’s composition is simply bad composition. Throughout twenty hours of material I looked at, 85% of the shots were simply framed way too high, cutting off information at the top of the frame and revealing way too much information at the bottom. Imagine a MWS (medium wide shot) in which the heads are cut off at the forehead, meanwhile, the shoes and feet are not only completely in the frame, but there is a great deal of excess negative space below the feet. Not good…
DRW
-
[David Roth Weiss] “the heads are cut off at the forehead, meanwhile, the shoes and feet are not only completely in the frame, but there is a great deal of excess negative space below the feet.”
David, English is his second language, right? Maybe he just misunderstood. Tell him you’re in “SHOW” business, not “SHOE” business.
-
[Bob Cole] “Tell him you’re in “SHOW” business, not “SHOE” business.”
By George, I think you’ve got it…
-
You cant say he isnt putting alot of soul into his work?
-
Reminds me of a story a friend told me about a feature he was working on — this was years ago in LA. The rushes where really dark, moody — underexposed. Everyone seemed worried, etc. After a few weeks (or something–this is a secondhand story, after all) the DP was fired and a new one brought in. Months later my friend saw the trailer at a theater and guess what –? It was made up of a lot of the ‘underexposed’ footage. Hmm? Maybe the Frenchman is into some kind of new artform. How are we to know? I saw a feature last night (Half Nelson) that was, apparently, handheld the whole time — without any trick of Steadycam or attempt to smooth it out. It bothered me at first (well really all the way through) but it did kind of grow on you. But the story was compelling, the acting good and soon (for the most part) I found myself just watching the movie. Maybe this will also happen with this film. Just my two cents.
Richard
-
Bottom line… this is the director’s problem. AND his fault for hiring the yahoo of a DP. But if he is fine with the work, so be it.
The editor should feel free to express his opinions about the quality or lack thereof… but if the work is ok with the director and/or producer, why beat a dead horse?… cut it, and move on. It doesn’t sound like this is a project that is destined for anyone’s reel anyway, no matter how well the editor (or anyone else) “saves it.”
As for the director… he’s either an idiot, somone who has no business directing, or a wimp. Again, I fault the director for putting up with it. As a director myself, my DP (or ANYONE on my crew) is free to make suggestions about ANYthing. However, that’s what they are…suggestions, which I am free to take or leave. I’ve never had an argument with a DP over which framing (or composition or camera move or whatever) was better for one simple reason: the argument would be a waste of time, because as the director I’m going to win. Period. If Mr. French was working for me and wanted to go on a ten-minute tirade about anything that wasn’t the way I saw it he would be making his argument from his car as he drove away.. for good.
And I’m not a hardass… I’m a peach, actually.
T2
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up