# Great Cinematographers



## Guest (Nov 17, 2020)

I thought about this thread when I was discussing Karl Struss and the film '*Sunrise*'. These artists of the camera (and lighting) made glorious contributions to the art of cinema. It's just not always about the acting, the script and the direction. If a film looks good it came imbue the quotidian with real art; conversely a very good narrative can sink like a stone if the images don't look good. Think static cameras and 'theatrical' films like "Quo Vadis"; the colour was good but the camera just didn't move much. Of course, this can be the director's fault too. It was Shirley Jones, in a documentary about the making of "Carousel", who said that director Henry King didn't understand how to utilize the large screen and, as a consequence, the film doesn't look as good as it might otherwise. The mise-en-scene worked but the camera didn't really do much with it!!

I'll start this thread with *Gregg Toland*; in my opinion, amongst the very greatest cinematographers ever. He's certainly my number one. Many of you will be familiar with Gregg Toland. Sadly he died much too young; at only 44 years old. Incalculable tragedy.

There's the inimitable Toland _chiaroscuro_; his very best include "The Grapes of Wrath", "Wuthering Heights", "Ball of Fire", "Citizen Kane" and "The Best Years of Our Lives". He was a monochrome artist, who bathed his scenes in "Best Years..." in a rich, velvety hew of shadows and light - creating depth and complexity to the quintessential suburban American home and its familiar characters. He let the image tell the story behind the characters and director Wyler was able to bring them to life with his characteristic elan and tight control.

Look at this glorious scene and its masterful 3-key lighting: try to image this scene with all the lights on - without dimension or depth - to gain an understanding of Toland's aesthetic.






I found another one (the complete film is on the internet, which is unusual). Here Al Stephenson's homecoming is bathed in light. Look at *19:25 through to 20:52*. Toland was a poet!!






Gregg Toland was a war correspondent who also saw action with John Ford. He was a hero of Howard Hawks who named his youngest child in Gregg Toland's honour.

He was a great cinematographer who went on to influence cinema for decades. One such is Roger Deakins, who has worked in monochrome with the Coen Brothers.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Toland was great, and for me was the star of Citizen Kane. Welles admitted later that he secretly gave him advice on camera placement and lighting, so that the young Welles wouldn't be embarrassed in front of the crew, so he seems a real nice guy also.

My pick is Victtorio Storaro. The Conformist looks like no other film I've ever seen. It's often described as dream-like, but I feel it's more realistic as I would see those places in real life, or at least get that same impression. Also his work on Apocalypse Now. Now that feels dream-like (or nightmarish).


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

yes, cinematography is important. I like photography so I know how important is composition, lighting etc. And BW photography or BW movies are very different from color movies. It is a play with shadows and light. Personally, I am not that good at recognizing who is a good actor and who isnt, but I do appreciate good shots. That is why I like to watch some artistic movies purely for the cinematographic pleasure. A recent example of a cinematographically great movies is for example La Grande Belezza (The Great Beauty).


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

some of my favorites:

Jack Cardiff 
the guy behind the gorgeous technicolor of many works of Powell and Pressburger, and also Albert Lewin. Movies like Red Shoes, A matter of life and death and Pandora are a pleasure for the eyes.

Stanley Cortez - Night of the hunter, the magnificent Ambersons, Shock corridor
Haskell Wexler - In the heat of the night
Carlo Di Palma - Red Desert
James Wong Howe - Seconds
Giulio Albonico - Dead of summer
Sergei Urusevsky and Alexander Calzetti - Soy Cuba (one of the most visually astonishing movies ever made)
Freddie Francis - The innocents
Alexsei Rodionov - Come and see
Gerry Turpin - Seance on a wet afternoon


----------



## Prodromides (Mar 18, 2012)

Monochrome photography is also my preference. Most of my favorite films are from the early 1960s and late 1950s, anyway, when there were 50/50 color/black-and-white film productions.

*Eugen Schüfftan*: LILITH, THE HUSTLER, EYES WITHOUT A FACE, etc.

*Gabriel Figueroa*: THE NIGHT OF THE IGUANA + the Mexican films by Luis Buñuel

*Douglas Slocombe*: THE SERVANT, FREUD, THE L-SHAPED ROOM, etc.

*Gilbert Taylor*: REPULSION, THE BEDFORD INCIDENT, YIELD TO THE NIGHT, etc.

*Sacha Vierny*: HYPOTHESIS OF THE STOLEN PAINTING, LAST YEAR AT MARIENBAD, etc.

*Gianni Di Venanzo*: HANDS OVER THE CITY, EVA, THE ECLIPSE, etc.

*Sven Nykvist*: LOVING COUPLES + films of Ingmar Bergman

plus the work that *Conrad Hall* had done in THE OUTER LIMITS:










"It Crawled Out of the Woodwork" + "The Forms of Things Unknown"










... regarding color cinematography, I love some of work that Hungarian *Gábor Pogány* did in Europe (mostly Italian co-productions) such as 10:30 P.M. SUMMER, DOCTOR FAUSTUS, BLUEBEARD, etc.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Whoever did "Spring Forward" was a master cinematographer. The sound design is incredible too


----------



## Guest (Nov 17, 2020)

norman bates said:


> some of my favorites:
> 
> Jack Cardiff
> the guy behind the gorgeous technicolor of many works of Powell and Pressburger, and also Albert Lewin. Movies like Red Shoes, A matter of life and death and Pandora are a pleasure for the eyes.
> ...


I was going to discuss James Wong Howe shortly. I just watched 'Hud' again recently and it looks superb.


----------



## Guest (Nov 17, 2020)

Prodromides said:


> Monochrome photography is also my preference. Most of my favorite films are from the early 1960s and late 1950s, anyway, when there were 50/50 color/black-and-white film productions.
> 
> *Eugen Schüfftan*: LILITH, THE HUSTLER, EYES WITHOUT A FACE, etc.
> 
> ...


These are amazing screen shots!! Actually, I've generally preferred monochrome film because of its inherent artistic properties.

Of course, there are splendid colour films - example, the saturated colours and filters (Ok, that's also film stock) of Leon Shamroy for "*South Pacific*". Absolutely gorgeous.


----------



## Guest (Nov 17, 2020)

There's 'the prince of darkness', Gordon Willis:










I found this about "the Prince of Darkness"; discussing "*The Godfather*"


----------



## Guest (Nov 17, 2020)

Phil loves classical said:


> Toland was great, and for me was the star of Citizen Kane. Welles admitted later that he secretly gave him advice on camera placement and lighting, so that the young Welles wouldn't be embarrassed in front of the crew, so he seems a real nice guy also.
> 
> My pick is Victtorio Storaro. The Conformist looks like no other film I've ever seen. It's often described as dream-like, but I feel it's more realistic as I would see those places in real life, or at least get that same impression. Also his work on Apocalypse Now. Now that feels dream-like (or nightmarish).


I think this cinematographer has also worked with Woody Allen. Anyway, you might be interested in this:


----------



## Guest (Nov 17, 2020)

*James Wong Howe*: innovative cinematographer, sometimes known as "low-key Howe" for his noir innovations of lighting and shade. He photographed some very memorable films in both colour and monochrome and he started his career in silent films. Howe died in 1976 and would have been there to witness some huge changes in film stocks, cameras and aspect ratios. The wider the screen the bigger the challenge for the cinematographer, not to mention negotiating those huge, unwieldy mechanisms before anamorphic lenses became available.

Notice how in "*Picnic*" James Wong Howe can fill the large screen: the director Joshua Logan had come straight from Broadway and wasn't a cinema director. This is an absolutely wonderful film; intimate relationships on a big screen. This dancing sequence sees the camera following the rhythm - and, of course, this is also attributable to editing:






(Kim Novak drops the beat when she's establishing the rhythm, but the scene works very well - with longer takes providing non-disruptive information.) The camera seems to glide effortlessly with them.

Here's an image from "*Hud*", in monochrome of course. The Texan landscape is rendered unforgiving in this picture; arid, unpopulated and vast. The film is essentially a 'four-hander', set in this backdrop - much like "Giant" from a few years earlier, though this was in colour. I love these films where setting provides an additional 'character' which is ruthless and whose characters are at its mercy, or recipients of its bounty.










I'm certain the Bogdanovich film "*The Last Picture Show*" was influenced by Wong and his aesthetic.


----------



## Guest (Nov 18, 2020)

"Miss Kubelik, I absolutely adore you!!"

"Shut up and deal".

Joseph LaShelle: "*The Apartment*"


----------



## erki (Feb 17, 2020)

I came across this tube video recently. It talks about some of my favourites as well along some mentioned here already:


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

I wonder if, in great cinematography, you are meant to feel it and experience it, but not really think about who did it or how it was done.


----------



## Guest (Nov 18, 2020)

@erki!! Thanks so much for that terrific link!! Can't wait to watch it.


----------



## erki (Feb 17, 2020)

> Thanks so much for that terrific link!! Can't wait to watch it.


Yes, it made me to revisit many films I had not watched for years and discovering some new germs in the same time. You welcome!


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

I love good cinematography, but I've never really delved into that world enough to retain the names of most of the *"Great Cinematographers"*.

But the films of *Hitchcock* have always impressed me, partly due to the cinematography, especially the films he made after the mid-30s (starting with *The Man Who Knew Too Much* (1934)) and those after he moved to Hollywood (starting with *Rebecca*).

So that would be *Bernard Knowles* for most of the last English-made films, but once he settled in Hollywood in 1941, his cinematographers would come and go. Even when he was able to function as his own Producer for his films (1945), the cinematography was still a revolver door, until 1951 when *Robert Burks* worked with Hitch on *Strangers On a Train*. They worked together on some of Hitch's most notable films: *Dial M For Murder, Rear Window, Vertigo, North By Northwest*, and *The Birds*. They worked together exclusively (except for Psycho) until 1964s *Marnie*.

Marnie was actually quite the pivot for Hitchcock, as it would also be his last film with long time collaborators *Bernard Hermann*, and editor George Tomasini (who passed away after the film was completed).

Hitchcock only made four more films after that, each with different cinemtographers, composers, and editors.

FUN FACT: The score for *Hitchcock*'s last film, the 1976 comedy thriller Family Plot, was composed by *John Williams*, fresh off his success with *Jaws*.

So, I'd say *Bernard Knowles* and *Robert Burks*


----------



## erki (Feb 17, 2020)

I'd like to bring up cinematographer *Jaques Tati*. He has made just handful of films. These considered comedies and are hilariously funny indeed however specially two go way deeper than make you laugh: 
Mon Oncle (My Uncle) 1958 that illustrates the absurdity of emerging industrial/futuristic society and fighting to survive centuries old ways of living.
Playtime 1967 that is beautiful collage of modern environment of bureaucracy, human alienation, sterile space. The human interactions as messy and uncontrollable are compressed into small pockets that are allowed to exist in specially designed clean-space. However that gets often challenged and ruined by non complying individuals. Visually absolutely marvellous.


----------



## Guest (Nov 18, 2020)

pianozach said:


> I love good cinematography, but I've never really delved into that world enough to retain the names of most of the *"Great Cinematographers"*.
> 
> But the films of *Hitchcock* have always impressed me, partly due to the cinematography, especially the films he made after the mid-30s (starting with *The Man Who Knew Too Much* (1934)) and those after he moved to Hollywood (starting with *Rebecca*).
> 
> ...


Robert Burks was killed in a house fire and that's why Hitchcock had an alternative. He was devastated by the loss of Burks and, later, poorly understood the role of Bernard Herrmann in the success of his films. In sacking Herrmann over "Torn Curtain" it was pretty much downhill for Hitchcock after that!!


----------



## Guest (Nov 18, 2020)

erki said:


> I'd like to bring up cinematographer *Jaques Tati*. He has made just handful of films. These considered comedies and are hilariously funny indeed however specially two go way deeper than make you laugh:
> Mon Oncle (My Uncle) 1958 that illustrates the absurdity of emerging industrial/futuristic society and fighting to survive centuries old ways of living.
> Playtime 1967 that is beautiful collage of modern environment of bureaucracy, human alienation, sterile space. The human interactions as messy and uncontrollable are compressed into small pockets that are allowed to exist in specially designed clean-space. However that gets often challenged and ruined by non complying individuals. Visually absolutely marvellous.


Tati did not do his own cinematography. You are mainly speaking about mise-in-scene here which, I agree, are quite original. However, I've never found his films in the least amusing. I guess I've got no sense of humour!!


----------



## Guest (Nov 20, 2020)

British cinematograher *Jack Cardiff*. Two films of his are significant for their lighting/cinematography. Here is the first, "*The Red Shoes*" - absolutely gorgeous production design (Heckroth) and superb mobile/canted framing and lighting. If you watch this ballet from the film you'll notice some prolonged shots where the camera is following Shearer; here Cardiff uses the stage spot light to keep his focus on the dancer. When you move your frame to such an extent in a single take this makes lighting extremely difficult, nigh impossible, since set-ups are usually made for specific shots; ergo, the spot light. Clever. And the spot isn't always there, which reveals the specific lighting for the shot compositions. In the second half of the ballet, where it becomes more frenetic and psychological, super-impositions are used (these, of course, occur during editing and in the laboratory). A film of the highest level of artistry:






This is the second, "*Black Narcissus*"; in some ways a risible and improbable film, but *it looks wonderful*, thanks largely to production design and Cardiff. Here are some interesting comments on the film, which qualifies as 'cinema art':






And here is a documentary - in separate parts on U-Tube - with Cardiff talking about the film: he discusses lighting and the three-strip Technicolor process.






It should be noted that both of these films still technically conform to what is known as "classical Hollywood narrative film". In this aesthetic, the camera almost never draws attention to itself - never removes audiences from the concerns of the narrative. All is at the service of the illusion of film; its verisimilitude. The important caveat is that, in the instance of these two Powell and Pressburger films, they are inherently artistic, creative and often surreal. Ergo, artistry forms part of the narrative itself and is front and centre of the experience rather than subservient to it.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Christabel said:


> British cinematograher *Jack Cardiff*. Two films of his are significant for their lighting/cinematography. Here is the first, "*The Red Shoes*" - absolutely gorgeous production design (Heckroth) and superb mobile/canted framing and lighting. If you watch this ballet from the film you'll notice some prolonged shots where the camera is following Shearer; here Cardiff uses the stage spot light to keep his focus on the dancer. When you move your frame to such an extent in a single take this makes lighting extremely difficult, nigh impossible, since set-ups are usually made for specific shots; ergo, the spot light. Clever. And the spot isn't always there, which reveals the specific lighting for the shot compositions. In the second half of the ballet, where it becomes more frenetic and psychological, super-impositions are used (these, of course, occur during editing and in the laboratory). A film of the highest level of artistry:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think that at least A matter of life and death and Pandora are as beautiful as the two mentioned.
































but in general his work is a joy for the eyes


----------



## Guest (Nov 20, 2020)

Absolutely agree!! There was something very special about Technicolor, which is mentioned in one of those links I provided. That Technicolor "Process 4" system yielded some astonishing hues. The story of colour film is compelling and it speaks of really sophisticated cameras and processes. The main problem with those Process 3 and 4 systems was the size of the magazines/blimps - which carried up to 3 reels of films simultaneously. Today those films have been restored with remarkable results. But, in general, camera manufacturers worked with those systems, enabling them; eg. Mitchell cameras. (We used Mitchell 16mm when making documentary films for television in the 1970s; we had high-speed (variable speed) cameras - for slow motion - and, of course, standard speed.)

People think that the cinematographer's job is to set the lighting, turn on the camera and shoot. Directors like Hitchcock had pre-planned shooting scripts and storyboards but others did not and the discretion of the DP was important. A cinematographer has to have a comprehensive knowledge of films stocks, processes, filters and lenses when making decisions about the shooting of a film. This is a very complicated business and, in fact, Technicolor used its own specialist technicians/art directors (eg. Natalie Kalmus) in helping to make these films work!!

Here are filters used by Leon Shamroy for "South Pacific": one of his considerations would have been 'how do I keep the colour dimensions vivid but filtered?"






It's a fascinating topic and I became interested in film stock and cinematography when I worked as Continuity in documentary films for TV. (Some of those cinematographers went on to major careers, eg. John Seale, "_The English Patient_". Without naming any names - a few of them were absolute pigs!! I did not personally work with Seale.)

(I forget to mention that every DP has a small army of assistants from 'camera operator', 'focus puller' etc. Like screenwriting, it can be a team effort as well.)


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Christabel said:


> Absolutely agree!! There was something very special about Technicolor, which is mentioned in one of those links I provided. That Technicolor "Process 4" system yielded some astonishing hues. The story of colour film is compelling and it speaks of really sophisticated cameras and processes. The main problem with those Process 3 and 4 systems was the size of the magazines/blimps - which carried up to 3 reels of films simultaneously. Today those films have been restored with remarkable results. But, in general, camera manufacturers worked with those systems, enabling them; eg. Mitchell cameras. (We used Mitchell 16mm when making documentary films for television in the 1970s; we had high-speed (variable speed) cameras - for slow motion - and, of course, standard speed.)
> 
> People think that the cinematographer's job is to set the lighting, turn on the camera and shoot. Directors like Hitchcock had pre-planned shooting scripts and storyboards but others did not and the discretion of the DP was important. A cinematographer has to have a comprehensive knowledge of films stocks, processes, filters and lenses when making decisions about the shooting of a film. This is a very complicated business and, in fact, Technicolor used its own specialist technicians/art directors (eg. Natalie Kalmus) in helping to make these films work!!
> 
> ...


*South Pacific*. Man, THAT was a failed experiment in cinematography. I mean, angles and shots and framing were all excellent, but that oddball tinting was sure a risk that didn't really pay off as they'd have liked.

I appreciate that risk. I think I'd prefer a version without the weird optical effects.


----------



## Guest (Nov 21, 2020)

I don't know to what extent that 'mystical' element via filters was called for by director Joshua Logan - who was essentially a Broadway director. (He also directed "Picnic", "Bus Stop", "Sayonara" and one or two others.) But I think Leon Shamroy was an exceptionally good cinematographer and he made a 'stagy' story like "South Pacific" look pretty grand on the wide screen. There's an awful lot of space to fill too, when you think about it. Of all the Rodgers and Hammerstein musicals committed to film I think "South Pacific" is the least successful - primarily because it's inherently a theatre piece sans the dancing set pieces of the other works - and because the score is so eclectic. I didn't know if I was watching vaudeville ("Honey Bun"), romance ("Younger than Springtime"), social commentary ("You've got to be taught") or operetta ("Some Enchanted Evening"). Shamroy also worked on "The King and I".

But Leon Shamroy raised the film over and above those doubts with his incredible images. He let the actors shine on a visually splendid canvas.

This is another of his earlier achievements: I'm thinking this is maybe from the days of Process 3 Technicolor. This film is regarded as a 'color noir' (using the American spelling). It's soapy, but it sure looks good!! He won an oscar for his work on "Leave Her to Heaven".






Another good discussion to have is about aspect ratios themselves, but that might become a bit esoteric!!


----------



## EnescuCvartet (Dec 16, 2016)

Just a few: Karl Freund, John Alton, James Wong Howe.


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2020)

EnescuCvartet said:


> Just a few: Karl Freund, John Alton, James Wong Howe.


Karl Freund; another one I was going to write about!! The poor man ended his career photographing 'I Love Lucy'! What television did to many of those great artists of cinema. Ray Rennahan was DP on "Laramie" and he worked on a huge number of TV shows. Here he is with Robert Fuller from "Laramie":










Some of his films included "For Whom the Bell Tolls", "Duel in the Sun", "Arrowhead", "Whispering Smith". He worked with Ernest Haller on "Gone With the Wind" too, along with an uncredited Lee Garmes.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Christabel said:


> Karl Freund; another one I was going to write about!! The poor man ended his career photographing 'I Love Lucy'! What television did to many of those great artists of cinema. Ray Rennahan was DP on "Laramie" and he worked on a huge number of TV shows. Here he is with Robert Fuller from "Laramie":
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'll bet he was happy to have an easy and steady gig like that after years of hard work.


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2020)

pianozach said:


> I'll bet he was happy to have an easy and steady gig like that after years of hard work.


You'd think so, but the 1950s and 60s were all TV - those two decades were just packed with TV shows, including "Wagon Train". The hard work would still have been there; I just don't think this work for TV had the lasting credibility and artistry attached to major films.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

John Alcott is at or near the top for me. Barry Lyndon is amazing! All shot in natural light. Love the nature scenes, where they look like 18th century paintings. He also did 2001 and Clockwork Orange with Kubrick.


----------



## Guest (Nov 26, 2020)

Phil loves classical said:


> John Alcott is at or near the top for me. Barry Lyndon is amazing! All shot in natural light. Love the nature scenes, where they look like 18th century paintings. He also did 2001 and Clockwork Orange with Kubrick.
> 
> View attachment 146622


That is actually a very good film, though I'm doubtful that Ryan O'Neal was the best person for the part!!


----------



## Guest (Nov 27, 2020)

This is very interesting about the cinematography for "Barry Lyndon".


----------



## Guest (Nov 28, 2020)

I just found this as a complement to the thread here on 'great cinematographers'. It's about shot composition and narrative.


----------



## erki (Feb 17, 2020)

Christabel said:


> Tati did not do his own cinematography.


Yes, Jean Badal and Andréas Winding are listed as cinematographers in "Playtime"(that I find one of the greatest films ever). But looking at their other work that is rather mediocre if not outright bad I am pretty sure Tati is the one who designed and directed every detail from light to frame composition in his film.


----------



## Guest (Nov 28, 2020)

erki said:


> Yes, Jean Badal and Andréas Winding are listed as cinematographers in "Playtime"(that I find one of the greatest films ever). But looking at their other work that is rather mediocre if not outright bad I am pretty sure Tati is the one who designed and directed every detail from light to frame composition in his film.


Well, you obviously know more about this than I do. Same with Hitchcock and his pre-production storyboarding, I guess. There is the little matter of lighting, of course, which Robert Burks did well for Hitchcock.


----------



## Guest (Dec 1, 2020)

Joseph ("Joe") MacDonald. He photographed many very good films. Here is one from 1958, "The Young Lions", which is a WW2 drama. Here is a scene, beautifully lit and shot in black and white, with two gorgeous male stars - Marlon Brando and Max Schell: the widescreen works well in this particular sequence - which is very disturbing indeed.






Here is Joe MacDonald (on the right) on the set of "*The Young Lions*". He was Mexican by birth.










One of the most famous films that MacDonald worked on was "*My Darling Clementine*" for John Ford, 1946. Some of the framing of the characters against the setting are just wonderful. He imbues this film with a real 'noir' look, which is unusual for a western in 1946.






Here MacDonald photographed in colour for Henry Hathaway on "*Niagara*", 1953, starring Marilyn Monroe and Joseph Cotton - a colour noir. Though he mainly worked in black and white there were some significant colour films in his oeuvre.






Arguably his most famous film was made for John Ford, "*What Price Glory*", 1952. It's in colour and the opening scene before the credits is like an expressionist painting as we watch the weary soldiers returning for a break from the trenches: in fact, the war scenes are bathed in that kind of surreal background imagery. This contrasts with the scenes back in the barracks, which come directly from the stage play:






Joe MacDonald had a distinguished career working with many of cinema's best directors, starting from 1935. These included John Huston, Fred Zinnemann, J. Lee Thompson, Michael Anderson, Norman Jewison, Edward Dymtryk, Elia Kazan, Lloyd Bacon, Sam Fuller, Nicholas Ray, "Wild Bill" Wellman.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

this thread deserves to be revived and also more pictures (and maybe moved where it should be, in the movie corner).
I've recently seen El sur, the movie of Victor Erice and the cinematography was just absolutely gorgeous. Jose Luis Alcaine is the responsible for it, and he's clearly a master:

































I watched The spirit of the beehive a long time ago, I'm really tempted to watch it again now, altough I'm not sure if Alcaine worked there too. In any case amazing cinematography and great movie.


----------

