Related Content









Co-Producer Bryan Carroll on the Tech Behind Public Enemies

Post your comments below

A turning point in the career of Public Enemies producer Bryan Carroll came when he worked as a film and visual-effects editor for James Cameron on Titanic. “That’s what sparked my interest into shooting movies digitally from script to screen,” he said. When he met Michael Mann, the director was thinking of shooting the night scenes in Ali digitally. “And that’s how I got involved with Michael, using what I had learned from many years in the digital realm,” he said. “I brought that in and building a bullet proof system, knowing we would end up on film.” He was first a co-producer on Robbery Homicide Division, the first hour-long drama shot digitally, then began Collateral working with the Thomson Viper. “This was the pinnacle of how you could really use HD in a feature film environment,” he said. “That was also the beginning of my relationship with Sony.”

Top: Michael Mann with the F23; photo by Peter Mountain




Then, Sony brought him the prototype of the Sony F23, which was 5 years in the making. “We [Mann and I] shot a Nike commercial and Sony showed up with the prototype F23, so we gave them feedback and started working on using this for a feature film,” Carroll said. “Choosing the right camera [for Public Enemies] always comes from the creative side. If we were shooting in film, we’d always choose the right stock. We approached it the same way here, doing multiple tests.”




In fact, initially, Mann thought he would shoot Public Enemies on film—until he did tests with the F23. “Michael was able to see within that something that was able to capture his vision, his paintbrush in shooting this film,” he said.

Shooting HD with its depth of field required every department to pay attention to detail. “You can’t paint bricks on a wall,” said Carroll. “We laid down cobblestones in the streets every night. When I’m producing [a movie shot digitally], you need more time and more funds for those areas. Otherwise they’d look like fake cobblestone streets.”

Carroll said the ergonomics of the Sony F23 “look like an ARRI 435 with a 400-foot magazine.” “The camera department really took this camera as one of their own,” he said. “In the past, the [digital] cameras required more maintenance, which required the DIT department to be more involved in keeping the camera running. For this camera, they’re handled much more like a film camera. It’s much more like a flow we were used to, and that was a huge advantage.”

The Sony F23 is a larger camera, said Carroll, but the deck can be removed off the body, which enables filmmakers to get it into smaller places. “Sometimes we used the Sony EX-1 or the T-cam [the Sony F950]. But the sturdiness and reliability of the new cameras helped us run much smoother on a set. In the past, I always had an engineer living on the truck fixing cables. This is truly like a filmmaker’s camera.”

Carroll revealed the production shot in video mode as opposed to raw/data. “We are firm believers, especially in the creative process, that what you see is what you get,” he said. “Exactly what we see on the monitor [on set] will be what we see on the 2K monitor, through color timing, early previews all the way to film.”

The digital workflow for Public Enemies began with what had been used on past movies. “Then we started tweaking and hot-rodding it,” said Carroll. “I would love to release the movie only digitally, but we still have a lot of theatres that want film. It’ll never be exactly the same on film. But we get it 99.9 percent of the way there with massive testing.”

The team did a “massive amount of testing with LUTs.” “The original LUTs are developed during the testing period and then adapted throughout the entire process,” said Carroll. “We continue to modify them until we see whole reels printed out, so we modify them scene-by-scene.” After testing with both Kodak Premiere and Vision stocks, they ended up going with Vision3 500T 5219 . “It was the one that emulated the digital file the closest,” he said.

The key to the workflow with the Sony F23 for Public Enemies was that it had to be adaptable. “It can never slow the creative process down, it can never slow the director down,” said Carroll. “It has to adapt. Nothing stops the creative vision. That’s why we shoot on HD-SR. Those tapes come back, and are duplicated. Selects are pulled that go to editorial. Selects also come back to us on the set. We had a screening room with 2K RGB 4:4:4 projection. Then from that, Michael derives his notes.”

Mann has an Avid Nitris in his editing suite. “As the editors finish the scene, it’s at 4:2:2 10-bit HD res. Michael can then go in his screening room and screen the movie at least once a day—at any given time–always at 2K.” For budget reasons, the editorial crew was working in standard def.

As screenings approached, Mann went to Company 3 where he worked on color timing passes with DI artist Stefan Sonnenfeld. “We don’t go nearly as extreme as if we were in a RAW or film process,” said Carroll. “When we get to the final stage, that’s when he’s doing his final color timing.”

The historic details in Public Enemies are practical. “Given that this is a period piece, I don’t think we have any 3D visual effects at all,” he said. “Effects were mainly clean-up, where we were taking away modern streetlights or transformers on telephone poles.”

The challenge was the size of these scenes with the detail and depth, as well as trying to live up to Michael’s vision. “That means to create a film that didn’t feel like you’re watching a movie about 1930 but to actually be 1930 and feel like you’re there in every detail. We were able to fulfill that with this technology.”

Carroll reported that they put the Sony F23 through some extreme conditions, particularly in the scenes shot at Little Bohemia in Wisconsin. “There were times it was -17 degrees,” he said. “We had rain that turned into hail that turned into snow and came back into rain in one night. We heard the lake freezing and the wind was extreme. And these cameras just held up and kept ticking, all the way to hot days at the prison when it was 80s. It was a pleasure having a camera that could withstand that kind of stuff.”

“It was a bold move of Michael to shoot a period piece that’s not a visual effects movie, on high-def,” said Carroll. “After Collateral, people said you could use HD for night scenes. Now, you see it is just another tool for how you wish to create your scene. Hopefully, with Public Enemies, we were able to prove it.”


Comments (21)
1.
I saw this this evening and I have to say that I did not like the video in a lot of parts of this movie. Some of the parts seemed extremely "cheap" looking while other parts looked beautiful. It was very distracting when there would be an action scene and one shot would look like a home camcorder and the next shot would look like a real movie. This was pretty bad in the first half of the movie. The second half looked a lot better. I'm not a fan of HD to begin with and this has really pushed me the rest of the way towards thinking HD is going to kill the movie industry. There were parts that just seemed almost fake, like you were looking at a 2D painting because the depth of view was just too deep.
Posted by Chris on Friday, July 3, 2009 @ 01:15 AM
2.
I was wondering why the picture,in "Public Enemies" looked so dead and lifeless. I got the answer, it was shot in digital HD. There is something not quite right about the faux look of digitally shot motion pictures. I've felt that way since seeing Michael Mann's "Miami Vice". You never want to see a digital HD movie twice. Visually it seems unnatural to the human eye. It gave me a splitting headache, just like "soaps" use to, when I was a kid. I actuallly had to close my eyes and go to sleep half way though the movie.

It would have be sooo much better if it was shot on film. I think the director just likes that 2K playback. Can't they do that with a film camera?
Posted by Greg on Friday, July 3, 2009 @ 05:51 PM
3.
I agree with the above, while I think HD films are the way to go, unlike other films like Superman Returns, and other digital features, Mann's films, Collateral, Miami Vice, and Public Enemies look like video. I'm not sure exactly what he is doing wrong, but there are tons of HD features out there that look great and you can't tell if it was shot on film or not if you're not thinking about it. Whereas Mann;s films try and test the limitations of low light and HD video, and the results should stay in the test lab. Years later these films will really show their age. But Mann has earned the right to play after so many masterpieces. Its a shame he can't experiment on more commercials and not 100 million dollar features!
Posted by Erik on Monday, July 6, 2009 @ 02:33 PM
4.
What's all this talk about 2K? If they shot to HDCAM-SR, the highest res laid down was 1080p. I couldnt imagine Mann taking in 1080p Uprez'd to 2K on the Nitris.
Posted by Tim on Monday, July 6, 2009 @ 02:42 PM
5.
I saw this the other night, and I'd have to agree... it was clearly (to me) shot on video, and it looks to me like it was shot at 30i. Or certainly not at 24p. Some of the shots, especially during shootouts (not sure if this was intentional) looked like they were coming from a behind-the-scenes special, shot in 30i. Like it or not "film" look is that for a reason, and if using HD video is a better way to go for creativity and budget, then I think you should at least endeavor to make it look like film. Or at the very least be consistent!
Posted by Mike on Monday, July 6, 2009 @ 02:44 PM
6.
The main footage with the Sony F23 is NOT the shaky "HD footage" in the film. That footage was made with a different camera.

I believe the F23 records 24fps in the same way a film camera does. So the idea that there is "some strange pulldown" going on in the motion is not accurate. This is not an XL2, here, people!

I also felt that perhaps the color correction was particularly cool and muted, but that has little to do with the camera.
Posted by Jesus Ali on Monday, July 6, 2009 @ 02:52 PM
7.
It's got less to do with the fact that it's shot digitally than with how Mann decides to abuse the gear and shoot his "vision".
Once Upon a Time in Mexico (Robert Rodriguez) was shot digitally with a Cine Alta. No video look there.
The video parts don't have to look like video but apparently Mann likes that crap (see Miami Vice for example).
Posted by Tcrew on Monday, July 6, 2009 @ 02:54 PM
8.
Saw it this weekend and with digital projection too. I can only assume that Mr. Mann wanted it to look like a reality series as it was blatantly video - along with the typical displays of motion sweep delays, edge rings and bloomed out light, weird skin tones etc etc. In addition the pointed quality of audio where the mix or perhaps at times off mix is also played out - at times the audio goes flat and one dimensional coming from the actual environment. I love Mann's work but I think this was a decision that didn't pan out and created a look that at times took you out of the film. Sometimes it felt like watching some folks getting together to "make a movie". We have seen much better use of digital cameras so I can only assume his decision to make it in video was to create the documentary - you are there - feel. Unfortunately it hurts the film along with a weak story and emotionally detached script.
Posted by Chris Laskey on Monday, July 6, 2009 @ 04:07 PM
9.
Just saw the movie and I thought it was beautiful. The shoot-out scene at Little Bohemia Lodge is gorgeous and the editing is fantastic. Until reading this article, I did not know it was digital. I really got into the flow of the movie; my son felt that maybe there was too much hand-held movement in some parts. Overall, I thought it was a great looking movie and an exceptional period piece.
Posted by Robin on Monday, July 6, 2009 @ 04:11 PM
10.
I saw this movie projected digitally because I wanted to be as close to the intention of the director as possible. Great story! Very entertaining. Now, speaking to the issue of using the F23 on this film, I understand the design idea behind deep focus on this film, but I left the theater wanting to put the F23 through some tests of my own. Surely the strong edge artifacts and noise were a bi-product of the "look" the director and cinematographer were after rather than a centerpiece of that look. I remember thinking to myself, "Surely, the F23 is better than this."

To my eye, it almost appeared as if some edge enhancement had been employed to create additional "sharpness" in the prison break scene in the first act. The clouds in the sky had unsightly edge artifacts and noise that appeared to my eye as signature edge enhancement artifacts. I noticed the same contrast and edge enhancement in trees and brush in the daylight scenes.

I have been shooting digital for a long time, and I can help but thinking the F23 can produce better images than what we see in this film. Digital is not film, but digital can look much better than what I saw of this film projected digitally.
Posted by Dan on Monday, July 6, 2009 @ 04:18 PM
11.
I don't know what the reason for shooting video is? If you want to save money, shoot on the ex1or ex3, cut the crew in half and you would get the same results as the f23. If I'm wrong please correct me!
Posted by Jason Chocianowski on Monday, July 6, 2009 @ 04:47 PM
12.
F23 is extremely different to EX3. EX3 is a CMOS camera and suffers from rolling shutter. F23 also shoots 10-bit LOG. Public Enemies was shot 24p. The "video look" comes from selecting the open shutter option. This can be done with any HD camera. This makes progressive video look like video. The reason for doing this is to get an extra "stop" of light coming through the lens meaning you can shoot in extremely low light.
Posted by Marc Windon on Monday, July 6, 2009 @ 07:47 PM
13.
Like most others that commented here I thought the film projected was a video ala soap opera. The print I saw looked so fake it wasn't easy on the eyes.
Make up looked flat and looked like make up. Hand held shots were very bad to look at and hard on the eyes to follow. Shots were polsterized. the color shift in this movie were the worst I had ever seen. And to boot most of the shot were in close up just like a soap opera. Come on Michael, didn't you learn your lesson with Miami Vice. Grain, grain, grain. you even said yourself Michael about M V you should have shot film after shooting 8 millions in tests.
Posted by Raffaele Marraffa on Monday, July 6, 2009 @ 09:44 PM
14.
I saw the movie last night and was impressed with the digital look. Now filmmakers are going to have to learn that shooting video they have to get away from hand-held cameras. The extreme closeups with the handheld cameras drove me crazy. if you're going to show video, put the camera on a tripod, dolly or steadicam and leave it there.
Posted by Bill Miller on Tuesday, July 7, 2009 @ 09:10 AM
15.
The entire look of Public Enemies was uneven and weak. Hard lighting, really flat. The closing scene was abysmal, it looked like it was shot with the ex1 intercut with F23. Really took away from the story.
Posted by Jim Chu on Tuesday, July 7, 2009 @ 10:40 AM
16.
I haven't seen PE yet, but watched Miami Vice again last night... and while I agree, for the most part that film still has a quality and a feeling to it that is difficult to reproduce with HD - I don't think Michael Mann is trying to make HD look like Film, he's using it as it's own medium. There's a quality to HD that you can't replicate with Film (and visa versa), it's a very raw and harsh image compared to Film, and the vision for HD on both Miami Vice and PE is all about giving it that 'reality' look. People have come to associate HD or video with 'reality,' and Film as something that's polished and Hollywood. The bottom line is - if the movie is good, the acting is good, and the story is good - the format the film is shot on is just a vehicle to tell a story.
Posted by Mike L on Tuesday, July 7, 2009 @ 10:50 AM
17.
Agree with the general consensus above. I was surprised at how distracting the mix of looks were. Skin tone all over the place, nasty shaky camera work and all that blown out DV look! It even looked like some shots were scaled up dramatically.

I loved the period so was disappointed it was represented for me in a reality TV way. My interpretation that cheap, video look reminds me of home videos from the 90's, not dark and brooding depression era America.

Odd audio mix too, almost sounded unfinished?

May have been something I could/should overlook but I also felt the script didn't engage me enough. Depp's a hero though.. and I enjoy spending time in his screen presence alone!

Interesting! Not my cup of tea but I support there being alternatives to the standard Hollywood fare.
Posted by Lucy N on Wednesday, July 8, 2009 @ 12:38 PM
18.
The movie was badly flawed when it came to cars. Depp as Dillinger in scenes with a 1935 Plymouth, and worse yet, a 1936 Chevrolet. How can they do such a good job with some period objects and mess up on the cars? Dillinger was dead before those cars were built.
Posted by chuck on Saturday, August 1, 2009 @ 01:07 AM
19.
The digital picture looked so fake that it ruined the whole movie experience. Looked like some kid had recorded it with a handycam. The "movielook" was totally gone.
Posted by Shibaja on Saturday, October 24, 2009 @ 07:00 PM
20.
Having just watched it on DVD (up-rezed to HD by the player), I can say all the remarks here about the quality and consistency of the look do not apply. I never suspected it was shot on video until I watched the bonus, noticed the weird camera, which got me to this website. They certainly have massaged the footage for DVD release, and they have done a superb job.
Posted by Christian on Sunday, December 27, 2009 @ 12:44 AM
21.
Just saw it on dvd last night. Now I have the most direct answer when I am asked why I insist to shoot with my Arri SR1 super 16mm.
Posted by rudy on Monday, December 28, 2009 @ 11:58 AM

Bookmark and Share

Post a Comment

Name:
Email:
Comments:

Please enter the letters or numbers you see in the image.
Your message will be reviewed before it is posted

Subscribe to StudioDaily Podcast


         
  flash video mini-site   rich media tutorials   store  
 
flash video News, analysis, tips and tricks served up daily at the new Studio Daily blog.
 
video tutorials All New Video Tutorials on Softimage Face Robot, Avid Liquid, After Effects, FCP and more!
  downloadable tutorials final cut pro after effects motion  
           
HOME | SUBSCRIBE | TOOLS | TUTORIALS | REVIEWS | BUSINESS | CONTACT | ABOUT US | PRIVACY & TERMS | ADVERTISING



Related Content