IMAGO Technical Committee Panel Discussion

FEEL THE BURN

ARTISTIC DECISIONS ON CINEMATOGRAPHY  TO BE BURNED OR NOT TO BE BURNED?

The second edition of Euro Cine Expo took place from 30 June to 1 July 2023 in Munich, and gave the opportunity for several cinematographers, colourists and representative from camera manufacturers to participate in a panel, organised by IMAGO’s Technical Committee (ITC), dedicated to debating and discussing the placement of artistic decisions in the workflow of a production – in-camera or in post? Here, we share the considered thoughts and opinions from the participants about this important subject.



PART 1

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Participants in the Euro Cine Expo 2023 panel:

1. Suny Behar – cinematographer/director (HBO Camera Assessments Series)

2. Loren Simons – Red Digital Cinema, senior motion picture technology advisor

3. Rauno Ronkainen FSC – cinematographer & Professor in cinematography at Aalto University Department Of film | School Of Arts

We can see from this diagram that decisions about the aesthetic look-and-feel of a production can be made at several different stages, decisions that can radically affect the image.

During production glass filtering can be used, sharpness and texture can be controlled in-camera. Manufacturers are now offering cinematographers the ability to bake-in a variety of textures, noise or grain in-camera, as they shoot.

However, many cinematographers and some studios/streaming platforms sometimes prefer to defer these decisions to post-production.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of these methods? What does this mean for the audience and the kinetic perception of drama? What semantic politics does this provoke? And, what power do cinematographers have in these decisions, recommendations or guidelines?

Here, eleven of the participants give their opinions on the subject. Part 2 of this roundtable will be held at Camerimage 2023, with the support of Euro Cine Expo and Cinematography World. Don’t miss it!

10.

11.

Colourist, Germany

In my field of projects, which encompasses low to normal-budget German and international feature films and documentaries, my observations somehow point in opposite directions.

On the one hand, there is a desire from producers and directors to push all kinds of creative decisions further down the pipeline; meaning to shoot more, to cover more angles, to shoot at higher resolution for re-framing in post, and to capture wider dynamic range to preserve all possibilities during grading.

On the other hand, I see a constant movement to start look development earlier in the production process, involving me as colourist in preproduction, conducting elaborate hair and makeup and lens look-tests, in order to come up with a meaningful show-LUT or look. This is something I very much welcome.

But, in my opinion, most cinematographers first need to improve their knowledge of what a look is

made of. DP Steve Yedlin ASC calls these ‘image attributes’. I have had only a very few first-time meetings with cinematographers where I felt I’ve been able to talk on eye-level regarding these image attributes and how to achieve a specific look for the film. Ultimately, to decide what to burn into your images and when, you should really know what makes-up that specific look you’re aiming for.

The idea of ‘baking-in’ looks that alter the RAW files is a contentious subject. Some post-production people complain that it’s destructive to the image file. That might be technically correct since it does alter the file structure.

But, as a cinematographer, I contend that it is actually constructive, as it helps to construct the image the way that we intend for the final look, even if it isn’t completely the image that we’ll finalise in a DI colour session, if we can attend. Many things can prevent the cinematographer from being at the DI – work, distance and no cooperation from the producers.

The ARRI 35 textures baked into the OCN files are good for us in order to have control over our final images. If the looks were purely in metadata, then there would be no guarantee they would be applied in post. It’s like using lens filtration. It is baked into the file and can only be removed or altered wilfully using advanced AI post tools.

The counter argument that I understand is when there are new output formats that need the material converted and our alterations might not work properly with the new conversions. In that case I would advocate twin files to be stored –one with the baked-in textures and other changes, another with only metadata for the adjustments. These could be saved for the eventual futureproofing of programmes when entirely new formats are developed.

ARRI digital cameras have a set of values that determine the way the camera processes images at their very core. These values, comprising different and carefully-balanced parameters, shape the amount and the character of grain in the image and determine the amount of contrast at different levels of detail in the image, which defines the perceived sharpness.

In the ARRI Alexa 35 these settings are now accessible and tune the image to your needs. We call them ARRI Textures.

Up until now, ARRI cameras have been preprogrammed with a single, unchangeable texture setting that is optimised for the widest possible range of shooting scenarios. For the first time ever, the Alexa 35 gives cinematographers the option to go beyond the default texture setting and choose from an evolving menu of ARRI Textures, each designed for specific image attributes.

ARRI Textures are applied to the image before the EI sensitivity setting and before the ARRI Reveal colour science. Both determine the basic behaviour of grain and contrast in your image.

This unique feature allows cinematographers to fundamentally alter the way in which the camera records images. It is a major step forward in giving filmmakers creative control over the parameters of digital cinematography.

Rauno Ronkainen FSC Cinematographer & Professor in cinematography at Aalto University Department Of Film/ School Of Arts, Finland Photograph fot.fotografowie.com

SEEKING THE LOOK TO MEET THE CONTENT

The look is part of the visualisation of a story – an important part – and it can’t be isolated from the rest of the visual elements, since only together do they create a coherent way to expose the author’s personal approach to tell the story.

These elements – camera movements, angles, optical choices, subjective / objective camera, grading – create the final look and are connected to the bigger plan that is supposed to boost and create content with a distinct and personal style that aims to appear both fascinating and individual for the audience.

During the whole process, from preproduction to post, creative members need to lock significant numbers of decisions, not only to help to frame their work but also to inspire them.

The structure of the image – lens choices, lighting, filter choices, etc. – are of key importance to help find inspiration and a personal signature for the visual world of the film.

These decisions may appear as risky choices, but, in general, the nature of all creative work is based on balance between research, practical work and intuition – connections that can be considered as risky – or as a process to create a unique vision of an artist.

Personally, I must confess that I have a little bit of a hard time regarding the subject of burning-in the look, since I don’t use any LUTs and want to keep things open until the end, when I see the final edit and even during the colour-grading process. But, on the other hand I want to use filters and analogue technology to create less digital-looking images. My way of working can be whatever depending on the need of the film and content.

Cinematographer, USA

ELECTRONIC TEXTURE CONTROL

Texture control is not a new phenomenon in cinematography. Cinematographers have long exercised texture control over their images. We have used soft or hard light to emphasise the textures of sets, objects and actors. Make-up artists assist the cinematographer in manipulating the texture of actors faces. Camera filters (both in front of the lens and behind it) are routinely employed to change the contrast and texture of scenes. Film stocks, processing and post-production manipulations are also routinely used to change the texture of the finished image.

Electronic ‘in-camera’ texture control in digital imaging is a relatively new parameter for cinematographers. Until recently texture control as an electronic in-camera artistic manipulation was only available to cinematographers as a post-production option. Now, some camera manufacturers are giving cinematographers the possibility to control texture as an in-camera function.

The community of cinematographers are realising that this new capability has value when working in a scenario where budget concerns do not allow for manipulation in post-production, but at the same time these controls must be handled carefully and skilfully. Much like camera filters, electronic texture controls in the hands of uneducated or inexperienced users can be dangerous, these in-camera manipulations cannot be undone.

It is my opinion that cameras featuring these tools should probably use a menu structure that sequesters such potentially dangerous functions behind a ‘user-level’ gateway. Cinematographers should only be able access these functions after de facto agreeing that they possess the skill and training to use them by moving through this user level wall. In addition, I firmly believe that these functions should include a prominent ‘reset to default’ option that is always clearly available, adjacent to the texture control settings.

Suny Behar Cinematographer/Director (HBO Camera Assessments Series), USA

It would never come to mind to question whether we should allow painters to select the size and aspect ratio of their canvasses, or whether sculptors should have to surrender the remainder of the clay that went unused in the creation of a statue should the buyer not be happy with the finished product, and yet, these questions seem to plague cinematographers of all levels.

This topic is profound and complex. So how about a simple adage to get things going?

It is my belief that any artistic decision that is not hobbled by a visual constraint (that is either technical or monetary) at the time of conception, should be allowed to be narrowly defined into the creation of the art.

If you are shooting in B&W because colour film does not exist yet, is this choice really artistic? Or are you confined by a technical limitation? (It could be either in that case).

If you are shooting in B&W in 2023, you are choosing to exchange the entire world of wide colour gamuts for a dedicated focus on grey scale tonalities. ‘Preserving’ such images in colour isn’t about future-proofing’ but rather ‘taste-proofing’.

Cinematographic decisions are more political than they appear

Artistic and technical choices cannot be made on-set at the last minute

Ari Wegner ACS ASC Cinematographer, Australia

Personally, I’m excited by the recent developments from manufacturers who are moving beyond a one-size-fits-all default sensor to a sensor which allows us to customise performance based on the specific challenges each shot brings.

For example, when the challenge is capturing all the details of a wide landscape shot, having the sensor prioritise fine detail. When the challenge is low-light levels, having the sensor prioritise the cleanest shadows.

Yes, by altering how the sensor captures the image we are essentially ‘burning-in’ those choices, but I’m comfortable committing to choices, especially when it means gaining access to the full range of a sensor’s capabilities.

Pascale Marin AFC / Collectif Femmes à La Caméra (Women With A Movie Camera Collective) Cinematographer, France

Cinematographic decisions are more political than they appear, and they depend heavily on the content of the project.

First of all, it’s important to establish who is the decision-maker at the end of the chain: is it the director, the producer or the broadcaster?

Secondly, the digital artistic decisions we’re talking about, which can be ‘burned-in’ or not, are only part of the decisions that make up an image. Choosing to put a diffusion filter in front of the lens, shooting in spherical or Anamorphic, choosing a camera position and movement are also cinematographic decisions, and they are ‘burned-in’.

It’s also crucial to be aware that certain artistic choices can also have both economic and technical repercussions on other aspects of production.

Personally, I work mainly on independent films with relatively tight budgets, so the director is usually the one who has the final say on artistic decisions. But how inflexible are they? How well do they measure the repercussions of their choices or changes of mind?

It’s up to me to find out. It’s up to me to help them see their ideas through to the end, or even further, but not to prevent them from going backwards if that’s part of their creative process. And all this within a given time and budget, and without jeopardising the work of other departments. So, above all, it’s a question of communication, sincere and enlightened.

Philippe Ros AFC, ITC Co-chair Cinematographer, France

Having worked since the early days of digital on sharpening, colour matrix and the creation of contrast curves, I’ve always thought that baking-in information in-camera was a demanding but exciting process.

Demanding because it is essential to clarify these artistic/technical decisions with the production team and the director. Demanding because it requires preparation: these choices cannot be made on-set at the last minute.

Exciting because the cinematographer must train their eye and work out these subtleties in a colour-grading suite with the director, the colourist and the DIT.

We live in an age of more: more information, more data, more choices, and more decisions that can be delayed until postproduction. Unfortunately, the vast majority of productions have very little time for colourgrading and finishing and, for filmmakers and cinematographers, in-camera choices may be the only solution.

Digital cameras are becoming increasingly sophisticated and the challenge, I believe, is to open new creative doors not only in the workflow but also specifically in the camera. Personally, I see the latter as a sign of greater artistic maturity. It’s also the acceptance of limits in a more interesting creative process.

Aleksej Berkovic RGC ITC Co-chair Cinematographer, Germany

There are many examples in the world of cinematography when creative decisions regarding the style of the image were made contrary to the standards. Evidence can be found in the biographies of many great cinematographers.

The decision-making process on the set is part of the lifeblood of collective creativity. The precision and accuracy of pre-production on the set are met with unpredictable factors that require real-time adjustments. This living process generates the energy of participation, which shapes the final result.

The possibility for error in the visual narrative style formation cannot be excluded either theoretically or practically. However, limiting the possibility of free choice of a cinematographer does not create an increase in ‘insurance’ against mistakes, but only significantly reduces the level of creative accuracy and harmony of the result.

The birth of a significant and talented film is still a mystery. Technology offers more and more possibilities, which does not mean that cinematography is automatically becoming better and more talented.

The core remains in the creatively-inspired choice of the cinematographer, who is part of the creative team, shaping the final result. The development of LUT files, the possibility of their correction even on-set, provides an increase in the conscious involvement of all members of the team. Why then should we violate the logic of development and implement restrictions where those are clearly not needed?

The cinematographer must have the technical ability to style the look and, in many cases, must be sure that the chosen style will be the basis of the final visual presentation.

Special thanks from the ITC

We extend our wholehearted thanks to Ronnie Prince and Alan Lowne of Cinematography World who, in 2022, introduced the ITC to Claire and Rob Saunders, the directors of Euro Cine Expo, and kindly offered us a panel session at the inaugural event. In 2023, Claire and Rob offered the ITC six slots at the show. The ITC is truly grateful to these four people for supporting our committee.

You should know the ‘image attributes’ that make-up the look you’re aiming for

All creative work is based on the balance between research, practical work and intuition

Electronic ‘in-camera’ texture controls must be handled carefully and skilfully