Transcript
of Live Chat With
Bob
Primes, ASC
March 29, 2003
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:08:49 PM)
I'm Bob Primes; I was here two weeks ago and the server in Miami wasn't working.
I'm sure Jeb Bush thought I was going to talk about the war or something,
but anyway here I am, and I am thrilled to be here and delighted to speak
with anyone who would like to send in a question.
Vidcap (Mar 29,
2003 1:09:13 PM)
Congratulations on winning the ASC award for MDs. Do you think this
is the beginning of the end of film? Will other producers now be more inspired
to shoot video?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:09:43 PM)
First of all, thank you very much for your congratulations; I appreciate
it.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:10:00 PM)
And secondly, the term video has, for decades, implied a radically lower
quality medium. The current state of the art in digital video, I think, is
approaching film very rapidly. It seems almost every month there's a breakthrough
and an improvement. So to call what is happening today video, even though
technically it is, is a little unfair, because the state of the quality of
video is still bitter in quality-conscious cinematographers' perceptions.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:11:19 PM)
But, yes, I think there will be more and more digital, and I can foresee
a day, I can't say when that will be, when there are no more advantages to
shooting film. But that may take quite a while.
David Walpole (Mar
29, 2003 1:11:30 PM)
Dear Bob, Hello to you from Perth In Australia. As Murder of Crows is
one of my favourite movies, not only for the excellent look that the film
has, but also the intriguing story line...What drew you to this project?
I would be VERY interested in any production techniques you used for this
shoot, and how long it took to complete the filming.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:12:17 PM)
Thank you for knowing about and appreciating A Murder of Crows.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:12:32 PM)
My key grip had gone over to the dark side and become a producer; this was
one of his first productions. It was put together very quickly because Cuba
Gooding Jr had a hole in his schedule. We shot 5279 stock; it was a dark,
kind of thriller mystery, with a black protagonist.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:13:31 PM)
My lighting tends to be contrasty to begin with; I used extremely little
film, and I had hoped to do a test to get my television eye back into film-projection
mode. Unfortunately, we went into production so quickly I never got my test,
and shot the damn thing by the seat of my pants. And it was only after we'd
shot the entire movie – I think we had a week in Key West, two weeks in New
Orleans, and three weeks in Los Angeles – and it was after the last day of
production I saw my first dailies.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:14:31 PM)
To be perfectly frank, the shadows were deeper and darker than I had expected.
It turns out Kodak had made a manufacturing change in the 79 stock that made
it 7% darker in the darker ranges. So we worked really hard and sweat bullets
getting a good print. But we made it.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:15:46 PM)
The ambiance of New Orleans and Key West made an incredible contrast and
was a wonderful fresh inspiration for a cinematographer's eyes.
julius (Mar 29,
2003 1:15:51 PM)
You have a great line about going for greatness or avoiding mistakes. Can
you share that logic with us?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:16:10 PM)
Oh boy! You know everything don't you? :)
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:16:28 PM)
The idea is that if your mind is focused on avoiding mistakes, it will make
you worried. You will play it safe; you'll hedge your bets; you'll add a
little bit more fill light; a little bit less radical angle. You'll add vanilla
to all your decisions.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:17:08 PM)
And I believe that is a totally contradictory mind state to the boldness
and fearlessness one needs to do powerful, innovative work.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:17:35 PM)
So if you set your mind on going for greatness – when the cut to the next
shot comes – it should be powerful enough to distract the viewer from any
minor inconsistencies.
huey (Mar 29, 2003
1:17:41 PM)
Please tell us about the set you use for MDs. Did you have a lot of
input as to how it was built?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:17:54 PM)
Yes and no.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:18:08 PM)
The sets were being built while I was on vacation in June of last year. I
was sent diagrams, but they can only help so much. The best part of the sets
was that there was a tremendous amount of glass. Unfortunately, that was
also the worst part of the sets. Glass makes it very difficult to keep reflections
of lights out of your movie.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:19:13 PM)
But this was more than made up with the fact that instead of shooting someone
against a plain wall, you would shoot them against glass that would allow
you to see depth and more rooms and more hallways and more extras in your
backgrounds. So it made for a grander, more complex, far more interesting
typical background.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:19:52 PM)
Also, corridors, which are plentiful in hospitals, are notoriously difficult
to light. But when the walls are glass, you can place your lights, cross-lights,
behind the walls and actually light through the walls. And you get a wonderful
effect.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:20:55 PM)
One of the problems was that almost nothing in the set was built to be wild.
Those steel-frame glass doors were actually welded onto the hinges and could
not be removed. Nor could any of the glass gimbols. So we had plenty of challenges.
And I believe the unconventional approach we had to use to overcome the challenges
was one of the reasons the show looked as good as it did.
GinoDP (Mar 29,
2003 1:21:08 PM)
I noticed that you have been involved in conferences concerned with the authoring
rights of cinematographers. Do cinematographers have legal authoring rights
anyplace in the world? With today’s digital mastering technology, isn’t everything
up for grabs?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:21:33 PM)
What a wonderful question!
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:22:06 PM)
I believe in Germany the cinematographers are considered the authors of the
images and have got rights, not only financial but somehow actually have
ownership rights. I'm sure Germany is not the only country.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:22:44 PM)
In the United States, the rights of business seem to come before the rights
of artists, and I suspect it will be a long time before artists have the
kinds of rights I believe they deserve.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:24:03 PM)
As far as digital mastering, when I toured Congress with Martin Scorsese,
which was a huge thrill for me by the way, Scorsese's concern was that through
digital remastering classic films could be authored to reflect the taste
or point of view of the studio that owned them.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:23:26 PM)
For example, a Japanese studio could change the tone of a World War II movie
if they thought it reflected poorly on Japan.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:24:16 PM)
I believe digital mastering, like so many things that are powerful, potentially
gives the artist huge tools to be used to make incredibly beautiful images.
But also, to risk the danger if the power to manipulate the images is put
into the wrong hands.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:25:07 PM)
That is to say, if a cinematographer interprets a work in a dark moody way
and hides faces because they believe that's dramatically effective, someone
with a weaker vision could come back later and lighten the faces, out of
fear, and there would be little the cinematographer could do about it.
didjitalshmigital (Mar
29, 2003 1:25:13 PM)
In Variety recently a manufacturer was quoted as saying "Most
major filmmakers don't have the confidence in digital that some in the media
do." Do you agree or disagree?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:26:20 PM)
I believe that cinematographers have been one of the few voices committed
to safeguarding the beauty and integrity of the image. Without the cinematographer,
I think studios would be inclined to use whatever was cheapest, even if the
quality declined a little.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:26:31 PM)
I'm very suspect of blanket statements about the superiority of digital or
of film. I believe cinematographers must study and learn digital with the
same care and thoroughness that they studied and learned film. And I believe
the state of the art of both film and digital changes rapidly.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:27:35 PM)
I would hope that the cinematographer who has learned to get the best quality
images out of both media would be consulted to see which media they recommended
for any given project.
Fred (Mar 29, 2003
1:27:39 PM)
Your work has the great painterly quality of an artist. Could you talk about
the image makers – including cinematographers – whose work most influenced
yours, by citing some specific image in a film you've done?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:28:11 PM)
That's a great question, but a helluva hard one.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:28:25 PM)
I can tell you some thrilling moments I've had in the presence of great visuals.
Reading Life magazine as a kid. Seeing first the book and then the
mounted exhibit of The Family of Man, where the world's greatest photographers,
I think all in black and white if I remember right, captured the human condition
from every class and every culture. Beautifully and compellingly. I was in
my early teens when I saw this and it was a huge influence in my life.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:29:53 PM)
The animated film Fantasia, which I saw when I was about 6 or 7. Films
like Bladerunner, Days of Heaven, The Black Stallion, Road
to Perdition, Citizen Kane, How Green Is My Valley, Napoleon.
If I get started, it could never stop.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:30:30 PM)
Whenever I'm in a town of any size, I almost always go to the art museum
and look at the paintings. Especially the Impressionists. I also love nature.
I love watching and studying natural light. This is, and will always be,
a huge thrill for me.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:31:42 PM)
I guess if you take all of these influences and mix them up in a blender,
whatever I do somehow comes out of all of them. I'm rarely aware of a particular
image that I want to recreate. But if I'm doing smoke in backlight that I
always love, it probably comes from Ridley Scott films, from Citizen Kane,
from God's rays of sunlight going through atmosphere. It's hard to say but
I know that I've been emotionally touched by that effect so many times, it's
something I'm always trying to do.
Op_Ed (Mar 29, 2003
1:33:06 PM)
You've said ICG and ASC need to play a role in educating the public, journalists
and others about the role of cinematographers. What should they be doing?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:33:26 PM)
Another great question. Thank you.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:34:03 PM)
For years, when I looked at movies, it always looked like natural light to
me. When I would see people shooting movies, I would see they had all these
lights. But when I would look at the movie, most of the time I would be convinced
the light was just perfect natural light.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:34:33 PM)
It's been a tradition of cinematographers to hide their work so as not to
distract from the story. To make the light look completely natural. To make
the camera moves invisible, generally moving at the same time a subject was
moving so as to hide the move. And in every way draw attention away from
our art form.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:34:51 PM)
Because of that, the public is largely unaware of cinematographer when they
see it. If they see a gorgeous sunset, they'll register that and they'll
say, oh what beautiful cinematography. But most of the rest they probably
miss.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:35:28 PM)
The general public knows the director is the captain of the ship, and believes
the director is directly responsible for everything that happens between
the script and the screen. Because of this, people will go to a movie and
pay money to see an actor, to see a particular story, and increasingly, to
see the work of a particular director.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:36:08 PM)
But the general public will not go to see a movie, as a rule, because of
a great, esteemed cinematographer. Therefore, the financial value of the
cinematographer's work is not considered very great. And it is very easy
for our art to be discounted by studios and gradually diminish. This, of
course, would be a very sad thing for both the art form and the public.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:37:30 PM)
So I believe cinematographers, and particularly the ICG and ASC, have a duty
to promote and publicize the work of cinematographers. And to help educate
the public to better see, appreciate, and understand our art form. This can
be done through museums of cinematography, just as there are Holocaust Museums
to remind people of what happened in the Holocaust, there could be cinematography
museums to educate people about our art form.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:38:48 PM)
There can be and will be film festivals based on celebrating cinematography.
I believe next month there will be one at the Cinematheque in Hollywood,
the First Annual Festival of Cinematography in association with the ASC.
The Newport Cinematographers' Forum will be on April 5th in Newport Beach
as part of their film festival. There is a Palm Springs festival featuring
cinematography and we have high hopes that as the public becomes more aware
of our art form it will benefit us all.
Camera Op (Mar 29,
2003 1:40:00 PM)
When you shoot in HD, do you have any say about archiving to film and are
you worried about archiving your work when not shooting film?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:41:21 PM)
The current estimate is that videotape lasts about ten years. Of course,
I would hope that my work as well as everyone else's work would be around
for far longer. The cost of archiving the film is such that a cinematographer
probably has little influence on the people paying that cost.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:42:02 PM)
It is my hope that long before ten years are up the technology to archive
and preserve digital work will, of necessity, be developed and that this
problem may be temporary. But yes, it sure worries me.
Lenscraft (Mar 29,
2003 1:42:09 PM)
You've expressed your interest in both music and film, which raises the question
as to whether you see a similarly in creating music and cinematography, or
is that too esoteric a question?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:42:39 PM)
It's a wonderful question. Music was the mother art for me. It was the first
art that touched me deeply. And one of the reasons is that it's abstract
and unanalyzable.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:43:08 PM)
The music harmonies come into your consciousness and you feel emotions. They're
not translated through your life experiences, through your memory, through
identification with a character. They don't have to be translated through
words or other logical systems. You hear the music; you feel the emotion.
It's as simple as that.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:43:45 PM)
There's something magnificent and fundamentally pure about the experience.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:45:05 PM)
I believe visual art can be as pure as music. When you watch Road to Perdition there
is a story, there is a play. There are all sorts of things related to real
life going on. And simultaneously, almost like an actor's subtext, there's
this incredible, beautiful, visual music happening, where the colors and
the graphics, the composition and the movement, at least for me, brings me
to that heightened, sacred emotional state that is virtually identical to
the consciousness I have when listening to great music.
julius (Mar 29,
2003 1:45:09 PM)
I loved your analogy between cinematography and the symphony orchestra. Sadly,
I think the lack of credit given to our craft is a direct result of our historical
moment. Culturally, we lack interest in nuance and prefer the obvious or
the immediate. Can we expect a return to a time of greater patience and appreciation
for intricacy? Or are we on an unending descent?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:45:51 PM)
Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy!
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:46:24 PM)
I fear the dumbing of America. I fear that our ability to concentrate fully
and to see and hear and feel nuances is diminishing. It seems that there's
a parallel between politicians who would like Americans to think no further
than a catchy soundbyte and entertainers who go for the obvious rather than
the subtle.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:47:47 PM)
I believe the audience is rewarded proportionately to how hard they work
and how deeply they focus.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:48:20 PM)
I believe the filmmaker has considerable responsibility to hook the audience,
seduce them, compel them, and try to make their work almost impossible to
ignore.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:48:38 PM)
But I also believe an audience must expect to concentrate, to focus, to give
themselves in trust to the filmmaker.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:49:20 PM)
I believe there's a rather nasty habit of trying to find fault with an art
work. For people to set themselves up as critics and as soon as they see
something they can criticize, to use that as an excuse for dissing the whole
artwork because they can find fault with it. I much prefer the approach of
the innocent, just to open your mind fully and leave yourself open to whatever
the filmmaker chooses to give you.
Fred (Mar 29, 2003
1:49:46 PM)
You have investigated the Thompson Viper camera system to shoot uncompressed
digital, I'm sure you could discuss the pluses and minuses of the Viper compared
to 24P SONY and/or the Panasonic system particularly shooting for a film-out.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:50:14 PM)
Thank you, Fred.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:50:20 PM)
I have only seen tests. I have shot the Panasonic/Sony system for film out
and been pleasantly surprised and pleased with the overall tonality.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:53:27 PM)
The Thompson Viper system bypasses the need to process the digital original
to make it look pretty. Just like film negative doesn't look at all pretty,
it is flat and orange and is only designed to capture as much information
as possible, that can then be printed so this two-stage process yields the
best possible results – so the Viper original looks flat and green but holds
the maximum amount of data that can then be converted to the best looking
print.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:54:03 PM)
That's the theory. And what I've seen looks quite good. But it would be unfair
to say that one system was superior to another unless I had seen direct comparison
tests – which I haven't.
1st Assistant (Mar
29, 2003 1:54:22 PM)
What has been your point of reference for MDs? Have you looked at
other medical episodics like ER, Chicago Hope etc for inspiration?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:54:47 PM)
Regretfully not. I watch almost no television. My point of reference was
not much different than any of my other work.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:55:59 PM)
A feeling of where the most interesting sources would be. I used very, very
little top light, and a lot of sunlight – that miraculously wended its way
down long corridors, around corners, and could seemingly permeate any room
in the hospital.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:57:15 PM)
It may have stretched reality, but I like the way it looked. We had shiny
aluminum floors, and we used them in the same way you would do a wetdown
on the street, to bring life and luminance to wide shots. But we also bounced
sunlight off of them to create a realistic uplight. We actually used 20Ks
through windows, which is a helluva lot of light.
SBDP (Mar 29, 2003
1:57:45 PM)
Were the cameras on the MDs set tethered to the recorder? If so, didn't
that inhibit movement?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:58:01 PM)
Yes and yes.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:58:36 PM)
The producers wanted to create a look that was extremely different from the
look of ER. We had soft ceilings on our set, so we could do low angles.
But this of course precluded lighting from high. It was a choice to be a
dolly show rather than a steadicam show. And so the tethering of the cameras
by and large was not a great hindrance.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 1:59:17 PM)
In the whole five months of production, I think we only did two steadicam
shots. Although lots of handheld. We did the steadicam shots by tethering
the steadicam operator to long fat cables for rehearsal. And then when we
were happy with the balance of the lights, we would free the steadicam to
transit a down-converted NTSC signal to video village.
Camera Op (Mar 29,
2003 2:00:03 PM)
When choosing an operator, would you rather have someone that is used to
shooting film or video or both when shooting in Hi Def 24P?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:00:58 PM)
One of our great operators was Dustin Blauvelt. Dustin worked on Raging
Bull and a whole host of major, major Hollywood features. This was his
first HD experience and he took to it like a duck takes to water.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:02:21 PM)
He did not use the conventional eyepiece; instead, we had two onboard monitors
and he could move the camera from the floor to the ceiling and through narrow
openings without having to move his ample body with the camera.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:03:06 PM)
He told me he was doing shots he could not have done looking through the
eye piece of a film camera. He loved the medium and adapted to it instantly.
I think my answer is that, like a cinematographer or a focus puller, an operator
if he's a great operator will adopt quickly to the medium.
Cyd (Mar 29, 2003
2:03:12 PM)
I heard you say at a lighting seminar that you tried to avoid using filters
on a recent show. Why? And what's your take on using filters to soften women's
features?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:03:57 PM)
I go through different periods on filters. I went through a period when I
would use black nets in front of or behind the lens for some time and then
I got bored with that. And then I used Pro-Mists for a while. And then I
went through a period when I would use no filters but try to make the light
so soft that the faces would look good without filtration.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:05:25 PM)
To me, it's a style or look that you decide upon at the beginning of a film.
When we shot Bird On A Wire, I used a #2 Tiffen black net in front
of the lens along with a 1/8th white Pro-Mist for most of the show. For Goldie
Hawn's close-ups we added a 1/8th regular fog to the pack. It was a romantic
comedy, and I thought it could use a little shimmer.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:06:40 PM)
In my recent high def experience, I found the camera showed every tiny imperfection
in the complexion, and I used soft effects filters that I called San Francisco
filters so as not to disturb the actors. I also sometimes took a 1/4 white
Pro-Mist, either alone or combined with a soft effect.
Nano (Mar 29, 2003
2:07:37 PM)
Has thirtysomething been released on dvd yet? Were you involved in
the transfer/mastering?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:08:35 PM)
I don't know if thirtysomething is on DVD yet. Because episodic shows
are invariably timed during the daytime hours where you're shooting, it's
very unusual for a cinematographer to be able to time an episodic show.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:09:17 PM)
After we set a basic fairly dark and contrasty look for thirtysomething in
testing, I had little hands-on involvement with the timing of the show. Our
associate producer, Ellen Pressman, who went on to become a distinguished
and respected director, was in charge. She was extremely conscientious and
did a great job. There was one time where she had ventured to do something
unusual and quite creative. When I saw it, it surprised me, and my initial
reaction was negative.
She was crushed. And at
that moment, I realized just how much she cared and how emotionally
involved she was in trying to make the show as good as possible.
I was grateful to have someone time the series who cared so passionately.
Janna (Mar 29, 2003
2:10:39 PM)
Do you have a particular method of handling actors? Can you share it with
us?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:11:38 PM)
That of course is more typically a question for directors. But I freely confess
to being a frustrated director who has been studying techniques for directing
actors with Judith Weston for almost three years and directed Harold Pinter's
one-act play, Night, last summer.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:12:41 PM)
As a rule, the cinematographer must be very careful dealing with the actors
because the actors' mental state is often very full and can be fragile. If
a director is "working" an actor, and the cinematographer comes
in and gives an actor a technical note about hitting a mark or the way their
head should be positioned or an eye-line, this can distract the actor's concentration
and interfere with the director's methodology. Therefore, I prefer to direct
most of my communication with actors through the director.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:14:12 PM)
During testing, I try to get the confidence of the actors by bringing them
one at a time into a room and having my gaffer hold the light while I talk
to them about their face and find the best angles to light them from and
look at the lighting they believe is most flattering to them.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:15:10 PM)
After looking at that, trying to find some more unusual combinations that
they may not initially have confidence in, but if I can either show them
or discuss them with the actor one-on-one, I can generally convince the actors
that I'm caring about the way they look and gain their confidence, as well
as learning the best way to light them.
GinoDP (Mar 29,
2003 2:15:14 PM)
You spoke earlier about archiving. I noticed that you are involved with the
National Film Preservation Board. What is the state of our classic films
today, and what’s the truth about digital video as an archival medium?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:15:42 PM)
I don't know the truth about digital as an archival medium. Whether optical
storage is better than tape storage, I don't know. As you can tell, I'm an
opinionated person, but this is something I simply have no knowledge about.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:17:39 PM)
As far as the National Film Preservation Board is concerned, we are a group
of experts from various disciplines (critics, film archives, universities,
directors, producers, cinematographers, actors, etc.) who gather to advise
the Librarian of Congress as to which 25 or 30 American films, which include
drama, documentary, and even home movies, should be preserved each year.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:18:13 PM)
My role is to passionately champion films that I love in general, but particularly
films that I believe to be of extraordinary visual quality. It's a very stimulating
activity to be in a room with 20 to 30 extremely knowledgeable and articulate
people who love films so much.
Fred (Mar 29, 2003
2:19:08 PM)
Could you speak to your experience working with first time directors? What
about directors who were not strong visually?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:19:51 PM)
Thank you, Fred, for your question.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:20:07 PM)
There are no formal rules of engagement as to exactly what the director does
and what the cinematographer does.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:20:32 PM)
Obviously, the director is in charge of interpreting the script dramatically
and working with the actors. And the cinematographer is in charge of lighting
and visual textures. The area of blocking, composition, and camera movement
is a shared area.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:21:36 PM)
Some directors, as in the case of Sam Mendes working with Conrad Hall in Road
to Perdition will acknowledge the cinematographer's eye may be so extraordinary
that they defer the blocking and camera choreography to the cinematographer.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:22:23 PM)
Another director such as Jim Cameron may choose to design the blocking and
camerawork so precisely that they have a director's finder with a video recorder
so they can guarantee that the shot is exactly as they first visualized it.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:23:13 PM)
It is the job of the cinematographer to completely grasp the director's vision
and to somehow merge that with their own vision in such a way that they can
relieve the director of the burden of having to precisely design every shot,
while at the same time making the director pleased with the finished result.
The number of different ways of doing this is as large as the combinations
of personalities that any given director and cinematographer may have working
together.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:24:10 PM)
What I personally love to do is to get the camera in position while the actors
are finishing up their blocking, so that I may present an idea for the shot
to the director before the actors have left the set. That way the director
may consider my shot idea, and then of course the director may choose to
accept it, reject it or modify it.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:24:56 PM)
When working with a first-time director, I am always careful of my language,
to say something like, what do you think of this? Or do you like this? So
even though I've presented the thought, it is always the director's decision
rather than my own.
Widescreen (Mar
29, 2003 2:25:01 PM)
I read that you preferred HD to Super 16 film. Some people say 16 mm isn’t
good enough for television. That’s kind of confusing because I have seen
Ken Burns great 16 mm documentaries. Can you shed some light on this issue?
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:27:03 PM)
I think I've been misquoted on that. What I said was that at the state of
the art of film technology last June, that is before the introduction of
5218 and 7218 film stocks, I believe that the ASA 500 16 mm stocks like 7279
and 7298 were too grainy for smoothed, polished television work. But would
be fine if you wanted something funkier. I therefore would have chosen 7274
as my 16mm stock, which is ASA 200 to 250 instead of ASA 500.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:27:51 PM)
This, of course, gives a tremendous advantage to 24P, which has a useable
ASA of 640. However, yesterday I did a test of 7218, which I suspect will
look just fine. But unfortunately I won't see the results until next week.
The other issue is that the longer zoom lenses in 16mm are still T2.8, while
they are 1.9 and 1.8 in 24P, which certainly gives 24P a bit of an advantage.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:29:17 PM)
I want to thank all the people in internet land for extremely perceptive
and challenging questions.
Bob Primes (Mar
29, 2003 2:29:41 PM)
It made me try to dig deep to answer such excellent questions. I hope you
have enjoyed this past hour and a half as much as I have. Thank you for being
here.
