Russell Carpenter, ASC
TITANIC Q&A ArchivesFollowing are Russell Carpenter's responses to e-mail questions about his award-winning work as cinematographer of Titanic. RESPONSES MARCH 5, 1998:
Hello Mr. Carpenter,
I am in my third year of film at SVA in Manhattan and I have a shot that I would like to do, but I have many questions — and doubts — about it. The shot is an extreme close up of a man's eye, and in the eye we will see the reflection of a man who is standing before him. The film is being shot in black and white negative.
My concerns are exposure for both the reflected person and the actual eye itself. Is it simply an issue of placing a lot of light on the reflected person and filling in enough on the eye to see detail in the eye itself?
Signed, a struggling student,
Nathan SwingleDear Nathan,
The answer to your question from the lighting perspective is that, indeed, you would have to put a tremendous amount of light on the reflected person in order to strike a proper balance to the CU of the eye.
The real showstopper, as far as I am concerned, deals with depth-of-field issues in keeping focus on the surface of the eye. I haven't tried this yet, but it seems nearly impossible to keep the surface of the eye and the reflected image in focus at the same time. Chances are that you'll have far less than an a few millimeters of focus even if you lit the shot to a T22!
This shot feels more like a composite shot or double exposure to me. There might be a way to do it in-camera by photographing the eye on film, then re-photographing a projected image of the eye through a 50-50 mirror tipped at a 45° angle to the screen with the reflected image of the man in the mirror. The man would have to be surrounded by black if it's just the image of the man that you want.
Good luck!
— Russell Carpenter,ASCDear Mr. Carpenter,
I am wondering if you would recommend an internship to a college student? How difficult do you think it would be to obtain one?
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Kathy Rusch
Dear Kate,
I think internships are a very valuable way of gaining experience, and if you can arrange one, by all means do so. Try to get involved as much as you can — it will pay off not only from an educational perspective, but the contacts you make will be good for the future.
In my experience, most production companies like the internship to be arranged through an educational institution (a letter from the class professor would do) with the understanding that the student will receive some kind of class credit as a result of his or her participation.
— Russell Carpenter,ASC
Mr. Carpenter,
Hi! I'm a cinematographer in Mexico City, and I think it's very important for a cinematographer to know and work with physical basics of photography: like densitometry, optics, lighting, exposure, sensitometry, etc. I don't know if I'm clear on these myself. I ask this because here in Mexico nobody is worried about this; only about good lighting. A cinematographer is considered good by his method of lighting, even when he ignores lens formulas, densitometry, color theory, etc. I am interested to learn more about this. Please tell me where can I find information about advanced cinematography
Thanks a lot. I'll appreciate your answer,
Oscar HijuelosDear Oscar,
A cinematographer straddles several worlds — that of the technician, the artist, and the manager. Balancing these worlds is essential, and it's not wise to ignore any area. Getting a good education in the scientific and technical side of the process will undoubtedly make you a better cinematographer. Perhaps the only danger would lie in getting buried in the scientific while ignoring the aesthetic and emotional aspects of the art.
Please check out our existing bibliographies, and you might also try www.amazon.com and do a search for 'cinematography.' There will be scores of titles dealing with the technical side of the craft. Also check out the Media Manuals published by Focal Press (Hastings House, publishers). I also recommend a concise manual Film Technology in Post Production by Dominic Case, which deals with the intricacies of the lab work.
Using the search engine at www.amazon.com should yield amazing resources.
— Russell Carpenter,ASC
Mr. Carpenter,
I am about to embark on a short film, a major portion of which takes place in a relatively well-lit city at night. My question is simple: with minimal lighting equipment at my disposal, is it more effective to shoot day-for-night or night-for-night? Please educate me with your tricks.
Sincerely,
Chris BremerDear Chris,
I think you need to shoot night-for-night if you really want to capture the ambiance of the city.
I have had very good results shooting 5279 pushed one stop and relying on minimal lighting. It means you have to shoot pretty wide open on the lens, but the results can be wonderful if you've got a lot of ambient lights that you can play in the background of the scene. Shooting longer lens may be appropriate if you want the background to defocus and the lights in the background to become part of the ornamental "aspect" of the scene. Wetting down the streets always helps, if appropriate.
Of course, you'll very likely need to shape and mold your foreground action to the environmental lighting. Don't fail to test! Chances are you'll wind up putting some sort of color correction on your lights, and film tests are really the only way to tell if you've got what you want.
— Russell Carpenter,ASC