Short Film - Shot on HMC-150

[dedazo]

http://vimeo.com/3390102

[aalleexx]

you jumped the 180 line on those overtheshoulders, when the camera is on the man, the camera is on the wrong side, its very distracting, was that done on purpose?

[dedazo]

It was. experimenting. worked well i think for the situation. Portrays him a lot better I though. It is not just another over the shoulder shot. "nothing written in stone about the 180 degree rule ". Thanks for watching

[Everts]

Nice , the acting got better and better.

[BrianMurphy]

Good story line, acting, audio,light. I agree with aalleexx, crossing the axis bothered me too. I also had issues with the proportions in your framing. But hey! Keep making movies!

[Oliax]

experimenting with the 180 degree rule? hmm, not a very good idea. maybe in an action sequence ( and only if it is done right) but not in an over the shoulder conversation scene. it is just distracting and takes away from the scene. there is no need for experimenting when it alienates your viewers

[John Caballero]

Hey, if you put the whole thing together, you shot it and you like it, then you break all the rules you want. Who says you can't? Besides, it is a heck of a funny ending. Keep on experimenting all your heart desires. It is all about doers.

[Z1Scottie]

the male lead sounds a lot like Bill Paxton

[dedazo]

Hey, if you put the whole thing together, you shot it and you like it, then you break all the rules you want. Who says you can't? Besides, it is a heck of a funny ending. Keep on experimenting all your heart desires. It is all about doers.

That is the spirit - thanks john

[Dafilman21]

The OTS's bothered me at first, but then I got over it and into the story nice job! Did you use natural lighting? And what about an adaptor?

[dedazo]

The OTS's bothered me at first, but then I got over it and into the story nice job! Did you use natural lighting? And what about an adaptor?

Used flourescent lighting - from home depot (color corrected on post) - with a 300watts on camera light for eyelight - NO ADAPTOR - bare HMC-150 - thanks for Watching and the good comments...

[mikeshu]

The technical issues didn't distract too much from the story between the two. In the end, it's about their performances, which worked perfectly. Lighting and camerawork needed some improvement, but that will most likely improve over time and with a larger budget.

[mikecost]

haha, loved the ending!

[vic777]

Did you shoot the complete story in it's entirety from each perspective (3 different angles), and then do the edit? Or how did you do the shots ...

[Elmy]

Very good, like others at first i was like WOW 180 rule! lol, but once I finished i completely forgot because the story was so simple and perfect and funny. Great job.

[Thomas Lew]

Storyline, acting, sound = excellent.

Lighting was rather poor I felt. Fluorescent doesn't really work that great to be honest. Everything looked rather dark and without any accents or lighting up of their faces. The 180 rule thing really bothered me. Yeah I know everybody's saying it, and while I appreciate your experimenting I hope your conclusion was that end in the end it really didn't work out. Plus, in some of the shots over 50% of the shot consisted of the back of somebody's head, rather then the person who is talking.

Just my opinion. Take it or run with it.

Great effort overall.

[studio1394]

I like experimenting however It does not seem intentional in the video. I would also pay closer attention to the lighting and camera compositions. The camera you used is capable of much more than this so keep at it!

[male_man]

I'm new at this, and was wondering if someone can explain the 180 rule? Thanx.

[wisted]

I'm new at this, and was wondering if someone can explain the 180 rule? Thanx.

Since the opening shot establishes the male on right, female on left, our brain naturally assumes this trend will continue when MCU and CU shots appear throughout the scene.

I wouldn't call it a rule necessarily, just an orientation method we take for granted. Most films adhere to this 'rule' and when we come across one that does not, it appears more jarring than it really is.

I thought it was great, myself. I personally would have experimented more with the camera and tried to brighten the subjects a tad more. But the writing, audio and performances were cool. Good job on the titles too!

[male_man]

Thanks for the explanation Wisted.

[jamesc]

Another way to think of the 180 rule (for two people) is draw a line between the two people talking. After establishing the initial camera on one side of that line, don't cross it and you'll be safe. People mostly break the 180 rule in order to disorient the audience (Taxi Driver -> gun in mirror scene).

The short was entertaining, but I personally found the 180 jumps very distracting as well. The framing bothered me as well. Backs of heads taking up half the screen (sometimes even covers the opposing actor's face. Rules of thirds: 1/3 back of head -> 2/3 talking actor.

[ksteiger]

Rules are great, but why didn't the composition bother me at first? For some reason I was drawn quickly into the characters and ignored the technical issues.
When I watched it a 2nd time I noticed it.

I guess if you break the rules intentionally people don't get as bothered. Maybe next time get radical. Have 80% of the frame be the back of the head, but only occasionally. That way people can read all kinds of extra "meaning" into the script. Instant directorial genius !
Just my $.02

Regardless, I loved this movie.

[RMJones]

At the first couple cuts the crossing the line bothered me. almost to the point that i was going to stop watching. But like others - the more i watched the less i noticed. The male lead was great. One of those performers that just has it. I think if he would have sucked the whole thing would have been down the tubes. And he does have that whole Bill Paxton thing going on. Also good job on sound design. In my opinion sound is one of the more important issues when making a film( and the part i know least about). Just one little hiccup in the sound and it totally destroys the illusion you are trying to create for an audience.

Im and trying to understand the experimenting with crossing the line in a scene like this and i really don't. But to be honest i have more respect for someone who will try and execute new ideas alot more than someone who always plays it safe. I think that is the point of being an artist. As long as you don't take advantage of your audience then anything is game. That is of coarse if the line jump was intentional. but who will ever know if it was or not. I can understand that the natural light probably looked better from angle you used. The sunlight coming in from the windows would have been a little to much if the camera was placed in the correct position. But i just don't see a need for a line jump here. Not when there are so many other options on how to properly shoot him from that same position.

*have one ots establishing shot of the camera in the correct position on him, them dolly to the position you used in the film, having the back of the girls head crossing from cam left to cam right. It will change the position needed for the girl ots, but you still get to use the same wide of the couple with the bar in the bg, and you still get to take advantage of the great natural lighting.

*You could flip (or flop - i always get those confused) the shot i post but then you will/may have lighting continuity issues.

One other little thing that bothered me a little is i though there was too much head taking up the frame in some of the ots. especially when your not using an adapter and have such a deep DOP i think that the less of the back of the head showing the better.
This is all meant to be constructive criticism. The most useless thing i could say is "great job".

In the end I really liked this short. I thought the casting was perfect, the script was fun and simple, and directing was good. GREAT JOB! : )

[dcloud]

breaking the 180 rule has no artistic merit at all.

180 rule is there soa conversation wont be confusing.