Megan:

Hi, my name's Megan, I'm a cinematographer.

Cinematographer is kind of like the right-hand man or woman of the director. I feel like they're there to achieve the director's vision.

A really great collaborative relationship with director means that you're both together working to help give the right space performance, whilst also delivering emotional, engaging visual design.

Your role includes meetings and shot listings with directors, looking at locations, in terms of both practical and storytelling reasons, working with production designer, choosing your lights, lighting the shots, building the look in posts in the grey by making a lot.

Your job is very managerial. I've worked my way through the department and you sort of become more managerial like you're actually behind the camera less and less.

There's a lot of communication and working with producers. And a lot of communicating your visual idea.

So,it's working with all the different key creatives like in terms of costume, makeup, production, design, director to all come together and achieve a vision.

You're head of technically 3 departments, in the sense, you're head of your camera department but you're also should be driving, lighting and grip because they all work together. So, it's like a triad even though there's a HOD with both those departments. A HOD or either is reference to a key is a head of department.

I mean, when I speak to people and they ask me what my job is in layman terms, I just say I tell them where to put the cameras and that's, yeah, like I tell people where to put lights and cameras.

A grip, at least in Australia is someone who assists camera with moving camera in terms of a dolly, which is a device you put the camera on and moving on tracks.

They're involved in supporting camera department and helping the camera move. They're also involved in helping like build tents and blocking out light in with solids or theatrical blacks.

Their role is a bit different in America compared to Australia, but they also work closely with lighting department, in terms of building infrastructure for them as you know in terms of scaff pipe and things like that.

So, they're very much helping facilitate infrastructure and builds on set.

I think choosing shots like, I think one thing I didn't do when I was making films at that age was get a wide shot. Like I think, start with a wide and then go from there.

Unless a director's intent is to shoot chronologically for performance and the budget supports it, we mostly shoot scenes out of order or the coverage has to be repeated.

So, traditionally I suppose you'd start with a wide master shot so you see where everything lands and then you go in for tighter shots which are like either mids or close-ups depending on your time that you have available to shoot or what you actually need.

So I mean there is a thing called the one-er, where you shoot it all out in one shot. Which sometimes is highly appropriate but it just depends on the needs of the scene.

But, generally the filmmaking process involves repetitively shooting the dialogue and at different angles so you're shooting the same scene multiple times to achieve the dramatic arc of a scene in the edit.

In terms of the choice to shoot single or 2 cameras or even more, I think, I mean I've worked in TV and in long film feature drama and actually the show that I'm currently in pre-production for we had a conversation of going single camera versus 2 camera.

By default in Australia, I feel like two-camera on TV is the main go.

Pros and cons of shooting 2 cameras is that you can get more shots on the least amount of takes and performances so you can get 2 sizes on one actor at the same time.

It also, and there's, you know, arguments on whether people like this or not but cross shooting is sometimes a way that particularly in TV cinematographers and directors and the first AD get out of trouble in terms of schedule.

Which means that you are shooting 2 actors at the same time that is in opposite directions.

You know, it can be super useful in the sense that you can get more coverage and it means for continuity because you're shooting the same performance with 2 cameras.

Downside is sometimes you are compromising your shots by always making 2 cameras play because there's always an edge of frame where the other camera could be in the other cameras shot. So, it can impede on your aesthetic.

In terms of single camera use, it can be in terms of just a simplicity of how much crew you have or what you need but it also can allow you to be more present and intimate sometimes performance because you're not always trying to factor in a second camera which can be also dictated by the fact that producers or a broadcaster just always want to know they're getting that coverage.

I feel like when there's any kind of stunt, I feel like it's at multiple cameras, but I feel like at this early stage of learning, I don't think they should be splitting their mind into 2 cameras.

I think they should be working to focus on the 180-degree line and like how that works because I think they're going to get into trouble in terms of having 2 cameras and they have line crosses, whilst they're still even learning those basic principles.

The line or like the 180-degree line which is like a fundamental principle within filmmaking and how you shoot coverage.

That basic principle is about just making sure, well it's like, it's also called crossing the line, which you can use creatively but, generally the rule is you shoot people like so if someone's looking that way the reverse shot they're looking that way so they're not looking in the same direction and you're not getting disoriented.

So, the whole purpose of maintaining the 180-degree line is that the geography of a space and scene is maintained. But, you'll see in a lot of drama in TV that those crosses happen. But, as long as you don't feel it and you're not disoriented, it's not an issue.

I just think when it's done with complete ignorance of the rule, that's when you feel it.

For example, I use 2 cameras on, 'I am Black and Beautiful.' That was a documentary we were filming.

It was all shot in a day so there was a lot of content to shoot in a day and we shot 2 cameras, which since we're shooting like interviews, people talking and then dance performances, that was a great example of like where 2 cameras was very helpful and better than using one.

So, I could shoot a design frontal shot and then like a raking profile.

Even right now as I'm being interviewed, I am being filmed by 3 cameras, 2 that have a very tight access to my eye line and one that is a little bit more oblique and three-quarter profile.

If I was shooting multiple cameras, I'd always be focusing on where to build in my key.

So, when the off-access camera is always back lit from the subject. So, it'd be lighting, the hero angle, which would probably be the frontal angle, to have a wrapped around key and then having my other cameras be blocked according to where I've waited my lighting and key light.

'Without Contextualising' the series first day inappropriately, that was a lower budget TV show that I shot for the ABC that did amazingly well internationally and won awards both in America and Europe.

So, I had to work with limited resources at times on that but still instil emotion and you know a rich cinematography design. In terms of how I made use of no money at times or limited money.

I think one of the biggest things, particularly when you're shooting drama, is the lack of extras or when you want more and you production don't give you that is how you stack and stage and shoot longer lens to make it feel like the space is busier than it actually is.

And then also choosing spaces that aren't as big and open that you can't feel or how you shoot that to not be as empty and as inappropriate for the story.

Even if it's just, you know your point DSLR camera, even just taking stills photos. I think anything that's allowing you to shoot a frame and tell a story, even if it's one frame or multiple frames.

I think now even your phone, I don't think there's any specific gear you should or shouldn't use.

I suppose though, in saying that I feel like going right to the high-end production stuff because you think you can or you have access to it is not necessarily I think the way to go.

Because you won't use it to its full extent because you're still learning to craft itself.

The way that I've been able to achieve in an expensive shot in a more makeshift way is actually in the way that you hide or hide the lack of production value you have. And so I have used Vaseline on a clear filter on a camera which has distorted and smeared out elements or like bloomed out highlights in lights.

And that has been used as a stylistic choice to enrich a scene but also mask the lack of set design we had. The best advice I could give to student filmmakers is to start with one light.

Like choose where your key light will be and then and then work forward in terms of how much feel and what looks good to the eye. I remember when I first started out just in my undergrad days, how I was like leaning into like the rules of three-point lighting and feel like that was the correct way in how to approach it.

I feel like if you just build up and see how your key feels as your key source and then work from there. I believe one of the most common mistakes a new cinematographer could make is over promising and under delivering.

I think saying rather than maybe admitting that they're not aware or as knowledgeable about the technical limitations or what is needed to achieve a shot, they'll oversell it to a director who is maybe at their same production experience level and then they both learn it doesn't work.