Why is the type of camera given more attention than DP skills?

Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC

Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC

I see too many actors and filmmakers paying all their attention to the type a camera is being used instead of the DPs skill set.

Why is that?

In my production, I was looking for how a DP shoots both action and greenscreen. Only 3 out of 200 shot action. And, only one shot greenscreen.

I turned down one of the 3 who shot with RED because special effects and stock footage is not readily available for RED. So, HD was right for me.

Some of my actors were disappointted we were not shooting in RED, until they saw clips from the rough cut. They like the way the footage is shaping up.

Am I the only one who will go with a skilled DP over the type of camera we will shoot with?
 
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC said:
I see too many actors and filmmakers paying all their attention to the type a camera is being used instead of the DPs skill set.

Why is that?
Click to expand...
Because it is much easier for a filmmaker to research and then
buy the "right" camera than it is to find a DP with skills or learn
the skills.

Fewer people are drawn to DP than are drawn to director. What
I find interesting on boards is almost none of the people asking
about cameras want to be DP's - they all want to direct and own
a camera.

There is also the misguided belief from most beginning filmmakers
that the director must know everything. How can I communicate
with the DP if I don't know everything about cameras? How can I
communicate with the gaffer if I don't know everything about
lighting? How can I communicate with the sound guy if I don't know
everything about audio? What I never hear is. How can I communicate
with the costumer if I don't know everything about fashion? Or even
how can I communicate with the actor if I don't know everything
about the Stanislavski system?

I totally relate because when I was starting I didn't know anyone
who wanted to be a DP so I needed to buy and learn to use a camera
and lighting. As soon as I found someone who wanted to be a DP
I quit thinking about cameras and lighting and worked on being a
director.
 
It's human nature I suppose. The most obvious determining factor of the quality of the movie starts with the technological capability of the camera its being filmed on.

Why does the layman not find the lenses more important than the camera? Back in the film days, the only real difference for picture quality (assuming no problems like light leaks in a camera) was the film stock used and the lenses.

Today, you shoot with a RED with a cheap lens and it will look like crap.

Definitely, find a DP who uses cameras like they are supposed to be used - as tools for a job - someone who still has an 8mm camera tucked away in their closet, because he/she never knows when they might need that look.
 
It's the same in the photo world. I was once shooting with a cheap Canon XSi and a 5D-MKII owner laughed at my plastic body and cheap glass. But when we both posted our pics in a photo forum, everyone else thought my shoots looked better. That's what happens when you are an expert on the specs of every camera, but don't know how to actually use them. This guy could be using a Nikon D3x and still take bad shots.

And it's the same reason a really pro photographer could take better pictures than me just using a point-and-shoot camera. It's the skill, not the equipment.
 
directorik said:
Fewer people are drawn to DP than are drawn to director. What
I find interesting on boards is almost none of the people asking
about cameras want to be DP's - they all want to direct and own
a camera.
Click to expand...
This relates dead on to an observation I've been kicking around lately: everybody says "When I grow up I wanna be THE DIRECTOR"!

It seems not enough people say "When I grow up I wanna be THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR"! or DP, or audio engineer or set designer or even producer or distributor.

Everybody wants to be director.

Around here we got umpteen dozen junior directors and a big ol pot of 'em with actual experience.

Where are all the audiophiles that wanna be king of the mics?
Any finance guys wanna play producer?
Any means and mode guys wanna play distributor?
WhereTH are all the DEDICATED cinematographers and DPs?

It's just odd to me.
I don't think I observe this in other industries.

Everybody wants to be quarterback, no one wants to be lineback.
Everybody wants to be branch manager, no one wants to be portfolio manager.
Everybody wants to be doctor, no one wants to be nurse.

Weird.
Just weird.

If you're not the lead dog...
Lead%20Dog.jpg


OMG.
 
I agree with Directorik, most asking about cameras here are buying a first camera and learning how to use it. Thus, the focus on cameras is an important one for them.

Camera quality is important. So is DP skill. An Alexa in skilled hands looks better than an EX-3 in skilled hands. There's several ceilings in the quality level of your film, and you can only reach the shortest one. Looking at only the camera/skill factors, a skilled guy can only reach a certain point with a crappy camera, just like a beginner can reach a certain point with RED or 35mm.

Both are important.
 
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC said:
I see too many actors and filmmakers paying all their attention to the type a camera is being used instead of the DPs skill set.

Why is that?

In my production, I was looking for how a DP shoots both action and greenscreen. Only 3 out of 200 shot action. And, only one shot greenscreen.
Click to expand...

You've kind of answered your own question. A lot more people have cameras than skills, therefore there is a great ratio of people discussing cameras rather than skills.

Some believe that having a camera is a skill, something I'm wrongly accused of about every 15 minutes.

In case this question isn't entirely facetious obviously the guitarist is more important than the guitar. You need a good camera when your skillset exceeds the range of your previous camera, that's it. If your skill is at theatrical level, your camera should be also. It's about eliminating bottlenecks in the quality flow.

Another good question is why does no one ever mention mobility. 5000 posts about cameras, none about actually getting a shot. You figure it out.
 
rayw said:
This relates dead on to an observation I've been kicking around lately: everybody says "When I grow up I wanna be THE DIRECTOR"!

It seems not enough people say "When I grow up I wanna be THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR"! or DP, or audio engineer or set designer or even producer or distributor.

Everybody wants to be director.

Around here we got umpteen dozen junior directors and a big ol pot of 'em with actual experience.

Where are all the audiophiles that wanna be king of the mics?
Any finance guys wanna play producer?
Any means and mode guys wanna play distributor?
WhereTH are all the DEDICATED cinematographers and DPs?

It's just odd to me.
I don't think I observe this in other industries.

Everybody wants to be quarterback, no one wants to be lineback.
Everybody wants to be branch manager, no one wants to be portfolio manager.
Everybody wants to be doctor, no one wants to be nurse.

Weird.
Just weird.

If you're not the lead dog...
Lead%20Dog.jpg


OMG.
Click to expand...

I understand why this is. It's because the director gets the lions share of the (everything).

It's because in America every single person is programmed from birth to be #1. (me included, cant escape programming)

I personally love to do audio mixing, or SFX, or fundraising, but ultimately, in our society only the director is recognized anywhere outside hollywood. Quick, who was DP on Last Crusade? You know who directed it.

Every job is important, and no movie would be good without all those roles being filled. Within the studio system, a more enlightened view prevails, and a great DP will get all the jobs, respect, and credit they deserve. The problem is that people don't know that, and from an external viewpoint, it seems a lost cause to be anything else.

Secondly it's financial. Directing a project carries great responsibility, but also comes with serious profit in the right situation. It's also a credit that says you can helm a successful property, and that's valuable.

In the Indie world, where every person, regardless of skill or personal responsibility, wants to direct the film, you often have the problem of trying to set sail with a crew of 20 captains. The solution is money. If everyone on board can make enough to progress to their own goals, then objections die out.

Lastly, many times a person will do a tremendous amount of work on a project, then start bringing others in. When a person that's written a script, raised funding, put together a team, worked for months on a shot list, etc is faced with the decision of handing all that credit to a guy that walked onto the set 5 minutes ago, they usually say no. I personally say no. If I feel another guy is better at handling actors, I title him as an acting coach. A director is an orchestra conductor, and I'm probably one of many that don't think the second chair violinist should be the only guy with his name on the poster.

I think a better way to think about films is like a good band. Of course there is a lead singer, but your guitarist is just as important, and just as much a star. If you don't learn to work together, there is no band.
 
Last edited:
Don't get me started on Douglas Slocombe. The guy had an extraordinary career and DPed for three of the best Ealing comedies (The Man in the White Suit, Kind Hearts and Coronets and The Lavender Hill Mob) which are some of my favourite films (not to mention being shot in the same lot where I did my film school). I still think it's an amazing story that the guy who shot those films is the same guy working on Indiana Jones all those years later.

NOT THE POINT! ( :lol: )
 
I can't speak for everyone, but a lot of us here don't have the cash to hire the DP we'd like to hire. In fact, we don't the cash to hire the DP we wouldn't want to hire.

Anyway, most people that call themselves DP's -- even in LA and Socal, aren't really DP's, they're people who know how to operate a camera. That's not a DP.
 
brianluce said:
I can't speak for everyone, but a lot of us here don't have the cash to hire the DP we'd like to hire. In fact, we don't the cash to hire the DP we wouldn't want to hire.

Anyway, most people that call themselves DP's -- even in LA and Socal, aren't really DP's, they're people who know how to operate a camera. That's not a DP.
Click to expand...

Well, I have good news, you're not supposed to pay your crew out of your own bank account. You go get that money based on the project, then pay who you need to pay. Understanding that helped take a lot of the anxiety out of starting a project for me, so I hope it's helpful to you.

Fundraising comes very near the beginning, "I never buy a business with my own money" - Donald Trump
 
Nate North said:
Well, I have good news, you're not supposed to pay your crew out of your own bank account. You go get that money based on the project, then pay who you need to pay. Understanding that helped take a lot of the anxiety out of starting a project for me, so I hope it's helpful to you.
Click to expand...

I suspect that the vast majority of people asking about cameras are not
in the position of raising funding by finding investors for a project. I suspect
most people asking about cameras are relative beginners who want to
make some movies to show in film festivals and just post on YouTube.

Especially those asking about buying a camera in the $400 to $2,000 range.
And those people cannot afford to hire a DP. A producer with a project looking
for funding is usually not the person who finds a message board and asks
about what camera to buy.
 
directorik said:
I suspect that the vast majority of people asking about cameras are not
in the position of raising funding by finding investors for a project. I suspect
most people asking about cameras are relative beginners who want to
make some movies to show in film festivals and just post on YouTube.

Especially those asking about buying a camera in the $400 to $2,000 range.
And those people cannot afford to hire a DP. A producer with a project looking
for funding is usually not the person who finds a message board and asks
about what camera to buy.
Click to expand...

I was just responding to that particular post. I have no idea what camera Brian has been talking about. I thought he mentioned shooting on MX at one point.

No reason to jump my case, I don't think this is exclusively a kiddie pool.
 
And, I have to say, my DP did a great job lighting up the greenscreen rooms. Not many DPs know how. That is part of what I mean about shooting greenscreen. Lighting up the room to shoot it in.

With action, I learned from the editing room from editors to look for a cinamatic style of handling the camera for action. Not everyone in the independent field, especially starting out are unaware of it.
 
Carrying on Nate's rock and roll metaphor, I think a large part of it is people who care about rhythm guitar, pay attention to it. Most people when listening to a band couldn't tell you if the rhythm section is good or bad; they like the song and good job to the singer (or lead guitarist, or lead flugelhorn, etc). Anyone who really spends time studying the music could tell you what makes good, poor or just passible rhythm guitar.

Un-metaphored, Joe Average sees a movie and well done to the director (if they're even looking that far; I know lots of people who don't). Joe Apsiring Filmmaker studies the film, and makes determinations about good cinematography, etc.

If both Joe A and Joe AF decide to make movies, Joe A is likely going to buy the best camera he can. Joe AF will either learn to do cinematography well, or find someone for whom that is the thing they love (and, you know, I've met some damn fine rhythm guitarists, because that's what they LOVE).

Among open stage style circles, there's a joke about the difference between a good guitarist and a guy with an expensive guitar. It's mean spirited, but I think you could probably tell the difference between a guy who says "let me tell you about my camera" and "let me show you my work". And for the record, given all the AMAZING things Nate has posted, I don't think ANYONE could argue he doesn't have the chops!
 
directorik said:
I apologize. It was not my intent to jump your case.

I will be more careful responding to you in the future.
Click to expand...

Directorik, please do not be more careful in responding to me in the future.

You have every right to say what's on your mind.

Just as I do.

I think that my outspoken manner is polarizing to some, but behind that I'm a very friendly person, and I welcome opposing viewpoints. As a high stress guy, I frequently get into little altercations with people, but the important thing is that at the end of the day, we are always able to go get a drink and put it behind us. No need to get hung up on one little statement or another, we're all here to make films in our own way, and that's what's important.
 
Harkening back to the original Op's question,

I think why people get disappointed in you not using the Red is that it has some "street value" to say "I'm shooting on a Red". It has some sort of status linked to it - as though you're going to be every bit as successful as the filmmakers who made District 9, etc. But, as has been stated before many many many many many many many times, it's a tool and only as good as the person's skill who is using it.

As far as wanting to be a Director, sure there is some bit of status connected to it but personally, if I had a short film and wanted to make it the way I wanted it to be made, I'd want to Direct it and not let someone else %&^# it up. But, what people don't realize is you can find someone who won't %&^$ it up and be either a producer or executive over it and in a way direct the director to make the film the way you want it to be made or that you had envisioned.

As for me, I like being in sound and I do have a personal goal of being king of the mics @ray. :)
 
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC said:
I turned down one of the 3 who shot with RED because special effects and stock footage is not readily available for RED. So, HD was right for me.
Click to expand...


I know I'm late to this thread, but - you can use any HD stock footage with the RED the same way you can use it with any other HD camera, right...? The RED is HD; they are not mutually exclusive.

gelder
 
You usually shoot 2K or 4K with RED. You can shoot 1080p. The smart thing usually is to shot higher Res than you release. So 1080p and 2k stock footage would work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top