American Cinematographer - March 2012 - 70

In addition to the film’s cramped cottage location, De Paula had to contend with night exteriors while working with a small lighting package. “This was one of the strongest points I made in my argument for shooting film,” he says. “Film would enable us to do faster setups on location, and I could really dig into the shadows.”

a good fit for the look we wanted, because we were after a claustrophobic feel with a minimal, naturalistic lighting style. The story called for fairly dark environments, and the budget meant that our lighting package would be quite small. This was one of the strongest points I made in my argument for shooting film: film would enable us to do faster setups on location, and I could really dig into the shadows. An example of this was a scene we shot at dusk under a lot of foliage from nearby trees. The light was fading very quickly, and I didn’t want the actors to lose the rhythm of the scene, so instead of switching from the film stock we were using, Vision2 200T 5217, to a faster one, Vision3 500T 5219, I carried on shooting,
70 March 2012

knowing that the information would still be there on the negative. Although I was underexposed by as much as 2 or 3 stops, the rushes proved me right. Under these extreme lighting conditions, I knew where the exposure would be on the negative, and I knew how I could manipulate that information later on in post. Had I shot that scene on a digital format, I probably would have spent time playing with the settings in the camera’s menus, compromising the look while slowing the production down and losing the available light. Also, I have found that although digital cameras, especially the latest ones, are very good at seeing in low-light conditions, the resultant image can have digital
American Cinematographer

noise and other artifacts. Many times I find it hard to rescue information from the blacks when color correcting a digitally originated image. At the time we started prepping Don’t Let Him In, I wasn’t happy with the noise and quality of the blacks we could get from a Red One shooting at our low light levels. As we began seeing our rushes during the shoot, everyone was really thrilled about the look of the picture. They realized film had been the right choice. In post, it was a huge advantage to be able to go back to the negative, color correct on the latest Baselight system in front of a 14' screen, and have all of that picture information in the negative. In the end, we produced a picture that has the look and style we envisioned from day one. It’s worth repeating: cinematographers are responsible for the look of the stories we shoot, and we should be given full responsibility when it comes to choosing the format. In Kelly’s own words, “The decision to shoot on 16mm [gave the movie] a richness and depth that digital video hasn’t simulated yet. The [result] will look a lot more expensive than it really was.” I want to believe that I can continue to choose the proper formats for the projects I shoot. It is one of the many creative decisions cinematographers make, and it is crucial to the success of our work. ●

American Cinematographer - March 2012

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Cinematographer - March 2012