Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?

Pete Cofrancesco · October 7th, 2019, 01:32 PM

Did someone say deep focus?

Paul R Johnson · October 7th, 2019, 03:45 PM

You select your DoF to tell the story Ryan. You know this, pick what you need. Isolate or give them everything - you pick

Rainer Listing · October 7th, 2019, 03:56 PM

You start with the creative vision to tell your story so that viewers will see it the same way you do. The technical serves the aesthetic. The audience doesn't automatically recognise what you have achieved. You need to provide guidance via publicity and marketing, else risk sinking without a trace like so many worthy others. So you may have to shift some of your focus from technical and creative to publicity and marketing. There's a reason studios may spend more on marketing than production. As well as highlighting your creativity, appropriate marketing can cover many mistakes, make virtue of necessities. The masses prefer the opinions of the outspoken to the effort of developing their own. After all, what is truth? Thus: "the director's use of deep focus lifted what may have been a mundane scene into a gripping vision of delight". Oh, and careful not to overdo it.

Ryan Elder · October 7th, 2019, 06:04 PM

Oh okay, you are saying that if the movie is marketed well, than people will not be bothered by the deep DoF near as likely?

Brian Drysdale · October 8th, 2019, 01:08 AM

People are more interested in a good story well told (as one ad agency had as its slogan), your actors are way more important than deep focus or shallow focus. They watch many films and even love some films that have deep focus without thinking about it. If you don't have the key stuff, they'll start walking out, no one has walked out because of deep focus or shallow focus.

If I recall you shot an interior scene at f11, that would only be necessary if you're shooting models, f5.6 has the lens working at it's best, if you want a general deep focus effect. I know of one DP who always used that stop, it was the cause of some banter with the 1st AC guessing his stop.

Paul R Johnson · October 8th, 2019, 01:29 AM

Ryan you've gone back to your rule bookagain. How many times must we warn you that in art, rule books don't work, or evolve fast than ink dries. People give you advice, you convert to a rule. Don't do it. Think about the law. There are rarely laws that are specific, they just provide frameworks for people to wok inside of. They're the hard edges not e centre point. Our audience are like any group. You went to college to learn film making but your audiences didn't! Audiences only notice bad movies, not bad technique making them.

I mentioned that one shot war film. Almost all will be lens to Infiniti sharp, because the technique makes shallow focus technically different. You could imagine some benefits from having sharp focus on the subject in a big busy scene, but could you actually do it?

Brian Drysdale · October 8th, 2019, 01:54 AM

I assume you're talking about "1917".

Paul R Johnson · October 8th, 2019, 04:36 AM

Yep = look at this clip for some amazing behind the scenes shots of the camera transfers.

Ryan Elder · October 8th, 2019, 06:58 AM

Yes, you're right I shouldn't turn everything into a rule, I got to change my mindset. It's just when people tell me something like I shouldn't have used such a deep DOF, it comes off like it's a rule then for example.

When it comes to 1917, what am I looking for exactly, the rack focusing?

But I suppose there is no rules right, cause in the 1917 trailer, I felt that a lot of the shots were over exposed, and the sky was too blown out. But it's still a professionally made movie, and a lot of people might not mind that technicality compared to me.

Brian Drysdale · October 8th, 2019, 07:14 AM

You probably won't see any breathing, it's mostly exteriors, so will be mostly deep focus. With 1917, it's the use of deep focus.

You can;'t always tell from a trailer what the final grading of a feature film will be like because specialist companies make them.

The skies will possibly blow out on overcast days because that's your light source and you can't put grad filters on in a film that's all "one" tracking shot without the risk of them looking fake. However, I see detail in the skies, so they're not blown.

Brian Drysdale · October 8th, 2019, 07:42 AM

deleted message

Paul R Johnson · October 8th, 2019, 12:34 PM

In the behind the scenes clip, you'll see they waited for just the right skies.

In the trailer and the behind the scenes, you can see so much the vistas, the use of empty space, the smoothness of the shots despite the terrain and the actors in it. You can see exceptional skill levels in everything, and watch people quickly getting out of the way. You can see how proper planning really works, and you can see narrative with no words, an it's not boring. The Director's plan to tell the story seems to break loads of our usual conventions, but it's very powerful. If I could devise, let alone make that movie, I'd be a very happy man. Just watching how they made should give Ryan some clues I think.

Ryan Elder · October 8th, 2019, 09:36 PM

Oh okay. I noticed that in the featurette, they used both a gimbal and a steadicam to make it with. Was there a reason they used both, as oppose to choosing one over the other?

Paul R Johnson · October 9th, 2019, 12:37 AM

When you have this level of budget equipment choice is simply down to which one will do a better job. That's a decision made on analysis of the scene. A gimbal mount can be passed on, a steadicam can't, a steadicam will be more'aimable' manually. The way they stabilise is very different. Physical things too, can the post clear obstacles, weight is important, the gimbal could be too heavy for some shots etc etc. Best camera, best lens, best technique for each setup.

Did you take the point on depth of focus though? It's a huge vista and there's something new to see on each play of the clip. Did you see anything that shouldn't have been in frame.

Did you consider sound? What exactly would that boom have been recording? Especially as so many wakie-talkies with no headsets/earpieces are visible? I looked for production compromises and saw very few.

For me the most impressive thing was the safety coordination of the pyros. The risk assessment would necessitate very precise firing and I wonder how they did that. I suspect they'd need a very high shot camera and then grids to enable safe zone firing. I'd love to get some detail on that. I do a bit of pyrowork and while nothing this scale, I find safety zones for firing quite tricky to control, and this has them multiplied in quantity and duration. Pyros are reliable, but actors are not!

Brian Drysdale · October 9th, 2019, 01:35 AM

They needed to quickly switch to various other mounts without stopping the action, which you can't do with a Steadicam, so a Gimbal type system can be used for those parts. Their Gimbal will have remote control. so that pan and tilt can be operated etc and probably has gyro stabilisation, The film was shot with an Arri Mini LF, which weighs nearly 6 lbs, plus a lens of 4 lbs, then you need the battery, lens motors and other accessories, plus the mounting system. All this means you need two people to carry it and do a safe transfer.

WW1 trenches are too narrow for two people, plus a camera between them, so the Steadicam is ideal for filming in tight spaces..

October 7th, 2019, 01:32 PM	#16
Pete Cofrancesco Inner Circle Join Date: May 2004 Location: USA Posts: 3,005	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Did someone say deep focus? YouTube (Short URL) Last edited by Pete Cofrancesco; October 7th, 2019 at 03:48 PM.

October 7th, 2019, 03:45 PM	#17
Paul R Johnson Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lowestoft - UK Posts: 4,045	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? You select your DoF to tell the story Ryan. You know this, pick what you need. Isolate or give them everything - you pick

October 7th, 2019, 03:56 PM	#18
Rainer Listing Major Player Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Nowra, Australia Posts: 440	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? You start with the creative vision to tell your story so that viewers will see it the same way you do. The technical serves the aesthetic. The audience doesn't automatically recognise what you have achieved. You need to provide guidance via publicity and marketing, else risk sinking without a trace like so many worthy others. So you may have to shift some of your focus from technical and creative to publicity and marketing. There's a reason studios may spend more on marketing than production. As well as highlighting your creativity, appropriate marketing can cover many mistakes, make virtue of necessities. The masses prefer the opinions of the outspoken to the effort of developing their own. After all, what is truth? Thus: "the director's use of deep focus lifted what may have been a mundane scene into a gripping vision of delight". Oh, and careful not to overdo it.

October 7th, 2019, 06:04 PM	#19
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Oh okay, you are saying that if the movie is marketed well, than people will not be bothered by the deep DoF near as likely?

October 8th, 2019, 01:08 AM	#20
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? People are more interested in a good story well told (as one ad agency had as its slogan), your actors are way more important than deep focus or shallow focus. They watch many films and even love some films that have deep focus without thinking about it. If you don't have the key stuff, they'll start walking out, no one has walked out because of deep focus or shallow focus. If I recall you shot an interior scene at f11, that would only be necessary if you're shooting models, f5.6 has the lens working at it's best, if you want a general deep focus effect. I know of one DP who always used that stop, it was the cause of some banter with the 1st AC guessing his stop.

October 8th, 2019, 01:29 AM	#21
Paul R Johnson Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lowestoft - UK Posts: 4,045	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Ryan you've gone back to your rule bookagain. How many times must we warn you that in art, rule books don't work, or evolve fast than ink dries. People give you advice, you convert to a rule. Don't do it. Think about the law. There are rarely laws that are specific, they just provide frameworks for people to wok inside of. They're the hard edges not e centre point. Our audience are like any group. You went to college to learn film making but your audiences didn't! Audiences only notice bad movies, not bad technique making them. I mentioned that one shot war film. Almost all will be lens to Infiniti sharp, because the technique makes shallow focus technically different. You could imagine some benefits from having sharp focus on the subject in a big busy scene, but could you actually do it?

October 8th, 2019, 01:54 AM	#22
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? I assume you're talking about "1917". 1917 Trailer #2 (2019) \| Movieclips Trailers - YouTube

October 8th, 2019, 04:36 AM	#23
Paul R Johnson Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lowestoft - UK Posts: 4,045	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Yep = look at this clip for some amazing behind the scenes shots of the camera transfers. YouTube (Short URL)

October 8th, 2019, 06:58 AM	#24
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Yes, you're right I shouldn't turn everything into a rule, I got to change my mindset. It's just when people tell me something like I shouldn't have used such a deep DOF, it comes off like it's a rule then for example. When it comes to 1917, what am I looking for exactly, the rack focusing? But I suppose there is no rules right, cause in the 1917 trailer, I felt that a lot of the shots were over exposed, and the sky was too blown out. But it's still a professionally made movie, and a lot of people might not mind that technicality compared to me.

October 8th, 2019, 07:14 AM	#25
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? You probably won't see any breathing, it's mostly exteriors, so will be mostly deep focus. With 1917, it's the use of deep focus. You can;'t always tell from a trailer what the final grading of a feature film will be like because specialist companies make them. The skies will possibly blow out on overcast days because that's your light source and you can't put grad filters on in a film that's all "one" tracking shot without the risk of them looking fake. However, I see detail in the skies, so they're not blown.

October 8th, 2019, 07:42 AM	#26
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? deleted message

October 8th, 2019, 12:34 PM	#27
Paul R Johnson Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lowestoft - UK Posts: 4,045	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? In the behind the scenes clip, you'll see they waited for just the right skies. In the trailer and the behind the scenes, you can see so much the vistas, the use of empty space, the smoothness of the shots despite the terrain and the actors in it. You can see exceptional skill levels in everything, and watch people quickly getting out of the way. You can see how proper planning really works, and you can see narrative with no words, an it's not boring. The Director's plan to tell the story seems to break loads of our usual conventions, but it's very powerful. If I could devise, let alone make that movie, I'd be a very happy man. Just watching how they made should give Ryan some clues I think.

October 8th, 2019, 09:36 PM	#28
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Oh okay. I noticed that in the featurette, they used both a gimbal and a steadicam to make it with. Was there a reason they used both, as oppose to choosing one over the other?

October 9th, 2019, 12:37 AM	#29
Paul R Johnson Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lowestoft - UK Posts: 4,045	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? When you have this level of budget equipment choice is simply down to which one will do a better job. That's a decision made on analysis of the scene. A gimbal mount can be passed on, a steadicam can't, a steadicam will be more'aimable' manually. The way they stabilise is very different. Physical things too, can the post clear obstacles, weight is important, the gimbal could be too heavy for some shots etc etc. Best camera, best lens, best technique for each setup. Did you take the point on depth of focus though? It's a huge vista and there's something new to see on each play of the clip. Did you see anything that shouldn't have been in frame. Did you consider sound? What exactly would that boom have been recording? Especially as so many wakie-talkies with no headsets/earpieces are visible? I looked for production compromises and saw very few. For me the most impressive thing was the safety coordination of the pyros. The risk assessment would necessitate very precise firing and I wonder how they did that. I suspect they'd need a very high shot camera and then grids to enable safe zone firing. I'd love to get some detail on that. I do a bit of pyrowork and while nothing this scale, I find safety zones for firing quite tricky to control, and this has them multiplied in quantity and duration. Pyros are reliable, but actors are not!

October 9th, 2019, 01:35 AM	#30
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? They needed to quickly switch to various other mounts without stopping the action, which you can't do with a Steadicam, so a Gimbal type system can be used for those parts. Their Gimbal will have remote control. so that pan and tilt can be operated etc and probably has gyro stabilisation, The film was shot with an Arri Mini LF, which weighs nearly 6 lbs, plus a lens of 4 lbs, then you need the battery, lens motors and other accessories, plus the mounting system. All this means you need two people to carry it and do a safe transfer. WW1 trenches are too narrow for two people, plus a camera between them, so the Steadicam is ideal for filming in tight spaces..