Why Steven Spielberg Avoids a Wide Open Aperture

Ever wondered why Steven Spielberg avoids using wide open apertures in his films? In this video, we'll dive into the filmmaking techniques that make Spielberg's movies look so sharp and detailed. We'll explore how his choice of aperture affects depth of field, camera blocking, and focus.

Use Promo Code: WC10

Learn about Spielberg's preference for wide angle lenses and how he uses them to create dynamic and immersive scenes. We'll also discuss why he prefers keeping everything in focus and how this choice impacts his storytelling.

If you're curious about the technical side of filmmaking or just a fan of Spielberg's work, this video will give you a new perspective on his creative choices. Join us to understand why Spielberg avoids shooting wide open and how it contributes to the magic of his movies.

[greenmedic]

New appreciation for Spielberg. Don't think I'll be able to view his films in the same manner again. Great analysis.

[robertobuatti]

Spielberg really has an eye for cinema and knows how to frame shots with perfect composition, camera movement, lighting, and know which camera techniques to utilize to tell the most effective story possible and they all feel organic and not artificial, that is why he is one of my most favorite Filmmakers ever.

[avx]

1. Nobody shot wide open back then, Spielberg was doing exactly the same thing as the rest of the industry. Still today few movies are shot below f/2.8 in Hollywood, unless they're going for a documentary look.
2. The two main variables that determine depth of field are focal distance and distance to the subject. At 21mm, everything that is more than 3 feet away from the camera to infinity will be in focus. I doubt you can find a movie shot mostly at 21mm that doesn't use "deep focus".

[ZacharyWillFilms]

I think when you have a beautiful background or spend millions on beautiful sets, why blur it all out.

[MrVideoVagabond]

It's gratifying to see someone extol the value of deep focus. Everyone these days is so obsessed with "bokeh" it 's insane. A while back, I was DP-ing on a demo for a documentary series a friend of mine was trying to get rolling, and some of my friend's contacts in "the biz" told him the footage was unusable -- because the background was in focus. :/

[kip]

Deep focus is an awesome technique that needs a resurgence. Ditto hard lighting

[gpapa]

You can say anything you want about Spielberg as a storyteller (all the adjectives have been exhausted: soapy, saccharine, predictable, too Hollywood, shallow etc) but one thing is certain, he is a hell of a filmmaker. No living director blocks and moves the camera like Spielberg, NO ONE. in terms of camera movement, framing and blocking is up there with Kurosawa, Welles and Lean.

[ngonzale]

So many Youtubers, who financed a 1.2 set of lenses for their Full Frame talking head videos, won’t understand and dismiss how un-teal-and-orange those clips were and call Spielberg’s work un-cinematic. Another beautiful video of one of the greats. ❤

[davexmit]

Excellent! When I watch movies I tend to scan around the frame. I'm sure I'm not the only one. And I love seeing all the details and movement that shallow focus denies the viewer. Shallow focus has been celebrated as THE way to make your film shots look cinematic, but it's just nonsense. Lighting, blocking, camera motion, acting, costumes, set dressing, editing, audio... everything combined makes a shot look cinematic.

[fthprodphoto-video]

Nobody shot wide open at F2.8 or bellow back in the days for many obvious reasons :

Films were shot at F5.6-F8 or above when it was possible to show everything in the frame and even when close focused, F8 gave enough depth of field to see approximately what was happening on the background and enough separation on the close subject without blurring the whole picture behind. The location, and the whole work of set design was a piece of art and needed to be shown. This is the reason why they used strong lightings with higher contrast and less diffusion than today.

Finally, a few directors shot at F2-2.8 or even bellow only when it was man absolute obligation, in very dark light scenes or to put extreme emphasis on the subject and create an effect with the background on very few shots.

[arghjayem]

I think Spielberg himself has said that when it comes to the cinematography the reason he avoids those kind of apertures and really shallow depth of field in his shots is that that isn’t how you as a person see the world- at least not unless you’re shortsighted or longsightedness and not wearing contacts or glasses. He doesn’t want the cinematography to be like that because it lets you know it’s a film, whereas having everything in focus is how you as a person see it. It’s meant to draw you in as if you are the camera observing this all rather than being a film you watch.

[jkapp]

A great analysis of Speilberg's work...I think this helps those of us that grew up with his films and cant quite describe what it was that made these films stand apart in our memories and lives...Videos like this helps to at least try to put a finger on it...

[trifix]

Like 20 years ago I never understood why lights always where so bright on sets. All those BTS-shows on DVDs made the scenes look like you had full on daylight indoors. No that I've become a photographer I understand it perfectly. When i started out as a photographer I always wanted shallow depth of field. That holds true today but it must serve a purpose. To isolate a subject. I often got so hung up on the depth of field that i would totally miss the background. I do a lot of weddings and this year is the first year that I've begun to stop down in order to show more of the scenery. Taking a step back and show more of the things around them.

With all that said - wonderful video of a wonderful director!

[ComradeStiv]

At first I wasn't sure if this was for me with all the technical jargon, but I caught on surprisingly quick thanks to your presentation style. Thoroughly fascinating, educational, and well done, sir.

[MrAnuraag]

Great Video! This reminds of Bicycle Thieves and the entire neo realism film movement where every corner of the frame told a story and not just focusing on the main character

[orcanimal]

The Stranger Things/E.T. joke is hilarious! I thought you made a mistake for a second. Clever

[johnburt]

I wish more filmmakers understood how to use depth of field. I feel like some just go with super shallow cause they fall in love with the Bokeh, not paying enough attention to how it affects story. I can’t tell you how many times I’m asked to pull at a 2 or less. I can do it but it’s hard to bury pull when you have 2 or more characters relatively close to each other but just out of reach to hold them together. Anyway, thanks for the video!

[rsolsjo]

Rewatched Jaws this year in 4K in my home theater, and realized not just the use of depth of field (ALL perfectly sharp and in frame), but framing. Immaculate use of framing throughout, where you almost have to (in a good way) pivot your head from side to side.

[Bhatt_Hole]

0:01 "Wide angle apertures"?

[usernamehandle]

Look, I’m frustrated that filmmakers on YouTube are so focused on theory that they refuse to or forget to talk about the practical implications of these techniques. How are we talking about deep DOF and not talking about lighting and exposure? Many indie filmmakers are using shallow DOF simply so give themselves more light, especially with tight budgets or in situations where you can’t simply add more light to a scene. And esp outside of the traditional filmmaking process. I’ve been a videog and photog for 6 years now, self-taught using mostly YT, and it’s super frustrating to be put on a job where I can’t know the lighting set up before hand. If an environment is too dark, I might have to shoot at f1.4 just to keep my ISO below 2000, shooting on APS-C. The key fact is that Spielberg ISN’T just shooting with a deep DOF, he’s ALSO got access to millions of dollars in lighting equipment, rigging teams, electricity wherever he is. It IS NOT ENOUGH to know the theory behind the aesthetics of a shot. The financial context and the access and freedom that it provides, has a DIRECT relationship with HOW YOU ARE SHOOTING. And not just “I’m using a better camera and better lenses now, ” but also how much light you have to work with, and how that directly affects the gear you choose and how it performs. And I wish that when people make educational videos like this, they talk about not just how these ideas affect the creative thinking when composing a shot, but how they effect the unavoidable aspects of filmmaking for us who aren’t in Hollywood, or are even working solo – the technical and logistical compromises and necessities that made those shots possible.