acting due to lens?

[New_Zealand]

I have a friend that is wanting to start acting in front of the camera she has done play but somehow during her acting classes she was told this:

(I have no experience in acting in front of a camera which is very different to stage, I need to learn how lenses work so can perform properly)


I have never told any of my talents in over 20 films I have done what lens I'm using (and not planning on doing so) Is this something new in acting classes and new directors are now telling the talents what lens they are using and that the talents need to learn the effect of these lens so they can act according?

 

[edinc90]

I have never heard that. I know some actors ask what the framing is so they know what's in shot and what's not. I'll tell them if the shot is wide, medium, or closeup. I rarely tell them the specific focal length, mainly because they rarely ask and/or don't care.

The main difference between stage and film is that stage acting is "bigger." The audience is physically farther away, so actions and emotions have to be played up. Film is a close-up medium, where the entire frame can be filled with just someone's face, so more subtle acting is required.

 

[nycineaste]

I don't know for sure, but maybe its because a wide angle lens can exaggerate the speed of a movement so she was taught to compensate for that? just a thought.

 

[Darren Levine]

either they're just speaking out of their arse, or like edinc said, they want to know how much room they have to work in.

you should always tell your actor their framing for that very reason.

stage actors do need to learn to 'act natural', vs 'act big', stage audiences don't see what an 85mm @ 5ft sees.

they could also have some habits which look very bad on film, such as little back and forth movements, side to side, etc.... you'll notice that good actors are very planted, even when mobile

 

[Rolf Silber]

While I think it should be clear that an actor needs to have some idea about the framing of a shot I doubt this should translate to the extreme as to change their acting in relation to what lens is used: "I now will do my award winning 100mm stare".... ;-)

At the same time it can be great if they develop a feeling for what the camera does and this a bit more so than just finding out how big, small, wide his/her "stage" may be.

Throwing them a hint that by now, say, in a close shot their face fills "the stage" completely, may help them to not over-act too much and give them a feeling about their physical presence on "stage" for an audience - that the camera actually will magnify their face to the absurd at times. They often understand the "stage"-metaphor better than if you tell them you have a 35mm in a close shot at f 2.0 or other tech-mumbo-jumbo - that in an extreme close up the opening of the eye-lids may equal the raising of a stage curtain: This can be helpful for an talented actor to give her/his performance "the beat" to make it great.

But: It's hard at times to convey to some actors the concept that the camera is more a partner than an instrument for the adulation of their work or pristine personality. The better and more intelligent ones understand this and are able to build "fields of energy" between themselves and the camera - like dancers do this with a partner.

In any case it's more useful to throw an analogy at them than a "technical" information....

 

[tired]

: "I now will do my award winning 100mm stare".... ;-)

my wife has one of those....

it's just for framing - an experienced stage actor will tend to be 'bigger' since he's playing to an audience 15' away - some stage actors find it hard to bring the performance back down and it really shows on the camera. I remember listening to Geoffrey Rush talking about a young actor on the set of Shine (Rush is a long time stage actor and if you think he's good on screen - you should see him on the stage) he commented that he didn't think the young actor (Noah Taylor) was 'doing anything' untill he looked at the monitor and it was all in the eyes. the tighter the framing is, the more a good actor will internalise his portrayal.

 

[jghenderson]

An actor needs to know where their mark is, where their light is, and what their frame is. Specific details about lens choice is useless information to them, and would be nothing but mental baggage.

 

[Allan Black]

Reminds me of the old gag:

actor: 'where is the light coming from?'

director: 'same place as the music'

Cheers.

 

[J Davis]

something here is lost in the communication

actors need to know their framing and their mark

 

[Rolf Silber]

: "I now will do my award winning 100mm stare".... ;-)

my wife has one of those....

My wife just did an Optimo-Zoom glance when I told her I will need that new Voigtlaender to accompany the BMC pocket cam ......

The problem with actors interested in the visual concept of a movie is that the really gifted and intelligent ones can become better when they understand it and transpose it into a creative tool for their part. This is immediately followed by the question how many gifted and intelligent actors are there in the first place.While I do not subscribe to the concept of actors being mere puppets or mannikens for sure there are not too much who can work in the described way.

Funny enough I worked once with a lady in her late eighties who had an almost spooky sense of understanding where the camera was when and what did it see. She knew exactly where the framing ended and would make that into a tool by playing the off-stage/on-stage trick perfectly to collect "attention pionts" ...... I told my DOP if he would be in doubt about the framing or what lens he just used, he could always ask her....

But then: She had her first appearance on a stage in the roaring twenties of the last century when she was just four years young....

 

[J Davis]

Only thought of this late but I think I know where the communication went wrong.

And the instructor actually is correct.

Once the actor knows the framing they need to tailor their movement to it. For example in a CU (close up) they may not drift too far off the mark and keep expression to facial. In a wide establishing shot, expression would not be facial at all and would be with the body. But once again the framing is what is communicated to the actor, not the focal length, lens brand or any such technicalities.

 

[paulears]

It's simply about the types of shot - perform in MCU, LS, 2shot etc - the drama schools that include TV modules always do this. They also teach the talk to the home audience techniques and the opposite - as in be aware of, but ignore the camera style - as required by the director. There is no requirement to be remotely technical - they also teach looking room - which to an actor is odd because the camera isn't looking at them, and often amateur actors attempt to move into the centre which isn't required.