Rob Draper ACS
Frequently Asked Questions
Below are answers I have frequently supplied to e-mails from visitors to this site.
Questions have come in from all over the World and many seem to focus on the same issues
Many questions come in from folks wanting to pursue a career in film, especially Cinematography whilst
a large number come from High School and College students working on Projects on the Industry.
I hope these answers provide some insight into set life and the role of the Cinematographer.
"Are Actors big headed?"
"Why do Hollywood Directors seem stressed?"
"Do you miss Australia?"
"Does your job get easier near the end of a shoot?"
"Do you have any involvement with writing the script?"
"Could you tell me about three modern Film Camera's?"
"Is it worthwhile owning your own equipment?"
"Can you tell me something about shooting Fuji 16mm Film?"
This was one of my favorites....."In 25 words or less...why do films look different?"
"Have you worked with really mean actors?"
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Are Actors big headed?"
Some actors do let their celebrity take over but most respond to simply being treated as a normal everday person.
For me an actor is no different from a farmer, a dentist, a school teacher, a gardener, etc....
we are all just people doing a job. Unfortunately society tends to place an unbalanced importance on celebrities.
I think the people who should receive the enormous salaries and all the accolades are teachers not actors.
But I don't want to get too wound up on that subject.
I believe in treating people with absolute honesty and integrity and in treating everyone the same, no exceptions.
That is how I deal with my crew, Producers, Directors, even Production Assistants (the most forgotten people on a film set).
You earn their respect by treating them fairly and once that is established I find it is easy sailing.
Of course some people have such enormous popularity that it is hard not to think...
"wow I'm actually working with....." but that has to be put aside. They are just people doing a job.
I photographed a film this time last year with Dolly Parton. What a wonderful lady. She is the greatest example,
in my view of what a Star really is. When Dolly walked on set she had an incredible presence you knew you were
in the company of someone really great...BUT..all the while she was as down to earth as any member of the family,
cracking jokes, talking with everyone on the crew but always dedicated absolutely to her craft and extremely professional.
Working with Dolly was truly one of the highlights of my career...largely because she was a Star in the movie sense and in every way.
"Why do Hollywood Directors seem stressed?"
Film making is an unbelievably stressful business. You have to keep in mind this is BIG business with millions of dollars at stake,
even on a regular TV movie which can cost upwards of $3 million. The Director and Director of Photography are the two people who
effectively determine, through their preparedness and speed of shooting, whether the film will come in on budget and on schedule.
With films costing upwards of $150,000/day of Production time...there is some pressure in that. You have to be very fast but at
the same time be incredibly creative...sometimes a very difficult combination.
On top of that are all the dealings with actors and the 80+ members of the crew, constant schedule changes and locations falling through,
late starts because someone is ill and days shortenend through rain, or snow, etc.
Every day there are thousands of little problems to be solved many of them not even directly related to what you are actually shooting
at the time.
For a Director and DP the days are generally anywhere from 12-15 hours on set....shooting. Then they both have to watch dailies from
the previous day and prepare the work for the next day...not forgetting trying to squeeze in a few minutes to just put your feet up
and take a break.
By the time you get to bed at night you will have worked somewhere around 18-19 hours and then I like to be up at least an hour before
I leave for set so there is no rush...then maybe 1/2 hour to get to set and always arriving 1/2 hour early..........starts to sound like
sleep deprivation don't you think?
To compound the effects of exhaustion is the fact that on location we also work a six day week with the last day generally being a "split"...
where we will work into the night finishing early Sunday morning. Then of course we will start again Monday at 6am so we may not even get a
full day off.
So....add up all the hours and then throw in the worry of finishing on budget and on schedule and being creative and dealing with maybe a
hundred different personalities and all of a sudden the stress level starts to become evident.
Another factor is the constant threat, generally self imposed, that you will become stale and not be as creative as you should and the
constant fear that you will not be seen as amongst the best...this self imposed pressure is what keeps you on your toes, constantly striving
for new ways to approach storytelling but it all takes it's toll.
Most Directors come up through the ranks but there are many pathways you can follow...college, university, film schools or just jump into the
Industry as a PA and start learning the ropes. There are even a few people who "wake up one morning incredibly lucky"...but they are few and
far between. For most it's simply plain old hard work and years of dedication to your craft, slogging your way through to the point where your
abilities begin to be recognized.
Now keep in mind I am a Director of Photography but all the same condiditons apply since the Director and the DP are the two people who directly
make the movie.
This is one of the reasons many Directors tend to stick with one DP. Someone who is a true ally and someone they can trust when
everything around them seems to be falling apart. Directors have to make some risky creative decisions and they need enormous
support from the DP so they feel free to make the choices, even when they seem crazy, and have the support of their main collaborator.
Both the Director and DP need to create a stable platform from which they can work. One where they can both take risk, not be
influenced by ego and not be afraid to question each others decisions.
The relationship is the most important on the crew. If the rest of the crew, and the actors, observe a great rapport between the
Director and DP then it ripples all the way down and the entire crew tends to get along. If that relationship is antagonistic it
can cerate a sometimes unbearable atmosphere on set...one in which you hate to wake up each morning because the tensions and stresses
are all magnified.
This is one of the reasons Michael and I work together so much. We not only respect each others abilities enormously but thrive
on the fact that we can take enormous risk and push the creative boundaries and still be able to comment honestly about each
others work...even when either one of us does not agree with, or see, where the other is going. It's a very healthy relationship
and it makes all the stress of the long days, etc disappear because we can really enjoy "the process". On top of a great working
relationship we are very good friends, our families know each other, and for me, it is really the perfect situation...to have a
Director who trusts everything you do and is not afraid to question or offer suggestions...and vice versa.
"Do you miss Australia?"
Ultimately everyone misses their homeland. I have been travelling all over the World since the mid seventies so I feel that whilst I am Australian at heart, my home is wherever I am settled, and that is presently in the US.
Of course you miss your friends and family but the World is really so small now, even compared with 10 years ago, that it almost seems like a small commute to fly back to Sydney.
"Does your job get easier near the end of a shoot?"
As you probably know, film are not shot in sequence. Actors schedules and ages, location requirements, special fx requirements, etc all play their part in making the shooting of a movie very fragmented. We might shoot scene 67 in the morning and 134 in the afternoon then the next day have to move to another location and shoot scene 1 and 93 then the next day come back to the original location and shoot scene 135 and 234 for example.
By the last weeks you are shooting, what I call, the cement, the glue that ties all those fragmented bits together.
Because we are shooting all over the place in the script by that time it places incredible strain on everyone, especially the actors, because you have to precisely match to the scene that comes before and the one coming after and it is like that for every shot.
As a result everyone is a little more focused and tempers tend to get a little out of control....but never to the point of being a problem.
You have to remember you have a group of very creative people all striving to do their absolute best and quite often the schedule, budget, weather, etc factors in to compound the difficulty of the challenge to match everything dramatically and physically (eg lighting, lenses, etc) in the last few weeks.
On that final day, after the final shot......wow...what a relief. It's like having a huge weight taken off your shoulders.
It usually takes me about four to five days to "come down" from a movie. You become so tuned in to the picture and focused on your job that nothing else can get in the way. It is quite like being a top athlete and being "in the zone" so once you really get rolling the way to keep your work at it's best is to stay there for the entire production.
"Do you have any involvement with writing the script?"
As a Director of Phtotography I do not get directly involved in any of the script writing process.
By the time a DP is hired the script has been written for some time....quite often many years.
The DP does have some input during shooting as to the dramatic content of certain elements but this is generally very
limited and is left largely to the Director and Writer in consultation, quite often, with the Producer.
"Could you tell me about three modern Film Camera's?"
Three camera's that instantly come to mind are the current crop of Arriflex Camera's, two of which I own.
Arri 535A Arri 535B Arri 435
The 535A is a state of the art camera combining sophisticated electronics which essentially control, and allow manipulation of, the camera.
The 535A is a sync camera meaning it can be used for dialogue and runs exceptionally quiet (around -23db). It can run at frame rates up to 50fps, has an electronic shutter and through the electronic Camera Control Unit (CCU) or the LCC (Laptop Camera Controller- a Mac powerbook and special program written specifically for this camera) can do multiple speed ramps with frame rate and shutter angle controlled by the computer.
The 535A can lay down SMPTE time code on the edge of the film and can also accommodate the Lens Control System (LCS) which allows computer control of zoom, iris and focus.
Thew 535B is a lighter camera and was developed followinf the 535A to meet industry demands for a more compact, lighter version of the 535A.
The B camera does not have the same electronics module, it has a much lighter, fully removable viefinder optic system which allows the camera to be stripped down for use on Steadicam.
The B camera will run frame rates up to 60fps and has a mechanical shutter meaning it cannot shange shutter angle in shot. This camera is also a sync camera, running at the same sound level as the A camera and is quite often used as either the back-up or with many DP's as the Principal camera on features and TV Movies.
With it's lightweight magazines the B camera makes a great tool for hand held shots.
The 435 is a development of the 535A which was called for from within the TV Commercial and Special FX fields. This is not used for sync dialogue as it is very noisy...not being blimped since most times it is run "off speed". The camera has all the electronics of the 535A plus it can run at frame rates up to 150fps AND do computerized speed ramps changing frame rate, shutter and iris...within the shot....You will see the application of this in many Commercials and music video's when the action suddenly slides into slow motion within the shot..(there are other ways of arriving at that effect but essentially those arose from the abilities of this camera)
"Is it worthwhile owning your own equipment?"
Its a two edged sword. On one hand you have the potential to make extra income and make attractive deals for Producers but at the same time, what will be an attractive deal to one will become a burden to another.
Fortunately, I am in a position where I can make strong representations regarding my equipment and, based on years of experience, show Producers the advantages and demonstrate them by having them call many other Producers who have benefited.
Things are changing though. There are many rental companies all after the same films and the rates offered by Producers are plummeting as rental companies fight with price cutting for every piece of the action.
I really believe you should not go into more debt for the sake of equipment at this stage. During your break-in period you need to be completely free of any ties and be willing to shoot whatever comes along. Equipment forces you into the position where you have to keep working and in the end you will be making your choices of films based on economic necessity rather than on creative progression.
Also the majority of theatrical releases, even low budget, are shot on 35mm so owning a camera can be a very expensive proposition, especially if you stop working. You need to be creating opportunities as a DP based on creative ability rather than on presenting an attractive deal. The last thing you want to hear is what a great deal you give.
I make a point of not doing any deals. I have a rate for myself and my equipment and that's it. Of course, it is much easier now than it was when I was first beating the boards. I just feel, looking back at what I had to go through, that equipment would have been a burden.
Keep in mind these are only my thoughts. I am a great believer in forging your own pathways, being the guy kicking up the cloud of dust rather than one of those struggling to see through it. So there may be a very creative way of packaging your talents and equipment so the combination works.
You need to weigh the pro's and cons.
I would be going full tilt to get onto Features...regardless of equipment in the beginning.
I had never owned equipment until about 4 years ago...not the slightest interest...and I know the amount of work I was getting could not have supported the huge package I needed to make it a viable route. As work started to snowball, it became a realistic pursuit and I took the plunge. It has not been easy and I have had to turn down a few good films because they would not meet my equipment rate...or in two cases even consider using my equipment.
This is beginning to sound a bit like yes you should/no you shouldn't. Unfortunately there are no absolutes but hopefully my thoughts will help you, in some small way, choose a path which will lead to your goal.
"Can you tell me something about shooting Fuji 16mm Film?"
The days of the green Fuji stock are long gone. That was true about 10-15 years ago but certainly is not the case anymore.
Comparing Kodak and Fuji you will get a warming effect in underexposure with Kodak and with Fuji your underexposed areas will remain very neutral. You will get a slight tendency on both stocks to Magenta on heavy overexposure...this can generally be corrected out but should be avoided if shooting and releasing on 16mm.
I have used Fuji stocks, almost exclusively, for the past 8 years and find them very consistent, fine grain and predictable.
Your choice of the F250 and F500 is certainly appropriate but I would look very carefully at all your locations and lighting availability before making a final choice. Obviously, the less grain you have going into the lab the less you will have coming out and with that in mind I would tend to lean toward slower stocks, perhaps the F125/F250 or F64/F125 combinations. This of, course, increases your lighting time and lighting requirements but will yield much better images given the 16/16 pathway you are likely to follow.
Overexposure to give a good solid dense negative is definitely the best route. The new stocks, particularly 35mm, allow very heavy overexposure without loss of detail in the highlights. 16mm follows this trend but not to quite the same extent.
I generally overexpose anywhere from 1/2 - 1 stop BUT I do tend to keep my lighting ratio's, in most situations, fairly tight...meaning the ratio between highlight and shadow is relatively low. Once I have set my ratio's, lighting to a given stop, I will then allow for the overexposure. The advantage is good density, lower grain, great shadow detail and greater ability to control contrast build-up through the interpos/release print stage.
A tool you might consider using, to help acheive a flat negative, is the Arriflex Varicon. I use this constantly as it has the same effect as flashing the negative...only you can "custom" flash every scene by simply adjusting the unit.
The Varicon allows you to dig into the shadows and obtain enormous detail without fill light and it also works well digging into dark green trees on day exteriors...it has absolutely no effect on the image anywhere but in the shadows.
Keep in mind through all this that I do not know the story, have not read the script and do not know your intended visual style. Perhaps a flat negative is not the way to go...maybe you are going for a high contrast, saturated blacks and deep colored look....all I can do is provide you with some generalized guidelines.
The Fuji stocks are very good and you need not fear any surprizes given you understand your approach and the parameters of each stock you choose.
This was one of my favorites....."In 25 words or less...why do films look different?"
Different looks for different scripts....that's the work of the Cinematographer, the Production Designer, Wardrobe and Make-Up. Every story has a different canvas on which it should be painted. It is the job of the DP to light, filter and photograph the film in such a way as to give it a realistic appearance to help engage the audience in the story and to help tell the story.
For example, say we have a film which is set in 18th Century Antwerp and is the story of a young pauper boy who is a talented painter. His hero is Rubens, the Flemish painter, and the boy struggles to be recognized.
This film may be shot in the style of the Flemish painters and my inspirations would come primarily from the works of Rubens and Breughel. Based on research into the period I would use lots of wood fires, gas and oil lamps and smoke...it was a very smokey time as there was no electricity. All this will help acheive the textural and lighting qualities of the old Masters paintings. Add to this the sets, locations, wardrobe, hair, make-up, etc and you can imagine the scenes taking on a very realistic feel without ever seeing an image....now...it's our job to get that feeling and mood onto the screen.
This film would have an obviously different "looK" to a contemporary romantic comedy which would be quite different to a hi-tech space film.
"Have you worked with really mean actors?"
I have worked with many famous actors (male and female) and with no exceptions they have all been wonderful. Actors are just like anyone else...people doing a job. I do not treat them any differently and I certainly do not bow down before them.....we are all equal. I have found, over the years actors respect the fact that you do not treat them as special and as a result they are much more relaxed and open and friendly. I have heard horror stories about some of the people I have worked with prior to shooting only to find they have been extremely nice and very professional.....I have no terrible stories.
Menu ||
Consulting ||
In Print ||
Hi-Definition ||
Archives || Resume ||
Awards ||
History || News ||
Cameras ||
Reviews ||
Books ||
FAQ ||Gallery ||
E-Mail