Five years ago I started the Frame & Reference Podcast in which I interview the best Cinematographers on the planet. It’s still going strong, about to hit the 200-episode mark, but since I started it I always wanted to kind of synthesize what I’ve learned so far, for the folks who haven’t been listening along all this time.
This whole podcast thing started back during the pandemic, born out of a desire to make sure my skills were sharp for when it was time to get back to shooting. And honestly, talking to these incredible cinematographers has been one of the most rewarding experiences I’ve ever had. I’ve literally learned more doing this podcast than I ever did in film school (plus it was a lot cheaper). I’m sure at some point it could be a book, but I wanted to try and take some of that amazing insight and advice I’ve been lucky enough to soak up and put it all here for those of you who are unfamiliar with the show or haven’t heard too many episodes. This article is for anyone out there who’s just getting started and wants to know what really makes you a Cinematographer, or maybe you’ve been doing this for a while and just want to hear how some of the best in the game think about the craft. Consider this a select compilation of wisdom from the guests who’ve been generous enough with their time and knowledge to come chat with me on the show. It’s not comprehensive, but I’ve revisited 30 or so of my favorite episodes to get this all out so it’s a decent sample size.
Let’s start at the beginning, because everyone’s path into cinematography is different, and honestly, that’s one of the coolest things about it. It’s not always this straight line. Checco Varese, ASC (Them, Dopesick), for example, studied architecture in Peru, went to Italy, came back with the “arrogance of his 20s” thinking he’d teach people how to build houses, only to hit an economic crisis. He kind of happened into filmmaking when a friend needed someone who spoke multiple languages on a job. Ellen Kuras, ASC (Eternal Sunshine, Bamboozled) came to it more as a director than a DP. She wasn’t necessarily a visual person growing up, going into a more academic field, but then took a photography class in college and that clicked. Ari Wegner, ACS, ASC (The Power of the Dog, Zola) actually grew up in a very creative family in Australia (pre-LOTR, of course). Her dad was a visual artist, her mom did ceramics and jewelry, there was a lot of appreciation for art, aesthetics, light, and composition around her, even if cinema wasn’t a big part of the conversation. Eric Koretz (who shot Ozark and has another episode of F&R coming out soon to talk about Ransom Canyon!) was always making art, photography specifically, and went to college for graphic design. There have been a ton of people on the show who went from being, like, architects or physicists or poets to becoming working Cinematographers. If you’re willing to put in the work it’s possible!
So, no single path, which is something I appreciate. What matters is finding that creative spark. For some, it’s seeing a movie that blows your mind. Greg Middleton, ASC, CSC (who also has a new conversation coming out in the next few weeks, who shot Moon Knight, Watchmen, and Game of Thrones), like so many of us, saw Star Wars at age 10 and was fascinated by how the visuals were created. You probably wouldn’t be shocked at how many DPs got into this world by way of George Lucas and Stephen Spielberg. For others, it’s just being drawn to creating images or art in some form and sort of “happening” into film. That was me, as I just figured everyone showed up on set and (aside from the director and actors) mostly helped out where it was needed. Part of me thinks I shoulda got into props or SFX but that’s for another time.
Once you’re on the path (or a path I should say), the learning never stops. While film school can be great, a lot of the real learning happens on set (or even when you’re taking a break). Eric Koretz, who actually teaches at AFI, noted that while classic film school teaching about lighting basics is important, sometimes it comes down to just using what’s available, like a simple lamp or a tube, if that’s what the story calls for. He also mentioned that learning without the context of a script can lead to just doing standard things like three-point or Rembrandt lighting because you don’t know what else to do. The experience of being on set and realizing you don’t need that standard setup is crucial. Especially with how prevalent YouTube tutorials are these days, with the promise of “Guaranteed, Easy, CINEMATIC Lighting!” you’d be forgiven for thinking there’s a good “one setup fits all” solution, but there really isn’t. Every scene is different, but luckily the location can speak to you and tell you what to do once you’ve got your reps in.
Jeff Cronenweth, ASC (Fight Club, The Social Network, and the Nicole Kidman AMC spot we all love) talked about his path, which involved spending 10 years as an AC. He saw this as the “Craftsman’s route,” which he felt worked best for him as a slower learner who needed to absorb and watch before applying things himself. Working as an AC allowed him to be on bigger sets and watch “the smartest guys solve those problems,” which helped him enormously when it was time to step up. His advice for aspiring ACs is to be around cameras, go to rental houses, volunteer, drive the truck, get on set, and learn the set ethics and your roles. He stressed showing initiative because people look at you differently than other PAs who aren’t actively trying to help or learn.
The idea of learning from others is huge, but you have to learn from the right people; not everyone is worth listening to even if they seem really convincing. Jeff, along with several other ASC members I’ve spoken to, really emphasize the willingness to “shepherd in the next generation” which I really appreciate about the organization.Jeff said that while he was apprehensive at first, feeling that kids probably know more than he does, he found it rewarding and wonderful, noting the spirit and energy is “intoxicating”. Adriano Goldman (Andor, The Crown) also mentioned how he enjoys helping younger filmmakers become more confident. It’s worth trying to track down your favorite DPs and ask them questions, 9 times out of 10 they’ll respond! Don’t be too aggressive, and definitely avoid vague questions, but if you’ve got a specific question about something you’re working on that you think they might know about, let’er rip!
It’s not just about formal teaching or mentorship. It’s easy to get stuck constantly reading books and forums trying to “prepare for anything” but just straight up watching movies is a fundamental part of the education. Jeff suggested looking at IMDB’s top 50 movies, watching them, and listening to behind-the-scenes talks or commentaries from directors like Coppola on The Godfather or Miloš Forman on One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Watch movies and see how the “great greats” do it! If you’ve heard any episodes of F&R you’ve likely heard me bemoan the slow death of the Special Feature, and I’m serious about that: Get a Blu Ray player, use your Playstation or Xbox if you have one, and start watching Special Features and Directors Commentaries! If you have a subscription to American Cinematographer you know how valuable that kind of stuff is, and it comes for free with your favorite movies! Criterion and Arrow especially have a wealth of supplementary info on their discs and are well worth your time.
Jeff even recommended watching something like Heart of Darkness (the documentary about the making of Apocalypse Now, which comes with a lot of the Bluray editions) if you really want to understand how hard movies are to make and what people go through. I remember watching that in a college class and at a certain point I came to the realization I wasn’t watching a documentary about the actual Vietnam War. It’s an intense doc. I also recommend Fog City Mavericks, The Story of Film, The Matrix Revisited, and the 3-DVD Special Edition of Panic Room that has documentaries about every step of the production from pre- to post. Hellboy 2 has a really great making-of featurette as well. Oh, and the LOTR Special Edition DVD sets, those making-of docs are like 12 hours long. Anyway!
Another crucial aspect of learning, and something that comes up time and time again, is learning from your mistakes. Koretz mentioned that when teaching, he feels he’s more beneficial being open and honest about the mistakes he’s made and how others can learn from them, rather than just talking about how great he is. If you do everything right every time, you should be scared. You’re either not pushing yourself, playing it too safe, or you’ve got a huge blind spot that’s going to whollop you soon.
He noted that failure is “far more informative than doing a great job” and that mistakes in life inform and hone you. Ula Pontikos (Russian Doll) mentioned how many times she’s heard cinematographers say that with digital cameras, they can actually “sleep at night” because they see what they’re getting immediately, unlike film where you had to pray you read the light meter right and the lab didn’t screw up your negative. Ellen Kuras vividly recalled being on her first film in Cambodia, getting to the Killing Fields, setting up her camera shaking, and praying she wasn’t messing up the light meter reading.
That nerve-wracking experience underscores the importance of truly knowing how to expose and shape your image. I still use my light meter all the time; I don’t even set up the camera, truly, until I’ve got my lights up and roughed in. To be honest it’s just so people don’t hover over the monitor and ask why “it looks like that” when it’s not ready. Then I’ll bring up the EL zones to see where my Dynamic Range is sitting, where my ratios are, and then finally just go with the image alone to give it the final “vibes check” and see if my “technically correct” image is serving my “emotionally correct” needs.
Greg Middleton suggested that to truly learn, you should find out the first time a technique was used and study why they did it. This applies to everything, even VFX or complex modern techniques: figuring out the problem they were trying to solve originally informs everything, and oftentimes will tell you more than just knowing the “how” we employ today. He also mentioned the publication Cinefex (which unfortunately went out of business) as a great resource for this. I’ve actually got most of the Cinefex backlog, luckily, only missing a handful of issues (if anyone has extras let me know!) Also, if you dig that kinda thing, Befores & Afters by Ian Failes is a great spiritual successor to Cinefex.
Okay, so you’re learning, you’re shooting, maybe you’re assisting. What is the role of the Cinematographer, really? It’s way more than just picking cool shots or the right lenses. Owen McPolin, ISC (Penny Dreadful, Foundation) put it well when he said how it’s really about celebrating the work of everyone else: the actors, costumers, production designers, everything in front of the camera. It’s more about carrying their stuff forward than imposing yourself. Filmmaking is inherently a team sport. Cronenweth emphasized this, saying that it’s not a place for ego; you’re helping the team. You’re documenting and enhancing their work. You’re almost in a position of hospitality.
Haris Zambarloukous, BSC GSC (Belfast, Thor), noted that working with director Kenneth Branagh, editor Una Ní Dhonghaíle described their process as very collaborative. She speaks plainly, tells him clearly what she likes and doesn’t like, and edits accordingly. This kind of freedom and collaboration, where someone is imbued with responsibility rather than just taking dictat, is what makes it interesting. Ari also stressed the importance of relationships, not just with the director and crew, but even “the people that you leave at home”. She feels that relationships are so important, sometimes even more important than a single creative decision on set. For her, there’s “no battle worth having” over one idea versus another if it risks the relationship, and she believes that the “good work also comes from that”. Communication is key in these relationships.
While the creative side is paramount, there’s also a practical reality to the job. Erik Messerschmidt, ASC (Mank, Devotion, Ferrari) pointed out that the studio or production company has a very specific metric for judging whether a day was successful. Did you shoot the call sheet? Did you break for lunch on time? What were the meal penalties? How many pre-calls? He noted that the Cinematographer is ultimately responsible for a lot of these things, and you have to get good at “playing that game to some degree” so that everybody walks away thinking it was a great day. It’s a “very weird metric” that’s not based on the dailies, and is often at odds with the DP’s goals as no one watching a film with bad Cinematography goes “oh well, at least they made their day!”. It’s a balance.
That being said, let’s talk about the actual image. This is where the art meets the science, the vision meets the tools, the light meets the emulsion. A common thread among several DPs is an approach rooted in naturalism. Messerschmidt said his “automatic place of where I start is from naturalism”. He cited Gordon Willis as his hero, noting Willis considered the environment instead of just using a glamorous key light because it “looked good from camera right”. This approach feels similar between Ferrari and The Killer, even though they have completely different looks. You let the scene tell you where the light’s coming from naturally, and then you enhance it (or simply sculpt it) as necessary.
Lighting isn’t just about exposing your scene; it’s about shaping it. Robert Yeoman, ASC stresses this point, particularly to intermediate students. Turning the light on is just the first step, and sometimes that’s all you need to do if the light is giving you the right quality! But oftentimes you have to diffuse it, bounce it, cut it, or color it to get the effect you want. One thing I personally try to tell students or new DPs is that, whatever is the last thing between the light and your subject: that’s the new light. So for instance, if you want a bare source then it might be worth really considering the type of fixture you’re using. If, however, you’re going to put a bunch of light through a big piece of diffusion… does it really matter? Sure you need enough power but as long as you’ve got that and enough room for the spread to be appropriate, it can be made by any company in any form, it doesn’t need to be a Skypanel or from Creamsource or whatever. Another little tip for anyone just starting out: make your key light darker. Most of you have that thing way too bright. Have it be at “middle gray” for your camera, and start from there.
Developing a personal style or aesthetic is a journey. Isaac Bauman (Loki S2), who started in music videos, found it hard to develop a sense of style there because of the abbreviated prep and production phases. It was only through shooting narrative that he had the time to sit and think about style, voice, and how his voice might interact with what a project was calling for. He believes he has a “consistent aesthetic” with underlying “bones” that are always there, even if it changes from project to project. I think that’s pretty true of any working DP, and although he says he “doesn’t have a style” even Roger Deakins has a way of working that is often recognizable, even though none of his projects are necessarily “the same”.
Sometimes the project calls for a very specific look, like creating a period film that feels authentic, not just window dressing. Eigil Bryld talked about shooting The Holdovers wanting it to look like it was actually made in 1970 or 1971 and then discovered 50 years later. This meant going to great lengths in post, not only with the image but sound too, mixing everything to mono and limiting the decibel level of loud noises. Surprisingly, they tested shooting real film on that movie and came to the conclusion that modern film (intended and developed to be scanned) was actually too clean! They figured they’d have to dirty it up anyway in post, so why not just shoot digital and save the headache? This also highlights how important the style of lighting and shooting was, sticking only to methods that were of the time. He said director Alexander Payne had “utter commitment” to this look, not letting anything slip. Eigil felt this period, the 70s, along with the 90s, was a “golden age of Cinema,” partly due to the counterculture and liberation that led to movements like the Dogma 97 films in Denmark where filmmakers like Lars von Trier were saying, “f*** the man, we don’t need money, guns, or VFX, we’ll just go do it.” This focus on constraints can be liberating creatively, and honestly if you have too many options you end up just making something generic or without intent. Constraints are good. These days you can do anything, so as we’ve mentioned on the show before: what don’t you do? That’s what’ll help distinguish your look, tone, and intent.
Speaking of constraints and tools, the tools of the trade are always evolving. We’ve talked about the classic film vs. digital debate plenty of times on the show, and it’ll probably never be “solved” but we certainly try. Jarin Blaschke (Nosferatu), Zambarloukous, and Yeoman still shoot a lot of film. Messerschmidt is pretty agnostic but seems to be firmly in the digital camp. The main reason, in my mind, that there’s even still a debate at all is because seriously good Digital Cinema Cameras, that hold up to film and surpass it both in image and workflow, are relatively recent. Now film has become a choice as opposed to the rule. Koretz talked about the Canon 5D Mark II coming out when he was getting out of school (when I was mid-college), which was a groundbreaking tool for him because it allowed a “more cinematic look” with proper shallow depth of field, unlike the shitty cameras we’d been using before. It’s less important now but at the time with the tech we had, we had to shoot at like 120mm just to get any separation! He stressed the importance of staying on top of what tools are coming out and how they can improve your work. Oren Soffer discussed famously using prosumer tools on The Creator, noting they would have “used the Sony FX3 even if it cost $40 billion because it was the right tool for the job”, but he really hammered home how important the colorist, ILM (for VFX), and costuming/production design on that film were. The camera is important but is more of a workflow consideration than an image consideration (cue Yedlin). I’ve actually had a number of DPs mention using more prosumer cameras these days, with Catherine Goldschmidt, ASC, BSC (The Last of Us, House of the Dragon) telling me she used a Ronin 4D on some specialty shots in The Last of US: Part 2 (Ed Moore, BSC told me he owns two of them, and also has an F&R episode coming out soon about Silo Season 2!) and on Andor Season 2 I read that they used FX6s and FX3s for cockpit shots in the Tie Avenger. We’re a long way from GoPros as crash cams! Even Greig Fraser, ACS, ASC used prosumer equipment on Dune 1 & 2 in the form of Aputure lights (check out his lighting plots and bts photos here).
The importance of post-production, especially color grading, can not be overstated in modern cinematography. Pretty much every DP I’ve spoken to feels that cinematography now has one foot firmly in post, and one on set. While you might get 90% of the way there in-camera, the grade allows you to refine the look in pretty drastic ways, but also add life or texture. However, Erik Messerschmidt mentioned the challenge with something like commercials, especially in the US, is that he agency might just take the footage and you don’t participate in the post-production at all. He’s seen commercials graded by someone else where he didn’t even recognize how he shot it. He did say, though, that art-directing flares and diffusion, like they did on The Killer and Mindhunter, is totally accessible and not overly sophisticated; it just requires the right tools in post. I actually learned from him how easy it was to do split comps (if you have a locked-off or nodal shot, you can put a light or microphone closer and composite it out later), so I have no fear of gear in the shot as long as I know I’m editing the footage and get a clean plate. They did that a ton on Zone of Interest to remove cameras, as everything was kinda done like a play in “one take”. It’s also great to be your own colorist, or at least know you’re working with one and have a relationship with them, because once you know how that workflow operates it can help you make the call to stop fussing with lights and flags and get to shooting when you know you can just, for instance, “bring that wall down in the grade”. It’s not always the answer but if it’s gonna save you an hour on set, it might be worth considering. Even a show like Severance (shot by Jessica Lee Gagne) has every single frame touched by ILM in some way. Even if you’re not dealing with CG characters, you will be working with VFX to some degree at a certain level.
For aspiring DPs, or even experienced ones looking for inspiration or refining their craft, resources are everywhere. Aside from Frame & Reference, I always recommend The Cine Lens Manual and Shotcraft by Jay Holben (the former written with Christopher Probst, ASC), my friend Markus Forderer, ASC, BVK (September 5, Constellation) has the CINEFLARES database, Messerschmidt suggested Hitchcock/Truffaut to me, a bunch of DPs have mentioned “Masters of Light” (of which F&R is kind of a spiritual successor), the Darius Khondji book by Synecdoche is fantastic, there’s almost too many to list. Even Ansel Adams’ “The Camera, The Negative, and The Print” are invaluable to today’s modern filmmakers.
Beyond technical resources, learning involves understanding the history of cinema. Whatever you love, figure out what those filmmakers loved! Think of yourself as a point on a filmmaking family tree and trace your roots back! I have found so many great films by just listening to DPs or Directors talk about what inspires them in commentaries or in these interviews. I’ve got notes scribbled for days of films I need to watch, it’s hard to keep up! Especially when I’m prone to buying the Bluray instead of finding it on streaming, haha
Maintaining a healthy lifestyle outside of film is also important to a healthy creative career. A bunch of DPs have talked about it but Ari specifically mentioned the idea of the “tortured artist” as having a romance to it, but ultimately not being a great way to live. She believes that when you’re more clear-headed and your relationships are healthy, you’re better able to explore and articulate emotions in your art. If you’re really interested in the sort of “personal side” of the work, definitely check out my conversations with her, Jessica Lee Gagne, both episodes with Koretz, the upcoming episode with Andy Rydzewski, Chris Ray’s episode, Anka Malatynska’s, and Larry Fong’s. There’s definitely more but that’s who I can think of at the moment.
So, what’s the advice at the end of all this for the TL;DR crowd?
- Embrace your unique path. There’s no one right way to get into cinematography.
- Never stop learning. Watch movies, read books, and study the history.
- Learn by doing, and especially learn from your mistakes. Failure is incredibly informative. Take any gig you can.
- Understand your role as part of a team. You’re there to help tell the story and carry forward the work of other departments. It’s not just about you or your shots.
- Relationships are paramount. Value communication and prioritize healthy relationships with directors and crew over creative battles.
- Master the craft, but also trust your instincts. Sometimes you can overthink things; the first thought or second thought is often the right one. Use your instincts. there are no absolute rules, only what works for the story and for you.
- Look at your set and approach lighting with naturalism as a starting point, but be prepared to shape the light and use what the environment gives you. Single source lighting is beautiful, but maybe your scene calls for something more theatrical!
- Develop your own style, but also serve the project’s voice. The project might call for something different than your norm, which is an opportunity for growth.
- Understand the role of post-production like color grading and VFX. Learn how your work on set impacts these stages and how to collaborate effectively.
- Stay curious about technology, but remember the tool should serve the story, not the other way around.
- Be open and honest. Sharing your struggles helps others learn.
- Find your Zen. Non-artistic challenges can build resilience but avoid the idea of being a “tortured artist” for its own sake; healthy relationships and a clear head can actually make your art better.
- Take your health seriously. Get 8 hours of sleep. Work out. Eat right. It’s crucially important, as once you’re on set a lot of that goes out the window and you need to be in it for the long haul.
Being a cinematographer is a complex, challenging, and incredibly rewarding job. It requires technical skill, artistic vision, collaborative spirit, and a constant willingness to learn and adapt. The insights shared by these DPs, from their creative origins to their on-set practices and philosophies, offer a fantastic roadmap for anyone interested in this field and I highly recommend you give them a look. Frame & Reference is available on whatever app you want (Apple, Spotify, and YouTube are the most common) and it’s totally free. They’re about an hour and some change each and I promise you that it’s worth your time. These people are storytellers at the end of the day, and they’ve got their own stories to tell.
This week’s episode with “Black Mirror” Cinematographer Stephan Pehrsson, BSC is out now.