After graduating from Film School in 1984, I embarked on a quest to become Steven Spielberg. Very rapidly I realized the futility of that course, and started working in the technical end of motion picture production, where I found I could actually make a living.

Rapidly I rose through the ranks to become a gaffer. By 1989, I had Gaffed Major Feature films (Cop, with James Woods) Network TV series (The Days and Nights of Molly Dodd..., The Slap Maxwell Story) and many many rock and roll videos. from 1990-1994 I was working on the effects units for Major Studio Features (The Abyss, White Fang, Total Recall) and making a REAL good living gaffing high-end commercials, (Lexus, Jeep-Eagle, Nike) Some of my commercial clients have included, Geraldi/Suarez, Propaganda, and HSI. I used to measure how my career was going by how many of my spots were on the Superbowl! A complete Gaffers Resume is available upon request, but, I don't do that job anymore.

By the end of 1994 I felt the need to move up to the next logical position, Director of Photography. I found that my training as a gaffer uniquely qualified me for the position. Lighting is the main element of the DPs job that consumes the most time on the set. After ten years lighting everything from $3000 Rock Videos to 20 million dollar features, I've discovered most of the tricks of the trade. My style is fast, simple and striking. If a handle must be put on it, "Post modern realism" would be the closest name for my work.

Documentary work has been a large part of my film career. I've been very lucky to have been involved in some very rewarding project that have taken me from New York City to the back roads of Brazil to the corn fields of Kansas. Turner Network, A&E and PBS have been some of my Clients. I was up for Emmy consideration for the Film Louise Brooks; Looking for Lulu that I shot for Turner Classics.

I work with a group of creative programmers, and together we have the processing power and knowledge to create Graphic Images, Motion Control, Title sequences, and any composting needed for Film or Video. I am fluent with Adobe products (After Effects, PhotoShop, Illustrator) as well as other effects oriented software and hardware (Boris, Blue Ice) I'm also very active with an AVID editing system.

Hopefully, your goals and mine coincide. If you like what you've read, and the Resume fits your project, I'd love an opportunity to talk cinematography with you and look at your project.

Digital Cinema

Digital cinematography is a brave new world and here with the people I'm working with I feel as if I'm riding the crest of a new wave of potential in both the art of cinematography and, at the same time, discovering a new form of story telling.

The Internet will never replace the experience of sitting in a theatre with a thousand other people, but the techniques we're developing here are filtering into the mainstream on a daily basis. Processes pioneered by people like us on their home MACs are now being used in productions at the major studios. The Inverse is true also. Now more than ever, the flexibility offered by inexpensive systems can give tools to the artist that were scarce imagined even 5 years ago. Compositing, Color correction, CGI that cost thousands of dollars and required systems out of reach to the average filmmaker, are now at the fingertips of anyone with a trust fund and a film school education.

Which leads me to another point…just because a film CAN be made, doesn't mean it SHOULD be made! A bad script is a bad script, in any format!

Matching the subject matter to the format is one of the things I see most filmmakers missing these days. Some scripts are better served by filming on 35mm, others are appropriately shot on 16mm, or BETA. One of the goals of the cinematographer should be to choose projects that can be enhanced by the format they're working in. I'm always looking for projects where the image and script go hand in hand. It seems rare now a days where I meet a filmmaker who understands the need for matching the emotional needs of the script to the expressive qualities of the image.

Given that…matched to the proper script, the ability of this new medium to tell a story is truly unmatched. I'm using it to experiment in a way that would be prohibitive if I needed to work in film. I'm finding ways to translate the imagery I see in my mind and put it out there for criticism, trying to push the envelope so I know what works and what doesn't.

It's important to not be afraid to fail! But, when the production you're working on has a budget of a million dollars, and it's the Directors and the D.P.s reputation on the line, it's MUCH harder to try new techniques…safety is paramount, because a mistake costs much more than money.

Here for a few hundred dollars, you can try literally, ANYTHING, and if it doesn't work, your career doesn't have to end. My partners and I have a number of experimental projects planned that could only be done within this medium. Cost is truly not a factor; the only impediment to production is finding the time! Energy levels are high, but unfortunately, we all have to make a living. If anyone out there can recommend me for a McArther Grant, it would be truly liberating!

The use of light and camera as a metaphor is my ongoing passion as a cinematographer. Now, the use of new techniques and formats has expanded my horizons exponentially. Exploring the range of emotional expression possible with film and story is my goal. I hope they're your goals too.

The Art of Cinematography

The cameraman's eye, while it's versed in the technical aspects of recording an image on film, should be more concerned with EMOTION! Just as an actor deals with sense-memory to find his character and articulate complex emotions through his expressive instrument. So should the cinematographer, through light, lenses, format, etc, seek to expose complex feelings from the script and translate them into a harmonious image.

My approach to the art of cinematography can best be termed "Emotional Realism". The search for an expanded view of reality has been the cornerstone of my visual/emotional language, wherein the lighting, camerawork, lens choice, and selection of format, are directly influenced by the emotional or psychological imperatives contained within the script and expressed by the actors. In this way, light, color and the camera not only form an integral part of the look of the film, but can also form active elements in and of themselves.

I'm a strong proponent of using metaphor and symbolism within the image to convey the sense of the characters emotional state. Darkness is an easy metaphor for the darkness within a characters soul or the danger in a situation. While light serves to represent redemption or completion.

Light forms the basis for all vision. It can represent characters, provide thematic devices, be used to provide motivation, or in a more difficult sense, be active in it's own right. In my first feature film, "Broken & Bleeding", the lead character was a dark young man who eventually ended up dying. His Girl friend spent the film trying to help him. Using shadow as his main emotional device, and light for hers, I went through the entire script and identified each scene as either him leading her into darkness or her bringing him into the light. In several scenes it was appropriate to perceive her as "sucking the light out of others."

The metaphors worked stronger than I could have hoped. The struggles brought forth from the script were reinforced visually in a stunningly simple way. I believe strong, soft backlight gives the most texture to a scene, So once that was established, it was a simple matter of working with the director and actors on the blocking, so as to use the shadows that occur on the set to best advantage.

The Camera itself is a much more difficult tool for the representational conveyance of a mental state. Again in "Broken & Bleeding", lens choice and framing helped the performances with an intimacy only the camera can provide. Tele photo lenses gave me an incredibly intimate glimpse into the characters. I used very few wide-angle lenses, mainly for dream sequences or if we were boxed into a corner by the locations.

My general preferences (and I try not to be totally married to this) is that tele photo lenses work for dramatic films, while wide-angle lenses work better for comedy. My analysis of this preference grows from the belief that dramatic situations play out in individuals internal conflict or dialogue. A good actor can express that SO beautifully in a non-verbal way. While comic timing (for example, look at any of the "Road" movies with Hope & Crosby!) works better in 2-shots. Remember these are gross generalizations. The two best examples I can think of are "Godfather" (Brilliantly Lit and photographed by Gordon Willis) and "O Brother Where Art Thou" by Ethan and Joel Coen and photographed by Roger Deakins. (I hope they keep making movies forever!!!)

In my own work I am constantly re-defining the "Frame". What is it the viewer is looking through? Is it a window? A door? A mirror? Can it be different for different characters? How does the lens choice influence the viewers' perception, identification and intimacy with the character? I find the exploration of these concepts to be the crux of the cameraman's real job, and the source of my own excitement and enthusiasm for my work.

I've always found the technical end of filmmaking to be the easy part. Sensitiomitry, optics, processing options and the array of toys available to the filmmaker, for some reason has always been simple for me to understand and utilize. So I find them secondary in importance to the other concepts stated above. I find that the "Stuff" they have access to seduces too many cameramen. I don't like doing "Cool Shots"; usually they end up being too heavy handed and distracting.

The script is the key and the basis for all creative decisions. If it doesn't make sense to the script, it just doesn't make sense! In one of my features I endeavored not to use a dolly. I was amazed how this wasn't a limitation on my creativity; rather, it truly made me THINK. We discovered how little a dolly is REALLY needed in a film. (We eventually used a doorway dolly for only three shots, and the movement added SO MUCH to the feelings within the characters.)

Working as an artist, has for me, always been a search for the right questions to ask myself. Answers to these questions have always stimulated more questions in a never-ending cycle. There is no one answer. There is only a range of ever-evolving options. Options that lead me onward in my creative quest for expression. That's what I love about my work.

all photos copyright John C. Luker II, 2000 - 2001.