Newbie Question on how to shoot scenes

Generally, the two shot / OTS sequence is always done with a single camera. Even the big hollywood films do it with one camera.

I story board the entire film with animatics using Lightwave 3D so I already know what shots I need. For each setup I do as many takes as needed to get the performance that I am looking for.

I already know what the staging and blocking will be before I get on set. With regard to having the actors repeat certain gestures or make certain movements at specific points in the script, I already know what I want and I have one person responsable for continuity/script on the set so that we get consistant results.

Any camera trained actor can repeat their performance in this regard.
 
For example. In the following, frame one is setup 1. Frame 2 - is setup 2. Frame 3 is setup 3. and frame 4 is setup 1 again. I do intercutting on the OTS shots to break it up a bit.

Setup_copy.jpg
 
NBCshooter said:
That's exactly what I do. I cut the scene in my head before the shoot, usually as I'm reading the script. Then I make a handwritten shot list on a reporter's pad."

When filming, do you make your cuts at specific points/lines in the script or do you shoot the scene all the way through based on your shot list?

Thanks for the detailed examples, Yagfxg33.
I get the impression that you and others shoot each "setup" from beginning to end of scene based on a your shotlist & storyboard.
Click to expand...
 
Exactly, jkc123. Two main reasons to do this:

If I was to cut while filming I am boxed into those cuts. I re-shoot the entire scene each time - Then make the cuts that make the most sense in post. While I have everything mapped out ahead of time, I tend to deviate from that in post as pacing / performance dictates.

The other reason is that it is easier for the actors to act out the whole scene at once. On rare occasion I will have the actors start up at a specific line in a scene but that is very situational. After all, it's tape. It's cheap. Robert Rodregiuez rarely cuts during a sequence. He hand holds a lot of the time and just keeps the HD camera that he uses rolling as he moves to the new position and has the lighting adjusted and has the actor do the scene again.
 
There's some great info for staging in this book:
"Film Directing Fundamentals" by Nicholas Proferes (ISBN 0240805623)

It has specific answers to the questions you're asking.

But I found that the one question (mentioned in the book) that serves as the ultimate "golden rule" is this:

WHOSE SCENE IS IT?

This is not the same as "whose film is this". Frank Capra once revealed that this was also his secret formula, and it SERIOUSLY works.

With each scene, ask yourself WHOSE head the audience needs to get inside of to fully appreciate the scene. If you think about this rule when watching GOOD films, you'll notice it's happening ALL THE TIME. That's how you get the audience to constantly connect.

EXAMPLE #1:
The scene from Goodfellas, where they're sitting at the restaurant and Tommy (Pesci) is telling his story, and Henry (Liotta) says, "You're really funny". The scene is about Tommy TESTING Henry. It's Tommy's scene, not Henry's. There are several other characters around them too.

So whose scene is this?

Primarilly, it is Tommy's. He's going to test Henry. And, later in the scene, he will be embarrassed by Sonny, the restaurant owner, who tells him, in front of everyone, that the club can't extend his tab any more. It's secondarilly about Henry's reaction to Tommy.

So here are the shots, pre-editing:

1) MS of Tommy telling his story (angled from Henry's side of the table).

2) MS of Henry reacting to the story (angled from over Tommy's shoulder), kept in MS so we can notice the reactions of others around him).

3) A FS of the table, a side view including Tommy and Henry approximately the same size in the frame.

4) A CU of Sonny, tilting down to Tommy as he tells him about the tab, which becomes a CU TWO-SHOT.

5) A reverse TWO-SHOT of Tommy and Sonny, from Henry's POV.

This example is as much about editing as is about shot planning. But without the well planned shots, the editing couldn't have happened.

1) The MS on Tommy is important because it keeps our attention on listening to Tommy's story, and effectively puts us in Henry's POV listening to it.

2) The MS on Henry is important because it switches the scene to Tommy's POV when he challenges Henry about what's so funny about him.

3) The FS is used sparingly and ONLY at the end of the entire scene. It isn't used until the test is OVER. It's used to show the entire table's reaction when Sonny begins to embarrass Tommy, and also include the full restaurant's reaction when Tommy makes a scene by smashing a bottle over Sonny's head. Notice specifically that the FS is NEVER used during the "test". THAT would give us the POV of the rest of the table. But it's NOT about them. It's about Tommy and Henry. In this case, we don't need a "setup" of the table. It's not needed. This is Tommy's scene, NOT the whole table's.

4) The tilting CU brings Sonny down into the scene and heighten the embarrassment being felt by Tommy.

5) The reverse TWO-SHOT allows us to see Tommy's building embarrassment from Henry's POV. It's used right after we see Henry becoming nervous for Sonny. After all, he's just passed a test. He knows about Tommy's mood swings and knows this is just pushing his buttons. For this brief moment, the scene becomes about Henry and his realization.

Sometimes the scene is not about a person but a thing. In a subsequent scene, when Sonny has partnered up with Paulie (the boss) for protection, we see lots of tracking shots of liquor, meats, and washing machines going in the restaurant in one door and out to a truck through another door. This is because it's their scene. We're seeing how these types of "partnerships" are really used to "launder" goods by the mob.
 
I like the idea of shooting the entire scene from each angle so you have plenty of coverage. It's nice when you go into editing to have everything you need, since you invariably come up with an slightly alternate way of looking at the scene. Maybe you need a reaction shot to "cover up" a small continuity problem. Yes, it takes more tape but really, what does that cost 5/6 bucks for a 63 minute tape. I think the only downside is the time it actually takes to shoot, could be time consideratons AND the time in post to organize all the shots.
 
Shooting a whole scene from every angle is perfectly valid, but often safety is the primary motivation. The footage will definitely edit together OK, and this approach has a definite place in every director's toolbox. It's also a very good way to start if new to directing.

But safety is also the downside - it's not particularly creative is it? It's no coincidence that "standard angles" of locked off wide 2-shots and over the shoulder singles (maybe internal or external to mix it up a tiny bit) are used in almost every scene of cheap, quick turnaround, talk-heavy TV soaps. It requires the minimum thought and setup time to do these shots, and they'll be safe in the edit.

Hopefully though, we are aspiring to not only capture the performances safely, but also in an interesting visual way which helps to tell the story. A dolly in to emphasise a thought, a crane up to reveal the surroundings without ever having to resort to that boring static wideshot.

As soon as camera and/or subject are moving, there better have been some thinking at the pre-production stage. The more complex the movements, the greater the requirement to have thought about and planned these beforehand, unless we are trusting to luck that the shots will cut smoothly together.

With greater complexity comes longer setup times (where to put the lights, the mic boom, the tracks?). Is shooting the entire scene from every angle the best use of the time? In some cases it might be, but the question needs to be asked.

What if the scene is an ambitious big family reunion around a dinner table? There's no way it would be time efficient to shoot every actor and groups of actors from every angle, in multiple sizes. And the actors would definitely be getting pretty jaded after doing the whole thing 30 times! Working through the script with storyboards and shotlists would be a necessity to wittle down the shots to the most important.

Even if there's loads of time on the shoot (a rare event!), time saved NOT shooting coverage we don't intend to use in the edit, is time we can use for experimentation and improvisation, more takes, or just grabbing those incidental details which provide more information about plot, character or environment.

When short of time, it's these types of shots that get ditched, and yet they are exactly the kind of business that distinguish great films. These, together with the coverage we do shoot which will have tops and tails, there should be more than enough unplanned footage to cover unforeseen errors. If a reaction is REALLY important it should be on the planned shotlist anyway.

Of course, every director will have a preferred method of tackling the filmmaking process, and there are no single "right" ways to do things. But perhaps we need to be sure we are deferring decisions for valid reasons, and not just avoiding making decisions for as long as possible!:)
 
i'm not saying its right...but its interesting to go to a shoot with no predetermined plans and see what you come up with spur of the moment.

sometimes being spontanious is good...but only to a certain degree i suppose

perhaps that would be after you've already used the basics first and you want to switch it up a bit.
 
Surely, even if the intention is to be improvisational, the wise director doesn't just turn up on set with actors and crew and expect magic. People will have met up before and discussed the project, or done rehearsals and workshops off set. He/she better have thought how are they are going to get everyone in the right frame of mind for it. The DP and Sound Recordist will want to know beforehand what you want to capture and the style you are after. Apart from very rare cases, great things don't happen in a vacuum.

Unless you are an improvisational genius, cast and crew will be twiddling their thumbs on set waiting for you. That's OK if you have unlimited time and a very patient cast and crew. If it was me though, it would feel rather unprofessional to expect that.

The best use of time is the issue, not the amount of tape!

Preparation is just a guide. It can be departed from at any stage to try something you've just thought of. It can be continually amended to accommodate spontaneous on set inspiration. Being spontaneous shouldn't be an excuse for being lazy. :)
 
Hitch's approach was to plan everything up front. Leave nothing to chance. Yet he achaived some very innovative things on film. It's all about what works for you personally. At the end of the day, if what you are doing does not serve the story then you are doing the audience a disservice.
 
I believe that Grabird is on to something as well. I think that he is saying that the director must determine whose scene it is and then select interesting and effective shots to properly portray the characters pov. I am sure that Martin S. didn't use the stop and start method of directing for that scene in Goodfellas. I believe that the scene was acted and shot all the way through.
 
Got this book for Christmas, and it's excellent!

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/05...002-0134377-1935214?n=507846&s=books&v=glance

It shows there are as many approaches to directing as there are directors.

Some shoot very little coverage, whilst others shoot lots.

Interestingly, some of their approaches have changed over their careers from being extremely prepared with storyboards of everything, to turning up on set with very little formal preparation.

My personal caveat is I don't believe that's the whole story, as these directors have the benefit of years of experience which allows them to "wing" it effectively, and they are probably also preparing unconsciously (ie. they've internalised what they've learnt over the years).

In addition, they generally are directing smaller scale, personal, intimate movies where capturing the performance is more important than how the camera moves. These lend themselves to needing less formal preparation - ie less camera equipment, smaller crews, no stunts etc.

Anyway, as the original question was about how a newbie should shoot scenes. As a newbie, I still think you can't go wrong by being prepared, as long as you also remain open and receptive to other better ideas that may come along.
 
what the old classic saying? ... entrance, exit, eyeline.

gives you the handles for editing also... covers your ass when cutting w/ all your talent etc.

from there on out.... imho it's all up to you.
 
Making a mental edit the day before shooting and from that creating a potential shot list is what I usually do before I'v got to shoot. I compare notes with my DP (when I have a DP) and go from there. Also when starting out, if you review lots of films you like with similar shots- you can "lift" those for your own film or to act as a template for how to shoot the scene. Having extra coverage always helps in editing to give you options. The thing is to eventually find a style of shooting that works for you both when shooting and one that works to get you what you need to use in post. Good luck.
 
I've been slowly learning the production process, I still can count my productions on one hand so I'm obviously not that experienced, but I still have formed my opinions.

I would love to shoot the whole scene from every angle, then just figure the rest out in post. Unfortunately, I'm already pressed for time as it is. With everyones busy schedule I have to get as much done as I can in the shortest amount of time(time is money anyways!). Because of that I spend most of my time preparing, doing blocking or storyboarding and then figuring out which shots I'm going to shoot when and in what order. Doing this and then just shooting what I need, maybe a little bit more, can save me a bunch of time in the production process and will help me get what I need faster. I don't really care about the amount of tape that I use, but the time that I spend using that tape is what counts.
 
ericyoung said:
Cool. Hope you like it. Let us know what you thunk when you've read it, Shawn.
Click to expand...


I own exactly 21 books on all aspects of filmmaking and I have to say that this book has been far and above the MOST enjoyable read!

As was mentioned earlier, the most amazing thing for me was to read these interviews where each of the Directors talk about their approach to Filmmaking and often times each Director expresses completely opposite points of view from the others:

Some like zooms, some hated zooms and now use them, some won't use long lenses, some never plan their shots until they get on the set, some storyboard everything out, some never use more than one camera, some hate doing coverage, etc.... for me it really opened my eyes to the same concept that is true in literature:

That there is a general grammar (guidelines) in filmmaking as is true in writing, and if you know what the rules are then you can "break" them in a conscious or motivated way to better tell the story, and work in a way that suits your personality. And if you're truly gifted, you don't need to study any of the rules or guidelines and can just do everything from a place of savant like genius and pull it off solely on intuition! (that's not me, but in the end I do like the idea of going with intuition once I've studied the grammar a bit)

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top