Why do people think directors shoot their films?

Tools    





I don't actually wear pants.
Among other things (like almost everything film-related), but they definitely do NOT shoot their films. That is why there is a cinematographer/director of photography; to shoot the film. Also, you can't shoot if you're in front of the camera, and some directors also act, while no cinematographer also acts in the films they shoot, thus further proving me right. Directors do not shoot their films; they tell the actors where to go, what to do when they get there, and how to do it. I don't know why people think directors do everything, especially shoot their films.
__________________
Thanks again, Mr Portridge.



You can't win an argument just by being right!
Some do but not many film makers wpecialise in all aspects of film making, and DoPs in particular are more likely to want to stick to their specialty because OMG it's my art.



I don't actually wear pants.
Some do but not many film makers wpecialise in all aspects of film making, and DoPs in particular are more likely to want to stick to their specialty because OMG it's my art.
That's not the director's job. In almost every film since the unions required full credit listings, you will see a DoP and a director credited, and 999,999,999 out of 1 billion, they are different people.

I really don't get why people think directors do everything. They don't.



Ridley Scott used to "operate" didn't he although I think as time went on he stopped doing that. I think Werner Herzog's the same. It came across to me, maybe even subliminally at first, that Herzog has one of the best eyes ever for setting up shots.



You can't win an argument just by being right!
That's not the director's job. In almost every film since the unions required full credit listings, you will see a DoP and a director credited, and 999,999,999 out of 1 billion, they are different people.

I really don't get why people think directors do everything. They don't.
Depends on the director. James Cameron knows more about anything to do with film making than even the specialists, according to someone I know who worked with him, but as I said, majority of DoPs stick to their specialty.



Among other things (like almost everything film-related), but they definitely do NOT shoot their films. ...
Most directors, plan out each shot and direct the cinematographer on what the director wants. The director will give directions as to the type of shot, the camera angle, the lens mm choice, the f stop setting, etc, etc. So most directors actually do 'shot' their own films.



You can't win an argument just by being right!
Most directors, plan out each shot and direct the cinematographer on what he/she wants. The director well give directions as to the type of shot, the angle, the lens mm choice, the f stop setting, etc, etc. So most directors actually do 'shot' their own films.
Interesting one there with soderbergh using pseudonyms

http://www.imdb.com/list/ls006826678/



Welcome to the human race...
Which "people" are you talking about? It certainly seems like the average user on here knows that there's a difference between a director and a DoP and understands that they either work together to inform one another's actions or are occasionally the same person.

A director may not "do" everything, but they still have to have a hand in everything in order to maintain control of it.
__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0



I don't actually wear pants.
Most directors, plan out each shot and direct the cinematographer on what the director wants. The director will give directions as to the type of shot, the camera angle, the lens mm choice, the f stop setting, etc, etc. So most directors actually do 'shot' their own films.
That's not the same thing. Telling someone how you want it to look, and actually doing it are two different things. Just because the director tells someone what to do does not mean he is doing it. See? It's dumb.



I don't actually wear pants.
Which "people" are you talking about? It certainly seems like the average user on here knows that there's a difference between a director and a DoP and understands that they either work together to inform one another's actions or are occasionally the same person.

A director may not "do" everything, but they still have to have a hand in everything in order to maintain control of it.
I've never met anyone online that doesn't think a director shoots his own film. Having "a hand in everything" and "doing everything" aren't the same, thus the conundrum people face.



I don't actually wear pants.
Depends on the director. James Cameron knows more about anything to do with film making than even the specialists, according to someone I know who worked with him, but as I said, majority of DoPs stick to their specialty.
No, it doesn't. James Cameron does not shoot as he is too busy directing. Directors do not shoot their own films. That would take away from the directing process because the director has to pay attention to the action, and then worry about the shot.



You can't win an argument just by being right!
No, it doesn't. James Cameron does not shoot as he is too busy directing. Directors do not shoot their own films. That would take away from the directing process because the director has to pay attention to the action, and then worry about the shot.
What on earth?

OK once more:

http://www.indiewire.com/gallery/dir...dpdirectors-2/

So this is what the bowel of sour grapes is about - you offered to shoot a film for someone you hate and he said no? OK I;m really understanding this line of reasoning.

Some take full creative control by directing, filming, colour grading and editing. Some do not. What are you so angry about?



Some directors "did" shoot their own film especially on their earlier indie career and it could be said the rest of them instruct DP did thing etc to assure their vision
Cant be sure what going on here instead generalization but it will be unbelievable if random movie buff wont know such common point of filmaking process



Most directors do not shoot their own films because they simply do not have the technical expertise to do so. A DoP is someone specifically trained in cinematography. It's the DoP who understands how best to shoot a particular piece of film - with regards to making decisions on textures, compositions and lighting.

But, keep in mind, the cinematographer shoots only what the director asks him/her to shoot. It's the director who decides "mis en scene" - what's on screen. You have a whole crew on set to handle the technical details of each aspect of film-making and every single person on set is working to capture the director's vision of what the film ought to be. So in the end, although the director does not directly handle any particular part of film-making, he is the true auteur of the film, the real artist responsible for what the film is.

The director is like a music composer. The composer writes music for each instrument in an orchestra which may consist of hundreds of musicians. Of course it really helps if you can get great masters to play your music for you but that doesn't change the fact that it's your composition they're all playing. The director is like the music composer and the actors, cinematographers, editors, .... are all the musicians who perform your composition.



Robert Rodriguez shoots a lot of his films, with help these days. He also writes, scores, edits.

Doug Liman has photographed some of his work.

Michael Mann has operated his own cameras. Spielberg has edited a lot of segments of his own pictures

Its all politics and DGA bologna. Plenty of hands on directors. Plenty.



Hellloooo Cindy - Scary Movie (2000)
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.



Most directors do not shoot their own films because they simply do not have the technical expertise to do so. A DoP is someone specifically trained in cinematography. It's the DoP who understands how best to shoot a particular piece of film - with regards to making decisions on textures, compositions and lighting.

But, keep in mind, the cinematographer shoots only what the director asks him/her to shoot. It's the director who decides "mis en scene" - what's on screen. You have a whole crew on set to handle the technical details of each aspect of film-making and every single person on set is working to capture the director's vision of what the film ought to be. So in the end, although the director does not directly handle any particular part of film-making, he is the true auteur of the film, the real artist responsible for what the film is.

The director is like a music composer. The composer writes music for each instrument in an orchestra which may consist of hundreds of musicians. Of course it really helps if you can get great masters to play your music for you but that doesn't change the fact that it's your composition they're all playing. The director is like the music composer and the actors, cinematographers, editors, .... are all the musicians who perform your composition.
This.
__________________
212 555 6342
Pierce & Pierce: Mergers and Acquisitions
Patrick Bateman
Vice President
358 Exchange Place New York, N.Y. 10099 FAX 212 555 6390 TELEX : () 4534



I don't actually wear pants.
Most directors do not shoot their own films because they simply do not have the technical expertise to do so. A DoP is someone specifically trained in cinematography. It's the DoP who understands how best to shoot a particular piece of film - with regards to making decisions on textures, compositions and lighting.

But, keep in mind, the cinematographer shoots only what the director asks him/her to shoot. It's the director who decides "mis en scene" - what's on screen. You have a whole crew on set to handle the technical details of each aspect of film-making and every single person on set is working to capture the director's vision of what the film ought to be. So in the end, although the director does not directly handle any particular part of film-making, he is the true auteur of the film, the real artist responsible for what the film is.
You're nearly there. The cinematographer will compose the shots to his or liking because he's in charge of the cameras. The director will say, "I want the shot to sweep across the cemetery," and the cinematographer decides how to do that. It's a collaboration, as is every aspect of filmmaking, except maybe editing (though that's sticky, too), but the cinematographer is in charge of how the shots are captured.

I hate the word "auteur" because it's used by people who don't know much about the process. I've done two professional shoots, and the director didn't do as much as the film fan thinks he does. It's annoying, and inaccurate.