The films “Sid and Nancy,” “The Shawshank Redemption,” and “O Brother, Where Art Thou” don’t seem to have much in common. Neither do “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” “Dead Man Walking,” and “Skyfall.” 

The bond through all those movies is cinematographer Roger Deakins, who has been nominated for 16 Oscars, winning for “Blade Runner 2049” and “1917.”

Deakins, one of the most influential cinematographers of the last 40 years, has now written “Reflections,” a book that’s part memoir – through his childhood, his early days as a photographer and documentary filmmaker – and partly a book about work, explaining to readers his creative process, how he works with directors and problem-solves in the moment. 

He also writes about his personal and working relationship with his wife, James, whom he met in 1991 when she was working as a script supervisor on “Homicide,” where he was cinematographer. They’ve been inseparable ever since, coming as a team for films and even for this interview, where James would occasionally nudge her husband (sweetly but assuredly) with thoughts about how to flesh out an answer.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity. 

Q. Who were you writing this book for?

I didn’t want it to be a technical manual. I do hope it reaches a wider audience than just people who love lighting. When I was a teenager, I had no idea about the film industry and didn’t see any way into the film industry myself. So it’s for that kind of audience. 

We have a lot of fun making films, but I didn’t want it to just be, “Making films is a great laugh.” And I didn’t want it to be a tell-all about Hollywood either. I wanted it to be about the positive experiences and the work, but I also wanted to show you have ups and downs – there were times I’ve walked away from the industry. There was one film that I thought was the worst, and it just disheartened me. I thought, if that’s the industry, I don’t want to be part of it. But then I got a call from Joel and Ethan Coen. 

Originally, the publisher wanted me to talk about six key movies, but I didn’t really want to limit it to that. They were great because they said, “OK, just do what you feel.”

The design and the image quality were really important. I wanted it to be very visual, and I told the publisher I needed that number of images to illustrate and represent different aspects of what I was talking about.

Q. Do you light for the overall story or the character or the particular moment?

It’s all those things. The worst cinematography is cinematography that stands out. If you come out of a screening and someone says, “I love that shot where such and such…” then you made a mistake. There shouldn’t be anything that stands out from the rest. So you have to keep in mind the overall concept and look of the film but you also have to understand the logistics of every scene you’re shooting – you’ve only got a certain time in the day – and you have to look at the actor’s sensibilities because some actors want to come on the set and won’t allow time to adjust lighting while others say, “Take your time with relighting.” Part of your job is to create a world where the actors can feel comfortable and can do their job.

Q. You’ve been an innovator using digital finishes and digital cameras and other newer techniques ahead of the curve. Was that conscious?

I find it very uncanny how certain pieces of equipment were invented just in time to make certain films work, to create certain looks that directors wanted. You hear about certain things coming down the line, and you grab it. But it’s still kind of a coincidence. 

With “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” Mike [Radford] wanted to shoot the film in black-and-white, and the producers said, “No way.” So we wanted to make it as black-and-white as we could. Bleach bypass had been used in Japan and experimented with here, and the lab we worked with found a way to make it work, so the film has that look.

When we did “O Brother,” we tried every which way to get the look that Joel and Ethan wanted photochemically, and just couldn’t do it, and nobody had done that kind of digital finish, but it was just available then, so we managed to get the look. 

We couldn’t have done “1917” five years earlier, or certainly not with the fluidity we did, because those gimbels, those different systems didn’t exist. 

Q. Do you offer suggestions when you think the director is veering in the wrong direction narratively, or is your job just to help the director fulfill their vision?

It depends on the situation. Sometimes the director might be under such intense stress that you wouldn’t bother him or her with an idea that you had about the scene you’re shooting. But on the other hand, you want to feel part of a team, so that if you have suggestions, you’re just trying to put them forward because you think they might help the scene. 

And you’ve spent time with the director discussing what it is they want, and then you get on the set and the director’s under a lot of stress. So in a way, the cinematographer is his or her best friend and the person that knows what the director’s going for and can gently say, “Are you sure? Didn’t we say we wanted this to be this way?”

Q. How much does your job vary from movie to movie?

You’ve got to do something different on every film. I don’t mean a different technique. I mean, you have to adapt to what the director needs and the story needs and the budget allows – those things dictate each film. In “Sid and Nancy,” we decided after a week or two to shoot it handheld and very off the cuff. 

Whereas “Nineteen Eighty-Four” was very structured. We worked out with the actors in the morning on the set exactly what the shots were for every scene. The producers were panicking because sometimes we didn’t shoot a single frame until after lunch. But because Mike and I and the actors nailed down exactly what was needed for the scene, we never went over schedule.

But we didn’t storyboard that one; while working with the Coen brothers, we storyboarded everything.

Q. How important is the prep work before you start filming?

I like a lot of prep and want to be there on the initial discussions of the concepts of sets and the location scouts. That’s important so that when you get on the set, you know what that relationship’s going to be and where you can help and where you might distract. 

All of those conversations that you have with the director ahead of time help. People have come on the set where I’ve been shooting with Joel and Ethan and can’t understand why it’s so quiet, and nobody’s talking to each other. It’s not that we’re upset with each other – it’s a case of being so prepared and having enough trust between each other that you just work.

James Deakins: During prep, he’ll wake me up at two in the morning with ideas because he’s trying to wrap his head around this new story and look. But I think you got to enjoy it a little bit more because you’re a little less nervous. I know you’re still nervous.

Roger Deakins: I’m still nervous because every film is a new thing unto itself, and you want to satisfy yourself, not anybody else. I’m always doing it to prove something to myself, I suppose.