New Indie Film Tech Tip: Zoom Vs. Dolly

Thanks Scott.

My .02 is that I only zoom when there is no other option. A dolly shot adds production value, and is almost always worth the extra effort.
 
Jim Brennan said:
Thanks Scott.

My .02 is that I only zoom when there is no other option. A dolly shot adds production value, and is almost always worth the extra effort.
Click to expand...

however, they have very different effects.
Watch the Bourne films, zooms are used at great effect.
 
Very helpful stuff. But occasionally it sounds like they're talking through a tin can underwater.
 
Hi Folks,

Glad you found the Tech Tip helpful.

Sorry about the audio. That's a product of the Windows Media file compression. I want to keep the file small so it doesn't take forever to stream.

Scott
 
Zooms are almost never encouraged to be used, unless to achieve a specific effect or for a specific aesthetic reason. This is because 'zooming' is the one function in film making that the human eye can't mimic. It is unnatural. The reason the Bourne film (Ultimatum is best example) may use zooms (fast zooms), is because the director and director of photography have repeatedly stated the film is supposed to have a photo-journalism feeling. It is also the reason they had two F/2.8 Nikon photography zooms converted by Arri to fit the cinema mounts.

From ASC magazine article "Bourne Again" September 2007 Issue:
The production carried Cooke S4 primes lenses and an Arri LWZ 15.5-45mm zoom, but the crew “mostly used lightweight zooms that I had specially made from two Nikon digital still-photography lenses, a 28-70mm and an 80-200mm,” says Wood. “Arri in Munich converted them to lightweight cinema-style zooms, and they work quite well. The Nikon glass is brilliant.” Dierken notes, “We called them the Oliver Lenses, and they helped the operators shoot everything handheld with the documentary approach Oliver and Paul wanted. Unlike other zooms, which are either too heavy or too slow, these zooms opened up to T2.8 and were quite light. Arri made the housings in six weeks, and the lenses turned out to be very sharp and the contrast was quite good. [Still-photography] lenses turn the opposite of the way cine-style lenses do, which could have been unpleasant if we’d used a normal follow focus, but with the LCS-3 we were able to just reverse the gears. The lenses worked so well that we ended up shooting 70 percent of the movie with them, and now Arri is making more!”
Click to expand...

Greengrass’ preference for imagery that has a spontaneous feel gave Wood some leeway, in the sense that a fluorescent interior could go a little green, a composition didn’t have to be perfect, and focus could be a bit off for part of a shot, and it would all work within the overall visual style. “Paul trusts his designers and cameramen,” says Wood. “He’s more interested in what the actors are doing and the story of the scene than the camera angles.” Wood and his crew captured the action in an almost documentary fashion, giving Greengrass and the editors plenty of coverage options in the cutting room.
Click to expand...
http://www.ascmag.com/magazine_dynamic/September2007/TheBourneUltimatum/page1.php



Those tips are some good stuff, but I think the majority of independent and low budget filmmakers need to get their fingers off the zoom rockers. If not used properly (almost never is) this can be a tell sign of an amateur.
 
Last edited:
Zooms to me say "1970s Baby!" Unless you are going for that, they look pretty lame.

BTW, even with a dolly or Steadicam, don't move the camera unless there is a reason to. Nothing is worse than a director moving the damned camera all of the time, just because they can. Directors today are wimps, they have succumbed to the pressure to shoot everything with 2-3 cameras rolling and they shoot a dozen takes of everything. I was working on a low budget comedy feature in Florida during the Spring, first time director and he rolled three cameras on everything and then switched angles numerous times and did 20-30 takes of everything. Drove the crew crazy. Why do filmmakers today have such small balls today? I admire filmmakers who pick the right angle, shoot it and move on and their films are beautiful and cut together beautifully.

Okay, rant over.

Dan
 
for me, when looking at the difference between slow zooms and slow dolly moves, a dolly captures an emotional, human quality while a zoom carries amore cerebral, analytical weight. and that is basically the "definition" i rely on to decide what's appropriate.
 
Last edited:
I would never say "Never do this or that". Zooms can work at the right time, just like a dolly shot, or static, or steadicam. Everything has a unique effect. THe only really time a associate a zoom shot with the word "amateurish" is when, in the middle of dialogue, it zooms in, then back out again, like a parent filming their kid at some school performance, zooming in on their kid, then pulling back out, then back in. I've been a lot of student films or people's short films where they do it, and it just doesn't work. However, it has a kind of "drawing in" feeling when done at the right moment, and it's definitely different than a dolly, and I don't mean it terms of look, but in effect. I haven't watched the video yet, so I don't know if I've really added anything to the discussion. That's just what I keep in mind when shooting a film.
 
I believe that a very very slow creeping zoom is almost indiscernable from a dolly move in...But only a very slow and small zoom. Too much and you'll give yourself away.
 
Thanks for the comments. I glad people enjoyed the Tech Tip.

I prefer dolly moves to zooming, but sometimes a zoom can be very effective to create a documentary feel with fast jerky zooms or tension with a slow creepy zoom.

Another trick I like to do is a hide a zoom inside another move. Sometimes while dollying with an actor, I'll zoom into and most people won't even notice the zoom. You can also zoom during a pan.

Scott
 
MalcolmOng said:
I believe that a very very slow creeping zoom is almost indiscernable from a dolly move in...But only a very slow and small zoom. Too much and you'll give yourself away.
Click to expand...

Atta boy Malcolm,

We're both on the same wavelength - a slow (creeping) pan combined with a slow zoom can trick the viewer into perceiving it's a dolly shot. Setup time is money so it's worth the effort to master this shot and use it when applicable.

Happy trails, Michael

P.S. Oh yeah, don't forget the combined zoom/dolly "Hitchcock" (Jaws) shot, etc.
 
puredrifting said:
Nothing is worse than a director moving the damned camera all of the time, just because they can.
Click to expand...

AMEN!! So much of the camerawork nowadays (and especially on TV series) is incredibly frenetic and leaves me exhausted. One of the worst trends right now is having the camera circling around two actors talking to each other. There is no dramatic motivation for the camera movement, and it totally takes me out of the story (and sometimes threatens to give me motion sickness).

I'm now in the midst of re-watching TWIN PEAKS (which I last saw during its first run oh so many years ago). Damn fine classic filmmaking, and incredibly rare for TV--it puts nearly everything else to shame.
 
I enjoyed the use of zooms in the Bourne trilogy but have to say that I hate zooms when they are on sticks (ala 70's films as said earlier).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top