MattHawkins Online - Film Making Forum

I highly believe that cinematographers are VERY under appreciated. Why, if you agree, do you think this is? If not, where do you think they should stand, and why? I mean, what's the deal?

Well just a quick response, will give a more detailed one later.

cinematographers are already very appreciated, in professional crew set ups they are the most highly paid of all the camera ops. Those full time cinematographers are earning more than almost any other technical crew member. Why is there names not in 'lights' like a Director's or an actors? Well why should they be? There job is to assist the Director in telling his story through helping the director (with expertise beyond any other in this field) of doing so through visual aspects comprising of the 'type' of shots, style of shots and style of lighting. Like any other crew member (sound or camera op) there is artistry involved, and in that respect they are as much an artist as many crew members (more so arguably) but they are not the principle artist - neither the storytellar themselves nor the performer.

Naturally folk also call themselves cinematographer (self-knighted) but to become a real cinematographer takes years, and in those years their 99% rising through the camera chain of command (and there not the types to cry over the lack of public audience spotlights hehe)

So thats the deal

Are you talking about appreciation from other filmmakers or from the public audience? Like how a person is more likely to know who Wes Anderson is rather than Robert Yeoman.

Cinematograph-anything, has been getting on my nerves.

Personally I think the best film is one where you don't need credits or a superstar, because the story and the characters are believable.

Cinematographers ARE under-rated. At the end of some movies i say 'If only they had some better angles' and normally 'if only they had some better cuts'. Editors and Cinematographers should work together to create a happy little place i like to call 'heaven'.

Yes, I meant outside of the film set.

I'm not sure I follow the argument. To the general public, only really the directors and actors are truly "appreciated". The guys are feel most sorry for are the rotoscopers.

Is there a real cinematographer even out there who whines about the lack of public 'appreciation'?

lol to be honest its usually just students calling themselves cinematographers (and not just cinematographers) that moan in general about lack of so called public appreciation.

I just don't think the avarge person knows what they really do so its just another name in the credits but most film people do appresate them.

If you watch Resident Evil: Apocalypse, you can see that they use like 1000 angles a minute and i think that is to hide that they don't have many AWESOME angles. Thats what I mainly hate about that movie, if it were the same as the original, i would absolutely cream over it.

Lawriejaffa wrote:Is there a real cinematographer even out there who whines about the lack of public 'appreciation'?

lol to be honest its usually just students calling themselves cinematographers (and not just cinematographers) that moan in general about lack of so called public appreciation.

That's not the discussion, I'm sure cinematographers couldn't care less about the attention and appreciation, but as an admirer, I'd like to see them get a heck of a lot more credit.

Why? As Lawrie said before, their job is to collaborate with the director to bring their vision to the screen. It's ultimately the director's decision where the camera is placed, how many are used, whether to shoot in slow motion, the color schemes, etc. It's a job that neither calls for attention or requires public admiration. Does the fact that nobody really knows who Gregg Toland is really that much of an injustice?

Besides, it'd just be wierd to see an hour long E! special on Conrad Hall...

So if you're looking for any kind of fame for your work, you picked the wrong job to go after.

Yep definately - Sgt Padrino hehe

However Gyro you could always pose nude and dance the can can on youtube - that'll get you attention - phwoar! hehe

Okay, nevermind, you guys are absolutely right. They don't deserve any credit at all.

Talented cinematographers get the credit they deserve within the filmmaking community. Anything more than that is completely unnecessary, so don't go getting all huffy on us.

Well, again, if you ask me they're highly under appreciated, and that's my opinion.

Gyro wrote:Okay, nevermind, you guys are absolutely right. They don't deserve any credit at all.

There there! You were the one who sparked the debate! Don't go running to mother when people disagree with you, because some people actually might.

I personally think there are loads of areas of film making that deserve more credit. Films are a team effort after all.

But yeah, from my experience of the film industry (i.e. listening to my dad waffle on after a days work) cinematographers get a whole ton of credit inside the industry.

But people aren't going to watch a film just because the shots might be nice. I think the Dogma films (not the Kevin Smith 'Dogma' in case people think I'm talking about that) proved that people will watch a film if the story/direction/cast are good, regardless of how a shot is framed or the lighting etc...

But yeah, I could go on. Most people don't even actually care who makes films and those who do care will care about the right people.

The general public might not understand the term "cinematography" in particular detail, but amongst the industry cinematography is a highly revered art. Surely that's the important thing.

*pats gyro's head*

Don't worry about all those nasty boys on the thread one day cinematographers will be known the world over...

Like everyone I'm always pretty happy and excited when I get any sort of recognition, but if I never did get any (as little as I do) I'd still be happy. I'm making movies because it's my artistic expression, and although most of the stuff I'm doing is comedy, there is always and underlining message that comes from my point of view on a subject.

To me it's mostly actors who get the most recognition. You can ask a regular Joe who Steven Speilberg is and they know, but as big as Ridley Scott is in the industry, that regular Joe is less likely to even know who he is. Recently I've been saying to some of my friends (when the conversations of movies comes up) how excited I am for P.T. Anderson's new movie and they have no clue who I'm talking about.

right Kenter... ill talk about M. night (well hes known) but ill use some DPs name or composer and they all call me a freak..


one day, THEY WILL LEARN!!!! muhaha

I think silent hill was one of the most artistic films i have seen. It had either really good cinematography or lighting, i wasn't paying much attention, but everything just looked so cool.