Shooting formats – how important?

Friday, October 9th, 2009 at 12:29 pm

I’m pretty certain that our two next features, Death & Glory and The Murder of the Lake, will be shot in High-Definition video. There are countless HD shooting formats to select from (HDV, DVCPRO HD, RED, etc.) and I’m sure that, as opposed to film, a HD format will be a better fit for our production budget, type of shooting schedule and distribution/screening plans.

One of the first questions filmmakers generally ask when they first learn of a local or indie film being produced is “What did they shoot it on?” Which leads to the question - is the shooting format a part of the film or just an accessory to the film?

There’s probably no correct answer as viewing films is obviously not an exact science; no two opinions are identical. The definition of what makes a memorable film is not stuck in stone. For some people the look of the film is more important than what the film’s about. For others it’s all about characters, story, themes, etc. You might not be able to put up with fifteen minutes of my favorite Wim Wenders film.

Yet I sometime I feel that we filmmakers get far too preoccupied with such technical matters; first and foremost we are suppose to be telling a story. Not to mention that I’d wager that the majority of filmgoers (who in many cases have paid to see your film) could care less about your shooting format – they just want to see a film’s that in focus and has dialogue that they can hear properly without straining (no small feat sometimes for a low-budget indie). Audiences are thinking characters/plot and not how cool RED cameras are.

But for filmmakers it’s impossible for us to imagine such films not being forever linked to their format. For example, when I think of Mike Figgis’ Leaving Las Vegas I immediately think of the 16mm graininess. In that case I think the 16mm feel is an accessory to the film. But the digital video in David Lynch’s Inland Empire is definitely a part of that film, as integral to the story as the characters in it - it’s not remotely close to Lynch’s 35mm Blue Velvet. Another question would be to wonder if a film like Werner Herzog’s recent HD documentary, Encounters at the End of the World, would have a different feel if it had been shot on 16mm film like his documentaries of the 1980s? They probably do look somewhat different if you screened them side-by-side but isn’t Herzog all about the originality of the content? I’m pretty sure he could care less about what we filmmakers think about his shooting format. Herzog’s not making his films to be studied by professors in film school nor should he.

Share and Enjoy:

Tagged with: Arts • Bill Millios filmmaking nh death and glory • Blue Velvet • David Lynch • Filmmaking • Leaving Las Vegas • Movies • Werner Herzog • Wim Wenders

Filed under: Death & Glory/Animal Rights • Filmmaking • The Murder of the Lake

Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!

Matt Newton

Good post, Bill. I would argue, however, that much like the painter who chooses to create his art in oil, acrylic, or watercolor, the filmmaker's format choice is as important, and can play a factor (either positively or negatively) into the viewer's interpretation of the language of that work. Yes, budget variables can dictate the format, but ultimately a choice needs to be made, and I feel that image quality can deeply affect the outcome of the storytelling. How you shoot a scene in 35mm with quality lenses, which can have an impact on your depth-of-field and how you isolate a character from the background, says something very different than using a consumer-grade camera with less flexibility - the character and the background layers will feel more flat and more like the real world via the human eye - depending on what you're trying to say with that scene, the degree of character isolation from the background can mean two different things. To me, formats mean the difference between what the director intends and what is achieved.

No, you're right, I don't think that Herzog makes his films for film school professors, but those films allow film school professors to present a variety of filmmaking techniques to those working to learn the craft. A Herzog film is certainly not the same as a Spielberg film - and, in the opinion of this filmmaker, all film is meant to be read and interpreted. I certainly don't watch a film and go gaga over the type of camera that may have been used, but I feel I have a discerning eye for image quality and how it is used to push the story forward. I believe everything in the frame of the film should be intentional, and format/image quality should be just as conscious a decision as the blocking of a scene. Story is necessary, but we need to still remember that cinema is a visual art, and how the art affects one visually still has to be respected. Good or bad, image does impact story.

Re: filmgoers - ultimately, I agree, the story and execution is the key. However, I tend to give more credit to today's moviegoers to know whether or not they're watching something that's been made on the cheap, regardless of the story. Personally, the film could be shot completely on super 8mm and if it has good lighting, sound, story, editing, etc., I'm fine with it. But, the format needs to be seamless, like a good visual effect - if my attention is called to cheap-looking video, then I'm distracted, and even the best story in the world won't save it.

Love the blog - keep up the good work!

Shooting formats – how important?

Buy Dangerous Crosswinds DVD

Recent Posts

Archives