Am I right in thinking this no-op interview setup is a bad idea?

H

HughHancock

New member
I've got a client who is looking to set up a decent-quality (high-end YouTube / low-end broadcast) seated interview without any additional crew - just the interviewee and interviewer. The interviewees will be quite high-profile, so we can't afford to have to re-shoot - it needs to go right first time.

My initial reaction was "no monitoring and no op? You're asking for trouble!". But this isn't an area I'm specialised in - I'm usually a narrative filmmaker. So I thought I'd double-check with people more expert than me.

Are there any sound/video combos out there that would be reliable enough that there's no need for a monitor whilst the interview (probably around an hour) is conducted? Or is there a way for the interviewer to non-obviously monitor the footage without it being obvious on the interview? We're looking to have both interviewer and interviewee in shot.

Our interviewer would have to set up the kit, and they're likely to not be video or audio professionals.

Budget for kit would be around $2.5k max, ideally less.

I'd be very interested to hear if there's a way to do this - or if there's definitely no way to do this reliably. Either way it's extremely useful information.

Thanks in advance, and apologies for the possibly very silly question :)
 
It's not a silly question.

Silly would be attempting to setup unmanned, non-monitored hour long interviews of high profile people by non audio/video professionals.

I would also question only having a single 2 shot for the entire interview.
 
There is a way to do it, but it is far from ideal.

Jerry Lewis helped refine and standardize what we now know as video assist so that he could direct from in front of the camera. Monitors facing the set gave him a view of the frame. Of course, there were crew members behind the camera as well.

Assuming that the chairs and lights are pre-set and do not move (i.e. a permanent or semi-permanent set), a video monitor could be set behind the inteviewee, out of frame but where the interviewer can see without a dramatic break in eye contact. For sound, an in-ear/IFB piece (a la news anchors and Secret Service agents) could give a workable, though less than reliable from a quality standpoint, sound monitoring solution.

These things are a gamble. Again, doable but far from ideal. While the interviewer can see that the numbers are rolling and the picture is up, and can hear (somewhat) that sound is being recorded, there's little s/he can do if a problem arises. Having someone behind the camera assures that exposure and recording levels can be rescued in the event of a misfire. There's no equal repacement to having a pair of eyes and a pair of ears behind the camera.

And to second Dave, a locked-down 2-shot is gong to be awfully uninteresting.
 
Thanks - that's very helpful and echoes my own concerns about the setup. I'll pass that on to the client (diplomatically :) )
 
What they said.

It's certainly possible, but less reliable. If the camera and lighting are nice, and the content interesting enough, I don't mind that set-up at all. That's apparently what this is:


But it's not a shot with the interviewer, just the subject. This is more visually pleasing I think for a single-shot interview. Plus it lets the interviewer glance at the camera screen and possibly wear an earbud.
 
combatentropy said:
If the camera and lighting are nice, and the content interesting enough, I don't mind that set-up at all. That's apparently what this is:
Click to expand...

This is fine for an interview that lasts only a few minutes, but for 76 minutes ( like the sample you posted ) I would want to stab myself in the eyes after 10 minutes. It's just SO boring to watch. ( I'd rather listen to an audio podcast of the same content )
 
Quite apart from the boring-ness, how would you cut it? If the interviewee fluffs and has to repeat -- or if a lav mic falls off and needs to be re-set (just happened in a class I'm cutting) -- you'll want to cut a bit out.

With 1 camera, you're left with a jump cut, which looks hideous. Or you can throw in a dissolve, which says "yes it was hideous, so I decided to make it look tacky too." ;-)

When shooting, always think of the editor!!!

(says the guy editing a 3-hour class.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top