Good Night and Good Luck

It's actually daytime, but "Good Night" sounds more dramatic.

312 has been a great class, and one of the few where I have a hard time imagining anyone walking out disappointed or feeling like they didn't learn anything. It's kind of sad when a class you really love dissolves. I know I'll still be seeing and working with a lot of you next semester, next year, and maybe even years to come, but it's still sad to see your class go. You get attached to idiosyncratic, dynamics of a good class - where everyone sits, the awkward silences between critiques, Anthony's cravings for pizza pie. But I'm comforted by the fact, that everyone has grown so much through the semester. It was weird to come into the class in position of experience ( I use that term relatively) because I was in exactly the opposite position last semester. There are just so many things I could talk about that I loved about this class, I'll keep it to a few...

"Cinematography for Directors" was an excellent book. Rachel did a really great job picking the reading material. This book in particular was so interesting to me though. I like that it dealt with cinematography in a "why" mindset other than focusing on the "how"

Filmmaking is an active and you really have to motivate yourself. Rachel structured the class in a way to reflect that. We did tons of stuff, but how high you set the bar was usually up to you. The scene assignment, the portraits of the place were awesome. I love going through the entire process of working with people, getting something of the ground and completed.

Being around gear and cameras and all that other good stuff lights a spark to learn more. I spend a lot of terms hanging out in the dvxuser, rogerdeakins, creativecow, and cinematography.com forums trying to learn more, but I attribute the spark of that desire to Rachel and the 312 class.

I read in each and every blog posted. I really got excited about seeing what everyone had to see, and I feel like I know everyone better through them.

It's already been said, but  there's a lot of talent in the class. The opportunity to be in a school that's actively building it's film department and be surrounded by other filmmakers who are eager to share and talk about their ideas is a blessing.

-Henry

I Googled "Money Shots"...

...and I don't think most of the pictures are "classroom appropriate".

I'm not exactly sure how I define the "money shot" when it comes to filmmaking. In class we seemed to talk about them mostly in terms or epic time lapses or some grand shots of the Grand Canyon at sunset. Those can certainly be beautiful , but a lot of times it's just beauty for the sake of beauty.

So in the context of an entire movie, money shots, for me, are those moments when everything comes into perfect harmony. Color, framing, light, wardrobe, production design, direction, ect. It creates a special moment, and it's that whole moment, not exclusively the cinematography, that makes it work. Here are some...





"Hero" this is visually stunning movie. Very stylized and full of money shots.



This is a still from one of my favorite scenes in "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button". Great scene.



"There Will be Blood" The use of wideshots in this movie is incredible. The entire scene with the explosion, the spewing oil, and Daniel Plainview covered in oil holding his son is awesome.

My torrid affair with DSLR's

I'll preface this by saying I'm a hypocrite. I currently own and shoot on a DSLR. Sue me.

For the most part, I've already given my two cents about the DSLR craze, but I'll say it again. I like the cameras, hate the users (or atleast a lot of the users) so I'll try to add something by trying to be objective about some of the pros and cons I've found in DSLR's

CONS

1. These are small cameras. They're not built for video, nor are they built to support all of the gear/add-ons to turn them into professional production cameras (despite Zacuto and other companies best efforts to shove every possible piece of gear down our throats). Let's stop trying to make them something they're not. A lot of the supposed benefits ( low-light) are sometimes negated by the fact that you have to open up the aperature so wide to get a decent exposure. It makes pulling focus a nightmare, especially off of a non-articulated LCD screen. At time, they feel very impractical for bigger productions.

2. Dynamic range is not so hot. I've heard and read some people trying to crown these cameras as legitimate professional tools suitable to take over the music video, commercial, and yes, even the television markets (der der did you hear they filmed House with it? der der). Right now, that market is still pretty dominated by 35mm, 16mm (The Walking Dead), and newer digital camera like the Red and the new Arri's. Once again, I really have no idea what I'm talking about, but if you think the 5D is a suitable replacement to those you might be high. The dynamic range and latitude for manipulation in post is simply not there. I've personally felt a few times that some of my 5D footage didn't hold up so well after transcoding and color grading. It's still incredible footage for student purposes, but it seems pretty crazy that if given a the choice (cost not being a factor), that anyone would pick the 5D over proven and other high-end emerging digital options.

3. The transcoding process is kind of a pain in the butt. And 5-11 minutes max clip times kind of sucks.

4. They're cheap. Wait, what? That's a bad thing? Well kind of (here comes the hypocritical stuff). An important question to consider - is the democratization of cheap, powerful cameras a good thing? I don't know, but peruse vimeo for awhile and you can decide for yourself. There's some good/great stuff and a lot of really bad stuff. 

I digress...

So what do they do well?

PROS

1. They are perfect for travel. I think this is the real bread and butter and revolutionary aspect of the camera that's not being talked about. Who cares if they're limited in they're ability as professional tool. THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE PROFESSIONAL TOOLS. For me, the ability to throw my T2i in a small, over-the-shoulder bag and take in anywhere is incredible. It makes a great training tool for any aspiring cinematographer. If you can take a camera with you everywhere you go, you can start training yourself to see the world in a different way. You can teach yourself composition. You can learn how to see light in a different way. You can learn what you like. That is awesome. 

2. They make great images. I've seen some incredible things shot on a DSLR. In the right hands and with a good set of lenses, they can can do wonderful, beautiful things.

3. They've inspired me any many others to learn more and make more. Whether or not they really offer everything they're being made out to offer, the perception is what matters. People feel like they can shoot something awesome now. And the upside to all of the squabbling over spec between this cam or that cam has pushed me to learn just what the poo all of that stuff means. It's an exciting time. Everyone's creating and learning.

4. They're cheap. Yep, really, really cheap considering  some of the features you're getting. There may be a million hipsters out there shooting vintage, verite' style poo-poo, but if there is some twelve year old right now preparing to shoot the next "Citizen Kane" that would be worth it.

Ahh, so many of the pros are also cons. I guess that's what we in the long-winded, circular logic business call a double edged sword. Any tool is only as good as the filmmaker holding it.

BYE, BYE

-Henry