Movies and Television...

lockwood81 · Apr 14, 2008

The more I learn and use my camera, seeing light and reading and learning about exposure....the more I marvel at the use of it in Movies and Television. I guess I'm just saying that I appreciate it much more now. Thats all.

PattiS · Apr 14, 2008

I totally agree! The movie 300 blew me away for this very reason.

plentygood · Apr 15, 2008

Haha, I was just thinking that too. I also love seeing cross-processing in shows two. Two of my three regular shows, Project Runway and Damages, both use it pretty artistically in some shots.

snapclick · Apr 15, 2008

Yeah I agree on that. Just like the show C.S.I.. It's so cool how they can focus on things and makes them very realistic looking.

Wozza · Apr 15, 2008

I watched 'Into the wild' the other night and the lighting and camera work was brilliant!

rob91 · Apr 16, 2008

300 is one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

PattiS · Apr 16, 2008

rob91 said:
300 is one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

Yes, it's definitely not everyone's cuppa.

rob91 · Apr 16, 2008

PattiS said:
Yes, it's definitely not everyone's cuppa.

I guess we can't all be adolescent males with sub-65 IQ's.

Village Idiot · Apr 17, 2008

rob91 said:
I guess we can't all be adolescent males with sub-65 IQ's.

So that's why you didn't like it...you couldn't understand it.

rmh159 · Apr 18, 2008

rob91 said:
I guess we can't all be adolescent males with sub-65 IQ's.

How adolescent and ignorant is YOUR comment. A$$.

Yeah if you're thinking about you'll notice a ton of composition rules as well when watching TV's / movies.

Iron Flatline · Apr 18, 2008

West Side Story - unbelievable. The shot composition is very cool.

abraxas · Apr 18, 2008

Iron Flatline said:
West Side Story - unbelievable. The shot composition is very cool.

Citizen Kane

rob91 · Apr 18, 2008

abraxas said:
Citizen Kane

The Magnificent Ambersons.

Hertz van Rental · Apr 18, 2008

PattiS said:
I totally agree! The movie 300 blew me away for this very reason.

Unfortunately that particular movie, like so many modern ones, is heavily post-processed and has quite a lot of CGI. So mentioning it when talking about light and composition in film is a bit off target.
This is not to put the film down (although it was totally inaccurate from a Historical point of view*) but the skills displayed in the making of it are not the same as the skills required to shoot 'straight'.
There was a cinematographer - I can't remember his name - who worked with Greta Garbo on one of her early films. For one shot he hand ground his own lens so that the whole image is soft focus except for the tear on her cheek, which is sharp.
That is skill and dedication in the traditional sense.
These days he would have done it in post-processing. There is nothing wrong with that but you need to recognise and understand the differences between different skills in order to appreciate them.

* There were actually over 1,000 other Greek soldiers who stayed with the Spartans, but they are conveniently forgotten. The 1,500 Greeks does not sound as impressive as the 300 Spartans

rmh159 · Apr 19, 2008

Hertz van Rental said:
although it was totally inaccurate from a Historical point of view*

From IMDB.com:

"The movie never claims to be historically correct. It is based heavily on Frank Miller's 1998 comic book mini-series. Changes from history were made by Miller and director Zack Snyder so as to appeal to a wider audience and create a more exciting and visually stunning action movie, rather than a typical historical epic."

The movie 300 is about a comic book based upon the war... not the war itself.