Mike Jones Digital Basin
screen media rinse cycle

The film look is a Crock - response and clarification

Whilst I certainly appreciate the large amount of traffic my previous post has generated and the profuse comments left here and elsewhere, I must say I am rather bemused....

I find myself reading many of the comments and wondering if some of you actually Read the post beyond the provocative title....?

It seems many of you have taken umbridge by perceiving my perspective as being that "no one should use shallow-focus"

let me be clear by a simple re-quoting the sections from my original post that many seemed to have missed...

"Any visual technique used by a filmmaker is simply a tool leveraged for an aesthetic story-telling purpose.... The effectiveness, impact and worth of any given technique a filmmaker employs is derived from its suitability to the context of the film. In simple terms, does the technique match the story..?"

Thus my concern prompting the  post is that far too many indie-filmmakers are going for ultra-shallow DOF and using Rack focus NOT because these techniques suit the story or are the right Tools; but simply because they think it 'looks' better or will make their film feel more 'professional'.

The issue is as I then said... "If a single aesthetic choice becomes so dominant and common and ubiquitous across all genre's of filmmaking, regardless of the creative problems posed by individual films, then it ceases to be grounded technique - it becomes stale, meaningless, banal, a default position rather than a creative choice."

As a result we have a whole generation of filmmakers who measure their aesthetic mark by how shallow their focus can be and how often they can Rack-Focus their shots. NOT by whether such techniques are the Best or even a Good solution to their creative problems.

Thus I wrote..."the problem is not Shallow and Rack Focus unto themselves as techniques but rather that they are not used as deft Tools and problem solving Options."

Let me re-iterate to avoid further misguided bile aimed my way... Rack focus and Shallow DoF is great when it's used for the right reasons. But like any technique, when it's overused and/or misused without careful consideration of what would service the story best, then we have a problem.

This problem is one I believe to be prevalent across all bands of filmmaking; from indie to big-budget.

This problem is suffocating cinema's visual language. It's the equivalent of having a whole dictionary of words but everyone is choosing to use only those that start with 'A'.

We have let Shallow and Rack-Focus techniques become aspirational 'ideals' rather than options and possibilities.

Before you urge yourself to protest once more let me pose you a question... The last time you shot a scene using Shallow / Rack-Focus techniques did you actually consider what other options might be available to you and the shot? Did you try other techniques? Did you experiment with staging and positioning for different effects? Did you ask yourself what would suit best the scene from a character, story or audience perspective...? Or did you just go for Shallow/Rack because it 'looks cool'...?  Because you 'Like it' or Because 'that's just the way things are done'....?

This is not a disparaging personal comment on you or your films (i havent seen them), it's just a self-evaluative question for any indie filmmaker to ask.

Indeed might I suggest that the simple questions "How else might I do this...?' and 'What other possibilities are there...?" is the very beating soul of all art. If you're not asking yourself these 2 questions then you are not an artist...

---

There was one comment in particular left by one Neil Samuels on a different website - but directed at my post - that part of me felt a need to reply too... Only I couldn't quite work out what the f#@k he was going on about...? It seems he might be intimating that I'm a vision-only 'Director' and my post is somehow being critical and disparaging of  'crew' and 'technical' positions who actually 'make' films happen... Thats an interesting left-field take on my post. Even more bizare since  my own experience is 15 odd years in technical and post-production and that I'm not a diretcor (on anything but some small persoanl projects). Owing my living to editing, shooting and post-production jobs I can hardly be accused of being 'director' centric... Im baffled how Mr Samuels could re-mix my post about over-used camera techniques in indie cinema into an attack on non-directors that he seems to have taken very personally...

If any one can fully decipher Mr Samuel's rant below please let me know :)

"You may be deliberately provocative all you want. What you are really trying to do is to look down your nose at those of us who create the films you put your name on. These techniques and many others are the technical foray from which those of us who do the work as opposed to those of you who claim to have this"Vision" create what is the essence of film or motion pictures. Because you have the money or have gotten someone to put up the money makes you a pimp to a story. We, on the other hand the thousands of independent technicians and filmmakers who really do make the films, are left with a meager paycheck and a small line on the back end of a film almost no one ever sees.

Your provocation which may or may not be as self serving as it appears is in all apparent likelihood nothing but some jackal who thinks his bowels have the scent of roses. Just for the record you pompous idiot, without us you would have nothing. Because your supposed talent would be nothing but a figment of your fertile and misguided imagination. You too we're just where we were but a few short films ago. trying to create a feature film with next to, or no budget. The only difference between you and us is the size of your overblown ego. I think you have forgotten what real work is for the love of the art. Instead you are now a critique of the people that innovate and actually care about the projects we make. Hmm...That's why we're independent filmmakers. Now perhaps; Being deliberately provocative, you could tell us why your such a jackass!!!"

Posted at 10:51AM Sep 28, 2009 by Mike Jones in moving image theory  |  Comments[6]