Clip from actress demo reel
- Thread starter Ryan-Guy
- Start date
Wilbur Eddings
Well-known member
wow man! That Auntie can really act!
Looks great, Nicely blocked and such.
I must admit though, entering a password made the whole experience very exciting. hahahaha
I'm not much of a pixel peeper so don't take my word for it but I think you should be making movies dude!
Great eye!
Looks great, Nicely blocked and such.
I must admit though, entering a password made the whole experience very exciting. hahahaha
I'm not much of a pixel peeper so don't take my word for it but I think you should be making movies dude!
Great eye!
Thanks Wilbur! Yes she is an incredible actress. I love working with real talent.
And thanks for the shooting compliments!
I'm sure somebody could find something wrong with some pixel somewhere in there hahaha! but I think that pixel peeping should only be applied when nothing is driving the story forward. I figure that if someone were to find a speck of "chroma noise" or something then I didn't do my job right trying to capture the story :-Laugh(DBG):
And thanks for the shooting compliments!
I'm sure somebody could find something wrong with some pixel somewhere in there hahaha! but I think that pixel peeping should only be applied when nothing is driving the story forward. I figure that if someone were to find a speck of "chroma noise" or something then I didn't do my job right trying to capture the story :-Laugh(DBG):
Justin Kuhn
Veteran
She was phenomenal; I hope he was better in his close-up.
Thanks Tv, the lens is the Canon EF 24-70mm at f2.8 (open all the way and I forget what the zoom was at the time), and I did the CC on fcp 3-way. I barely crushed the blacks a hair and pushed it blue, raised the mids and pushed it a little towards the skin tones (orange/reds), lowered the highs and pushed towards the blues, and bumped the saturation. I also added .05 monochromatic film grain to sell the filmic look. For this sort of narrative, i think that the af100, as well as most other digital cameras, are too "clean," hence the grain.
I'll put a frame grab of the unCC up.
Cine-D
V/Detail -4
Norm2
Ped -2
Rest was default settings.
marlontorres
Well-known member
Looks great!
PaPa
Major Contributor
Based on that one shot I think she did a great job. She definitely got her emotional preparation in there, but it's hard to judge really without getting a bit of him in there too. I just hope she wasn't acting alone, cause that really sucks for an actor. I'm here, are you there?
Chris Adler
Veteran
Nice acting.
His part seemed flat and cliche and sadly her lines have been delivered a hundred times before almost word for word.
His part seemed flat and cliche and sadly her lines have been delivered a hundred times before almost word for word.
marlontorres
Well-known member
The camera wasn't on him, I'm sure he was saving his performance for the reverse shot.
PaPa
Major Contributor
I hope that's not the case. An actors worst nightmare. That never helps anyone unfortunately.
marlontorres
Well-known member
Well ideally you would have two cameras shooting to get the best performance at the same time but with low budget one camera shoots, it would be exhausting for a performer to match that level of intensity take after take. I don't care who you are, even Meryl Streep can't pull off something off with that type of intensity more than a few times at best...
He isn't the strongest actor. To his defense he has just begun traditional training. She was a trooper and really didn't let up the entire shoot. but afterwards she crashed. I'd love to see what she could do with an actor that matches her talent and a two camera or more set-up.
Shooter
Veteran
Shooting drama with 2 cameras aint all that easy. Its kind of used as a "TV" technique more than for dramatic narrative.
It can seriously compromise the lighting the camera angles and the audio.
Its is also more difficult to monitor and for the director to watch both performances simultaneously.
It can seriously compromise the lighting the camera angles and the audio.
Its is also more difficult to monitor and for the director to watch both performances simultaneously.
marlontorres
Well-known member
A lot of DP's tend to "over light". I would shoot this with a two cameras. One pair of over the shoulders and another pair of close ups. Use maybe one light, two at most to compliment the seemingly already nice natural lighting.
Shooter
Veteran
Here are some of the "compromises" to be aware of that can and do happen with 2 cameras setups:
Lights need to be set where both cameras cant see them or their stands, cutters, frames etc. (Not always optimal lighting on both actors)
Lenses and angles need to be chosen where the cameras cant see each other. Its difficult to get close to the line or shoot a bit wider.
Framing gets compromised to hide "stuff".
Cameras are limited in pan and tilt range (and tracking).
Actors are restricted in their movements.
Sound recordists struggle to get audio for both angles / performers without overlapping dialogue.
Mic placement is compromised.
Can cause timing and continuity issues for editors.
Hard for director to focus on two actors on two monitors simultaneously.
Takes longer to block and set up.
Needs more gear and crew.
Apart from that...multi cam can work really well for some scenes and shoots. (Interviews, sports, reality TV, game shows, Sit Coms...)
marlontorres
Well-known member
Mostly true but I was talking about specifically this incredibly intense situation in terms of performance. I would be willing to sacrifice all that you mentioned for performance. I doubt the audience will care much if her lighting isn't perfect as long as the camera stays on their faces and they deliver incredible performances. Especially in a scene that is so "raw". They'll be so engaged that the last thing on their mind will be the missing Hollywood twinkle in their eyes. Pan, tilts, tracks are all needless here once her performance begins. I would just stick to MCU and then move into the CU.
As for the sound, very true but if she is much better than the male actor as the OP said, I would just keep the camera on her and just cut back to his reaction shots. Plus, there's always ADR which I've often used to IMPROVE performance.
As for the sound, very true but if she is much better than the male actor as the OP said, I would just keep the camera on her and just cut back to his reaction shots. Plus, there's always ADR which I've often used to IMPROVE performance.