American Cinematographer - December 2008 - (Page 16)

Tomorrow’s Technology ASC’s Tech Committee Outlines Critical Issues by Stephanie Argy and Richard Edlund, ASC In 1913, a group of motionpicture cameramen in Los Angeles began meeting to talk about the most pressing technical issues facing them at work, particularly the static electricity that was building up in their handcranked cameras and causing the film to fog. This group became known as the Static Club, and in 1918, they united with the Cinema Camera Club from New York to form the American Society of Cinematographers. The ASC Technology Committee is in some ways a return to the spirit of the Static Club. At committee meetings, ASC members and associate members, vendors, manufacturers, scientists and other interested parties examine, discuss and help shape new technologies related to motion pictures. Over the six years of the committee’s existence, those conversations have grown dramatically more complex and far-reaching. The Technology Committee is really a collection of subcommittees, each of which sifts through the latest technological developments in a given area and determines which have merit. The Camera Subcommittee, for example, arranges tests and hosts presentations about new cameras; these have included the Dalsa Evolution, the Panavision Genesis, the Thomson Grass Valley Viper FilmStream, the Arri D-21, and the Red One. Meanwhile, the Digital Intermediate Subcommittee developed and published the ASC Color Decision List, which is a way to transfer color-correction information between various applications. The Technology Committee includes representatives of all the most important vendors and manufacturers, 16 December 2008 who are able to take cinematographers’ input and apply it to products or services their companies are developing. In their day jobs, many of the vendors and manufacturers are in competition with one another, and they sometimes have sharply different ideas about how technology should be implemented. But in the same way that Samurai warriors would leave their swords at the door and sit down together to enjoy the aesthetics of a tea ceremony, there is, for the most part, an air of civility at Technology Committee meetings. On a day-to-day level, some of the most pivotal issues being addressed by the Technology Committee focus on workflow and how movies of the future will be envisioned, shot and finished. Previz applications are enabling filmmakers to plan scenes and compositions months before production starts, often before a cinematographer has even been hired. Who should be part of the previz process, and how soon should the cinematographer become involved? Are there dangers that decisions made in previz will get locked in without the cinematographer’s input? At the other end of the filmmaking process, the digital intermediate is changing the entire perception of who controls a movie’s final look. Unlike lab color timers, who were clearly working at the cinematographer’s behest, colorists have developed a much stronger role; in a very short time, some have become virtually equal contributors in the creation of a project’s look. What is the cinematographer’s responsibility in post? How long should the cinematographer stay involved? How can producers be induced to pay for extra weeks or months of the cinematographer’s time? Or will there come a time when cinematographers themselves become colorists? Many cinematographers use the colorist as a bridge to a technology they’re not yet entirely familiar with, but in the future, will there be cinematographers who actually run the interface knobs the way film editors run their own non-linear editing systems? Related to the DI is another of the Technology Committee’s pressing concerns: archiving digital media. There is a danger that the data captured on digital productions or created through the DI process could become “digital nitrate” (in the words of committee member Garrett Smith) because there are currently no standards for digital archiving and asset management. Studios have cobbled together their own approaches, and at the moment, the plan is to “migrate” digital material from one format to a newer one. But the time and money required to do this on a large scale makes it impractical in the long run. At various points in motionpicture history, there have been transitions so dramatic that the entire filmmaking process was affected — the introduction of sound, for example. Now we face what might be the biggest, most rapidly evolving shift yet, and the playing field is level because no one has decades of experience in this new world. Looking back, we imagine those previous transitions as exciting times, but the filmmakers who experienced them probably found them confusing and disruptive. In all those situations, certain people stepped up to guide the development of the new technology and shape the future of filmmaking. That’s the opportunity the ASC Technology Committee offers to those willing to get involved. For more information, visit the ASC Web site: www.theasc.com. I http://www.theasc.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of American Cinematographer - December 2008

American Cinematographer - December 2008 Contents Editor’s Note Short Takes: True Blood Titles Tomorrow’s Technology Production Slate: Closer to Truth A High Price for Progress Rags to Riches 1-Man Riot Squad The State of the Art: An Update Post Focus: Deluxe New York New Products & Services International Marketplace Classified Ads Ad Index 2008 AC Index ASC Membership Roster Clubhouse News ASC Close-Up: Donald McAlpine

American Cinematographer - December 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.