very interesting....

[crimsonson]

Dear P.J. Huffstutter and Jon Healey:

Bad news! This is yet another angry letter from another one of those
sensitive cinematographers complaining about your July 11 front-page article
in the Los Angeles Times headlined “Filming without the Film.” You remember
that nifty piece you wrote that predicted that the careers of famous
directors would come to an end unless they jumped on the digital bandwagon.
I’m certain that you have heard from various other filmmakers who were
offended by your choice of words, which characterize directors and their
“crews.” I guess that is us, though you make it sound like we are more like
carpenters rather than participants in one of the most collaborative of all
art forms.

You use words like “fear” to describe our state of mind about digital
technology, and you tell your readers how we “blanch” in anticipation of
seeing film dailies, which will reveal our mistakes, such as shooting into
bright lights, not noticing catering vans in the background, or loading he
cameras wrong, resulting in reshoots that “eat up time and money.” I am not
going to repeat all of the misstatements and misinterpretations of the
reality of making movies that are woven through the fabric of your story. I
am guessing many other people have brought them to your attention.

Though, I must admit I am amazed that Robert Rodriguez apparently told you
that he didn’t know the true color of Johnny Depp’s eyes until he saw it on
an HD monitor. By the way, you attributed a quote to Mr. Rodriguez about “the
eyes being the windows to the soul” that is basically a twist on something
Sven Nykvist, ASC said many, many years ago when he was working with Ingmar
Bergman: “I always tell the cast what I am doing and why. I tell them that
the truth is in their eyes. If we show their eyes we can bare their souls. If
the chemistry is right, you can capture an inner beauty on film. And that is
pure magic.” I am sure that Sven and Bergman always knew the colors of the
actors’ eyes. The truth is that I can’t imagine a director or
cinematographer making a statement like the one you attribute to Mr.
Rodriguez. We can take your word on face value….

BUT, the problem I am having with that is that there are so many other
blatantly incorrect assumptions in your story, including your verbiage about
film dailies. It is true that most cinematographers look forward to dailies
with a sense of trepidation; but it is not because we are afraid technical
errors will be discovered. Cinematographers, by nature, are fearless
experimenters. We are always trying something new that no one has ever done
before in a quest to evoke emotional responses that help our directors tell
stories. We believe in what we do, but the proof is always on the screen. The
truth is that there isn’t an HD monitor today that is capable of revealing
the nuances and subtleties of light, shadows, colors and textures on the
negative. You have to see the images magnified and projected on a big screen
with film the way audiences will experience it.

I am writing to you in a dual capacity, as an individual cinematographer, who
was offended by your story and alarmed that our hometown newspaper could be
led so astray in reporting on our city’s cultural heritage and main industry.
I am also writing to you in my capacity as president of the American Society
of Cinematographers. I assume that you don’t know anything about ASC, so I
will tell you some things I believe you should know if you are going to do
interpretive writing about our industry. Our organization has its roots in
1907, when cinematographers in New York and Los Angeles organized informal
clubs for the purpose of discussing their art and craft. That was literally
during the dawn of the motion picture industry. Their need to exchange
information and ideas was essential, because if you think about it, virtually
every job needed to produce movies previously existed in the theater, except
for cinematography and editing. There were writers, directors, actors, scenic
designers, and so on. Cinematography was an entirely new art form, which like
painting and sculpting required the mastering of a complex craft. Our
predecessors were literally inventing a new language using light, shadows,
textures, camera movement and composition, and ultimately, colors, to create
illusions about time, place and moods, and also to accentuate the
performances of actors and actresses. Slight differences in composition or
lighting can turn a love story into a horror film, and vice versa, without a
word of dialogue.

The two camera clubs coalesced as ASC in 1919 for the purpose of advancing
the art and craft of filmmaking, and each succeeding generation of members
has remained true to that heritage. We have some 240 members today, by
invitation, based on an individual’s body of narrative film work. Our members
come from every part of the world. We also have some 120 associate members,
also by invitation, representing every sector of the motion picture and
television industries. Our main objective is true to our history: to inspire
and recognize artist excellence through innovation and imagination.

I began my career in Chicago as a still photographer, and worked my way up
through the ranks shooting low budget features, telefilms, commercials and
eventually mainstream movies. In fact, I shot one of the first tests of the
Sony HD camera system. I, like my colleagues, have never been afraid of any
technology that could help me become a better filmmaker. The next film I have
coming to the screen is Stuart Little 2, which was a total collaborative
effort between myself, director Rob Minkoff, visual effects supervisor Jerome
Chen, and many others. I am proud of the new territory we explored in the
convergence of film and digital technologies, and of the results.

I realize that by now you are both probably hoping that this will pass, and
we will lose interest. I am sure that you did the best that you could under
the circumstances. You may even still believe there are two sides to this
issue. In fact, I am well aware that there are aspiring filmmakers who are
hoping that digital technology will provide a short cut for their entries
into the industry. Having walked in their shoes, I wish them well, and
encourage them to persevere in the pursuit of their dreams; however I also
feel obliged to caution them that there are no shortcuts. My advice is that
they should believe in themselves and beware of commercial predators who
would misuse them.

As for the technology debate, I think that is a side issue. Right now, I
believe that film and digital imaging are as different as acrylic and oil
paints. The qualities of the images they render evoke different levels of
emotion. Will that ever change? I don’t think anyone has the answer to that
question today. One thing I have learned is that nothing is inevitable. If it
was, we’d all be watching 3-D movies as was predicted as inevitable some 50
years ago. I urge both of you to decide what kind of journalists you want to
be, and if you are truly interested in finding the truth, we will be happy to
help you.

Cordially,

Steven Poster, ASC
President, American Society of Cinematographers
(stevenasc@aol.com)

[nermanflapkit]

Where'd this come from?

-nerm

[wahiba]

:roll:
Tomorrow the grass will be greener
Today is awful
Yesterday was the golden age
:roll:

[crimsonson]

its from the a DP's list serve.