You may wonder why there are some directors
who maintain the same visual style throughout
their entire filmography, while other directors
have a catalogue of movies with a mishmash
of aesthetics.
Likewise, some cinematographers stick to their
signature style, while others mix up their
style depending on the director, script or
genre they’re working with.
So exactly how much influence does the DOP
and the director have on how a film ends up
looking?
In this video I’ll attempt to answer that
question by looking at the traditional roles
of the director and the cinematographer, analyse
directors with a set visual style versus a
fluid style, and look at case studies from
popular films to see examples of how different
directors collaborate with different DPs.
If you’d like to get these and other videos
early and also support the channel at the
same time I’ve started a Patreon page which
I’ll link in the description.
Part of the difficulty of assigning a definitive
label of who has visual creative control on
a film comes from the fact that filmmaking
is a collaborative process.
No cinematographer, or director for that matter,
can claim sole responsibility for all the
images in a film.
Visuals are created through a combination
of working with a director, a production designer,
a grip, a make-up artist, a focus puller,
a gaffer and many more.
Each person on set has their own little imprint
upon creating the images which we finally
see on screen.
To simplify things however let’s go over
a list of some of the traditional roles assigned
to a director and a DOP, then look at what
roles they tend to collaborate together on.
A director’s job is to take a screenplay
and to translate that into a fully formed
film.
This requires a large skillset.
They usually have control over: casting actors,
controlling the overall tone or mood of the
movie, crafting performances from the on-screen
talent, controlling the edit, and making key
storytelling decisions.
A DOPs role is traditionally more technical.
They control: selecting technical gear within
a budget, overseeing the technical setup and
shooting of scenes, and delegating how each
scene is lit.
Some aspects of visual storytelling which
directors and DPs typically collaborate on
include: storyboarding or shot selection,
camera movement, production design, the framing
of each shot and the colour grade.
It’s important to note that none of these
roles are set in stone.
Directors occupy a spectrum between those
wanting to control the cinematography versus
those who do not.
Some directors like to take a very hands on
approach, even going so far as to operate
the camera themselves or to dictate exactly
what brand of lenses must be used.
Other directors are only focused on performances
and storytelling and let the cinematographer
decide everything else.
Realistically, most directors fall somewhere
in the middle of the spectrum, where they
are concerned with crafting a particular look
for the film, yet leave it to the expertise
of their cinematographer to achieve that look.
Just as some DOP’s adopt a specific, trademark
style, others can change their approach completely
depending on what the story is.
The same is true of directors: some maintain
a set style, whilst others are more fluid
in how they create images across different
films.
An example of a director/DP duo who have maintained
a set style over various projects are Wong
Kar-Wai and Christopher Doyle.
Most of their films are set in the vividly
coloured neon world of Hong Kong.
Throughout their work together they have utilised
similar stylistic techniques such as: shooting
at a low frame rate and step printing frames,
using rough, visceral handheld camera work
and embracing practical lighting.
An example of a director less bound to a singular
visual style, who has taken a more fluid approach
over his career is Martin Scorsese.
He’s worked with many different DOP’s,
each with their own lighting style and cinematic
approach.
He’s used different stylistic techniques
and, as technology has changed throughout
his career, he’s embraced this change visually,
using every medium from black and white 35mm
film to 3D digital capture.
Generally speaking, I think that when there’s
a strong, lengthy working relationship between
a director and a cinematographer, a visual
style will begin to form naturally.
Conversely, a director who bounces from cameraman
to cameraman between projects may find that
their films have less of a singularly coherent
visual style.
Of course this isn’t always the case.
With this in mind, let’s look at two case
studies of different directors and analyse
how they collaborate with their cinematographers.
Although known primarily for their work with
Roger Deakins, the Coen brothers are a duo
who have worked with different DPs over their
career, usually when Deakins has been unavailable
due to a scheduling clash.
They’ve worked with other DOPs such as Barry
Sonnenfeld, Emmanuel Lubezki and Bruno Delbonnel.
Let’s compare No Country For Old Men, shot
by Deakins, and Inside Llewyn Davis, shot
by Delbonnel, to see how using different cinematographers
can result in two stylistically distinct films.
I think the Coen Brothers are a good example
of directors whose visuals fall in the middle
of the spectrum.
They carefully control the selection and movement
of every shot in the film by storyboarding
the entire film in pre-production before the
first day of shooting.
Lens-wise they also know what they like.
They like shooting on wide angle spherical
lenses, particularly a 27mm.
So, when Delbonnel arrived to shoot the project,
a large part of the cinematography had already
been planned by the directors.
If this is the case then why does Inside Llewyn
Davis look so different from many of the other
Coen Brothers films shot by Deakins?
A lot of it comes down to their different
lighting approaches.
Delbonnel is known for creating extremely
soft, single source light.
“My signature is a source with double diffusion,
and sometimes I do triple diffusion.
Then, I add a little fill inside, or not.
If I do, it’s very soft, and it’s usually
a [polystyrene bounce] or something simple.
I rarely use hard lighting.”
Deakins on the other hand tends to create
many planes of contrast across his images
by using multiple fixtures to create different
pockets of light and shadow.
Unlike Delbonnel, Deakins blends using both
soft light, with gentle shadows, and hard
light, with defined, sharp shadows.
Another difference between their two styles
is how they treat the grade.
Delbonnel worked with his colourist, Pete
Doyle, to achieve a cold, destaurated, pastel
look.
He sucked some of the saturation out by removing
the blue channel from the RGB curve so that
the skin tones would still retain some life.
Across all the images he also added Delbonnel’s
classic ‘bloom’, diffusion effect, which
suffused the highlights with a soft texture,
giving images the feeling that they were shot
on old, uncoated vintage glass.
Deakins’ approach to the grade was a bit
more conventional.
He prefers a sharp image, undiffused, with
good levels of contrast and a filmic saturation.
So, the Coen Brothers maintained the core
feeling of their style by controlling the
shot selection, framing and camera movement,
yet by using different DPs the look and quality
of the image in the two films were clearly
influenced by the respective styles of the
cinematographers who shot them.
While different DPs working for the same director
can produce different styles of images, some
directors work with different DPs yet are
able to maintain a very similar visual style
throughout their work.
Zhang Yimou is one of those directors.
Let’s compare two of his ‘wuxia’ genre
films, ‘House of Flying Daggers’ shot
by Zhao Xiaoding and ‘Hero’ photographed
by Christopher Doyle.
Zhang’s early ‘wuxia’ films are known
in particular for their rich colour palettes.
Both films have lush, precisely controlled
production design, where everything, from
the costume of the characters down to the
colour of the exterior locations is carefully
considered.
Although some scenes include a mixed palette,
many of the scenes in these two films are
designed with a more monochromatic, singular
colour palette.
Unlike the Coen Brothers case study, the lighting
approach taken by Zhang’s DPs are similar
in both films.
The colour in his films comes from the mise-en-scene,
or design of the setting, rather than from
the lighting, which is well exposed and soft,
with few shadows, and naturalistic in nature.
Even the choice of gear by the two cinematographers
followed a similar pattern.
Both were shot on Super 35 with Kodak film
stocks on Cooke prime lenses and zoom lenses
when necessary.
Both films use a lot of long focal lengths
which compresses the background, creates a
shallow depth of field and isolates the subject.
The operation of the two cameras also follows
‘wuxia’ cinematic conventions.
They pan and tilt on a grounded fluid head
to follow the action and keep the actors in
frame as much as possible.
A lot of the framing, such as the use of high,
top down angles, and central framing of characters,
particularly in close ups, seems to be influenced
by Zhang’s cinematic taste.
Some directors are therefore able to maintain
a similar cinematic style between films despite
collaborating with different cinematographers.
There’s a good reason that many famous directors
have formed long partnerships with their DOPs.
The more you work together as a team, the
stronger the bond of trust, familiarity and
likemindedness will become.
As cinematographers our job is to be fluid
and comfortable enough to take different director’s
visions and replicate them visually.
Creating images with a director should always
be an exchange of ideas: whether you’re
suggesting a wardrobe colour, a new shot,
a focal length or a specific lighting style,
always remember that you’re being hired
as much for your visual perspective as for
your role as a technician overseeing the camera
and lights.
Building a strong bond with a director through
prolonged conversation will help you to better
understand their artistic preferences and
what kind of role they want you to occupy.
Some of the most experienced directors and
DOPs that I’ve worked on set with reach
a stage of communication where it becomes
unnecessary to talk generally about what needs
to be shot, as they know exactly what the
other’s cinematic preference is without
even having to even say it.
In this case, creating the look on set is
a matter of refining the vision rather than
attempting to find it in the first place.
This is a great position to be in as a DOP
on set, where the general vision for the film
is already figured out between you and the
director before the camera rolls on its first
frame.
I’d just like to personally thank those
viewers who have signed up to Patreon already.
Your support really helps me to continue to
make these videos as regularly as possible.
Until next time, thanks for watching, and
goodbye.
