CTF
Sr Member
It's also been said that Spielberg watches "The Searchers" before starting a new movie.
Lawrence of Arabia, too.
It's also been said that Spielberg watches "The Searchers" before starting a new movie.
I did not know that Spielberg or any other director in the american system can take so much control over the visuals ?
I always thought that the DoP has main control over the visuals, making their work so darn expensive?
The relationship between director and DP is a very dynamic one.
As a DP, when I meet with my director, I'll find out if it's my canvas or his. This is the very first thing I need to know as it will dictate the working relationship for the rest of the shoot.
Some directors don't want to be troubled with the look of the film and leave it in the hands of their DP and production designer.
Some want to be involved and will relay their vision to the DP and Production Designer and expect them to make it a reality.
To me a movie is a collaboration of a lot of creative people, and not one single director in the world can claim that a movie is solely his or her work. Of course one person should have a vision, but the result is always a collaboration.
DS, I think that you really should not discuss the composition of a movie shot without mentioning the DoP.
An interesting interview with Janusz (!) Kaminski:
http://www.afi.com/education/conservatory/cinematography_video.aspx
That was a great interview. But it goes without saying that it's the job of a good DP to know what the director wants - not vice versa. The tunnel shot posted was something SS himself discussed at a Q&A at USC while discussing the technics employed by more modern directors whose signatures are larger than the portrait. In the discussion of what makes a person's "style" - its the small, ever present choices in the work that leave impression of certain person's hand at work. Nothing unique about the above posted shots, unless used at a constant - which is the case as far back as Sugarland Express (maybe even Amblin - but it's been awhile since Ive seen it)
Point taken! :thumbsup
I think I´ll have to brush up on my Spielberg and his "visual preferences" in the near future, and focus less on the production design that´s going on in there
It sounds to me like you know more about, or at least are a serious student of camera and cinematic layout - which gives you much more technical insight than I have. i only know from what I heard or read. If Speilberg is doing more with his tapestries I'd be interested to hear what you spot.
Treadwell said:I'd agree in spirit with the notions about composition, its importance, and the skills of directors and DPs keeping it in mind. But there is also the phenomenon of, through overanalysis, finding stuff that wasn't put there intentionally.
...
One can always find the right lines to draw to support just about any visual theory.
I'd agree in spirit with the notions about composition, its importance, and the skills of directors and DPs keeping it in mind. But there is also the phenomenon of, through overanalysis, finding stuff that wasn't put there intentionally.[/qoute]
I can assure you that when it comes to visuals in films or static art, (especially a Spielberg film) these elements are no accident.
Ive written several articles on composition, and I can instantly see when composition is intentional or just a case of luck.
I admit that Im not well informed on the job requirements of the DoP, Director, Cinematographer etc, but from looking at the finish product, I can tell that the elements in these finished shots were done intentionally for the best possible impact...Especially considering that these type of shots are a trademark of Spielbergs in nearly every one of his films (He can't have that many accidents).
For one thing, the ark warehouse was a post-production thing supervised by Lucas and his boys. Spielberg didn't even shoot the live action element, much less compose the painting. Kasdan's script laid it all out beforehand anyway.
From what Ive heard Spielberg does most of his own storyboards, so even if it was done in post production, whoever filmed the scene would still have to adhere to what Spielberg specified layout.
How are you going to show aisles of crates in "the biggest room in the world" without lines of perspective occurring?
Actually , I never mentioned lines of persepective...all shots have lines of perspective.
I said it was a "pyramid" composition.
A pyramid comp method that funnels they viewers eye into a path to a desired point. It does include perspective lines , but the perspective lines are used in a specific way.
Spielberg could have easily used any number of methods to film this shot...But his method seems to work best -
Rule of thirds shot
Radii compostion from a bird's eye POV -
Another rule of thirds shot, framed by the Ark crate, worm's eye view -
Similarly: Indy next to the truck. Sure, they used a wider lens to increase the sense of perspective. Cool. But carefully lay out the route of the vehicles so that they pass some rocks on the left at just the right moment to create a "V" shape while Indy transfers?
Well considering that the truck would merely need to follow along the rock wall, there really is no difficult "route".
DS
From what Ive heard Spielberg does most of his own storyboards, so even if it was done in post production, whoever filmed the scene would still have to adhere to what Spielberg specified layout.