Cinematographer Eric Steelberg, ASC, who shot Juno and Up in the Air, talks about starting with Super 8 in high school and building his career as a DP.
What first interested you in film and how did you start in the industry?
Eric Steelberg, ASC: In high school a couple friends and I got a film production class started and when parents heard about it, boxes of donated Super 8mm film cameras, projectors, and editors started showing up. Right after that we even got a 16mm Eclair NPR, 6 plate Moviola flatbed editor, and Nagra from the ’60s. Everyone wanted to direct and produce while I was the camera guy. I had been enrolled in still photography classes since 7th grade and usually had a camera everywhere I went. So immediately I became the cameraman on all these high school short films, mostly shot in Super 8. By the time I graduated high school, I had shot films on the 16mm Eclair in B&W and color, as well as edited them on the flatbed. It was a wonderful learning experience and the best part was that I had to teach myself everything…our teacher was more theory, history, and inspiration than physical production. He learned a lot from us too. Film school seemed liked the next logical step, but I applied to all of them and didn’t get in to any. I figured that if I did a couple years at a community college I could more easily transfer into a film school than join as a freshman. After a couple years at a community college taking advanced still photography courses and working on short films and micro budget features on weekends, I decided that film school probably wouldn’t advance me any further than the rate at which I was already working. So I rolled the dice and dropped out, determined to go out and try to start a career on my own. During that time I ran into Jason Reitman [director, “Up in the Air”] who was a friend and classmate of Carl Erik Rinsch, who I grew up with shooting shorts as well. He mentioned he was doing a short film and heard I was also working on shorts and he asked me to be his 1st AC. I was happy to do it– why not? After that shoot, Jason needed some insert shots for his short and the DP he had hired wasn’t available so he asked me to fill in. That was in 1997. His short led to me getting hired by others for their short films, getting hired to do re-shoots and 2nd unit on low budget features. Eventually, Jason as well as Carl Rinsch got signed as commercial directors and when they did I was able to get an agent. That led to years of commercials and more sporadic low-budget feature work, eventually landing me my first indie theatrical release, “Quinceañera”, which won both the Audience Award and Grand Jury Prize at Sundance in 2006. Everything else is history.
Who are your main influences? Other cinematographers, photographers, artists?
Eric Steelberg, ASC: The very first cinematographers whose work I noticed at a young age were Caleb Deschanel and Allen Daviau. Their work holds a special place in my heart to this day. Those were the first of many “a-ha!” moments I’ve had. But I was also somewhat obsessed with the still photography in my parent’s volumes of National Geographic. I was struck how they were able to tell stories with still frames while movies need so much more. Different arts, I know, but at that young age it was profound. I was simultaneously introduced to the work of Ansel Adams in photography classes in junior high and even got to visit someone’s house who had a collection of about 30 original prints that Ansel made himself. I don’t know if I’ve been in awe of any other photography since.
More recently I’ve come to love and be inspired by the photography of Cartier-Bresson, Sal Leiter [who was our main point of reference for “500 Days of Summer”], Eggleston and Stephen Shore [“Labor Day”], Greg Crewdson, and the paintings of Vernet and Claude Lorraine.
And why cinematography?
Eric Steelberg, ASC: As most people who know me will tell you that I’m a bit of an introvert and quiet person. But somehow when I’m on set or have a camera, I know how to be outgoing with it and use it to express how I feel in a way that I can’t with words. I suddenly have so much to say with composition and lighting. I really don’t feel like I know how to do anything else, that telling stories though imagery is in my DNA. The appealing part is that people are willing to hire me to do so!
Do you have any favorite cameras? Are there any cameras you would like to work with in the future?
Eric Steelberg, ASC: My favorite camera is whatever one I used to make my best work. Honestly, it’s just a tool. There’s too much hype and talk about cameras. I don’t get it. The tech geek in me understands hype and marketing… but in the end most of that means nothing to what ends up on screen or makes the story better. And that’s what I’m doing…I’m translating. There are words on a page that have meaning that need to end up on screen and the camera is just one of the tools I use, but any camera can do it to be honest. The issue becomes about the aesthetic. Film stocks and processing are what we used to have to manipulate a look, and now these new cameras with their differences are the new films stocks. The last movie I finished, “Labor Day”, was shot on the Red Epic. I think that movie is my best work to date so I’m a bit partial to that camera. That being said, I’m about to start principal photography on a new film which we are using the Arri Alexa on. It is more suited to the look of that camera. I’ve seen some beautiful tests from the Sony F65 and I’d love to work with it. Panavision will undoubtedly be coming out with their new camera soon and I’m eager to see it.
Film and digital can produce widely different effects. Do you have a preference between the two, either with how they work or the aesthetic they can provide?
Eric Steelberg, ASC: Unfortunately, there may not be a film versus digital issue beyond this year as film’s use continues to be dramatically scaled back. But for as long as it’s around I am pleased that I have so many digital and analog choices. I think one thing that appeals to a DP about film is that the image creation is more in his/her control because it can be manipulated further in camera and prior to post than digital can. It’s less of a democratic process. You can do more in camera thereby having a bigger sense of authorship and creativity with the image, and even more in the lab. That doesn’t really exist with digital. Everyone sees what a DP is doing live which tend to bring comments and input, not allowing the DP to finish his/her work as intended. And of course I am generalizing and this isn’t always the case, but I have experienced it many times. Digital isn’t to be frowned upon, though, it must be embraced as our main format of the future. Its technical capability is close to matching film and is in some ways already exceeding that benchmark. It’s a different look than film, it’s cleaner. This is sometimes great and sometimes a curse. But I won’t lie and say that I don’t like the immediacy of seeing my work without having to wait for a lab report the next day. I definitely sleep better shooting digital. Am I happier? Hard to say. I think it’s equal to film. The bottom line is that I have more tools than ever available and so long as the manufactures can sustain all these choices at once, I’ll continue to use whichever format has the best aesthetic for the creative intent of my work.
Do you find that you tend to plan out your shots beforehand or do you just work things out once you’re on set? Do you have a certain look or feel in mind already heading into the scene?
Eric Steelberg, ASC: Some directors like to storyboard everything, some like to storyboard just the complicated scenes, and some don’t plan at all and want to be inspired when they get to set and watch the actors’ rehearsals. I feel like I’m a bit of each. I like to go through the script with the director and get their ideas for each scene and then share my input and ideas. I definitely push to storyboard complicated scenes. For those you really need to know the approach you’re going to be taking and if you end up not using it, fine, but at least you have a well thought out starting point to build from. I also try to be flexible enough in my lighting and approach to compositions to allow for improvisation if the director wants to be spontaneous. “Up in the Air” was shot in five different, fully-
functioning airports. What was that like?
Eric Steelberg, ASC: Hard. Very hard. Each one had a completely different set of rules and restrictions as the others. One would think they would generally follow the same general guidelines but they don’t. And I don’t say that in a negative way, just that you couldn’t use any experience from the previous airport and apply it to the next, hoping for efficiencies. I was very limited in the amount of crew and equipment allowed into the secure areas of the grounds. Think about how long it takes to get you and your carry on through a security checkpoint. Now imagine a movie crew with grip, lighting, props, wardrobe, all going back and forth between the set and the work trucks. Not a very fast process. But I will say every airport went out of their way to be as helpful as they could.
In the same vein: for most people, an airport is an airport, and not a place you want to spend a lot of time in. How challenging was it to make each location unique and not altogether unpleasing?
Eric Steelberg, ASC: It actually wasn’t all that challenging since all the airports are so individual in their design so the uniqueness was already done for me. The bigger issue was adjusting amount, quality, direction, and color of the light to fit the story. It turns out they don’t like to mess with their lighting especially when the airport is active with real passengers. I remember one scene we were doing at a gate in St. Louis and we had to pause at the active gate and wait for a plane to unload. So the crew and actors all sat there waiting as passengers disembarked and when they walked off the jet way and saw Panavision cameras and George Clooney standing, waiting, waving, the looks on their faces were priceless. In addition to “Up in the Air”, you have worked with
Jason Reitman on “H@”, “Juno”, “Young Adult”, and “Labor Day”. How would you describe the relationship between a cinematographer and director?
Eric Steelberg, ASC: It’s a marriage, or at the least a serious relationship. There needs to be tremendous trust and good communication. I would say the most important thing is for the cinematographer to spend more time listening than talking. You can learn a lot about what a director wants by what isn’t said and how things are described as opposed to the actual words used. You get a sense of how they feel about something and that is invaluable to my approach.
To wrap things up, do you have any advice for cinematographers just beginning their careers?
Eric Steelberg, ASC: Shoot everything you can. Don’t worry about the camera or technology. Use whatever is available. If you can create something and tell a story on a camera technically inferior then when you finally get the chance to use something better, you will really stand out. Look at Anthony Dodd Mantle who started by shooting the Dogma films on miniDV in the mid 90s. He got an Oscar a few years ago.
Keep learning filmmaking
Want more lessons like this? Join StudentFilmmakers free for live webinars with working pros, and stream on-demand filmmaking classes in cinematography, directing, screenwriting, sound and post.
