I am shooting a short documentary type film soon, and I have two subjects in the frame, one is quite short, and the other quite tall. The short subject will start off in the shot, and then the tall one will enter later. However, I don't want to give the short one too much headroom for the start, so should I not give him much headroom, but then whenever the tall one enters, just tilt the camera up every time, and then when he leaves, should I just tilt it back down for the short one? Or will doing this enough times, draw attention to itself perhaps?
How can I shoot a short subject in this case?
- Thread starter JimS2
- Start date
Oh okay, well it's just that a lot of the video is showing the two people walking around, touring places, so I won't be able to get a platform to put down in real places you walk around in, without it being noticeable of course. It looks fine if both of them are in the shot, it's just if the short one separates, do I tilt down then, or should I keep it at the same level? Side by side is okay with me, if that's the heights that they are, but when one leaves the frame, that's when it gets awkward and wonder if I should tilt.
Oh okay sure. I just thought if I did in this case, it might look obvious, but I will do that then. Thanks. Some of it has been shot already and I was thinking I could do a little panning and scanning in post, to adjust to their heights, but if I zoom in up to 30% does the resolution loss become noticeable?
Last edited:
Why not give it a test run and determine if the resolution loss IS noticeable?
Always best to test and then you decide whether it is acceptable.
Always best to test and then you decide whether it is acceptable.
NorBro
Major Contributor
If you don't want your audience to feel something is awkward then don't pan and scan. It's too noticeable by even average viewers (but sometimes it's also used on purpose like for a comedic effect to draw attention to something).
If you're going to zoom in - and 30% may not be noticeable if you're shooting 4K - then cut to an already zoomed in shot but don't zoom in by key-framing in post (at least not too often).
If you're going to zoom in - and 30% may not be noticeable if you're shooting 4K - then cut to an already zoomed in shot but don't zoom in by key-framing in post (at least not too often).
Yes. This is called editing. You can also cover the zoom with b-roll.
As David said...
Try it for yourself.
Please stop running in circles, ironpony. Try something. Actually try it. Do it. Does it work? Great! Did it not work so well? Okay, so try it a different way. This is the only way you’re going to learn to make your own decisions.
As for the stuff you haven’t yet shot, if you’re the one operating the camera, it’s your job to follow the action. It’s also your job to get wides and cutaways so that you can cover your edits. It may be a documentary but it’s perfectly okay to have them go back and walk the path again while you shoot a wide from behind so you have something to fall back on, and to have them repeat certain actions in extreme closeup. Get cutaways of things they see, from their perspective. Get beauty shots. It’s called coverage, and it’s the only way to shoot single camera and be able to make something of it in post.
Oh okay sure, it's just in the wide shots I have so far, the short person has a lot of headroom compared to the other, and as long as it looks okay. I am not sure on the zooming. How does a filmmaker tell much how resolution loss is acceptable? I am going to say 30% is pushing it, but maybe okay, but not sure. That is why I thought I would ask others.
And we’ve circled back already.
You have two people of noticeably different heights. On wide shots, if you can see both of them from head to toe, it’s fine. The viewer will get it. Wides are establishing and occasional cutaways. Mediums and closeups pull the viewer into the action.
Weren’t you in film school a few years ago? What did they teach you about framing and camera angle?
Another full circle.
Just try it, Ryan. See for yourself. Does the image soften noticeably at 30%? Then back out a little. Stop asking if it’s okay and just bloody try it. Pretend that we can’t see your computer screen from here, okay?
It softens a bit but maybe that's okay. Yes in film school they would teach us things like make the other person look higher. But if they are walking around in public places, they did not teach us what to do then. They also didn't talk about if tilting was a good idea, whenever a taller person left the frame.
But sure, I can tilt then.
But sure, I can tilt then.
NorBro
Major Contributor
But how would you ever know what people truly think about anything that you do?
Who's right and who's wrong?
Who's telling the truth and who's lying?
Would you more favorably listen to someone who's made a lot of money? Or someone who's work you admire who hasn't?
___
Everything that we do in life is going to be okay for some and not okay for others.
So your 30% zoom will look amazing to some people, and not so amazing to others.
If one film school teaches you to zoom out completely and film both heights from far away, another film school may teach you to zoom in completely on one subject so you don't see the other. And a third film school may teach you that tilting accordingly for subjects is a good idea, but a fourth film school may teach you that tilting is a bad idea.
The same applies for all of your focusing, panning, tilting, zooming, headroom, grading, writing, directing, acting, funding, and every other aspect of your production and post-production strategy execution process.
Life isn't perfect.
Who's right and who's wrong?
Who's telling the truth and who's lying?
Would you more favorably listen to someone who's made a lot of money? Or someone who's work you admire who hasn't?
___
Everything that we do in life is going to be okay for some and not okay for others.
So your 30% zoom will look amazing to some people, and not so amazing to others.
If one film school teaches you to zoom out completely and film both heights from far away, another film school may teach you to zoom in completely on one subject so you don't see the other. And a third film school may teach you that tilting accordingly for subjects is a good idea, but a fourth film school may teach you that tilting is a bad idea.
The same applies for all of your focusing, panning, tilting, zooming, headroom, grading, writing, directing, acting, funding, and every other aspect of your production and post-production strategy execution process.
Life isn't perfect.
Greg Smith
Veteran
I have yelled and screamed this exact point at poor Ryan on several previous occasions. I've come to the conclusion that not only does he not like to experiment, it's far from certain that he has the judgment to determine if something "worked" or not after reviewing it. So even trying things out may not help him make up his mind. The stuff he's put into some of his posted videos leads me to believe he has no instinct for what makes a good or bad shot.
Back when I bought my first cameras and was learning this stuff for the first time, I used to spend hours on end - full days, actually - just walking around with the camera, composing images through the viewfinder, figuring out the controls and experimenting with angles, composition, lighting and movements. I didn't always expose film or roll tape while doing this (that was expensive, after all, while wandering about was free), but got a lot of ideas and gained confidence in my vision when it came time to shoot real projects. Somehow, Ryan seems to lack the curiosity or motivation to do this (and like I said, can't tell good from bad results when he sees them).
Imamacuser
Veteran
If you have enough space and light, you could place the short actor closer to camera for a forced perspective effect to even out the hight difference.