Alright i have only recently started getting into film/movie making. I was wondering can a director also be the Dp? I really like operating a camera but also i would like to direct my work. Would people see that as amature if the Director was also the Dp? Thanks for any info!
director and dp?
- Thread starter brettzdamn
- Start date
It happens quite a lot in indie films but almost never in Hollywood or big budget films.
So to answer your question, yes you can.
So to answer your question, yes you can.
alright cool i was just thinking i wouldnt want people to be like "Thats soo unprofessional!" or somthing like that 
Nicolas Roeg in Walkabout.
George A Romero in Night of the Living Dead.
Christopher Nolan in Following.
Robert Rodriguez in Sin City.
Stanley Kubrick in Killer's Kiss.
Guess what these all had in common...?
George A Romero in Night of the Living Dead.
Christopher Nolan in Following.
Robert Rodriguez in Sin City.
Stanley Kubrick in Killer's Kiss.
Guess what these all had in common...?
You know how to keep people from saying that?alright cool i was just thinking i wouldnt want people to be like "Thats soo unprofessional!" or somthing like that
Make a really good movie.
Who cares what other people say? If you want to do both, do it.
I did it one weekend. My DP dropped out and the replacement wasn't
available for two days. I'm not a bad DP so I jumped in. I didn't like it.
It's such a very different job and I felt very disconnected from my
actors during those two days. I was concerned about all the tech stuff
that I couldn't spend the time I wanted working with my actors. I was
sure glad when the new DP showed up so I could get back to my main
job. Directing is hard enough - I would never do both again.
If you feel comfortable doing both jobs you should do both jobs and not
even thing for one second what some people will say about your choice.
Thanks man i really appreciate the encouragement!
Yeah you can for sure. Just echoing Directorik, it's hard enough forefinger without having to focus on DP stuff to. The more scattered responsibilities the higher the chance something will fall through the cracks or you'll miss something or whatever.
But yeah, it's doable and has been done well before.
But yeah, it's doable and has been done well before.
Its your film. If you want to do both, by all means, go ahead.
In my case, there is no way I will ever let a DP anywhere near my set. A gofer to lug it around, yes, but that's it. My film lives or die on my vision, period.
Be aware that you need to be a rather skilled cinematographer. If you're not quite there, it may backfire.
Good luck.
In my case, there is no way I will ever let a DP anywhere near my set. A gofer to lug it around, yes, but that's it. My film lives or die on my vision, period.
Be aware that you need to be a rather skilled cinematographer. If you're not quite there, it may backfire.
Good luck.
Yeah im fairly new so i have lots of practice to do.
yeah thats exactly how i feel also
If you're on a budget then you gotta do what you gotta do. But I can tell you that things will be compromised. It's hard to pay attention to stuff like the acting when you're focused on the shot. You'll miss something obvious that will be discovered in the editing room when it's too late.
Soderbergh does it all of the time, under the pseudonym Peter Andrews.
I can totally relate to that haha, but I eventually overcame it for the greater good of having help.
I prefer delegating everything but the writing and directing. That's enough work!
Please understand that everybody has their own style and this is just opinion. What I like might not work for anybody!
James Cameron and Luc Besson are often behind the camera. Personally, I've done it both ways and I've come to prefer being behind the camera. Let me ask what you would prefer:
1) While the DP shoots, you watch a monitor and speak to you actors over a loudspeaker (Francis Ford Coppolla style).....or, you say "cut!" and go right up to the actors and explain what you want, but have to step back, again.
2) Standing a couple of feet away from your actor, you place your hand on his/her shoulder and say, "just like that! Now, I'm grabbing a macro shot of your eye." Back out to a medium closeup. "Okay, now without touching the camera, headbutt me and I'll jerk back to simulate the impact. Perfect!" You are performing together, instead of just telling someone what to do. You are a partner in this dance.
For me directing is "blocking" the actors within a composition as much as it is telling them how to say their lines. I shot my last feature and several shorts with limited monitor use. Time was always of the essence and (like directorik exampled), I've had to fill in when the DPs no called, no showed on EXILE, as well as a couple of 48 Hour Film shoots. Who do I need the monitor for, if I'm already looking through the camera? It's just extra setup. Without it, I can move through the setspace quickly and move to the next angle.
Let me put it this way, if you don't feel even more creative looking through a limited field of view (composing the shot, deciding which info to show or focus on), then you shouldn't be handling the camera. Communicating what I want to a DP is an additional step, for me. I would be dependent on a viewfinder to do that well. But, when you are walking around with the camera all the time, like a musician and his guitar, it just starts to flow..... Grabbing that quick sunset or rattlesnake crawling by becomes second nature. Getting a character's point of view becomes more automatic, especially if it's something like 48 Hour and there is no time to make a shotlist or storyboard. I actually like that kind of pressure.
I've found after a day or even a couple of hours, that I develop shorthand with the actor. Once they see that you are getting decent shots, they understand the importance of the process. I'll often say, "I have you in closeup( and can't see the other actor), so cheat your face towards me" or "take one step back and enter the frame, so your movement matches the previous shot." We develop these little continuity tricks that some directors don't always think about when looking at a screen and thinking about it like a picture from the storyboard. This is a moving picture, so there is emphasis on what transitions from one frame to the next.
I am not a pro DP, nor even an artist. But, I really like this process and want to keep improving on it. The camera is like a mask I wear. Without it, I'm just another opinion. When I point it at somebody, I have their full attention - not because they are performing for me, but because the camera symbolizes the audience that will eventually be watching.
James Cameron and Luc Besson are often behind the camera. Personally, I've done it both ways and I've come to prefer being behind the camera. Let me ask what you would prefer:
1) While the DP shoots, you watch a monitor and speak to you actors over a loudspeaker (Francis Ford Coppolla style).....or, you say "cut!" and go right up to the actors and explain what you want, but have to step back, again.
2) Standing a couple of feet away from your actor, you place your hand on his/her shoulder and say, "just like that! Now, I'm grabbing a macro shot of your eye." Back out to a medium closeup. "Okay, now without touching the camera, headbutt me and I'll jerk back to simulate the impact. Perfect!" You are performing together, instead of just telling someone what to do. You are a partner in this dance.
For me directing is "blocking" the actors within a composition as much as it is telling them how to say their lines. I shot my last feature and several shorts with limited monitor use. Time was always of the essence and (like directorik exampled), I've had to fill in when the DPs no called, no showed on EXILE, as well as a couple of 48 Hour Film shoots. Who do I need the monitor for, if I'm already looking through the camera? It's just extra setup. Without it, I can move through the setspace quickly and move to the next angle.
Let me put it this way, if you don't feel even more creative looking through a limited field of view (composing the shot, deciding which info to show or focus on), then you shouldn't be handling the camera. Communicating what I want to a DP is an additional step, for me. I would be dependent on a viewfinder to do that well. But, when you are walking around with the camera all the time, like a musician and his guitar, it just starts to flow..... Grabbing that quick sunset or rattlesnake crawling by becomes second nature. Getting a character's point of view becomes more automatic, especially if it's something like 48 Hour and there is no time to make a shotlist or storyboard. I actually like that kind of pressure.
I've found after a day or even a couple of hours, that I develop shorthand with the actor. Once they see that you are getting decent shots, they understand the importance of the process. I'll often say, "I have you in closeup( and can't see the other actor), so cheat your face towards me" or "take one step back and enter the frame, so your movement matches the previous shot." We develop these little continuity tricks that some directors don't always think about when looking at a screen and thinking about it like a picture from the storyboard. This is a moving picture, so there is emphasis on what transitions from one frame to the next.
I am not a pro DP, nor even an artist. But, I really like this process and want to keep improving on it. The camera is like a mask I wear. Without it, I'm just another opinion. When I point it at somebody, I have their full attention - not because they are performing for me, but because the camera symbolizes the audience that will eventually be watching.
Please understand that everybody has their own style and this is just opinion. What I like might not work for anybody!
James Cameron and Luc Besson are often behind the camera. Personally, I've done it both ways and I've come to prefer being behind the camera. Let me ask what you would prefer:
1) While the DP shoots, you watch a monitor and speak to you actors over a loudspeaker (Francis Ford Coppolla style).....or, you say "cut!" and go right up to the actors and explain what you want, but have to step back, again.
2) Standing a couple of feet away from your actor, you place your hand on his/her shoulder and say, "just like that! Now, I'm grabbing a macro shot of your eye." Back out to a medium closeup. "Okay, now without touching the camera, headbutt me and I'll jerk back to simulate the impact. Perfect!" You are performing together, instead of just telling someone what to do. You are a partner in this dance.
For me directing is "blocking" the actors within a composition as much as it is telling them how to say their lines. I shot my last feature and several shorts with limited monitor use. Time was always of the essence and (like directorik exampled), I've had to fill in when the DPs no called, no showed on EXILE, as well as a couple of 48 Hour Film shoots. Who do I need the monitor for, if I'm already looking through the camera? It's just extra setup. Without it, I can move through the setspace quickly and move to the next angle.
Let me put it this way, if you don't feel even more creative looking through a limited field of view (composing the shot, deciding which info to show or focus on), then you shouldn't be handling the camera. Communicating what I want to a DP is an additional step, for me. I would be dependent on a viewfinder to do that well. But, when you are walking around with the camera all the time, like a musician and his guitar, it just starts to flow..... Grabbing that quick sunset or rattlesnake crawling by becomes second nature. Getting a character's point of view becomes more automatic, especially if it's something like 48 Hour and there is no time to make a shotlist or storyboard. I actually like that kind of pressure.
I've found after a day or even a couple of hours, that I develop shorthand with the actor. Once they see that you are getting decent shots, they understand the importance of the process. I'll often say, "I have you in closeup( and can't see the other actor), so cheat your face towards me" or "take one step back and enter the frame, so your movement matches the previous shot." We develop these little continuity tricks that some directors don't always think about when looking at a screen and thinking about it like a picture from the storyboard. This is a moving picture, so there is emphasis on what transitions from one frame to the next.
I am not a pro DP, nor even an artist. But, I really like this process and want to keep improving on it. The camera is like a mask I wear. Without it, I'm just another opinion. When I point it at somebody, I have their full attention - not because they are performing for me, but because the camera symbolizes the audience that will eventually be watching.
Wow i realy like that. Very interesting way to look at things.
Please understand that everybody has their own style and this is just opinion. What I like might not work for anybody!
James Cameron and Luc Besson are often behind the camera. Personally, I've done it both ways and I've come to prefer being behind the camera. Let me ask what you would prefer:
1) While the DP shoots, you watch a monitor and speak to you actors over a loudspeaker (Francis Ford Coppolla style).....or, you say "cut!" and go right up to the actors and explain what you want, but have to step back, again.
2) Standing a couple of feet away from your actor, you place your hand on his/her shoulder and say, "just like that! Now, I'm grabbing a macro shot of your eye." Back out to a medium closeup. "Okay, now without touching the camera, headbutt me and I'll jerk back to simulate the impact. Perfect!" You are performing together, instead of just telling someone what to do. You are a partner in this dance.
For me directing is "blocking" the actors within a composition as much as it is telling them how to say their lines. I shot my last feature and several shorts with limited monitor use. Time was always of the essence and (like directorik exampled), I've had to fill in when the DPs no called, no showed on EXILE, as well as a couple of 48 Hour Film shoots. Who do I need the monitor for, if I'm already looking through the camera? It's just extra setup. Without it, I can move through the setspace quickly and move to the next angle.
Let me put it this way, if you don't feel even more creative looking through a limited field of view (composing the shot, deciding which info to show or focus on), then you shouldn't be handling the camera. Communicating what I want to a DP is an additional step, for me. I would be dependent on a viewfinder to do that well. But, when you are walking around with the camera all the time, like a musician and his guitar, it just starts to flow..... Grabbing that quick sunset or rattlesnake crawling by becomes second nature. Getting a character's point of view becomes more automatic, especially if it's something like 48 Hour and there is no time to make a shotlist or storyboard. I actually like that kind of pressure.
I've found after a day or even a couple of hours, that I develop shorthand with the actor. Once they see that you are getting decent shots, they understand the importance of the process. I'll often say, "I have you in closeup( and can't see the other actor), so cheat your face towards me" or "take one step back and enter the frame, so your movement matches the previous shot." We develop these little continuity tricks that some directors don't always think about when looking at a screen and thinking about it like a picture from the storyboard. This is a moving picture, so there is emphasis on what transitions from one frame to the next.
I am not a pro DP, nor even an artist. But, I really like this process and want to keep improving on it. The camera is like a mask I wear. Without it, I'm just another opinion. When I point it at somebody, I have their full attention - not because they are performing for me, but because the camera symbolizes the audience that will eventually be watching.
I can't imagine you're putting nearly as much time and thought into lighting that a dedicated DP would.
I know this wasn't directed at me, but, oh, yeah, lighting is on the top of my list when I set the camera down. Proper lighting can make a crappy camera produce cinematic masterpieces.