Three DPs, 22 Questions

Three Cinematographers on How They Make the Grade

The Day After Tomorrow

Ueli Steiger, ASC

F&V: What was your first impression of this script?

U.S.: [Director] Roland Emmerich first told me about this film in February 2002, so we had a long time to think about it and prepare. He wanted it to look and feel like this is an actual catastrophic event happening to real people in contemporary times. It was obvious that we were going to need hundreds of visual effects shots that had to blend seamlessly with the live-action scenes. That made this film a natural candidate for digital intermediate timing.

F&V: Why DI?

To blend over 600 VFX shots with live action and to get better release prints from Super 35mm.

F&V: Have you previously timed movies in a digital suite?

U.S.: I had never timed a feature film in a digital suite before, so I spoke with other cinematographers and visited different facilities in Los Angeles. I recommended Efilm and Roland accepted my advice. He made an up-front commitment that I would supervise timing both the feature-film and home-video releases. I treated digital timing as an extension of my role as a cinematographer. For instance, it was an obvious decision to shoot The Day After Tomorrow in a widescreen [2.4:1] format because of the scope of the story, which included many big exterior scenes with deep backgrounds. We chose the Super 35 format because of the flexibility of the lenses. One of the advantages of doing a DI is that you skip an optical step with Super 35, and that makes a big difference in the quality of release prints.

F&V: Did the early DI decision affect the way you lit or shot the film?

U.S.: Roland wants the audience to feel the cold, so we wanted a clean, crisp look with rich colors. I decided to shoot the entire movie with a single negative [200-speed Kodak Vision 5274], which records exceptionally sharp, fine-grain images. We were mainly shooting on big stages in Montreal, so control of lighting was never an issue. There is a scene near the end where the American president is at the embassy in Mexico. I warmed that scene up with CTS color gels on the lights. Later, at Efilm, I added a bit more warmth. It’s a visual clue that there is hope for the future.

F&V: How did you handle integrating all the visual effects into the film?

U.S.: [VFX supervisor] Karen Goulekas was at the first conceptual meetings I had with Roland and she was on the set with us every day. She was our visual liaison with ILM and the other visual effects companies. There were about 600 effects shots, including puffs of cold breath coming out of people’s mouths, smoke, tornadoes, birds flying in the distance and helicopters. I spent about six weeks with [Efilm colorist] Mike Eaves on both the film and video versions. About half of that time was spent blending the visual effects elements into shots.

F&V: How did you communicate your intentions to the timer?

U.S.: We created the basic look on the negative and mainly corrected it for continuity during timing. I used a Canon G5 digital camera to take stills of every set-up and made prints. Mike used my stills as a reference to make a first pass and then we went through it shot-by-shot and made corrections. I encouraged Mike to make suggestions.

One big difference is that you have more flexibility with Power Windows to isolate parts of frames. For instance, we filmed the opening scene in Antarctica on a stage in front of a blue screen. I lit to simulate a beautiful sunset. During timing, we adjusted the gamma and colors in the background so it blends more smoothly with the action. Another time, an effects house composited a flight of birds into a Manhattan skyline. The sky was almost monochrome on the effects shot. We isolated it and made the sky a much deeper blue to match the rest of the scene. They scanned at 4K and downresed to 2K, so timing was very interactive. Mike said if I wanted something in a shot to be a little redder, I could ask for a point just like I do in a lab. I could even ask for a half a point for a finer adjustment. I could see it on the screen right away.

F&V: Why DI?

To evoke period film stocks, mimic older lenses and emphasize emotion.

Peter Levy, ASC, ACS

The Life and Death of Peter Sellers

F&V: How did you prepare for this picture?

P.L.: [Director] Steve Hopkins and I looked at some of Peter Sellers’ classic films and visited places where he lived and worked in England, including Shepperton Studios and The Dorchester hotel. The story begins when Sellers was a radio star on BBC during the late 1950s while he was in his mid-20s. It ends with his death in 1984. One of the things we spoke about was how we were going to create a sense of place and time, including recreating memorable scenes from some of his classic films, including The Pink Panther, Being There, Lady Killers, I’m All Right Jack and Dr. Strangelove.

F&V: Did you have a chance to do any testing?

P.L.: We shot some tests of Geoffrey [ Rush, who plays Sellers at all ages]. I wanted to see how light reflected off his make-up. I decided to use a Pro Mist filter to soften the look. We shot with two handheld cameras whenever possible, a Panaflex Platinum and a lighter weight XL, both with Primo zoom lenses that were too sharp for close-ups. I used a Soft Effect filter when we were in tight. We re-created black-and-white scenes from Dr. Strangelove and I’m All Right Jack, and also some home movies. I shot those scenes on Eastman Plus-X [reversal film]. There is a richness in contrast and tones and a glow in the highlights that has a specific look.

F&V: Why did you suggest a digital intermediate finish?

P.L.: We were recreating different periods stretching over 30 years, so I felt that it was important to time the film with a digital intermediate finish so we could manipulate the images. I spoke with Dean Semler (ASC, ACS) and other cinematographers, and visited different facilities. I was well-versed in the possibilities from special effects, commercials and playing with ( Adobe) Photoshop. I chose Efilm in Los Angeles. One factor was the way they have set up their timing suites with a high quality, 2K digital projector instead of timing off a monitor.

F&V: Did knowing that you had a commitment for a DI affect the way you shot?

P.L.: It gave me a sense of freedom just knowing while I was shooting that I could go into the DI suite and give a scene a slightly yellower cast or alter contrast to create a period look. There were times when we were shooting exterior scenes, and the sky was brighter than I wanted. Normally, I might have taken time to put on ND grads, but I knew the sky is easy to control with Power Windows in DI, so we just kept shooting.

F&V: What was your basic approach to shooting this?

P.L.: We framed in 1.85:1 (aspect ratio), which translates to 16-by-9. I opted to shoot on contemporary stocks with the exception of black-and-white scenes. I used ( Kodak Vision) 5246 for daylight scenes, and often over-exposed it by two-thirds to a full a stop. That gives you kind of a luminance. I used ( Kodak Vision2) 5218 for everything else. We shot almost the whole film handheld, using a steady rig, because it gives you a feeling of immediacy. The main exception was scenes from movies. When we shot a scene for Dr. Strangelove, we emulated Stanley Kubrick’s composition, lighting and movement.

F&V: Who was the timer you worked with at Efilm?

P.L.: Steve Scott. We quickly developed a fantastic rapport. I used DI to get create looks and feelings in scenes at different times and places in Sellers’ life. It begins with the way you light and shoot on the set, but you can finesse colors and contrast and keep the look consistent in DI. I also used Power Windows to mimic older lenses by creating a vignette effect, a slight darkening at the corners of the frame. Sometimes I felt a wall behind an actor was too bright, so I asked Steve to put a window around it and tone it down and draw attention to the actors in the foreground. It’s a way of telling the audience where to look. It’s a very powerful tool, and the wonderful thing is that you see it happen in real-time. DI allowed us to get the looks we had in mind while we were shooting. The evolution of the look is subtle and we didn’t rely on any one technique. Sellers’ comedies are more brightly lit than the rest of the film. As his life gets darker, I used more dramatic lighting. His personal life was drab compared to when he was performing. I touched a lot of those things up in DI. It’s an empowering tool.

F&V: Why DI?

To avoid the desaturation of bleach bypass and to maintain scene continuity.

Daryn Okada, ASC

Paparazzi

F&V: What were your impressions when you read the script and spoke with the director?

D.O.: The story is about these rogue paparazzi who invade an actor’s privacy and cause a nearly tragic accident that hurts his wife and young son. In a way, that suggests a gritty look, but that didn’t work for me because of the Hollywood angle. At our first meeting, [director] Paul Abascal said he wanted a slightly hypnotic, surrealistic look with very rich black tones and very saturated colors. I was intrigued by that.

F&V: What was the visual strategy for shooting the film?

D.O.: We had a very ambitious 38-day shooting schedule with many setups at practical locations around Los Angeles. On our schedule, we couldn’t always shoot at the right time of day. The story calls for the scope of a widescreen format. I used the [500-speed Kodak Vision2] 5218 film in four-perf Super 35.

F&V: How did you establish the look?

D.O.: We convinced the producers to give us film dailies on Kodak Premier stock. That gave us saturated colors with deep black tones and kept every department on the right track.

F&V: Did you have a commitment from the producers for a DI finish?

D.O.: No, but they knew the look depended on bleach bypass or some other kind of post-production process. My preference was DI, because it would give us much more flexibility for matching shots for continuity and enhancing colors and contrast. I didn’t think that bleach bypass or another photochemical process was the right approach, because they tend to desaturate colors to gain contrast.

F&V: Where did you do the digital intermediate?

D.O.: Cinesite scanned the film with a Northlight at its native 6K resolution. We downresed the files to 2K 10-bit and timed the film at LaserPacific.

F&V: Why scan on a 6K scanner if you are going to time at a lower resolution?

D.O.: 35mm film negative has about 6K of information per frame. Ideally, if we had the time, money and technology to work at 6K with a wider bit depth, there would be fewer trade-offs. If you scan at lower resolutions, you are going to miss subtleties in the images. The scanner is making too many decisions for you. The current belief is that each frame should be oversampled at least twice the resolution you will work at to get the best raw file to correct from.

F&V: Why did you pick LaserPacific for the DI?

D.O.: Their digital timing theater with the latest Texas Instruments 2K digital projection was a factor. I believe if you are doing a digital intermediate, you should see the images on a big [33-foot-wide] screen in a cinema environment, the way audiences will experience them. I also wanted real-time color control of the images at 24 frames per second.

F&V: Can you give us some examples of what you did?

D.O.: We saturated colors and made black tones richer. Because of the tight shooting schedule, we were photographing different elements of the same scene at different times. In some shots, the sky was whiter. We used some Windows to isolate the sky in those shots and matched the deeper blue in other shots for continuity. We also played with highlights to create a warm, sunny luminescent look in some shots. In one scene, paparazzi are all around the actor driving at night. Their strobes are flashing. It’s disorienting. I asked [ color timer ] Frank Roman to isolate the flashes and make those highlights hotter. We made a series of single-frame corrections that were only on the screen for fractions of a second, but it has a mesmerizing effect that allows the audience to experience the disorientation that the hero is feeling. It’s more intense, with an organic film look that doesn’t feel electronic.

F&V: How interactive was the process?

D.O.: It’s essentially instantaneous. I’d ask Frank to make the flashes hotter. He would make the correction that made it hotter. He asked if that was what I wanted. We tweaked it a little. Then, he programmed to match that look in all flashes.

F&V: How long did it take to time the film in a DI suite?

D.O.: It took six to seven days to correct from the raw files. The color-corrected digital files were squeezed into widescreen aspect ratio and recorded directly onto color intermediate film.

F&V: How about timing the DVD and other home video formats?

D.O.: We wanted to be as true as possible to the intentions of the motion picture, while accounting for differences in how television and film projection display contrast, colors, light and darkness. Frank Roman worked with me on that, too. That was important, because he got inside my mind and saw the film the way I did. We used the same color correction decision list and 2K file in a high-definition suite. That was also important, because I wanted to see colors and contrast on a TV screen the same way people will see them at home. It is also important for the film and video versions to be timed with a single set of eyes by the original cinematographer. We timed Paparazzi for distribution in HD, DVD and standard television formats in full frame 1.78 aspect ratio, letterboxed in 2.35:1 format, and panned and scanned in 4x3 format.