Originally Posted by deckard24

I still haven't decided how I feel overall about KOTCS, but when I see it for the second time tomorrow I'll have a better idea of where I stand. One thing is for sure Janusz Kaminski's cinematography was as distracting and out of place as I knew it would be!! It seems Spielberg's continual use of him for his films, really gives weight to the argument that he's gotten complacent, comfortable, and somewhat lazy in his advancing years.

If you go back to Jaws in 1975, Spielberg used Bill Butler for his cinematography, then for Close Encounters of the Third Kind he used Vilmos Zsigmond, for 1941 William A. Fraker, for Raiders of the Lost Ark , Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade Douglas Slocombe, for E.T. Allen Daviau, for The Twilight Zone:The Movie Allen Daviau, John Hora, and Steven Larner, for The Color Purple and Empire of the Sun Allen Daviau again, for Always Mikael Saolomon, for Hook and Jurassic Park Dean Cundey. Then from Schindler's List(1993) to Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull( 2008), 11 films in total plus 4 more over the few years including the upcoming Lincoln, Spielberg has used and will use Kaminski!:confused: 15 films?!

I don't get it! Spielberg switched up cinematographers continually for some of his greatest films Jaws, Close Encounters, and E.T., the Indy series with exception, but now he's gotten into this trend of Kaminski and Kaminski only! I for one am sick of Kaminski's visual style! His blue/grey metallic palette, overly lit, hazy atmospheric look has gotten stale. I personally think KOTCS would have been light years better if someone other then Kaminski was behind the lens. Come on Spielberg, get out of your rut and mix things up again!!

What do you guys think?

Originally Posted by Matt Holcomb

All will be revealed in the upcoming American Cinematographer article.

Originally Posted by playmountain

According to David Mullen ASC (DP on The Astronaut Farmer among others) over at Cinematography.com:

"I talked to someone working on the movie who said that they were shooting 35mm anamorphic, Panavision C and E-Series, and did not plan on doing a D.I. (Digital Intermediate) except for the digital efx that had to be transferred to film, otherwise a traditional film post."

C and E-series Panavision anamorphics do date back to the original films.

I did hear that Kaminski was using his usual diffusion filters, which the original series of films did not really do (except for a few scenes shot with Dior nets, particularly in "The Last Crusade"). But I also heard that they were lighting to deeper stops like Slocombe used to do, shooting on average around a T/8."

***

So, overall... very good news! For those keeping track, this will be Spielberg's first 2.40:1 aspect ratio film shot with anamorphic glass since Hook in 1991. His last film, Munich was shot in the Super 35 format using spherical glass with a 2.40:1 theatrical AR.

Originally Posted by deckard24

I still haven't decided how I feel overall about KOTCS, but when I see it for the second time tomorrow I'll have a better idea of where I stand. One thing is for sure Janusz Kaminski's cinematography was as distracting and out of place as I knew it would be!! It seems Spielberg's continual use of him for his films, really gives weight to the argument that he's gotten complacent, comfortable, and somewhat lazy in his advancing years.

If you go back to Jaws in 1975, Spielberg used Bill Butler for his cinematography, then for Close Encounters of the Third Kind he used Vilmos Zsigmond, for 1941 William A. Fraker, for Raiders of the Lost Ark , Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade Douglas Slocombe, for E.T. Allen Daviau, for The Twilight Zone:The Movie Allen Daviau, John Hora, and Steven Larner, for The Color Purple and Empire of the Sun Allen Daviau again, for Always Mikael Saolomon, for Hook and Jurassic Park Dean Cundey. Then from Schindler's List(1993) to Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull( 2008), 11 films in total plus 4 more over the few years including the upcoming Lincoln, Spielberg has used and will use Kaminski!:confused: 15 films?!

I don't get it! Spielberg switched up cinematographers continually for some of his greatest films Jaws, Close Encounters, and E.T., the Indy series with exception, but now he's gotten into this trend of Kaminski and Kaminski only! I for one am sick of Kaminski's visual style! His blue/grey metallic palette, overly lit, hazy atmospheric look has gotten stale. I personally think KOTCS would have been light years better if someone other then Kaminski was behind the lens. Come on Spielberg, get out of your rut and mix things up again!!

What do you guys think?

Originally Posted by torao

There's an old thread from pre-release times containing some potentially interesting (I'm unable to judge) stuff about Skull's cinematography:



There has also been this thread about all film stock questions, btw.

Originally Posted by AtomicAge

I will say that I love what Kaminski did with Catch Me If You Can. It's warm and colorful. Beautifully photographed film.

Doug

Originally Posted by Blade

Doug - When Catch me if you can was good it was amazing - I'm thinking of the scene at the pool / hotel when hanks nearly catches di caprio and the scene towards the end with come fly with me is being played. However, most of the film doesn't live up to these highs imo. Is that fair?

Originally Posted by segask

here it is: http://www.ascmag.com/magazine_dynam...kull/page1.php

a few quotes:
says Kaminski. “An Indiana Jones film has to have that glossy, warm look with strong, high-key lighting. It’s suspenseful but not too dark — you always see things clearly. We also had to recognize that we couldn’t use some of the same tricks that worked 20 years ago because the audience has become more sophisticated; today, you can’t use a torch in a cave scene and have light coming from other directions. We were always asking, ‘How can we do this as well as Douglas Slocombe but make it a bit more contemporary?’ ...

... Kaminski frequently softened the image with Schneider Classic Soft filters to create “an idyllic Americana look.” ...

...A 4K Xenon lamp was used to create the hard shadow on the car in full daylight. “We were in New Mexico, and it was 108°, and all of our electronic lights kept shutting off because of the heat, . . . We ended up giving a lot of star treatment to all the electronic lighting because it just hated being in that kind of temperature. Steven just smiled and said, ‘Well, that’s why we used arcs last time!’” ...

...Kaminski muses, “It was a tremendous honor to follow in Douglas Slocombe’s footsteps and continue the visual style he established. At the same time, I was happy to be able to create my own interpretation of the material, because this movie takes place 20 years later. Overall, it was great to be part of the legacy of Indiana Jones.”

Originally Posted by gear01

Maybe Douglas Slocombe is the unsung hero of the first 3 Indy films.
I totally agree with deckard24, I hated the look of KOTCS. I hated the washed out, overexposed dull frosty look of KOTCS. Go back and watch the originals, lush colors, crisp details, and excellent lighting.

Originally Posted by FILMKRUSC

I also got sick and tired of seeing all the lens flares in KOTCS. For me lens flares are not stylistic but sloppy uninspired lighting.

Originally Posted by StoneTriple

It's in keeping with the other three films.

http://raven.theraider.net/showpost....0&postcount=19

Originally Posted by gear01

I totally agree with deckard24, I hated the look of KOTCS. I hated the washed out, overexposed dull frosty look of KOTCS. Go back and watch the originals, lush colors, crisp details, and excellent lighting.
Also, the trilogy's placement of the camera, with interesting angles, and the camera set in realistic locations with attention to composition. Something glaringly different in KOTCS was the computer generated flyover or flyaround shots. In the original films every camera was mounted to a truck, the ground, or a helicopter or a plane, throughout the originals the camera was attached to a physical thing.
If there was a matte painting it was a 2 dimensional element that was creatively composited with live action footage or effects. That was the formula we remember and love. It should have been recreated, but sadly was not.

Originally Posted by Sankara

I like Kaminski.

Originally Posted by Ben Friend of Indy

The basic look of the film I don't really hate, it's just that when it gets bright, it gets REALLY bright with it looking like there's a glow on everything. But on the other hand, when they hit it, they really hit it. For me, the graveyard/Orellana's cradle sequence is a highlight of the film on just about every level--particularly cinematography. This was the best. It seemed like generally, the darker scenes were the ones that looked the best.

As I watch it on DVD, though, I'm finding more scenes where I like the look of them. It's certainly not as sharp a contrast as something like, say, TPM to AOTC.

Originally Posted by IndyJess

The washed out, overexposed dull frosty look of KOTCS was the pits. But why the harsh lighting on Harrison's craggy face?

Originally Posted by Darth Vile

I agree... The warehouse, Oxley's cell, the graveyard/Orellana's tomb and the interior of Akator are all wonderfully lit. I also don't have much issue with the romanticized lighting of some of the interior shots e.g. the diner, college classroom or Indy's house... it's more the external jungle/waterfall scenes where it’s apparent.

Originally Posted by Major West

It's called a mirror.

Originally Posted by Vance

It's the overuse of CGI all over the place. You can easily tell that much of the 'outside' locations were actually CGI tweaked (nearly all of the jungle sequences were almost entirely CGI, ala "Clones" and "Sith"). That made the lighting and everything look much more... 'video-gamey'. You can see the palette dithering and other effects quite easily in the shots, which make them look poor compared to the oddly crisper 'real world' shots in other places.

Originally Posted by AtomicAge

Actually its not. If you watch the extra features on the DVD you'll find that about 80 to 90% of the Jungle scenes are Hawaii untouched.