The photographed world is topsy turvy, perhaps never more so than when its background falls out of focus, leaving you or just your eyes the only delineated point in a universe become theatre. If the history of cinema is a history of characters in their surroundings, then it is necessarily also a history of depth of field. Always subject to changing fashions and technological innovations, the digital era now threatens to suck the art right out of the question. Who are all those winsome people lurking against blurry urban landscapes? Why does the world defer to them? Could they cope in a deep-focus world?
If people like the budding “filmmaker” below had their way, our world would hardly be in focus at all (a circumstance which would be greeted with relief by many architecture critics).
RE: what camera should i use…
I am currently in development/pre-production on my debut 3D digital feature that american elsewhere, a romantic comedy/tech espionage thriller set in 2011-12 Palo Alto and at a late 90s anti-globalization protest. I am directing, producing and playing the lead role!
Only thing is i’m going crazy trying to figure out which camera to use ’cause I AM A SHALLOW DEPTH OF FIELD MANIAC!!!!
There is no written down script at this juncture but settings include:
-An organic food supermarket
-The concept store of well known computer manufacturer
-Meet cute city park/main street etc.
I’ve been collecting cameras during the pre-prod period and now own two (for 3d, duh!!!!!) of each of:
-Panavision Panaflex Millennium XL
-Bolex (thought it was a piece o’ crap ‘till i got it 70mm converted lol)
-Canon 1d mk4, 5d, 7d, 660d
-Nikon (can’t think of the name)
-Sony F3, F5
-leica S2 (would be awesome if it had video…firmware update pls?!?!
-iphone 5 (ok so i got connections ;-)…)
and I don’t want to use lights or anything just run and gun (I’ve tested up to iso 12800 and i.q. is still better than 35mm!!!!).
I have a ton of lenses and just tape them wide open at 1.2 or 0.9 (my Leica noctilux). Sometimes with the 1.2 like the person’s eye will be in focus AND also there eyelash — you guys know if this means the lens is FUBAR? It’s rillly frustrating if you want that SHALLOW DEPTH OF FIELD look WHICH SPELLS C-I-N-E-M-A.
Also do any of you guys know if upgrading to os x lion will give me SHALLOWER DEPTH OF FIELD?
Alsoo, anyone know if i can still get a Dogma certificate if I use my sweet slider rig for some shots? Same thing with variable ND filter?
Thing is principal photography starts tomorrow so ASAP would be good, ok?
BTW, you guys ever think about how good citizen kane (1941) would be if O.W. had known about SHALLOW DEPTH OF FIELD?
peace y’all and check out my dope test reel below
(btw, i did this indie imagemakers visioning retreat last weekend out half moon bay way and they did this AMAZING exercise where first you meditate an adverb and then an adjective like of how a critic would describe your movie i was totally blank and thought i’d wasted the 10 grand and then right at the end before the guru clapped his hands i had this vision: “HAUNTINGLY WINSOME”
livin’ the dream/stayin’ positive
payin’ the lease to keep the peace,