How Kubrick Achieved the Beautiful Cinematography of Barry Lyndon 

Why didn't you obey me Bryan

I thought your acting ability was outstanding. I could never understand how a child in that age group can be so capable and convincing. Thank you for a great performance.

Great acting

Omg! Is this true! Is this really you! Incredible! 😊❤ You were absolutely outstanding… What a movie!

What was it like working with Kubrick?

Davey Givens beautifully stated.

'Museum' would be a better word. Contemporary art galleries dont show beautiful European landscapes, they show confusing conceptual art and strange media fetishes.

an art gallery of 18th century masterpieces....

For me, that was Vincent & Theo. Numerous times during the movie, I realized I was looking at one of Van Gogh's paintings, only then it was alive, with characters walking around in the painting, fields of sunflowers blowing in the breeze, etc.

@@GregConquest even better said

I just said that above before reading this quote.

Perhaps Martin Scorsese never saw _Ryans_ _Daughter._

@@Obladgolated i bet he saw that Scorsese watch worldwide movies he even saw most of the movies of satyajit ray's

Ivan Ahmed it is said that scorsese watches one to two movies every day even during the days of shooting

knowledge share how

Def a great time working for stanley as i did many years later.stew fmj crew.

Very cool story! It's hard to imagine "normal people" owning property in such a masterpiece of cinematography!

Awesome! Thanks for sharing. ✨✨✨

So how was it like to work as an actor in Kubrick`s movie? Was it as exhausting as people say?

I hope the catering was good?

tru

More Kubrick on the way!

forever and ever and ever.

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-9Gtc4DHYvc0.html

yes please

barry lyndon is his best.

As if u r a fuckin movie lord with ur 10 bucks

It's John Alcott's cinematography.

I watched it for the 1st time a few weeks ago and I´m still in a coma.

It's like a multi course meal in a fine restaurant. Most films nowadays are like fast food.

Fuck Brecht

It's interesting to note that you exclaimed, "It's not boring" ... This may of course depend on who's watching the film, as I have never actually watched Barry Lyndon all the way through, yet now watching this great recap of all the camera and lens work I'm fascinated to watch the entire film, as I've done a lot of experimentation with cameras and artwork since I was a young Jr High student in the mid-1960s. I've since then become a big Kubrick fan because of his 2001: A Space Odyssey, which I saw at age fourteen in Portland Hollywood movie big screen just st after it's debut earlier than year. I had just bought my first astronomy telescope as a 13 and a half year old in 1967. So this was my experience of seeing my first Kubrick film at age 14, in the summer of 1968. I couldn't believe that I later heard people walked out of the theater after the first 20 minutes, of 2001: A Space Odyssey. Imagine that they were actually bored. I was also playing with our family's Kodak box camera that my parents allowed me to use when I was a young child. And by now at age 14, I had attached the camera to the top of my meager 60mm Tasco refractor telescope to take time exposure photos of the night sky. I probably saw Dr Strangelove, soon after 2001, on late night television. Being an astronomer and early artist in childhood, led to my artwork being shown in NASA websites quite often, about 10 years ago. So by my college days, in the early 1970s, I was already performing experimental photography with time exposures of the night sky. It's also interesting to note here that they recently reported in the news, the audio interview with Stanley Kubrick in 1965 done by the New Yorker magazine, about the time he just started working on 2001, you can look this up and listen to over an hour of him speaking about his early development of movie making in the early 1950s. Kubrick could not pass college entrance exams earlier, about the time he was working for LOOK magazine in the late 1940s. So he went to take night college courses in science. It's an amazing hour long interview with him in 1965, by the New Yorker magazine.

Alex, that's a great way of putting it.

One reviewer at the time called it "cinematic wallpaper." I love the movie.

@Rob C A lot of movies with CGI (animated movies) are phenomenal.

@Rob C ok boomer

Not overlooked anymore, finally the world is beginning to appreciate its brilliance. I think it is one of the very few films without ANY flaws whatsoever. Not a single one! Not a single superfluous second. Even a game-changer like 2001 COULD have used some slight shortening of a few scenes, but with Barry Lyndon it is impossible to think of any such cuts.

@@ulfingvar1 6:21 wants a word with you...

2001 was less expensive than what we have today?

nolanb21 agreed, I think start to finish this is his best work

I will have to give it a 3rd go. Tried to view it twice before , but I got bored. I love all his other films , but this one is indeed challenging to sit through I must admit.

The same people have never watched 'Gone With the Wind' 'all the way through'. How many Americans have actually read 'War and Peace'? How many have seen all five hours of Bertolucci's '1900'? They would say, "I don't have time," and then rather watch ten people run up and down a basketball court, or wander through a mall, or play Bingo... for the same time.

Agree..., up to some point. "2001" IS NOT a movie. It owns to a different and higher form of Great Art. No attempts (and there has been a good lot) to imitate it in cinema have achieved their purpose, because no filmaker seems to have understood this. "Barry Lyndon" IS a movie and a undeniable all-time masterpiece. I don't remember how many times I've seen it, and every one I enjoy it more.

it's very dangerous to assume what ones exposure to culture and fine art is based on their nationality. What a childish statement to make.

I have understood only half of what was explained. I am learing, well I am willing to learn the work of a cinematographer.

But as a cinematographer, is this information still useful to you? Are Arriflexes still in production, or do you have to settle for Reds and similar digital contraptions? You'd either have to have a director with the same sort of insight and technical legerdemain that Kubrick possessed, or become a director yourself.

@@commandercaptain4664 Kubrick actually knew well about photography because this is how he discovered his passion. He started as a still photographer before getting into movies. So he just had knowlegde about it. It doesn't matter what kind of cameras you work with, wheather it's analog or digital, the rules of photography apply to both of them.

@@commandercaptain4664 jesus, young people with their 10k REDS and raw footage. study more about character blocking and story development instead of focusing which camera is the best and spluring thousands without knowing how to light a scene.

I have been a fan of this film for many years yet this is the first I have heard that artificial light was used outside the windows during interior shots. Excellent video.

Tony Gazza they don't movies like they use to.

It's only a 'masterpiece' if you can watch it in the comfort of your own home, pausing for bathroom breaks as necessary. Viewing it in the theatre at the time was an ordeal few moviegoers cared to endure! I saw it in a big city theatre that should have been packed. It was mostly empty and few of the audience stayed 'til the end. To be honest, I don't even remember if I walked out or not. I think word of this stinkeroo got out before the day I went. IOW, audiences stayed away in droves. And, remember, Kubrick's prior film had been a hit, so that's saying something.

Indeed.

Russ and Zak. It went over your head is what you are really saying.

Yes - if people don' t enjoy this quality of cinema let them sod off and watch the rubbish they do enjoy. I have no problem with that. But some of us need something more intellectually or artistically challenging be it in cinema or literature. Does that make us wrong??? I don't think so.

Andrew Robinson Stoney.

TheDativeCase to be fair it is really slow. The movie is an incredible achievement, but I can understand why someone who’s just in it for the story i.e. most people would find it boring. The film was always regarded as an incredible technical achievement, but outside of a few movies buffs no one is saying “oh I want a good evening, let’s watch Barry Lyndon”.

@@drunkenmasterii3250 Yeah, and that comes from a lack of appreciation of art. People want entertainment and not art. Nothing wrong with that.

Boring, eh? Let's see... The film opens with Barry's father getting killed in a duel. Then it kicks off with Barry falling for a girl, losing said girl to another man, "killing" said man in a duel, and going on the run. From there he gets robbed a gun point, joins the army, gets into a fistfight, survives a skirmish and watches a close friend die, deserts, has a brief affair with a peasant woman, gets caught and shanghaied into service by the Prussians, saves a Prussian officer's life in a battle, gets roped into being a spy, joins up with another spy, disguises himself so he can be smuggled out of the country, runs a con game, engages in a sword duel, seduces a noblewoman (without even saying a word to her), marries, and finally retires to his cushy new estate to enjoy the finer things in life. And that's just the first half of the movie.

I was at a screening of the doc, KUBRICK REMEMBERED, and Leon Vitali (who played adult Lord Bullingdon) revealed that Kubrick bought into the critical trashing the film took, and it wasn't until he happened across it on TV during the filming of FULL METAL JACKET that he sat down and watched a good chunk of it, and said to Leon, "I did make a good film, after all."

Thanks so much for your kind words! I really appreciate it!

hi, could you recommend me some other analysis channels.

Yeah! This guy is really good!😁👍

Reminds me of the story of Bergman making "The Seventh Seal." Bergman or his cinematographer (can't remember which) noticed a certain cloud formation toward the end of the day that was perfect, and they hurriedly staged the final iconic "dance macabre" scene along the crest of a hill.

Thanks for the info!

Thank YOU for Tylerizing RU-vid! You're a genuine Mr. Know-It-All, but you're not a jerk about it. I mean, you could crush us all with the sheer majesty of your gigantic brain . . . but you don't! You're a role model for all of us. :) I'm a cinema geek on three subjects: Kubrick, Truffaut, and silent cinema. I make films, too. I'm about to step up to 4K. It's going to be annoying as hell since I create silent films - in black and white. All that technology at my fingertips - and I'm using it to make films that would've been cutting edge - in 1925. What a waste!

TheStockwell Where in Scotland, first I've heard of it.

What do you think of Allan Dwan?

I have a soft spot for Dwan. He wasn't an artistic director in any way, but he was a man who made films, and some of them very good, for half a century. I learned about him in Kevin Brownlow's BBC series about the history of the silent cinema. Dwan became a director after being sent from New York to find out what was going on with a film being made in California. He arrived and found the cast and crew doing nothing - and being paid for it - because the director was drunk and nowhere to be found. Dwan's employers told him he was now a film director, whether he liked it or not. As Dwan tells it, he told the cast he was now the director of the film and they'd better accept it - or the film would be shut down and they'd be unemployed. One crew member said, "You're the best damn director we've ever seen."

If you are interested about Kubrick's Practical Lighting, check Entertain The Elk's video which is about

terrypussypower Agreed!

When I really think about it, Kubrick HAS to be my favorite as well...🤔👍

RodCornholio I agree, nobody these days comes close.🤔👍

Thank marvel for that. Ruining the industry (actors, directors, special fx) but also ruining the minds of consumers and spoonfeed these junkfood movies which people forget the moment they leave the cinema.

A.J. Anderson-Yakowicz ABSOLUTELY AGREED! The wardrobe department nailed it. The historical atmosphere of the movie makes one feel as though one truly is indeed in 18th century. Just a masterpiece of cinematic photography. It's my favorite of Mr. Kubricks work. Even more than 2001.

Much like most things mentioned, grad liters are 'standard issue' in any cinematographer's kit, not some magical item invented by Kubrick.

Thanks! I haven't read anything about non-practical candles. I was wondering if they did anything like that. Where did you find that info?

The density filters I was completely unaware of. Thanks!

Yes. The are called graduated filters, or grad for short. They are used to darken part of the frame and are very useful when trying to darken the sky, which often photographs brighter than it appears to the eye when exposing for the things below the sky (ground, people, trees) static.bhphoto.com/images/images750x750/1456508311000_292653.jpg

Yes the graduated filters have been around for decades but Kubrick made big use of them.

HAHA!

Alcott used an Angenieux 25 - 250 t/3.8 ( Which you also note is a 10:1 ratio. )

@@JohnDoe-ev9kt Having had an identical 25-250 Angenieux, I can attest to John Doe's answer being correct. From the moment the film was announced to be in production, to my purchase of the American Cinematographer Barry Lyndon issue at Samuelson's Film Services in London and long afterward, I almost feel like I was completely absorbed by the project. You can imagine how pleased I am that my son teaches film and video production, and is as enthusiastic about the work of Stanley Kubrick as I am. I think our conversations at dinner have left many friends and family members feeling quite left out.

Thanks, Scott! A lot of the wonderful photos came from the post Cinephilia & Beyond did on Barry Lyndon (link in the description). Others came from the Stanley Kubrick Archives book and various other books.

Thanks!

Glad you liked it! Thanks for the correction. If I remember correctly, in the interview with John Alcott, he mentioned that they were able to control the aperture via something mounted on the side of the camera. I'm not too familiar with the differences in T stops and F stops, but whenever I mentioned a T lens or an F lens, I am actually quoting directly from a source.

CinemaTyler Yeah unfortunately the lingo gets used incorrectly but correctly when randomly interviewed confusing things for everyday readers. Basically the T stop is a more precise way to measure how much light is actually hitting the film or digital sensor compared to F stop which also adjusts the focal plane. With historical movie films they only had low ISO film stock available for use for a long time making it vitally more important to measure in T stops since film based movies was/is more expensive to redo a scene. Whereas a digital system, they can just adjust it more easily in post as long as it's within a stop of where they need to be. Then they can even do HDR blending to adjust the sky and other elements that need adjustment but they try to do as much in camera with correct lighting of all the elements to save on post costs. Seven Samurai is a good film to review as well known for its deep focus like Citizen Kane but done differently. With the low ISO film stock they had, they used very bright lights to accommodate the narrow F stop and then factor in the T stop for correct exposure. If I recall correctly it's almost all done at F 64!

A follow focus can be used to control aperture as well, as long as the lens has a geared aperture ring. The follow focus would be mounted on 15mm or 19mm rails.

Of course, but most motion picture lenses have no need to be fitted with a remote f/stop control. Generally once the director of photography calls the stop for a given shot it remains set for the take, if not the entire angle.The constant tweaking to compensate for continual brightness variations during often very long takes is what led to it's use in Barry Lyndon. I think that was the point being made here.

Both adjust the depth of field - in that regard f/stops and T/stops are similar. T/stops are f/stops with a 'fudge factor' to allow for light scattered and absorbed by the optics. A lens set to f/4 which loses a half stop of light would be said to be said to T/4.5 to compensate for exposure - however depth of field must always be based on the f/stop, not the T/stop. T/stops were developed by the Technicolor company when they used to shoot colour motion pictures with camera that shot 2 or 3 black and white negatives simultaneously back in the 20s and 30s (hence the "T"). These early colour camera systems were rated at somewhere around 5-12 ASA, and light losses in the special lenses they required meant they devised a sort of pseudo f/stop used for setting exposure (but not depth of field). I don't see how this would have a bearing on the need to ride the aperture during Barry Lyndon though.

Thanks for the correction. Apparently I left out Scotland as well. It was that dang Time article I used...

It puts paid to the idea that everything within a frame of a Kubrick movie was meant to be seen; sometimes even the best make mistakes.

I am certain that if we had the appropriate Rosetta Stone, we would learn of his confession here about faking the moon landing footage.

That person was me. His message I can now disclose since a sufficient period of time for discretion has passed, epecially in respect of his family. The message, deciphered, is "I have made a terrible mistake. I have shone a false light on the world. I repent of this and my many other sins, especially over-sized babies. And must return one day to do penance by making zombie movies.". I willfully attest that this is the full, accurate, and final message of Stanley Kubrick.

LOL, it takes a really critical eye to find such mistakes, and it proves that too much film education can destroy a person's enjoyment of film.

Kubrick made many mistakes, which are fully visible in the finished film. Where did you get the idea he never made mistakes? That statement is simply not true.

@@ingvarhallstrom2306 The nobleman losing at cards says "Je suis fatigue but the correct French is J'ai fatigue (I have fatigue)

well said mate ! thats why art is vanishing...