Do you care?

CML was set up for high-end pro’s and those who aspire to be in that class.
I’ve never worried about offending anyone else.

There are lots of places on the net for cinematographers who don’t care about or maybe just don’t recognise a high quality image.
I never wanted CML to be one of those places.

My recent experiences of working with post people whose whole approach to life was “that’ll do” “good enough” “nobody”ll notice” has caused me to stop and take stock.

I feel that CML has been drifting in that direction.

I realise the political and economic pressures that are on us, believe me!

That doesn’t remove from the fact that if we don’t stand up for image
quality nobody will we are “the guardians of the image” and painful though it might be at times we have to fight that fight.

Answer for yourself a few simple questions, in a world where data size
didn’t matter, where RAW recorders were tiny and cheap, where transfer times were zero, where processing power was vast WOULD YOU EVER SHOOT ANYTHING OTHER THAN RAW?

Of course you wouldn’t because deep down inside you know that compression damages your images.

Next question, bearing in mind the conditions listed above, given a choice
of a system that recorded equal amounts of RGB and one that recorded 50%G and 25%R&B and then guessed what was in the holes that that approach left behind would you ever use anything other than the full RGB system?

Of course you wouldn’t because you know that resolution and colour are
compromised by CFA systems.

Now, given that you would go the quality route every time, why are you being such chickenshits and compromising your images all the time?

6 Replies to “Do you care?”

  1. We care, but the producers don’t and sometimes we need the job Geoff, especially for those of us who just graduated film school and just need a gig so they can quite their day job delivering pizzas.

  2. Agree implicitly. When I shoot digitally I refuse to shoot anything other than RAW. I always liken not doing that to spending the night at the Playboy mansion, but in your sleeping bag.

  3. It’s funny, I just had a moment on a job yesterday that was almost exactly what you describe.

    Though it had nothing to do with camera choice, it had everything to do with camera image while working with an editor/director.

    It was a reverse shot in a scene for an actir’s reel, forcing us to place a camera into a corner with no monitor and the director saying, I got it in focus let’s just shoot it. His reasoning, I can fix whatever trouble we miss in post and I don’t really care about it because it’s not the main actor.

    I almost said ok, let’s just shoot it. I didn’t want to fight him again on this. So, I didn’t say anything as I went and got the monitor and struggled with an unfamiliar camera to get monitor up. Though he grumbled as I fussed with it, it would turn out to be the best shot of the day while if we didn’t and “just shot it” it not only would have been the worst shot, it would have distracted from the scene and altered the perception of the main actor.’s performance.

    What I learned was that sometimes you don’t have to fight for it, you just do it and let them to choose to fight for shit.

  4. Image quality is key. There may be people who prefer to think differently, but then what they are doing is, by definition, not ‘high end’. Keep engaging, teaching and proposing the best quality image and that is what people will aspire to.

  5. I’m gone to convey my little brother, that he should also pay a quick visit this weblog on regular basis to
    obtain updated from most recent gossip.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

two × 3 =