Director of Photography - DPChallenge Forums

04/25/2005 07:19:33 AM · #1

I have a very "open-to-answers" type of questions. What is the linking between conventional photography and directors of photography for films, also known as cinematographers. I know little about this subject and would like to learn more about what it is as a career and such. Any information and insight would be greatly appreciated.

Lee

Edit: spellin'

Message edited by author 2005-04-25 07:19:50.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

04/25/2005 07:46:38 AM · #2

I am not too sure what you actually wish to learn from this question, but here is a simple attempt at an answer.

The biggest difference is that a DOP (Director of Photography) is working with motion and a dynamic, three-dimensional shot. In contrast, a still photographer is capturing a still, fixed scene. This issue of motion plays a major role in the creation process and is a key difference between the two creative processes.

The dimensionality of the scene has a much greater impact on the scene as well. This is not to say that a still photographer is not shooting objects or subjects in a 3D setting, but in moving film, the DOP better leverages the 3D space to create context for the scene - for example, they may rack focus from one character to another in order to shift the viewer's attention during a conversation.

A DOP will often shoot a scene with the previous or next scene in mind. As well, they may need to consider the current scene as it relates to the entire storytelling process. So, there is a significant concern for "time". A DOP may be considering how the current scene needs to interact with special effects, like mattes, keys, animation, and special effects.

A still photographer does not usually need to hold such a "big picture" view of the shoot. They pay great levels of attention to capturing the essence of the scene within a single frame. Although, effects work and layering is becoming more common in still photography as a direct result of digital darkrooms and their amazing creative capabilities.

Often, a DOP has a much larger team supporting their efforts and collaborating on the images - set designers, lighting directors, grips, director, producers, editors, effects specialists, etc. So, in some ways, it is a far more controlled scenario, but potentially a very creative team-oriented environment.

Whereas, a still photographer can work alone or with a much smaller team that play secondary roles - make-up, hair. Most often, a still photographer does their own lighting and post-production.

In the end, both are exposing light to celluloid. But, the context, dimensions, knowledge and the skills are different between the two art forms. By the way, I have never met a DOP who was not also a qualified still photographer, so there is a great deal of cross-over. However, a DOP may use photography as a tool to select locations and to better aid in the visualization of the shoot. Sometimes, they began their careers as one or the other and changed roles. Most often, the shift is from still photography to motion picture, but this is not a hard rule, just an observation.

Does this help?

Message edited by author 2005-04-25 07:56:48.

PhilipDyer

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

04/25/2005 07:54:03 AM · #3

Another key difference is that, to win a Pulitzer Prize in photography, you have to take 1 great picture. To win an Academy Award for best cinematography, you have to take 170,000 of them. Okay, that's not entirely accurate, but you get the point. :-)

coolhar

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

04/25/2005 08:56:05 AM · #4

Originally posted by PhilipDyer:

If you are suggesting that it is easier to win a Pulitzer than an Oscar, or that winning an Oscar takes more skill, I'd beg to disagree. Remember that the Pulitzer winners are always competing in a much larger field. The two are not really a good comparison.

PhilipDyer

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

04/25/2005 09:47:32 AM · #5

Nope, that's just an industry joke. Maybe next time I should make the smiley a little larger? ;-)

Man_Called_Horse

04/25/2005 10:25:15 AM · #6

Hmmmm......how can I say this?

Vittorio Storaro is a DP (not DOP), Ansel Adams is a Still Photographer.

In the biz,(The film biz), they both belong to the same union.

The DP is the other boss of the shooting crew taking charge of lighting, camera, and grip. (The other boss is the Director)

Taking on a career as a DP is not something you can do through college. There are no degrees. There are some DPs that have gotten the job through nepatism, or being in the right place at the right time, but for the most part, DPs usually get to that position through the camera department, or the lighting department.

A still photographer is any one of us in this forum. You become a pro when you start charging, and receiving money.

One more thing about DPs. You have to know your equipment, and there limitations. Between the camera, lighting and grip departments, it is vital to know the equipment, have a close working relationship with the Director, and no the script backwards and forwards. If you do not, than time and money and manpower is wasted. That is not good.

Watch Project Greenlight on the Bravo channel.

A good book to hunt down is the Set Lighting Technicians Handbook 2nd Edition by Harry C. Box. You can order one through my Union ( I think ) @ Local #728 818-891-0728.

Good Luck.

Message edited by author 2005-04-25 10:27:09.

04/25/2005 03:37:09 PM · #7

Thanks everyone, great info! I just was wondering if conventional photography could be a segway into a career like this. Anything else would be great; links, info, other careers.

Thanks!
Lee

04/25/2005 07:23:43 PM · #8

little bump

04/25/2005 08:16:10 PM · #9

Originally posted by swinging_johnson_v1:

DoP is a correct term to describe a Director of Photography in most countries, other than in the good old USA. It is the standard for English speaking countries such as Canada and the United Kingdom for example. DP is strictly an American term. Since I am from Canada, and went to College in Tokyo, Japan, I still use the more conventional terminology that is accepted globally. With respect to my American colleagues, I commonly accept and use either term as is most appropriate for the circumstances and the person with whom I am speaking.

It was my mistake, I should have translated the term to Americana. ;-)

By the way, I also disagree that a quality post-secondary education is not a path to success as a DP (DoP). I am sure that many fine schools around the world and in the USA would support this view as well. But, you are very correct in suggesting that it is not what you know, but who you know that makes the world work. This is true in California and everywhere else too. Such is life...

04/25/2005 08:24:00 PM · #10

Hi Swinging_Johnson_V1,

I do not mean to be an annoyance, but I did get a laugh when I performed a Google search on your DP reference, Vittorio Storaro.

Here is an excerpt from the first couple of paragraphs of his biography that I found on the web...

Vittorio Storaro, the award -winning cinematographer who won Oscars for "Apocalypse Now," " Reds" and "The Last Emperor," was born on June 24, 1940 in Rome, where his father was a projectionist at the Lux Film Studio. At the age of 11, he began studying photography at a technical school. He enrolled at C.I.A.C (Italian Cinemagraphic Training Centre) and subsequently continued his education at the state cinematography school Centro Sperimentale di Cinematografia. When he enrolled at the school at the age of 18, he was one of its youngest students ever.

At the age of 20, he was employed as an assistant cameraman and was promoted to camera operator within a year. Storaro spent several years visiting galleries and studying the works of great painters, writers, musicians and other artists. In 1966, he went back to work as an assistant cameraman on Before the Revolution, one of the first films directed by Bernardo Bertolucci. Storaro earned his first credit as a cinematographer in 1968 for "Giovinezza, giovinezza." His third film was "La Strategia del ragno" which began his long collaboration with Bertolucci. He also shot "The Conformist," "Last Tango in Paris," "Luna," "The Sheltering Sky," "Little Buddha," for Bertolucci.

So, it seems that a good formal education in film is a solid starting position for success as a DP, do you agree?

Message edited by author 2005-04-25 20:24:51.

Man_Called_Horse

04/25/2005 08:36:54 PM · #11

Originally posted by Morgan:

Hi Swinging_Johnson_V1,

I do not mean to be an annoyance, but I did get a laugh when I performed a Google search on your DP reference, Vittorio Storaro.

So, it seems that a good formal education in film is a solid starting position for success as a DP, do you agree?

I agree tha Mr. Storaro is one of the best in the biz. I had a pleasure to work with the man, and personally think of him as a genius behind the lens.

It does not surprise me that he has a formal education, but I can guarentee you that his formal education did not get him to where he is today.

You seem to want an answer that is not challenging, so think what you want. Hollywood is the template to all the other markets of the world. American Cinematography is the original, and any other market that does things differantly is certainly their way for a reason.

Out of the hundreds of cinamatographers in the biz, I can tell you for certain that film school is for the producer. Not to dismiss formal education, I too have a BA in Broadcast Production. But, the average cinamatographer did not go to school to learn how to shoot a film, or light, or use grip gear.

Morgan, Have you worked on a set before?

Message edited by author 2005-04-25 22:09:16.

04/25/2005 08:43:33 PM · #12

Originally posted by swinging_johnson_v1:

Have you worked on a set before? 12+ hour days, 5 sometimes 6 day weeks?Do shoot moving film? Whats your story?

Is this directed towards me?

04/26/2005 07:35:48 AM · #13

Originally posted by swinging_johnson_v1:

Originally posted by Morgan:
Hi Swinging_Johnson_V1,

I do not mean to be an annoyance, but I did get a laugh when I performed a Google search on your DP reference, Vittorio Storaro.

So, it seems that a good formal education in film is a solid starting position for success as a DP, do you agree?

I agree tha Mr. Storaro is one of the best in the biz. I had a pleasure to work with the man, and personally think of him as a genius behind the lens.

It does not surprise me that he has a formal education, but I can guarentee you that his formal education did not get him to where he is today.

You seem to want an answer that is not challenging, so think what you want. Hollywood is the template to all the other markets of the world. American Cinematography is the original, and any other market that does things differantly is certainly their way for a reason.

Out of the hundreds of cinamatographers in the biz, I can tell you for certain that film school is for the producer. Not to dismiss formal education, I too have a BA in Broadcast Production. But, the average cinamatographer did not go to school to learn how to shoot a film, or light, or use grip gear.

Morgan, Have you worked on a set before?

Yes, I have 30 years of production and technology experience related to motion picture and television. I began my career as a TP (Technical Producer) and today I try to avoid the production environment completely in favour of other more interesting and personally rewarding aspects of the industry - post production, transmission, distribution, wireless, etc.

Today, I am a digital media architect and consultant by trade and work all over North America, including in Hollywood, Burbank, and New York, as well as Atlanta, and Chicago. I am based in Canada and work extensively in this country too.

I have designed and built studios and sound stages in Los Angeles, as well as numerous other local projects, including electronic editing systems for film conforming, film to tape colour correction suites, online suites, transmission facilities (Satellite and terrestrial) and more.

I noted that you edited your posting from its original form. I did see the original version and I have obviously hit a nerve. I apologize for upsetting you. It was not my intention to cause any discord. I was just trying to clarify the facts and offer a balanced perspective on the subject.

I will drop this thread now.

Man_Called_Horse