So we are arguing who actually controls the camera? From my understanding, physically its the camera man who may or may not be the cinematographer as the cinematographer may be directly instructing that person/camera man. But ultimately who controls it, back in the day before the Disney studio executives took over, I would guess it was the director. I can picture him sitting in his Directors chair with a sign saying "Director" on the back wearing a green baseball cap, right in front of him is a closed circuit live screen of the footage being shot. The cinematography may be excellent, present compelling material but ultimately it's the directors call, I don't see him/her outranking the director.
But that's only how I imagine it. What is he/she actually allowed to do in terms of taking control of a area that is not his/her speciality. I mean, it's really the cinematographer's responsibility to present the images, if the Director is micro managing what can be done? I'm guessing there'd be plenty of disputes, especially with a domineering Director.
Someone like James Cameron, who you'd think would get involved in all areas as he's multi skilled in film. Yes, so I would say generally the director isn't behind the physical camera but he's behind it all if you know what I mean.
But that's only how I imagine it. What is he/she actually allowed to do in terms of taking control of a area that is not his/her speciality. I mean, it's really the cinematographer's responsibility to present the images, if the Director is micro managing what can be done? I'm guessing there'd be plenty of disputes, especially with a domineering Director.
Someone like James Cameron, who you'd think would get involved in all areas as he's multi skilled in film. Yes, so I would say generally the director isn't behind the physical camera but he's behind it all if you know what I mean.
__________________
Thanks again, Mr Portridge.
Thanks again, Mr Portridge.