Hello Ben and thank you for taking the time to talk with Lights Film School blog readers about your two most recent projects “The Reformed Troglodyte” and “The Gentleman Shaver“.

Both of these two shorts are branded shorts sponsored by theartofshaving.com. Let’s take a look at “The Reformed Troglodyte” first:

Many people may not know this, but your short film “Apricot” was also a branded short. Can you tell me a little bit about the differences in the relationship between yourself and the companies from these two projects (Art of Shaving vs. Apricot).

Apricot was a filmmaker’s fund that was sponsored by a brand. The company was interested in supporting a filmmaker with an aesthetic that they like and related to and put their support behind it. A little similar to what Absolute did with Spike Jonze’s short ‘I’m Here’. It was creatively my concept, script and execution. Gentleman Shaver and Reformed Troglodyte are fairly different situation, as I didn’t write them. They were developed by the great team at BBDO NYC and I was brought on board to bring them to life. This structure is much more akin to the typical commercial process. With the Art Of Shaving films, there was a much more hands on approach from those who were investing in the project. Perhaps that is the difference between working in USA and France.

It seems to me that there is some potential for some interesting bridges to be built between the two worlds of short fiction filmmaking and advertising.

Companies that are sponsoring these shorts don’t want their product placement to be too subtle or hidden, but filmmakers don’t simply want to “sell out” by filming a product under a soft-box and throwing a commercial jingle in the background. These ads are somewhere in between those two extremes.

You made a really great point, during one of your other interviews with us when you mentioned that your philosophy is to “point at” the realities of your filming environment. When I watched “The Gentleman Shaver”, you made it clear that it was a shaving product branded short. I didn’t get the impression you were trying to hide that. However, with “The Reformed Troglodyte” the shaving component of the film, although it was present, was not as pronounced as in “The Gentleman Shaver”. Can you tell me how these two films work as one? There seemed to be a totally different narrative approach to both films.

They were simply written that way before I came to them. I think there is a huge danger in these sorts of projects and I am not keen to do them unless I feel like they are being done for the correct reasons. People shouldn’t think of them as 5 minute commercials, because they simply can’t be that. The story telling still needs to be the top priority and if it isn’t, then the project becomes very bland and dull to watch. I have worked on those projects when the aim changes mid stream and it never ends up successful for anyone. I wouldn’t say Gentleman Shaver is product or brand specific, in fact you never really get a decent look at the product at all. It is simply a story taking place around the ritual of shaving. There is no lingering or huge close up of a sparkling razor blade. That would really be pointing the finger at it! Reformed Troglodyte has more of a character arc, more locations and spans a greater length of time so if feels quite different to Gentleman Shaver.

Great point. Thank you. Next, when you start to work on these projects how collaborative and open is the process when working with a company? When you start work on a project like this and you meet the people from the company sponsoring these branded shorts, do you get the impression they are worried that a filmmaker may go too “auteur” with the short? Did you feel you needed to put them at ease letting them know you would be respectful to their desired outcome?

I’ve never met anyone from the brand for any of the project’s that I have completed to date. That is usually managed by my production company producers or the creative agency involved. Sure there is sometimes a push from someone for it to be more like some commercial, but when you do it and show them it the edit it is usually pretty obvious that it ruptures the integrity of the short film world that you are creating. Like anything, sometimes it is a challenge but if they are intelligent and smart people you can be very respectful and explain why you want to do it and they are happy to trust you. On some upcoming collaborations for potential projects I am looking at for 2012 I have met directly with the company, they have actually been craving the creativity and filmic qualities for their projects. You have to pick your battles and I have had meetings where both myself and a brand have realized that we are not right for what each other’s creative visions would be for the project, so you simply don’t do it. If you establish what you do, then people seem to come to you for that thing.

From the company’s standpoint, why do you think a company would rather go this route than a regular 30 second advertising spot?

It’s another way to connect with their audience. It delves into the ideas and philosophy of the company in a rich way that 30 seconds simply can’t. Your emotions are much more alive and stimulated.

Do you feel there is a potential shift in the overall advertising world towards more narrative ads? Do you feel that this is a better way to reach audiences?

It has always gone in waves. The same thing happened in music videos that is now happening in fashion films. Narrative comes and goes depending on what the audience’s current tastes are and what the technology facilitates. The role of Vimeo.com and YouTube has a lot to do with the emergence of current narrative based advertising, the same way MTV had a lot to do with the boom in music videos.

Let’s talk a little more about the specifics of “The Reformed Troglodyte”.

Let’s start by talking about your choice of typography. What inspiration did you draw from to come to this choice?

Ha! That wasn’t my choice. But I liked it. It was masculine, strong and had a nostalgic throw back.

You’ve managed to find spectacular locations for these shorts. How long did it take you to location scout these properties? Did you have the help of the sponsors in securing or looking for these locations? For example I love the wide shot at :09 you opened the film with.

The locations were all found, managed and secured by my USA production company The Institute (http://www.theinstitute.tv/index.php).

I landed in L.A. after flying in from Australia, had a shower, wound my body clock back 15 hours and began looking at locations in the car with my great producer on the job, Kati Haberstock. She knows the town very well and listened closely to what I was wanting to achieve. I am quite specific and vague at the same time when looking for locations so it can be time consuming. I am searching for a ‘feeling’ in the location. This might be found in the architecture, surrounding hills or choice of wall paper. Over 4 days I looked at dozens of file images from a location scout and we drove around looking at them.

Sorry. I know you probably get this question all of the time. But filmmakers are curious and need to know the answer to this question…What camera and lenses were used?

Oddly, that is the most common asked question I get asked. Which I find strange, because it would be one of my last. I guess I am always drawn to the more philosophical and thematic questions for filmmakers. But I certainly don’t mind. On Gentleman Shaver and Troglodyte we shot on the Arri Alexa with Cooke Lenses. Eigil Bryld (DOP) had previously shot some commercials with Al Pacino using digital technology that looked great in black and white. Take a look at it below:

I wanted to nod to the qualities of 1960′s black and white film image, shooting 16mm was out of our budget range, so we tried a few things to get an interesting look. I didn’t want to simply desaturate the image in post and call it ‘black and white’. Eigil used sepia and lime coloured filters to create a monochromatic image that captured a lot of mid-tone detail.  In post we drained saturation from the image. Then I wanted the black’s to be crushed so that the shadow detail was lost. Following this, I raised those crushed blacks so that it was actually a milky grey rather than true black. Lastly an over all sepia tint was subtly added. Old film prints transferred to different formats a few times seemed to get a color (either blue or sepia) creep into them over time. I wanted to try and give a healthy nod to that aesthetic whilst keeping other aspects modern.

How much did you light these shorts vs. using natural lighting? You seem to be a filmmaker with a great eye for natural light. This might be a weird question, but tell me a little bit more about your relationship to the sun.

Life doesn’t give you a nice back light on your head and some soft fill, so I don’t like the way over lighting looks on screen. I don’t quite understand my relationship to the sun, but natural light plays a huge part in driving the narrative. I believe you can advance the emotions of the story by miles with a shot of the light doing something particular versus pages of dialogue. I don’t know how to explain it, maybe I never will, but I am definitely aware of it. I think it came from years of teenage and university film making where we didn’t have many resources, just a couple of blown out windows in the location. So I guess you learn how to make that something you can work with.

Gentleman Shaver was lit through the outside windows with a strong source and then some softer lights rigged above the actors just out of frame. But it was all to simulate natural light in the morning. Reformed Troglodyte was very basic too. Very few lights, mostly bouncing some light around with boards. I really wanted that one to look very unpolished as far as lighting and camera work goes, yet the world itself such as the cars, suits and architecture to be very considered. That was what I loved about Godard and the French New Wave films, everyone was dressed impeccably, yet there was minimal lighting and the camera work was very raw.

Let’s talk about cinematography and design for a moment. I love the shot at :27 (above). I see the vertical lines in the wood panel wall. And I see the strong diagonal lines of the mirrors caused by the camera position. How closely do you work with the cinematographer to draw out these design elements? How collaborative is the director / cinematographer relationship?

I get a strong idea of camera position and the design elements on a location scout. I don’t want to waste time on the shooting day and I need to have a plan before entering the shoot. But then I when the DOP gets involved at the tech scout stage I always want to listen to their suggestions. Often they will listen to what the elements are that I like about that angle I have chosen and sometimes take that and run with it for a while, searching for other angles. Then they come back with some suggestions that might improve on those elements that I originally liked. In the end it is just about hunting for good images that fit our storytelling correctly. This happens often in limited time, so there is no place for preciousness. It also is very important that you have similar tastes to your DOP. You want to make sure they don’t want to do some crazy shot in the middle of the world that you created which doesn’t reflect the personality of you or the film.

You have some great hand-held work. Not just in this short, but in your previous work as well. There is a very subtle and gentle “feather” to the edges of your frame. It stops the image from feeling too static but Eigil Bryld (the cinematographer for the short) controls the camera enough that it doesn’t appear chaotic or messy either. What are you using to stabilize the camera and what, if any, movement techniques are you using to get that gentle feathered look?

The ‘feather’ as you call it seems to put some people off and others really like it. I find you can really feel the personality of the DOP in their handheld work. On Troglodyte and Gentleman Shaver, Eigil Bryld was the Cinematographer. He is a very sweet Danish guy who’s demeanor isn’t chaotic messy, so therefore his work isn’t. He used a simple tennis ball on top of the tripod to rest the camera on for a few of those shots. It just gives a bit of rock and looseness to the frame with out making it hectic. Other than that, it is simply his steady hand and shoulder. I don’t do much ‘feathering’ or windowing to the image in grade for my work. In fact on these black and white shorts I didn’t want any.

How much of your sound came from the actual environment and how much was re-designed from the ground up?

Gentleman Shaver is pretty much how it was recorded on the day. Just volumes enhanced and diminished later.

As for Troglodyte, it just depended on what the quality of the real audio was. I like to over drive some of the more simple elements of my sound design at times. It is just a cinematic thing I like to do. So often basic things like footsteps or engine roars will be there, but i like them loud to emphasis that this is a kick ass car and our character is heading somewhere definite. My editor on the project Michael Saia at Jump (http://www.jumpny.tv/) had a big hand in the design of the audio, which was great because he knew the genre inside out.

Can you tell me specifically about a few sounds. Which ones were added and which ones were actual?

Footsteps at 1:09? (getting into car) – Added

Birds? (driving scene) – Added

Car? (driving scene) – Actual

Atmospheric sound? (on the cliff) – Added

You had a great team for these shorts. For these shorts you worked with costume designer Amy Westcott (Black Swan) and Production Design by Kiki Giet (Mark Romanek music videos). In our previous interviews you talked about how happy you are when you have design and wardrobe departments working closely together helping you achieve a really cohesive look. Can you tell me a little more about your relationship to these departments and their relationship to each other?

I like to have production design on board from a very early stage and with these shorts Kiki Giet was with me from the first day of location scouting. There is a bond that seems to form when you are driving around in hot cars looking at locations. We would just talk ideas, about what we liked or didn’t like at each location and got on the same page as each other pretty quickly. Coming from a music video background Kiki was really resourceful. She brought so much propping to the films that I was spoiled with choices in some instances. But like all my work, I always look for the inherent qualities in a pre-existing location which the aesthetic can resonate from. The references for the shorts is a much loved aesthetic that you rarely get the chance to do, so Kiki really ran with it. Amy Westcott was someone whose work I have admired for a while and loved that she put herself forward for the films. When working with someone at that level, you can talk to them in creative short hand and they just get it. She brought little touches to the films that really elevated it; the fabric of the suit, the style of undone bow tie. She had worked on Entourage, so she was clearly fairly familiar with how to dress men. Overall, there wasn’t so much of a dialogue between those departments as I usually have, but hopefully the vision was strong enough that they feel cohesive.

For filmmakers interested in getting into this line of work how do you approach companies or have them approach you? You worked with BBDO New York (A very prestigious ad company) for these projects. Can you tell us a bit more about your relationship to them and how they factor into the equation?

That is about getting representation. My production company in the USA signed me for commercial work and they had the relationship with BBDO NYC. It is their job to try and generate work from agencies and brands that might fit your profile. To get signed with a company, do the research on the ones that interest you and show ‘em ya reel! You want to make sure their personality suits your own. If you work together and generally everyone is happy then chances are you will do it again on another project and those relationships build!

Thanks for the in-depth interview Ben. As always it’s a pleasure to share your work with our blog readers. Please keep us posted with regards to your future projects!

Ben Briand

http://www.benbriand.com/

Twitter

http://twitter.com/ben_briand

TRANSCRIPT:

Welcome to the Lights Film School video tutorial on using flags. A cinematographer once said that “Great cinematography is not about knowing how to turn a light on, it’s about knowing how to shape and mould that light”. The intention of his video tutorial is to help you understand that shadow is light’s creative equivalent.

Let’s begin by talking about what flags are:

Flags are pieces of black duvetyne held together by metal frames. Flags are generally held up by c-stands in an effort to cut or shape light and provide “negative fill”.

It’s important to mention that when using c-stands you should first position your flag exactly as you want it with the c-stand joints loose. Then when your flag is ready, tighten the c-stand joints in order to secure the precise position of the flag. This will not only help you precisely establish where your shadows will fall, but it will also save you a lot of time during your setup.

Many independent filmmakers rather than using black fabric flags and c-stands, will instead use tripods, clamps and black foam core. A large piece of black foam core can be purchased from an art supply store for around $10-$15 and it will have essentially the same impact. In fact, virtually any opaque object can be used to flag light.

Where to position your flag?

Knowing how and where to position your flag is important. A flag that is positioned close to the surface the light is being project onto will appear dark with clearly defined shadows and edges. However, as the flag starts to move towards the light source the shadow will become slightly more diffused with softer edges.

Moving your flag.

Once you have your flag in position you can start controlling where your light falls by re-positioning your flag. Here we wanted our flag close to our light to give a soft shadow with gentle edges that “feather out”.

There are many applications for using flags but let’s discuss how we can use flags to control the spill of light while filmming a subject.

Notice how we have a subject in frame and we are moving the flag back and forth. You can see the impact this has on the image. However, it should be noted that it’s easier to control flagging different layers if there is a noticeable separation of depth. So let’s pull our subject off the wall a little bit… Much better. Here you can see how the flag impacts the image as we move it back and forth. The flag’s purpose is to help filmmakers highlight the parts of the frame that are most important to them while muting the areas that are less important or distracting. Picasso even said it himself when he stated that “Art is the elimination of the unnecessary.”

But now let’s start from scratch building a shot from the ground up.

We’ll begin by turning our overhead lights on so you can see the room before we start to design our light. Now let’s walk around the set so you can see how the flags are blocking the light. This flag, directly in front of us, is stopping the 1K zip light from hitting the back wall. And this other flag is going to be stopping the light from hitting our subject. Notice there is only the smallest sliver of light shining through as we move in front of the flags. Most of the light is being completely blocked. We can now manoeuvre these flags to shape the light to our liking.

let’s go to black.

Notice how these two flags stop all of the light being projected from the 1K zip light from hitting the background. Now let’s introduce our subject to the shot. As predicted, only a sliver of light is making it’s way though the flags.

Now let’s look at what happens when we open up the background flag. Notice it has no impact on the subject who is still only being lit by a small sliver of light.

If we open up the flag on the subject the following will result.

But now let’s block the light on our subject and our background again. At this point we’ll turn on a small practical background light. We’ll also open up the flag hitting the subject so a sliver of light comes through.

Because we’re getting closer to our final composition lets now also turn the rim light on.

Let’s walk around the studio again. Here is the flag flagging our actor. Watch what happens when we move it right to left. Notice it has no impact on the background.

Now let’s look at the other flag that’s stopping spill from hitting the background. Watch what happens when we open and close that flag. Again, notice this has no impact on our subject. Having this flag stop the spill of light from hitting the background allows us to keep our background darker giving us more contrast and a dramatic and moody look. When we open the flag up the composition becomes flatter.

So now let’s punch into our final framing. Let’s look one last time at the impact that the flags have now that our rim light, background light and our key light are all turned on. Here we move the flag controlling light on the subject back and forth. Again, notice this has no impact on our beautifully lit background. Now we can experiment by opening up the background flag a little bit… But it was nicer with a darker, richer background, so let’s put that back. And here you have it… your final shot!

The idea here is to think about lighting in terms of layers and depth. Light your background, middle-ground and foreground separately by using flags to help you control the spill of light.

TRANSCRIPT:

Hello and welcome to our tutorial on Head-Room, Lead-Room and Anticipatory Framing. For this tutorial we’ll discuss all of these concepts providing visual examples along the way. Let’s begin by talking about Head-Room. 

What is Head-Room? – Head-room is the space between the top of your subject’s head and the top frame of the composition

Let’s look at our first shot “here”. Our actor is sitting and reading a paper. At first you’ll notice we’re not giving him much breathing room above his head so let’s “inch up” just a little bit so we’re skimming the top of his head with our frame. There we go. Much better.

As a general rule of thumb your subject’s eyes should be placed roughly in the top third of the composition. 

As you can see, if we tilt up further we add an undesirable amount of head room above our subject’s head. The space above his head becomes what is known as “dead space”. 

Now let’s push it to the extreme to see what too much head room looks like. As you can see our subject’s eyes are now placed on the bottom third of the frame and we have an astronomical amount of dead space above our subject’s head.



Let’s move on now to discuss “lead room” and “nose room”. 

what is lead room?

Lead room is the space where dramatic energy is directed. For close up shots, lead room will often be referred to as “nose room”.

Let’s have a look at this composition with the man looking camera right and reading a book. 

Notice how we left more space in front of his face because he’s projecting energy in that direction? 



Now let’s look at what happens when you don’t leave enough lead room.

Notice how the energy being projected forward towards camera right is being pre-emptively cut off by the right wall of the composition. There is more space behind the subject than in front of him.

Almost everything you’ll be interested in filming will have an energy to it: For example, a rolling ball, a moving car or a man reading a book. You need to take this into consideration when framing your shots. 

It should also be mentioned that these rules should be used as guidelines that work most of the time. However, there may be times when you might find creative or narrative motivation to include less lead room or more head room. David Lynch’s film “Elephant Man” for example uses an abnormally large about of head room, while some filmmakers may wish to use less lead room to give the shot a bizarre sense of balance or to purposely hide visual information from your audience. So experiment with what feels right for your story.

Now lets discuss anticipatory framing

Anticipatory framing establishes that the camera needs to anticipate the movement within a scene rather than react to it. If you’re reacting to movement you’ll generally end up with jerky, reactionary shots. You want to be able to predict the movement within a frame. This is even more difficult for documentary filmmakers who often don’t have the privilege of marking or blocking out their scenes. For this reason it’s important that filmmakers practice camera operation.

A great way to practice camera movement is to have a friend walk back and forth in the frame while you try to keep them properly positioned within that frame. Try to “feather in” and “feather out” at the end of your movements. Remember that your camera represents your audience within a scene.

You’re supposed to be creating an “invisible 4th wall” between your actors and your audience. An uncontrolled camera won’t be strong enough to support the 4th wall and instead of engaging in the story, your audience will be constantly reminded of the people standing behind the camera, which will break the illusion you’re trying so hard to create. The camera shouldn’t draw attention to itself. It should be controlled, subtle and motivated by the movement within the frame.

If you’re editing other shots or shooting on more than one camera make sure the movement and dynamism of each shot can be integrated into other shots in the scene. This is called the choreography of movement. And to us filmmakers it’s our own little ballet. So you need to figure out the “tempo” of your movement which will then in turn determine what type of dance you’re doing.

Here is an example of what not to do

You need to avoid jerky, corrective and reactionary shots. If you’re operating a camera and you make an adjustment for a framing error, simply retake your shot. Do not use these shots in your final video. A shot with uncontrolled movement will temporarily draw attention to the camera and pull your audience out of your story. Your goal as a filmmaker is to keep your audience as engaged in your story as possible. You want your stories to be creatively as well as technically well constructed.

Movement is an essential part of cinematic expression and it’s important that you don’t prioritize convenience or ease over technically well-constructed shots.

Lights Film School has recently finished shooting an assortment of  incredible new video tutorials covering the topics of Cinematography and Design. We will be publishing these videos over the next few months on our blog and YouTube channel. Stay tuned!

Topics covered include:

1. Tonal range / shooting black and white video
2. Contrast ratios
3. Molding & shaping light / using flags and diffusion
4. Lighting for independent film
5. 1 point lighting / 2 point lighting / 3 point lighting / 4 point lighting
6. 180 degree rule / 30 degree rule
7. Framing heights
8. Types of light
9. Color temperature
10. Light direction
11. ISO & noise
12. Lenses & impact on the image
13. Color psychology & simplicity / color wheel
14. Camera movement
15. Wardrobe & styling for film
16. Depth / lighting the foreground, middle-ground and background
17. Designing & lighting a frame from the ground up (tying it all together!)

Outside from Thomas Wightman on Vimeo.

The snyopsis for the Lab Chat can be found below:

Lighting- Where do I begin?

When the cinematographer arrives on the set, he or she orders the crew to place the lights on certain areas of the set. But which light does the cinematographer positions first? Where exactly in the set does he/she put the lights? What are the steps or procedure that the cinematographer observes when he or she begins lighting? The objective of this session is to discuss the relationship between the director, the production designer and the cinematographer. We will also discuss the difference between motivational lighting and glamour lighting, which basically sets the pace on where the cinematographer begins. A sample scene from a script would be sent to participants prior to the session. We will dissect the scene as cinematographers and the directors and discuss how to approach it cinematographically. There is also a video demonstration that Lights Film School students need to watch prior to the Lab Chat. Please join us for this exciting and very important chat.
DATE: Saturday, Septebmer 4th, 2010
TIME: 8:00 PM – 11:00 PM EST
Led by Mark Meily

Mark Meily is an award-winning filmmaker of 22 years, who’s films have screened in a variety of film festivals all over the world. Two of these feature films, written and directed by Mark, received some great reviews in The New York Times, the Village Voice, LA Times and The NJ Star- Ledger. Mr Meily’s recent film “Baler” was screened at the MoMA last June 11, 2009

Mark has taught filmmaking for over five years now where many of his students have since gone on to become successful filmmakers. He has has also taught screenwriting and directing in both 16mm and 35mm formats. He loves sharing his experience and knowledge to aspiring filmmakers.

In 1989, Mr Meily became a scholar of the French Government. He studied film at the Ecole Superieure d’Etudes Cinematographiques (ESEC) in Paris, France; and also at the Centre Audio-Visuel de Langues Modernes (CAVILAM) in Vichy, France.

The Third & The Seventh from Alex Roman on Vimeo.

However, the new consumers behind the cameras rushed into the new technology creating technically weak content. Often the images were strong from a  composition standpoint but most of the first videos created from these devices lacked control over image movement, a concept that is understood all too well in the world of filmmaking.

The result was a glut of new material that suffered from bad camera shake and jumpiness. This unwanted camera movement draws unnecessary attention to the camera which pulls the audience out of the story. Camera movement needs to be motivated by the story. Hand held footage, although commonly accepted in the realm of documentary filmmaking, is often regarded as a stylistic mistake in fiction filmmaking unless the movement compliments the story. However, the “hand-held” look in larger budget productions is often never actually “held by the hand” at all. Although the camera operator’s hands help support the stabalization device, their shoulders or chest act as the main support for the camera.

________________________________________________________________________

IF YOU’RE LOOKING FOR EXPOSURE, RECOGNITION & EVALUATION THEN CONSIDER IMPROVING YOUR FILMMAKING SKILLS BY SIGNING UP FOR OUR INTENSIVE 4 MONTH ONLINE FILMMAKING COURSE HERE.

Message by:  Lights Film School
________________________________________________________________________

Filmmakers use stabilizing devices for most of their shots (both static and motion shots). They use dollies, tripods, jibs and cranes to name only a few devices. When a filmmaker wants to free their camera of these devices they often turn to devices commonly known as steadycams. These devices are designed to increase the points of contact between the camera and the operator. The result is a much smoother image.

It’s important to understand that audience’s know the difference between “hand-held” camera shake and “stabilized” camera shake.

Holding a camera by its side with your hands is arguably the worst way to stabilize the your images. The camera will pick up your heartbeat, small jittery movements from your morning coffee and any other small naturally occurring bodily function (hickups, footsteps etc). This results in footage that looks uncontrolled. Essentially, this type of footage has an amateur or home-video quality to it. The movement on the 4 edges of the frame is too jittery and is associated with the styling of a home video maker.

On the other hand if you’re using a shoulder mount or steadycam your footage will still have a little movement which will be noticeable on the 4 walls of the frame, but the movement will be much smoother and less distracting. Cinematographers often call this “breathing” on the image. It means they want to incorporate that naturalistic look without drawing unnecessary attention to the camera. Instead of jerky, uncontrolled movements the movement in the frame is soft, controlled and feather like.

Shoulder mounts can now be picked up for very reasonable prices. The entire DSLR industry and filmmaker community have helped miniaturize these once expensive and bulky hardware systems, into inexpensive and easy to handle equipment. Thank you DSLR filmmakers!

The brands and prices for DSLR compatible shoulder mounts can be found below.

Redrock Shoulder Mount System: $826 (Shoulder rig) – 2,412 (bundle)

Zacuto – $475 (Target Shooter) – $2615 (Crossfire)

Cavision – contact for pricing

Genus Shoulder Mount kit: $875

1. Writing for Small-Budget Productions

While some of us may dream of penning the next Hollywood blockbuster, the truth of the matter is that most of us will get our first break on a much smaller scale.  Learning the craft of writing for a manageable production budget is essential for every screenwriter – whether you are trying to sell your scripts to Hollywood or plan on producing them independently.  In this session, we’ll delve deeper into the choices you must make in areas such as location, actors, special effects, and more when you are writing a script on a tight budget.  We’ll discuss how to maintain a high level of creativity without requiring 50 million dollars worth of explosions and car chases.  We’ll focus on writing character-driven stories, which are the hallmark of independent film, while also discussing examples and asking questions.  For more information on this session please send an e-mail to phil@lightsfilmschool.com.

2. Lighting- Where do I begin?

When the cinematographer arrives on the set, he or she orders the crew to place the lights on certain areas of the set. But which light does the cinematographer positions first? Where exactly in the set does he/she put the lights? What are the steps or procedure that the cinematographer observes when he or she begins lighting? The objective of this session is to discuss the relationship between the director, the production designer and the cinematographer. We will also discuss the difference between motivational lighting and glamor lighting, which basically sets the pace on where the cinematographer begins. A sample scene from a script would be sent to participants prior to the session. We will dissect the scene as cinematographers and the directors and discuss how to approach it cinematographically. The video of this demonstration would be sent to the students prior to the  lab chat.

3. Writing Tension: A Close Look at ‘Munich’

Few films capture the essence of tension as well as Steven Spielberg’s Munich.  This film ratchets up the suspense from the first frame and continues to do so throughout the duration of the film, pausing only briefly to allow the audience a few moments of introspection.  In this session, we’ll discuss this film in depth, paying specific attention to the writer’s role in orchestrating the film’s tension.  Prior to the session, it would be helpful if participants read excerpts of the script (sent via e-mail upon registration) and watched the film.  We will look at how tension and suspense influence everything in this film, from the characters, to the setting, to the political and emotional climate.  Bring your questions and comments.  For more information on this session please send an e-mail to phil@lightsfilmschool.com.

4. Camera Movement to Compliment your Story

One trait great film directors have is their intricate camera movement. It is a mistake however, to put a camera movement in a shot unnecessarily. Camera movement should always compliment your story. This session will tackle all kinds of camera movement and their purpose and when to use them.  A basic camera set-up with a dolly and a jib will be on hand for a demonstration. The video of this demonstration would be sent to the students prior to the lab chat.