http://issuu.com/open-box/docs/bc065_issuu
plus interviews with Dion Beebe, Haris Zambarloukos, Simon Duggan on the future of cinematography p38-40
Interviews with Jess Hall, Christian Berger, Phedon Papamichail & Roger Deakins on cinematography's future p27-33
- Haris Zambarloukos BSC -
Q: In the last 10 years what has been the biggest change
for you as a cinematographer?
A: The biggest change I believe has been in the colour
correction process. Nine years ago I was able to finish my first film, Enduring
Love, in a DI process and since then all but two have been a DI finish.
That has dramatically increased the time needed to complete the final process
and has created an unavoidable dilemma: do you prefer ultimate control over the
finest detail of the look of your images, or the finest possible print? A DI
gives you that extra control, but nothing looks more beautiful in a cinema than
a photochemically finished print – a black and white one at that.
Q: What do you feel are the biggest challenges facing
cinematographers today?
A: It is the same today as it was when the first moving image
was created, how to use motion picture art to create a compelling emotional
experience for the audience.
Q: What are your thoughts on digital image quality vs.
film?
A: I would rather sit down somewhere else... preferably with a
drink.
Q: And what developments would you like to see in the
future?
A: Cinematography developments have raced ahead of other areas
in the film industry, to the point where we might be going backwards. Maybe we
should develop appreciation and true understanding of the tools we already
have.
Q: What, for you, has been the most significant
development in technology or new piece of kit in the last decade?
A: The ability to scan a negative, and the idea that you could
colour correct digitally has had the most profound impact on our work in a
number of ways. I still love the photochemical process and I think in terms of
the texture and the crispness that you still get a better print, in my opinion.
But the ability to fine tune a picture at the end is just incredible. We take
it for granted now that we go into a DI suite and that is how we colour correct
a film. But 10 years ago that wasn’t possible.
Q: What films, or which cinematographer’s work, have you
been most impressed with in the last 10 years?
A: I don’t think I’d ever seen anything like Road To
Perdition (2002) (top picture) when it came out. That will take some
beating. In terms of moving forward, presenting films in a certain way, the
work that Wally Pfister did on The Dark Knight (2008) using
IMAX and 35mm is really significant, as is all the work Anthony Dodd Mantle BSC
has done mixing formats. I just loved Slumdog Millionaire (2008)
and I think all of Anthony's work has such an intense energy, I find it
breathtaking. I always admire what Rob Hardy BSC and Robbie Ryan BSC are doing.
- Mandy Walker ACS -
Q: In the last 10 years what has been the biggest change
for you as a cinematographer?
A: It has to be the invention and constant upgrading of the
technology of digital capture mediums and the ending of film prints and
processing. When we did our pick-ups for Tracks out of Deluxe
Sydney it was the last piece of film to be processed there. The camera
department is now set up differently with the addition of the DIT and data
wranglers. Also, the other significant change is the way images are seen on-set
with better quality monitoring. This has changed the way people look at their
own work in other departments on set. By seeing that what is on the modern
monitors is potentially pretty close to what they will see in the end product.
Q: What do you feel are the biggest challenges facing
cinematographers today?
A: To maintain the role of the cinematographer on a movie where
VFX are controlling more and more the pre-visualisation, and post production of
the images. I always try and set up a collaborative relationship between the
with the director and myself with the VFX supervisor, so they understand the
visual language that the director and I have decided on. That way, when we are
finished shooting, they don't go off on their own tangent and make
images that don't fit the visual style of the film. It has happened
to me that at the last minute some scenes have been manipulated so much that it
looks like another film. Also, those relationships are important during
pre-production, and especially if the film has a lot of pre-visualisation and
VFX storyboarding. Again, you don't want to be told by them what the
shots are. It's an important relationship and you need to be
communicative with each other at all steps of production.
Q: How do you feel digital compares to celluloid imagery
and acquisition?
A: I am still using both, and I feel that film is still the
best choice for some situations and digital for others. I would be sad if film
went away as a choice. On Tracks, both the director, John Curran,
and I were adamant that we shot on film as we felt that the many varied
landscapes, weather (some harsh and some with subtle beauty), and colours could
all be recorded with the best resolution and contrast range possible with
negative. We were in isolated in hot dirty locations and we could always grab a
camera and quickly shoot, not worrying about cables, monitors, and overheating,
etc. Even though after shooting film for 25yrs, I still got a thrill
watching the printed film dailies, and nearly every time it would look better
than I thought, like those skies with their detail. However, I shot a TV
pilot on ARRI Alexa, as the project called for large theatre and hotel lobby
locations, where I used minimal lighting and embraced the available light
fittings, and night urban scenes. For me that camera worked really well in
those low-light situations and had more detail in the shadows than film.
Q: What developments would you like to see in the future?
A: That digital capture does not go down the path of some of
the latest television sets, in that the manufacturers think sharper and less
motion blur means better images. I'm always using older lenses and trying to
not have a super sharp image on digital as it can look like reality TV and not
drama. I would like the camera manufacturers to make the images have more
colour resolution and handle larger contrast extremes, especially in the
highlights. Just because a camera has more than 4K resolution, it doesn't necessarily
mean a better image. I'm not after sharper images – it can become a
harsh look on an actor’s skin, showing every wrinkle and pore.
Q: What has been the most significant technological
development in the last 10 years?
A: The technology to do on-set looks and grading of your
dailies. I find shooting digital can be a positive experience, when you have
your LUT on-set and can show the director pretty much how the end result will
look. Then you can light to that image and control things in the image that
previously one couldn't do until later on in post.
Q: What films, or which cinematographer’s work, have you
been most impressed with in the last 10 years?
A: All of the films shot by Roger Deakins. His work is always
faithful to translating a particular script to the screen, and to visually
expressing the story to an audience. The decisions he makes for camera moves
and lighting are never unnecessarily showy and don't take away
from the focus of the storytelling. I also love the work of Emmanuel Lubezki.
He has taken chances in his work, such as in The Tree Of Life (2011),
that are not conventionally technical in their coverage and lighting, but are
so perfect in conveying the emotions of the characters and the story. Plus the
innovative way he has shot films such as Lemony Snicket's A Series Of
Unfortunate Events on stage (2004), and Gravity (2013)
with his use of the huge LED panels. He is truly a groundbreaker, and one with
great taste.
- Dion Beebe ACS ASC -
Q: In the last 10 years what has been the biggest change
for you as a cinematographer?
A: It is ten years now since I first picked up a digital camera on the
movie Collateral. It was like a mass of cables with a lens
attached. An umbilical cord connected it to a huge mothership the size of an
industrial freezer. One had to be careful not to touch the menu button unless
you had some sort of degree. But the first time I saw palm trees silhouetted
against the LA night sky, and freeways captured beneath the sodium glare of
streetlights, I realised digital photography was about to change the way we
shoot movies.
Q: What do you feel are the biggest challenges
facing cinematographers today?
A: Cinematographers have always been required to stay abreast
of changing technologies. However, the past 10 years has seen such enormous
changes that it is important not just to know what is out there, but to also
try and be comfortable with the technology. These are not just changes to
cameras but to lighting choices, colour timing tools and visual FX procedures
too. Staying current in the industry is certainly one of the challenges we face
and also one that keeps what we do exciting.
Q: How do you feel digital compares to celluloid
imagery and acquisition?
A: It is important to regard each format as unique. That one
captures light via electronic data and the other through a photochemical
process clearly demonstrates this distinction. I also believe each has its own
unique aesthetic. Film aesthetic is something we immediately recognise and has
its origins deep within the films captured on celluloid for over 100 years. Its
look lies within the grain, texture and contrast of film and the reaction of
light on the negative. On the other hand digital image capture has its own, and
still evolving, aesthetic. And with it has evolved a lighting style that is
unique to the digital format. If I were to describe this it would be an ambient
lighting style. The digital cinematographer must look to build contrast and
depth into an existing ambient base light and find a way to integrate it
seamlessly. There is a soft, open look that emerges from this that I feel is
unique to this format.
Q: What has been the most significant technological
development in the last 10 years?
A: The digital sensor.
Q: What developments would you like to see in the future?
A: I'd like to see the continuing development of film negative.
Film is a unique storytelling tool. Let's not lose that
No comments:
Post a Comment