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

[Josh Bass]

I wonder why this car was so distracting. Unless the film was set in another era I have to think people being distracted by any car of any color in the background means you lost them with the story at that point.

My low budget, “didnt realize it til too late” solution would have been to desaturate or alter the color in Resolve. Uniform saturated colors lend themselves well to this type of treatment unless something of a similar color that you DONT want to affect crosses through them.

[Brian Drysdale]

I don't think the same green beetle distracts from the car chase in "Bullett", it's talking point after people have seen it numerous times, but not on the first viewings.

Bullitt (1968) - San Francisco Car Chase Scene (4/10) | Movieclips - YouTube

If something like the colour of a car in the background is distracting, there's something wrong with your action.or story at that point. That's unless the car is modern car in a 1960s scene, Green is hardly eye catching, a bight red or pink car might worth consideration as a distraction but not green.

Using a shallow DOF on mid day exteriors is a relatively recent phenomenon, since in the past the standard set of neutral density filters had 0.9 as it's densest, so with f16 being a sunny day (100 ASA tungsten film with 85 conversion filter) that gives you f8. You could get denser ones (eg a ND 1.2 for f5.6 or pack more ND filters in - which can be limited by your filter trays and how much extra glass you want to put in front of your lens - with 100ASA stock, an 85ND9 and a ND9 get f2.8 on a film camera, these filters being part of a standard filter package on a film), but after a certain point you can't see much through the optical viewfinder and today you'd need an extremely dense ND filter if your camera has an ISO of 800 to 2,000 in order reach the shallow DOF stops. With latter you need IR correction with a number of cameras.

Usually, if something in the background is going to be distracting, you frame it out of the picture.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay thanks, but I usually don't know what audiences will find distracting in the background until later. Sometimes in public places, certain things are impossible to frame out though. But it was a bright saturated green car for sure. Do you think that maybe if something is distracting color wise like that, that I should rotoscope out that one object and color it differently in post?

[Paul R Johnson]

I don't think I have ever done anything like this. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Surely as we've said, the scene should be interesting enough to keep people's attention on what the Director planned?

This is frankly a bit silly!

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay, it's just I was also learning to use Da Vinci Resolve and some colorists separate the background from the actors and color the background separately, so I thought maybe this was normal practice. Well I could count on the script and acting being interesting enough, that not having full color control over the background of the locations is not an issue then?

I asked the person before what was distracting about the green car, and he said it's because that color seems out of place thematically. He said that each color in the background has to mean something, if that's true. So could that be an issue with uncontrolled colors, is to look at if they fit thematically?

[Josh Bass]

In an ideal filmmaking world on a controlled professional set? Yes EVERYTHING in the frame from colors to set design to wardrobe etc. is supposed to be deliberate and therefore meaningful.

HOWEVER you and other low budget filmmakers are almost never working on that type of set/production. You’re working with whatever location you were able to get and sometimes it is what it is. Sometimes there are green cars that dont fit.

If you want to change that, you’ll have to shoot only on locations you can completely control.

Paul and a lot of the folks here dont understand the issues you run into because they dont work on no budget, basically “just for fun” stuff; they only work in a budgeted professional world.

Ive been where you are many times and basically, everything you ask about comes down to, you cant get pro results with non-pro resources and budgets. You have to either learn to live with the (sometimes extreme) compromises or completely rethink your approach. Cant control background in exterior locations? Dont use that location. maybe dont even use exteriors at all. Now that problem is solved.

[Brian Drysdale]

You are getting into a higher level of skills than you probably have with the Resolve, because you can do something doesn't mean that it's done to any great extent because of budgets etc.

I don't know what the colour of a background car has to do with the theme of your film, since given the level of control you have on your budget is pretty minimal, there's a point where the real world comes in and you have to live with them because you can't control it. Plus there's also a certain level of BS can come from some people.

If you want to get a meaning of green try this: https://www.bourncreative.com/meanin...e-color-green/

[Ryan Elder]

Oh I was just told by a couple of test viewers before who were also filmmakers that colors matter, and not every color is going to go with the look and thematic feel of your movie, so you have to watch for unwanted colors therefore.

Originally Posted by Josh Bass

In an ideal filmmaking world on a controlled professional set? Yes EVERYTHING in the frame from colors to set design to wardrobe etc. is supposed to be deliberate and therefore meaningful.

HOWEVER you and other low budget filmmakers are almost never working on that type of set/production. You’re working with whatever location you were able to get and sometimes it is what it is. Sometimes there are green cars that dont fit.

If you want to change that, you’ll have to shoot only on locations you can completely control.

Paul and a lot of the folks here dont understand the issues you run into because they dont work on no budget, basically “just for fun” stuff; they only work in a budgeted professional world.

Ive been where you are many times and basically, everything you ask about comes down to, you cant get pro results with non-pro resources and budgets. You have to either learn to live with the (sometimes extreme) compromises or completely rethink your approach. Cant control background in exterior locations? Dont use that location. maybe dont even use exteriors at all. Now that problem is solved.

Well my former film school professor looked at some of my work and he said that you have to have complete control of the location and be able to paint or make any changes you want to, because when you release your movie, you are not going to be able to explain to audiences, that you didn't have the control. Audiences are not going to want to hear any excuses like that, nor are you going to be able to tell everyone that. Does he have a point?

As for not shooting exteriors and only interiors, that is also a problem because interiors you do not have complete control over either, if no location owners will let you repaint even.

[Brian Drysdale]

With low budget films all you can do is your best. Pick a suitable location and go with it, if someone parks a green car in the location, you'll just have to work around it of it can't be moved.

If the car is near by and obvious in the frame it may be more important than if it's parked way up the street, however, it being an Aston Martin or a Ferrari in a working class area would be more important than its colour.

I would usually more attention to its make and model than its colour, since that says something about the owner. A green car is pretty nondescript colour unless it's a military type 4 x4 vehicle

Given the questions you're asking here, they may possibly be pulling your leg.

[Paul R Johnson]

ah..... one of those Professors. I often think some very famous Directors would sit open mouthed at their lectures, and all the arty-farty claptrap that they have wrapped in educationalist theorems and jargon. My least favourite sessions were on semiotics. I'm firmly convinced that most examples given in the lectures were actually accidental and the creators didn't incorporate these features deliberately, but just as part of the narrative, and the educationalists seized on them as theory.

This sentence sums it up for me. "you have to have complete control of the location and be able to paint or make any changes you want to, because when you release your movie, you are not going to be able to explain to audiences, that you didn't have the control." I think he lives on a nice fluffy, safe cloud somewhere where there are no sharp edges or real life issues.

[Josh Bass]

Possibly.

To reiterate what Brian said.

Ok, you don't have complete control of those locations...could be cars in BG outside, can't paint inside...on your low budget, you will then have to find locations that already fit your needs--i.e. the interior already looks close enough to what it should that it wouldn't require painting, maybe just set dressing. Exteriors...I dunno...don't shoot into deep backgrounds you can't control? That's really all you can do. Or risk having these issues again.

[Brian Drysdale]

The car used in Dr No wasn't a grand stylistic decision on colour and model, they wanted Bond to drive a sports car and the only one available on the island was a blue Sunbeam Alpine. It was hardly a huge creative decision. it was a practical one.

Dr. No - Car Chase Scene - © Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. - YouTube

[Seth Bloombaum]

Originally Posted by Ryan Elder

...Well my former film school professor looked at some of my work and he said that you have to have complete control of the location and be able to paint or make any changes you want to, because when you release your movie, you are not going to be able to explain to audiences, that you didn't have the control. Audiences are not going to want to hear any excuses like that, nor are you going to be able to tell everyone that. Does he have a point?...

This professor’s statement reminds me of a quote usually attributed to Yogi Berra:
“In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice it doesn’t work that way.”

If and when time, available resources, and money don’t matter... well, that would be different. Realistically, only a very very few people with lots of credibility get to throw money at problems to make them go away.

On the other hand, holding to one’s creative vision is always important, as is knowing when you’ve achieved it. Or when you’ve compromised it, and whether that compromise is significant in the storytelling. That’s true in any level of work, whether student projects, weddings, production services, indie films, streaming reality shows, or high budget features.

Which is, Ryan, an interesting way to look at your many threads and posts that ask for this crowd’s confirmation of what others have told you.

What do *you* think about the green car?

[Ryan Elder]

Well I didn't really notice the car being a problem until others pointed it out, then I kept looking at it that way.

[Josh Bass]

That could mean it wasnt a problem but then again weve had similar discussions on here where something didnt bother you and folks here criticized if. You could post a screenshot and get better feedback here.