My mom came for a visit this last weekend and rather than just eat, watch movies, and be lazy, I took her to two of San Diego County's state parks. After her plane arrived I proposed that we take a quick drive over to Point Loma to visit the Cabrillo National Monument. The park is named after Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo, a Portuguese explorer, who landed in San Diego in 1542 while looking for trade routes to Asia. Little did he know that the Asia was all the way across the Pacific Ocean and he was a long, long way off! However, this was the first time a European had landed on the west coast of the United States.
In 1935 the Portuguese government commissioned the Cabrillo statue seen in the park. This was after multiple failed attempts by the U.S. government to erect a proper statue. Of course, the first attempt was around the time of World War 1, so you *could say* that Fort Rosecrans was a bit distracted. Finally in 1949 the statue was installed at the national monument after being stored in California for many years. However, the original sandstone statue began to deteriorate, so in 1988 the U.S. government replaced the statue with a limestone replica that exists there today.
The Cabrillo National Monument is located at the far southern tip of Fort Rosecrans, which was an active military base off limits to civilians during World War 2. We were lucky during out visit because they were allowing people to go inside an actual military bunker. It was a small space with two levels and a metal ladder connecting the two stories. The upper level is used for the sea patrol look out and the lower level contained very cramped living quarters. All dozen of us in there at one time were packed in like sardines!
The Old Point Loma Lighthouse was completed in 1855, just four years after California joined the United States. The visitor center has a documented description the somewhat isolated life of a light house keeper. He lived there with his wife and an assistant in very cramped quarters. They only occasionally received visitors from the "town" of San Diego, because going around the bay was a significant journey....which takes all of 15 minutes today. On October 25, 2014 the park plans to allow visitors to climb up into the actual lighthouse.
In 1891 the light house was abandoned in favor of one closer to sea level because fog is an issue in San Diego bay. However it's not as much of an issue for the new light house just down the cliff to the west.
One interesting thing I learned is that the lens that is used in every light house is a Fresnel lens, the same as most modern film lights! You can see the concentric patterns in the glass jar that houses the kerosene flame. When fully lit, it was estimated that the light could be seen as far as 25 miles off shore.
On Sunday we visited the Anza-Borrego State Park visitor center in Borrego Springs. Unfortunately with the current California drought the scenery wasn't the most picturesque it could be. With the rains this weekend hopefully the desert sprouts up its well known wildflowers.
The 600,000 acre park established in 1933 was named after Spanish explorer Juan Bautista de Anza and the Spanish word for bighorn sheep, borrego. Today it's better known as the source of my grapefruit at Trader Joe's! What makes this hot, arid desert ripe for farming? Well...you know the Grand Canyon? The Anza Borrego desert was once ocean, however all the dirt that was carved out of the Grand Canyon by the Colorado River had to go somewhere - so it ended up in southern California forming a vast desert where photographers flock to fry in the sun.
Here are a couple panorama photos of the desert. The first one looks east from the visitor center toward the town of Borrego Springs. The second photo looks north from the visitor center. If you look closely you can just barely see the RV park on the far right. Click on the photos to make them larger.
On the way back we went through Santa Ysabel, which brought up the locally known Julian apple pies. That necessitated a trip to the Julian Pie Company. The picture says the rest.
I stumbled upon Emmanuel Lubezki's Instagram account today. This is what I should be doing with photography...always a student. Click on the link to see some of the photos from this soon to be Oscar winning cinematography for the film "Gravity." I personally enjoyed the ones picturing nature.
Lately I've been cleaning up some audio from a project I shot nearly five years ago. It's about to head out for a film festival screening. People always question my advice when I tell them to get it right on set. They don't know how many sleepless nights I've spent fixing bad audio, noisy video, bad lighting/exposure/white balance...and here I am at it again, 4.5 years later on material that needs to be resurrected for a special showing with a backache from the edit chair.
The first lesson I learned the hard way is to get it right in camera. When I started out five years ago I was judging things by eye and my beginner eye wasn't as good as it is now. As a result I ended up with noisy video that was underexposed and the white balance was uncorrect-ably off. Through the years I've learned techniques that can help this footage just look reasonably OK. However, that took hundreds of hours of experimenting and rendering and experimenting and editing...until it didn't appear to be *too* messed up to use. In contrast, I shot another part of this project two years ago and the only thing I did to that footage is add a tone curve in certain sections because it fit the mood (about 15 minutes). So - get it right in camera.
Even the legendary Roger Deakins talks about creating a "thick negative" requiring little post production to make the movie look like it should. So when newbie directors tell me that they are learning Davinci Resolve to color grade all their problems out of the footage I cringe and advise them otherwise. Why not get it right in camera and concentrate on telling the story in post production, rather than color processing all your footage? Resolve is great for applying stylistic looks and fixing an occasional oops, but it's not a crutch for broken cinematography.
I also learned that unless you have a serious budget, don't shoot in a "raw" codec. Raw requires serious computer horse power, drive space, and an expert eye for color grading. If you need a good codec, use Prores. Just because you can color grade a film doesn't mean that you should plan to, unless you're looking for a highly stylized look that can't be achieved in camera like Sin City. Even then, there are ways to get close to the final look in camera. A good experienced DP will help save you from massive post production. People read all these blogs and think it's simple to just shoot with whatever settings on the camera and fix it in post. It isn't.
Then there's audio. I thought it would be simple to just use a lavalier mic, read blogs on how to hide it on clothing, and use that. Well...the audio has been in post clean up for five years. Some of it had to be abandoned and I had to edit around what I have left that is suitable for fixing. Now every time I have to one-man-band-it I take my laptop and MOTU traveler along with a good set of headphones. That way I can see the graph of the audio waveform to check for clipping as well as listen for any undesirable noises intruding on my audio. People read blogs and think everything can be fixed via SoundSoap or other software. It can't be fixed a lot of the time. I've done audio post for nine years and there are still things I just can't fix even with the best analysis tools. With the audio I captured two years ago on my current project using a shotgun microphone all I had to do was fix inconsistent levels due to loudness variation of my interview subject (30 minutes).
Then there's ADR. So many directors think that if they can't get good sound in production they'll just ADR-it in post. In my experience amateur actors have a really tough time reproducing their dialog and emotion in a sound booth. We spent 2 months doing ADR on a feature film this last summer with all the dialog audio that was messed up in production. On a short I shot it took multiple weekends to get the ADR audio "close enough" and that was a seven minute film. I swore up and down to use good audio capture techniques after that. I want to tell a story, not be a sound engineer.
On top of this I've decided that I want to be a cinematographer. I don't want to direct, write, act, produce (most of the time), edit, design sound, VFX, nor color time. The 10,000 hour rule applies to each of those. If you want to be a director - be a director. If you want to run a camera department - learn how to run a camera, light a set, and manage a crew. In my experience the more you try to do by yourself in narrative film making, the more mistakes occur. I don't want to fix five year old mistakes anymore. I want to be building toward my 10,000 hours of experience in my chosen skill.
This said, it takes time to learn how to get it right on set. I tell people who are greener at production than me to expect to mess up their first few projects. I did. My colleagues did. Everyone I know did. But people new to production don't want to believe me because they're smarter than that. They've watched the latest Youtube tutorial! It's OK to mess up your first film. Just let it go and move on. You'll learn how to get in right with those mess up's. I did.
I was at the ASC open house event in Hollywood yesterday. Most of the big players in film photography were there; Dean Cundley (Back to the Future series), Daniel Pearl (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre), Owen Roizman (The French Connection), Phedon Papamicheal (The Monuments Men), Shane Hurlbut (Need for Speed), Jeff Crownenweth (The Social Network), Bill Bennett (...just about every car commercial made now days), Caleb Deschanel (The Right Stuff - and his daughter Zoe!), and many more. I even sat down with Isidore Minkofsky (The Muppet Movie) for a bit...and frankly if I had known he shot The Muppet Movie I would probably have completely geeked out!
I was talking with another person at the event that was looking to get more into filmmaking. My advice to him was to fail harder. Later that evening I met some friends at LA Live for dinner and as I was walking back, trying to avoid any accidental security violations at the Grammys, I thought to myself why aren't I failing harder? Last year I made a commitment to learn more about lighting and camera work. It's time for me to put that knowledge to work and take more risks. In order to move to the next level I need to fail more often, otherwise I'm living in this safe zone bubble and my work will never progress.