Who knows camera gear better than the directors of photography who actually use these tools to shape the visuals that drive storytelling in film and television? The answer, clearly, is nobody, and with this in mind, Playback approached four top Canadian DOPs and asked them to jot down their thoughts on any new piece of equipment of their choosing that has made them approach their craft differently or which has yielded innovative results.

The film vs. digital debate continues to be the big story in the cinematographer’s world. Canadian Society of Cinematographers and Gemini Award winner David Greene admits to preferring the photochemical medium to the digital. So, as he reports during production of Rhinoceros Eyes, the Madstone Films feature about a young man’s obsessive love for a set designer, it was a challenge to adapt to shooting with the Sony/Panavision 24P HD CineAlta system. He stresses, however, that the most important creative elements on a set are the script behind the film and one’s collaborators.

Norayr Kasper, who made a big splash recently with his work on the popular and acclaimed Trudeau miniseries (Big Motion Pictures), echoes that sentiment. Kasper emphasizes that a cameraman’s tools are just that – devices used to arrive at a result – and it is this result, born out of a DOP’s imagination, which truly defines his role. The digital domain comes back into play here as Kasper proposes that the most important tools at a cinematographer’s disposal – and too often not – are those in post-production.

Daniel Vincelette picks up on the growing importance of post, particularly in the context of two features he recently lensed using cameras with unusual perforation pull-down rates, including Le Marais (Les Productions Thalie), which was recently accepted by the 2002 Toronto International Film Festival. Rounding out the group is CSC Award winner Luc Montpellier, who writes about how he called upon Panavision’s Panaflasher to achieve ‘that ’70s look’ on the recently wrapped Peter Wellington feature Luck (The Film Farm).

David Greene

Based in: Toronto

Selected credits: TV special: Water, Earth, Air, Fire; features: Century Hotel, Cornered, Rhinoceros Eyes

I have always felt that the most important element of a movie is not the medium, but the message. Given the opportunity, I would have selected motion picture stock to shoot Rhinoceros Eyes, but the choice to originate digitally was made before I was involved. Immediately, there was no question for me but to go with the CineAlta 24P high-definition system developed by Sony and Panavision.

CineAlta has afforded me the best of both worlds, allowing me to shoot with Panavision’s Primo Lenses [which work with Panavision cameras] but in a digital format.

I sense the common perception for the last few years is that digital filmmaking equates to a ‘Dogme 95’ unpolished, seemingly off-the-cuff style of shooting. That kind of thing can work, and I am a huge fan of films such as The Celebration, but there is a misunderstanding that the overall process somehow becomes easier when shooting digitally. One can certainly shoot with available light as easily, if not more so, with film than digital, but if you intend to establish a visual ‘language’ for the film, the process is the same.

In fact, I have found it more difficult to shoot digitally than with film, simply because you are performing in a slightly different way on set and adapting to a new way of working. I have not used my light meter once in the last 26 days of our 30-day shoot and have become quite dedicated to our RGB waveform monitor. The reason digital is more challenging is simply because you really have to roll back on the highlights and reconsider the latitude the format provides. In the end, though, I feel that we have definitely pushed the limits of the format and produced some interesting images that are difficult to distinguish from the film medium.

I have found all of this challenging and interesting, but most importantly, every day I am excited about our script, the work of writer/director Aaron Woodley and our amazing cast and crew, who make showing up on set each day a wonderful experience.

Norayr Kasper

Based in: Montreal and Toronto

Selected credits: MOWs: On the Edge, Time of the Wolf, Redeemer, The Last Debate; miniseries: Trudeau; features: Two Thousand and None, The Life Before This, Bach Cello Suite #4: Sarabande, Calendar

It’s hard to think of any tool I am particularly fond of, or which I use very regularly to define my style of cinematography. Today’s camera and lighting packages commonly include tools that only a decade ago would have been considered a luxury. Panavision packages include ramp modules, matte boxes, lenses, etc., while ARRICAM has just released a one-camera platform with a myriad of electronic tools to give HD camcorders a run for the money.

While today’s film stocks are very forgiving in mixed color environments and exposure fluctuations, there is little that can’t be manipulated in post. Of course, that is if the cinematographer gets that far in the process.

When I read any script, I think first of principal ideas, and then follow the process of their visualization by using whatever tool may be needed. In fact, I rarely find myself using the same tools time and time again. With increasingly compressed shooting schedules and with so little time to think creatively on set, I find myself focused on meeting what occasionally seem like impossible expectations, leaving little time to experiment with new tools. So I search for simplification in expressing my ideas. What really matters to me is an inspiring script, a risk-taking director, and a motivated crew.

In my view, the most important tools in manipulating the image created by any cinematographer are those used in post-production, especially with digital tape-to-tape color correction and new digital intermediate technology.

The capabilities of post today are immense and critical to the integrity of the image. In this process, the need for a cinematographer’s qualified eye is essential. This is why I am bewildered when producers negotiate a DOP’s participation only to the end of shooting, rather than promoting collaboration throughout post and color timing.

While any project I light bares the signature of what has been devised on a scale known only fully by me, I am disconcerted to see my images refined by others, especially on TV movies. What a shame, realizing that the eye that assembled the visual elements during production, whether on film or tape, is often kept away from enhancing the director’s vision with the most important tool in image manipulation available.

Daniel Vincelette

Based in: Montreal

Selected credits: TV series: Le Masque, Paparazzi; MOW: Le Pays dans la gorge; features: Caboose, Leaving Metropolis (formerly Poor Superman), Le Marais

While 35mm cameras have a normal pull-down rate of four perforations per frame, I recently shot two features using cameras with different perforation pull-down rates. On Leaving Metropolis, Australia’s Multivision supplied me with a two-perf pull-down camera using a new technology resembling the Techniscope cameras employed on Sergio Leone westerns in the 1960s. I shot the other film, Le Marais, with a camera using three-perf pull-down, which is now widely accepted for TV, even though the film is intended for theatrical release.

As you can guess, these choices were made for financial reasons. Every time you save 25% or 50% of the cost of raw stock, processing and transfer, you give yourself and the production – most likely working on a tight budget here in Canada – the opportunity to originate on film and get the best picture possible.

It is even more interesting to link all-digital post-production with these means of origination (as 35mm film is still the most versatile way of getting good-quality pictures). Even though Leaving Metropolis required a conventional optical blowup to get a four-perf interneg providing good image quality, Le Marais is getting the all-digital treatment. Once edited, we scanned the negative to 2K files, did digital timing (coloring) and created any needed effect, rendered the result in Cineon files and transferred those back to a film interneg we will use to make our release prints.

The results of digitally posting 35mm-originated material is the way of the future, if not the present, especially when improved software and memory allow for affordable scans in 4K files and color digital files in the 10-bit logarithmic rate and even higher. It gives the DOP an incredible post-production palette. Everything we used to do in TV coloring but not in film timing is now available in both of these converging universes, and scanning unusual but more economical frame rates is not a problem for telecine.

Luc Montpellier

Based in: Toronto

Selected credits: Features: Luck, Khaled, Jack & Jill; series: An American in Canada, Foreign Objects, Paradise Falls

When director Peter Wellington and I first began meeting about his film Luck, it became apparent that we would have the task of creating a subtle period look for the film. The story of Luck unfolds during the famous 1972 Summit Series – a time people remember as one of the most important hockey moments in Canadian history.

This being the case, my task as the director of photography was to cue the audience that it was watching a film actually shot at the time of the series. To achieve this, I needed to reproduce the color and contrast of film stocks available back then, but using modern emulsions. After numerous tests, I decided the Panaflasher from Panavision would be the perfect tool to give me what I wanted.

The Panaflasher is a unit attached to the camera body that exposes a base of light onto the film before or after it passes through the camera gate, affecting only the shadow areas of the negative. This enables you to manipulate contrast (in-camera) and reduce color saturation. Additionally, you can choose to add colored filters in front of the flasher unit to alter the tone of the shadow areas. On Luck, I decided to flash the image 27.5% using a Lee 101 yellow filter in front of the flasher. This resulted in warm, yellowish blacks and a subtle reduction in contrast.

In the end, I was quite pleased with the effect. It was important not to let the cinematography upstage the performances. The Panaflasher enabled me to do just that – create a period look without bringing too much attention to the image itself.