by Katrina Diamond
The panel kicked off with a 5-min. montage of great movies, then dived right into questions.
This ‘The State of the Crafts’ session at NAB was a panel of the following speakers:
* Richard Crudo, ASC - Vice President
* Stephen Lighthill, ASC President, “The Spirit of ‘76”, “Earth 2”, “Nash Bridges”
* Dean Cundey, ASC
* David Mullen, ASC, “Northfork”, “Smash”, “Big Sur”
Moderator: What is the role of cinematographer now?
- Dean Cundey considers himself the bridge between the expo hall (science) and the aesthetics (art). He helps create the image the audience wants to see not because of the device used, but because it speaks to them.
Yes, Cinematogs are the guy in between’ but more importantly, they help create the images that make people want to go to the movies.
- Stephen Lighthill: Our role starts earlier now, with pre-vis software, current knowledge of workflow & tech, and working more closely with post than we ever have in the past.
We hear things from time to time, such as “You no longer need to light, etc.” from marketing but you still need a humans eye…right? Are there ways new technology has affected the way you light?
- David Mullen: I am finding I worry a lot less when in high-rise or a dim-lit restaurant, because I can augment/shape light w/higher sensitivity (like Alexa). Not like Grand Central terminal (where you can’t bring in lights), but not too worried with the lens. So from a purely technical standpoint, you can now work at lower levels.
What about interaction with people on set? Are there ways technology advances has changed the dynamic?
Stephen Lighthill: For starters, everyone has an iPhone and can send jpegs on set really quickly.
Richard Crudo: The pace has accelerated the amount of work we do in the time we do it. There is massive communication (which can be confusing) People often mistake movement for progress, and sometimes you have to slow it down, step off the speeding train, because it dead ends sometimes. Also, a lot more people have their hands in everything, and they have an opinion on everything, which can be instantaneously disseminated.
Dean Cundey: There are still the essential pieces; the Production Designer, set design & location, environment where characters are in, and also we still work with the director to help implement his vision and editing. Those are the essential pieces; how it’s implemented is now the big question. Production Designers pretty much do the same thing (while set designers use CAD programs, and use to help director visualize, the essence of what they do is still the same. Where the relationships are changing most is in post, since many characters are being created in post.
Richard Crudo: Technology today is the TOOL to get you there. It’s hammers and nails, but it’s all about how you use them. It’s not about if you can get exposure / lighting.
With the rise of color correction, how does the rise of DI affect the way a movie is created? (E.g. If on film, still flashing negatives, or now using post tools to create similar effect?)
- David Mullen: Whatever tool looks best for the job.
Color saturation overall is so much easier to dial it down digitally, and saves you time on set, lots of practical considerations. Pick and choose your combination of set vs. post tools. Just make sure you know which would do what first!
Stephen Lighthill: The elephant in the room now is the issue of collaboration. Now that an image can be manipulated at any stage, the support of director and producer to help carry out that work is essential; we spend a lot of time making sure we have that support to see project successfully through to the end.
Dean Cundey: The other side of proverbial story (personal experience in this sort of situation) is the extent of what you would change on set. On one project, t Director wanted to keep it as he saw it, the Cinematographer wants to go and alter it to set the perfect mood.
David Mullen: Directors’ priorities change. Sometimes a DP’s job is to insist on the visual consistency established early on. You have to respect what the director wants to do. But sometimes they think monitors on set will be how it looks, and not think about how it will look after the fact.
Stephen Lighthill: Hi-resolution is a very important fight, because there’s the classic phenomenon of them falling in love with a bizarrely tweaked image that just won’t work. Dailies are so important so editors don’t fall in love with image they won’t be using.
Are accurate dailies in editing pipeline still a struggle? Is work being better represented at each stage now?
Richard Crudo: Double-edged sword, because more could go wrong as well. Need to control it- take everything through entire production and make as many post alliances as possible. Going on set, then having to step off to then take time to go into editing bay and vice versa can be a recipe for disaster if not governed very closely.
Dean Cundey: Magazine disappears; you think you know what’s on it. We used to go to the lab and went through same process; hope they interpret correctly. Now, the producer wants to do it on set because they can. You can potentially control the image so it’s closer to what you want, instead of a guy in middle of night who couldn’t get a day job (colorist). Oops, hope there’s not any out there. = The role of the DIT (who used to be just responsible for recording material) - now his capability has expanded. Need somebody collaborating with editor and director for six months, and hope it reflects how everyone wants it to look at the end.
David Mullen: In the 90s, indies all had video dailies on VHS. Generally an improvement. Now they getting them on the Internet, but issues with gamma on computers and not being standardized. Producers from LA talking about contrasts issues and it’s because the MAC display vs. PC! We need another set just for the computer it’s a huge problem, this lack of standards.
Still watching dailies with crew?
- Richard Crudo: TV is so quick; the only person who sees dailies is the editor. You’re literally cutting right there with while you are shooting. There’s a calibrated screen you can sit and see at lunch. That tradition of “the wrap” hopping in car, watching the whole thing together as a team ritual has evaporated.
Dean Cundey: The good ole days (not that old, and not that good). In Spielberg’s screenings with crew, you would sit and discover work you did yesterday. Gaffer would run back and forth, watching on set. In spite of the free lunch, it’s better to not do that.
Richard Crudo: Something has been lost, certainly the communal experience to have ‘that moment’ when it’s not an integral part of production’s way of doing things. It’s never been simpler to do, and do well. (If you have the will to fight that battle).
David Mullen: Analyzing dailies is not there anymore. If it doesn’t happen at the moment, it doesn’t happen.
Stephen Lighthill: Film school is an extreme issue.
Richard Crudo: Assistant stays on a monitor so they don’t have to communicate with the operator. Digital technology has disrupted the familiar, strict protocol on how things are on set. It has gone by the wayside.
Stephen Lighthill: Truism. All productions involve visual effects, we at the ASC need to catch up with our relationship with visual effects people to keep improving the collaboration. Definitely a culture clash and will take lots of effort. But they are both growing, separately a little bit.
images courtesy of: Google & ProductionHUB
