Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: Ask David Mullen ANYTHING

Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 573 FirstFirst 123456781454104504 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 5728
  1. #31  
    Senior Member Casey Green's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,090
    Hi David - thanks for the opportunity to learn.

    I was curious what your experience has been like with the Directors you have worked with over the years... as far as how well they have truly understood the technical details of the cameras and lenses that were being used on a project and how important/unimportant that was during the making of the film.

    As an aspiring Director of features, I am trying to learn as much as possible (technically) as well as keep the story and actors at the highest priority. So I have often wondered just how much is expected of the Director from a DP's perspective. Since all Directors will have their own unique strengths and talents (as well as weaknesses), I would imagine there would be quite a range in this area...

    any stories about this "from the trenches" would also be appreciated.

    thanks again,
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by David Mullen ASC View Post
    ...At the other end of the scale, there might be some smaller tungstens, like Dedolights or Peppers.

    I will second David's suggest here. I love the Dedolight 150 series sources. Their 25:1 spot to flood ratio and really even coverage makes them one of the most useful tungsten sources that I have ever had the privilege of using. Take a look at their photometric data and you will quickly learn that they have a lot more usable punch than anything else in their power range. Their very small physical size make them ideal in situations where no other fixture would work.

    The Peppers are great too, but I consider the Dedo's nearly essential on almost every project that I lens.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #33  
    Junior Member scriptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    10
    David thank you for your answer that just exactly what i want to know
    ++
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #34  
    Senior Member Dan Blanchett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles & the World
    Posts
    661
    Quote Originally Posted by David Mullen ASC View Post
    If you are determined to use very low levels of available light, like for night exteriors or candlelight scenes, you should get some high-speed lenses (T/2 and faster.)
    Thanks for the feedback. Hopefully I'll be in a position to rent some higher speed primes when needed. (if I can't swing getting the RED primes, that is)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #35  
    David, thanks for the opportunity to pester you. Can you talk for a minute about the ASC. How you got in, what it means for you professionally and personally and the path a young cinematographer can follow to help him achieve this level.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #36  
    Hi Mr. Mullen,

    I know there have been a lot of questions so I don't expect this to be answered. That said, I am hoping to one day (a long ways away from now considering I'm a first year University student) become a DP. I do own a copy of Cinematography which I believe you had a large role in writing and while there is a huge wealth of information which I have gleaned a ton from, I feel that I am not at the level of knowledge yet where I can advance further in the book than where I am. I am stuck on the film stock section. I am having difficulty understanding how the stock related to light and ties into how you judge what lights to use at what intensities etc etc.

    So basically, I am wondering if there might happen to be a book or resource you might be able to recommend I read before that that is perhaps a little more general so that I can better understand the concepts put forth in Cinematography. I hope to take a course this summer on lighting but that depends on my work and how much time I have. Thanks a lot for taking the time to answer people's questions! Oh and I have to agree on The Fountain. That film was absolutely beautiful. Incredible work. And Children of Men was very powerful for me and I believe that was due to the way in which the camera work followed the scene. What was done made me feel like I was there. Anyways, my humble 2 cents!
    Yash Keough
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #37  
    Casey,
    As a director, you will probably delve as deep into any subject as your intellectual curiosity drives you to, regardless of exactly how practical everything you learn is. I love researching about obsolete film processes like 3-strip Technicolor, Cinerama, Autochromes, etc. Don't know the real value in that, but it's interesting to me. How much you need to learn technically sort of depends on what you'll be trying to do, with what equipment, and if you'll be doing it on your own or not. Even among DP's, there are different depths of knowledge - I know one DP who does his own densitometry readings of his negatives while another does his own lens collimination work. This is sort of deeper than I necessarily want to go. Ultimately all that matters is the quality of the work you do. As you shoot more, you'll find more areas that you want to study and explore, while other areas may seem less and less important over time.

    What I encourage any filmmaker to do is develop their ability to previsualize, to develop a visual imagination, and find ways of conveying emotion and story information through images. Learning the technical stuff is useless if you don't have a creative idea to express using that knowledge.
    ___

    Chris,
    Getting into the ASC: It's an honorary society, membership by invitation only. You need letters of recommendation from three ASC members, then your credits, work are reviewed by a commitee who also interviews you. If they all vote for you, then your name is passed to the Board of Governors, if they vote for you, your name is posted to the general membership; anyone who objects has thirty days to do so, and if no one does, then you're invited and you have to pay a membership fee.

    Honestly, I felt I was a bit young and my credits were small to be attempting to join at the time, but I was encouraged to go through the process -- they were looking for new faces that had a passion for cinematography, not just to do it, but to teach and talk and promote it. So my work combined with my writings on cinematography, my research, and my occasional lectures and teaching about it, weighed in my favor. I think it also impressed them that I had written an entire index to the 1970's issues of American Cinematographer magazine. Also, "Northfork" had just come out at the time, which was some of my best work ever. And a lot of members knew me from the time I was a film student pestering them with questions -- even if they didn't know my name, they knew me as the kid who seemed to have memorized a decade's worth of American Cinematographer articles.

    Myself, along with a few other DP's, sort of represent the indie feature wing of the ASC...

    Obviously I'm honored and flattered to be in there. The best thing is chatting with my heroes -- the last meeting, I had a nice talk with Richard Edlund about "Star Wars"; we also share an interest in Japanese cinema.

    ___

    Yash,
    In terms of simpler intro books than "Cinematography", I'm not sure if there are any noticably simpler, though you may find how someone else explains things to be easier to understand -- maybe Blain Brown's book, for example, or the Ascher book. Otherwise, I'd probably read some basic intro to photography books, since the principles are the same regarding film speed, shutter speed, f-stop, etc. I think I started with the old Upton Photography textbook, but also the Ansel Adams series too.
    David Mullen, ASC
    Los Angeles
    http://www.davidmullenasc.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #38  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    1,756
    David, I have a particularly odd question for you.

    I'm flirting with a little business venture which requires either a fresh new idea and design.... Or re-hatching an old one for further use.

    I won't get into particualrs so forgive me for asking this question in such a vague sense but........

    What focus chart and or shape (if any) would be the most or atleast seldomly useful one to be printed on an object that is 3" x 3" 1/2 ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #39  
    Don't really know. Maybe the center of a Seimens Star chart would still be useful at that size? Probably not. The only reason I can think of for such a tiny focus chart would be testing MTF of macro lenses maybe...
    David Mullen, ASC
    Los Angeles
    http://www.davidmullenasc.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #40  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    1,756
    That's what I was thinking, thanks David!
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts