digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

The Phenomena of Light in Contemporary Hollywood Cinema

geeksofdoom.com — A look at how director Steven Spielberg used light to create a supernatural dimension in 1977’s ‘Close Encounters of the Third Kind’.

Who dugg this? Made popular Jul 4, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

32 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • emperortomato, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9is this a joke?
  • kraemer007, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11That article was WAY too short to even be considered an article. Dugg down.
  • geeklibrary, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Such a great film. Spielberg always seems to have such a great handle on the use of 'ominous' light.
  • Hypermarkalan, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8What the hell? How did that nonsense get frontpaged? I thought the story would show lighting techniques and how they affect film. Nope. One quote from Spielberg & one from Annette Kuhn, two crappy pictures, and that's a frontpage worthy article?
  • maehem, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I'm sure Spielberg had alot of input to the lighting process but it was probably the Lighting Director who should get some credit?
  • mediaphile, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Wrong. Speilberg tells the DP what he wants visually out of a scene. DP tells Gaffer what lights he needs, and where. Gaffer tells Key grip, and Key grip tells grips. Try working on set for a bit, then tell me how much interaction the Director has with the Grips. Moron.
  • neszis, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3The real genius behind Spielburg's photography is Janusz Kaminski, his director of photography on all of his recent films.
  • StanleyReturns, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5I see it doesnt take much to get on the front page of Digg these days.

    Close Encounters is a great film and all, but this is blurb is utterly trivial... and 30 years late.
  • MacGyver2210, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2This is a nifty little blurb, if not a very long article, and what it says is completely true. The lighting techniques used by Spielberg (and his team...) were pretty groundbreaking at this point, and hadn't been used widely at all. They led the way for cool back/down lighting on many characters, and also set the tone for this type of lighting as 'ethereal' and 'paranormal'. You can see great examples of simlar techniques in the Poltergeist movies.
    If you ever happen to see the old version of 'House on Haunted Hill' it's just excellent - you never see a ghost, you never see anything really happen, but I'll be damned if it's not still scary, and it's done using everything from deep backlighting or downlighting, to crazy tesselation patterns in the wallpaper that they zoom in on that *sorta* look like eyes or something.
  • mediaphile, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2In all fairness, Close Encounters was shot by Vilmos Zsigmond. Janusz didn't come on until Schindler's List. Either way, while Spielberg obviously has final say on all aspects of his films, the Director of Photography is really the one to be credited with the beautiful visuals therein, and is often solely responsible for such things. Directors are primarily responsible for the performances of the actors; the look of the film is usually discussed in general with the DP, and delegated from there on.
  • MacGyver2210, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Just because you're jaded and not interested beacuse it doesn't have top-of-the-line CG animation, doesn't mean the rest of us who are a little more cultured don't still appreciate a little blurb about Spielberg's lighting techniques.
  • RoundysSince, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2It's really a film.. you know.. not real.
  • Sp00k, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1" . "

    Use it.
  • YoctoYotta, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1It was written by a girl . . .


    *ducks*
  • kenz0r, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Thank you. When I gripped on a set, actually often this happens, the only communication I'll EVER have with the director is at lunch or after wrap.
  • Sp00k, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Agreed. Who the hell is digging this crap? Buried.
  • kenz0r, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2This article is very insulting to cinematographers who's job it is to light a film and tell a story with light. Close Encounters, photographed by Vilmos Zsigmond, a notable cinematographer, is famed for it's lighting which was not creates solely by Spielberg, but rather a collaboration between Director and Cinematographer, as all films are (with certain exceptions). To give the credit to a director of a film for being the one who lit it is wrong, in addition to being an insult and discredit to the cinematographer.
  • Pooball, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Watch "The Searchers" by John Ford. The Close Encounters scene pictured in the article, as well as the article itself, will seem far less original once you watch the scene where the Indians raid the house.
  • MacGyver2210, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Right, but Spielberg tells the Grips, Lighting Directors, and DP's what to do, so it's his credit. Sorry to bust your self-pitying bubble.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Not to dump on film at all, but lest we forget about where the DP comes from? It was when people left the stage and started to appear onscreen, and the director realized he needed his theatrical design team to make movies instead. Sure, there may be a handful of "neat lighting" moments in film, but even a halfway mediocre theatrical production's lighting could sweep you off your feet.
  • antipax, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Too short, amazingly short. I'm surprised at how the lack of content but glitzy design and new age phrases allowed it to reach the front page.
  • opusaz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Wow, thanks for posting this. The writing took me back to my college days with all those first year art students sitting on the floor (since you know, furniture is elitist) discussing "F"ilm.

    But yeah, Spielberg is in fact great.

    "It is at this moment that we see lead protagonist..." Tee hee.
  • tpagrosk8, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0A movie without sound is a silent movie. A movie without light is radio.
  • ManicRage, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0From the author of this piece through ManicRage: I AM the writer of this piece and I don't really care what YOU think. I wrote it for me and if it wasn't for certain people DIGGING it YOU wouldn't have got to read it in the first place. I don't write to impress people or to gain a reaction out of someone, all of this negativity is boring and somewhat pathetic...sexist and nasty comments are from the lowest of the low, so if you have to waste your time moaning, then you really have too much time on your hands.

    I know full well that people will say what they like over the eather of the internet because they are faceless to MY face. You wouldn't say *****.
  • ManicRage, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0To those above.

    The article was written by my missus.

    I know for a fact that the article was an EXCERPT/EXTRACT from her Final Year University Dissertation which ran at 12,000 words. [she was expected at Uni to write 5000]

    So you complained it was too short. You definitely would have complained if it was too LONG.

    This is typical of opinionated people hiding in relative anonymity behind their computers.

    Her dissertation goes into much more depth and is written skillfully and passionately.

    But I am not going to waste my time justify myself and this to narrow minded individuals.

    I am proud of this piece.
  • rcran, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3My reaction as well. Kind of a 'No *****' situation... How else would that effect be done? It's all light!
  • cybe, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1If you were the extra-terrestrial Ruler and 'King of the Universe'; Who had sent information CRITICAL to the survival of human+Beings, over thousands of Earth years, in exact and minute detail, and the relatively primitive inhabitants of Planet Earth had turned parts of it into nonsensical, ritualistic religious "rites and ceremonies" so that no-one read and studied the actual information with an open-mind and without applying incorrect preconceived ideas to it anymore; how would you reach those people who deserved to SURVIVE, when the vast majority were defying you and were insanely trying to destroy themselves and the planet's eco-system (their own "life-support" machine), in the late 20th century?............
    http://jahtruth.net/closeenc.htm
  • Schmidtopolis, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1There's no accounting for people with multiple accounts, and a few friends.
  • ChrisWickenscom, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1"supernatural dimension" eh?
    Last time I checked there was no alternate dimensions in that movie. ONLY ***** ALIENS. Dugg down for stupidity.
  • BunkeyLunkey, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3Dugg for the quality of CE3K and for introducing an introducing concept... even if the piece hardly explores it.

    Ah well, at least it's not a time eater!
  • closetosomet, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1i am a strong christian and i think that that website is total bunk.
    to each his own i guess...
  • ManicRage, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4I digg it.

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.