Jump to content


Photo

How Come "In Consideration" ads for Cinematography...


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Joe Taylor

Joe Taylor
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts
  • Other

Posted 04 January 2006 - 02:03 PM

This is especially true in American Cinematography. There is an image in an ad for "Jar Head" that credits Roger Deakins' cinematography for a shot of soldiers marching through the desert with oil rig fires blazing in the B.G. What makes this shot what it is is the digital F/X, not the cinematography. Why do they think they can fool the academy. It's almost insulting. I'm sure they didn't build their own oil rigs to burn in the desert. I don't think you can even legally burn a tire in America.

I can recall other examples. "A.I"s ad for cinematography consideration is all digital. I can also remember a image for a giant moon married in the image for another film that was supposed to be credited to the cinematographer.

Why does this happen?
  • 0

#2 Chance Shirley

Chance Shirley
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 256 posts
  • Director

Posted 04 January 2006 - 02:27 PM

Shots with digital elements can be trickier for the DP than "plain" shots, because the DP has to make the in-camera elements of the shot work with whatever digital elements will be added later. Which obviously requires a good bit of foresight on the DPs part to get the highlights/shadows/colors correct.

Also, the way I understand it, the director of photography is in charge of the entire visual department, which would include visual effects. So to say a DP can't take credit for a nice-looking effects shot doesn't make much sense to me.
  • 0

#3 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3060 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 04 January 2006 - 02:49 PM

Those 'For your consideration...' ads generally features the same images as are used in the films' posters and other publicity. The Academy is being asked to consider the film as a whole, not just a few stills.
  • 0

#4 Joe Taylor

Joe Taylor
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts
  • Other

Posted 04 January 2006 - 03:23 PM

Those 'For your consideration...' ads generally features the same images as are used in the films' posters and other publicity. The Academy is being asked to consider the film as a whole, not just a few stills.



Yes, but these types of ads are often misleading. I've read that more than a few academy members will often vote without actually seeing the film or watching their screeners. Could an academy member actually base their judgement of someone's work by glancing at a glossy in a magazine. I'd be outraged but not surprised by a truthful answer.
  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 04 January 2006 - 06:35 PM

Yes, but remember that the people doing the nominating for Best Cinematography are part of a nominating committee for that category, not the general Academy membership. Since they tend to be cinematography-saavy (often working and retired cinematographers, and other technical types), odds are low that they can't really make a mental distinction between an efx shot and a live action shot.
  • 0


Opal

CineLab

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

The Slider

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Rig Wheels Passport

Technodolly

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

Wooden Camera

The Slider

Metropolis Post

CineLab

Ritter Battery

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Opal

Visual Products

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

FJS International, LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

Glidecam

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets