Director of Photography Assistant Camera | Gaffer
"As a story teller, my goal is to to tell stories that ended too soon; the stories of people with two choices, both of them bad. I want to step outside myself and appreciate the freedom I have by crafting visually-stunning films about people without freedom. Whether their slave master is heroin or sex, money or an alcoholic father the world is too big to film from just one angle."
| Email: firstname.lastname@example.org |
I understand that money for a film is money, and that not everyone partakes in the "industry" side of the art... But at the end of the day, who are $7K features supporting? Are they encouraging production of projects that previously had no access to any sort of funding, or are they encouraging irresponsible producing and lack of quality? As someone who has been on more than one "micro-budget project" (including one with the creator of this grant), lack of substantial funding for a given project promotes a need for speed, often at the sacrifice of on-screen quality and mental/physical/emotional health. My main issue with this grant is perfectly summed up in the $7K Films FAQ:
"Q: Can I use the $7k grant to supplement other funding options or as part of a larger budget?
A: In short, no."
You can probably make a feature on $7K - it doesn't mean you should.
Just wanted to add that this normally isn't a director's dialogue, but rather the 1st ADs. I know the response is going to be "But on our budgets, there aren't 1st ADs" but they're some of the most important people to have on set. Other than that, great quick reference!
I'm rooting hardcore for Roger... Sicario was a cinematic masterpiece in the most subtle of ways. The way he created a gritty Mexico without jumping over the edge - you could see how he innovated upon his use of sodium and mercury vapor lighting from No Country for Old men, but he also perfected his landscape technique from Skyfall. Also the homage paid to Silence of the Lambs with the night vision sequence was phenomenal...
I love Chivo but the beginning of the Revenant felt so masturbatory. It was impressive movement for the sake of impressive camera movement - I thought it would've felt much more captivating with editing. He definitely hit his stride halfway through the film (right as Leo has to crawl out of the pit - not a spoiler) and from then on I was interested, but it felt slow and dull up until that point. His use of natural lighting was also impressive, but there were also definitely moments where he added artificial lighting (look at the square eye lights in fire scenes - very obvious to keep ambience up) so its not exactly revolutionary...
Richardson's work on Hateful Eight was also amazing and, as the video said, "He was able to transform a small wooden shack into a theatrical landscape". It was masterful use of motivated camera movement and lighting that brought me back to some gorgeous classics, but it didn't speak to me like Roger's work on Sicario.
Again, just my $0.02! All these films were absolutely gorgeous and everyone is entitled to their own opinions!
Not to rain on your parade, but I totally used this formula last week. Our director wanted a straight overhead shot of a table, and we couldn't get a goalpost rig in so I had my Key build a pipe boom over table with 12' speedrail. We then had to figure out where to place the "centre" of the rig in order to get the pipe balanced, and then we had to weight it. But all of this had to happen as it was being built, otherwise we would start to stress the rail and our brackets (plus the potential of the rig coming down, which wouldn't have made our insurance happy). I calculated our FS7's weight at about 15lbs and we used 9' of rail, giving us 3' of rail on the other end to place 2x 25lbs sand bags. Now, obviously thats not exact but its a good example of how this works in an actual scenario where things matter and time and money is on the line.
Any word on any photometrics, upgradability (i.e when Arri comes out with a Lighting Engine 2), or price point for the smaller versions? Also, its interesting to see the RP version retail for cheaper. I get that it lacks the colour control, but RP is attractive as it is. Thats a pretty steep price if they're trying to compete with either Kino or Cineo, who both have exceptionally better LED technology as it is (and this is coming from someone with an unconditional love for the newer L-series lights). Oh well, I guess its time to play the waiting game?
We're speaking to the same point - you can make amazing films for cheap, but $7K is irresponsible. Theres a middle ground and this is far from it.