Shooting the "Walk and Talk"

J

Jus10m

Active member
Hi All.
So we're going to be a shooting a new show using the HVX200 which will include a fairly hefty amount of walking and talking (ala "The West Wing" and "Studio 60") which will take place indoors and outdoors. But mostly indoors, in a tight windey corporate office type setting.
This is what is making me opt for using a steadicam instead of a dolly or doorway dolly.
And that brings me to the main question. We are deciding whether the Red Rock 35 adapter (which we plan to use for most of the footage) is needed during the tracking shots.
Here is a link to the opening of "The West Wing", which is the style of shots that we will be doing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExRwaKAJOTc

Do you think a shallow depth of field is at all needed for this type of shot?
Are there other attributes beside a shallow DOF that the Red Rock should be used for in this type of shot?
Or would the HVX200 provide a pro look by itself (with proper lighting, and actors that don't suck of course)
I mainly ask all this because if the RR is needed for the shot, than a much heftier steadicam will be needed - meaning a heftier budget.
Thanks in advance to all that help out. You guys usually rock in these forums.
-Justin
 
Good example. As you can see, the BG is barely soft at all. If you had really shallow DOF in a shot like that it would look extremely stylized. If you're going for that, okay. Steadicam over a dolly definitely. But don't discount a good operator handheld if you can't get a stabilizer.
 
Definitely don't mix RR and non-RR into the same scene if it's ever avoidable. Neither looks bad on their own, but intercutting draws a lot of negative attention to it. Would much rather see handheld shots than that.
 
Hey guys, thanks for the wise words.
Yeah jim, it seems that the DOF is pretty deep in that West Wing scene, so it doesnt really seem like the RR is really nesseccary for the shoot.
And yeah Gohanto, I was worried about that. I was thinking of shooting the walking bits without the adapter and then for when they stop walking and talk to each other, I would shoot the OTS's with the RR. But I guess the change in DOF and grain would probably be distracting - unless I add grain to the non RR shot in post.....

What do you think?
 
As a more practical concern, how would pull focus with a RR with a Steadicam shot? Pulling focus on a dolly with such shallow depth of field is one thing but trying to rig up a wireless FF unit and suffering from lack of really clear, high-res monitoring would make it almost impossible.

Dan
 
Yeah, that's a really good point. I've been doing some research on remote follow focus units and have figured that we would just rehearse the movements over and over, while taking measurements of the focus at various points of the shot.
Then the focus puller will just have to hit his marks on the dial at the correct moments.
I know this sounds like an extremely difficulty task, but if the DOF isn't too shallow, it should still be able to work.
Or is this just a car wreck waiting to happen?

Does this only work if the focus puller has a monitor to watch?
 
Experienced crew of pros, no problem.

Inexperienced crew of non-pros, might take a lot longer. Focus puller usually needs a monitor to tell what the camera is seeing but if the moves are simple, it could be done without monitoring, in theory ;-)

Dan
 
Jus10m said:
Yeah, that's a really good point. I've been doing some research on remote follow focus units and have figured that we would just rehearse the movements over and over, while taking measurements of the focus at various points of the shot.
Then the focus puller will just have to hit his marks on the dial at the correct moments.
I know this sounds like an extremely difficulty task, but if the DOF isn't too shallow, it should still be able to work.
Or is this just a car wreck waiting to happen?

Does this only work if the focus puller has a monitor to watch?
Click to expand...

It is solely up to the experience of the AC to be able to pull focus on a 35/50mm or similar lens. Steadicam makes it all the more challenging but an experienced AC will not use a monitor. Contrary to popular belief, monitor makes it harder to pull focus.

It is best to hire experience or do extensive testing. Also if possible speak with AC that pulls focus on similar jobs and get their experience as they use a lot of techniques to be able to judge distance. Everything from their position, marks to what FF unit they are using makes a big difference.

I practice pulling focus with my AC to learn what he does better (so I can make his life easier) and I found out that it trully is technique+art+zen.

Hope this helps a little.
 
With a wide lens on the RR (17-28mm) and enough light, you could get a DOF of about 5-10 feet and have no need to pull focus. That's what I would do, and have done several times before. I've even done it using a 50mm wide open and focused by adjusting my distance to the actor.
 
This all goes back to even using the RR. Unless shallow DOF is specifically needed, I wouldn't use it, but I also agree that if you are going to use the RR on the remainder of the film, regardless of DOF needs, the RR does lend the picture a distinctive look and feel that would be missing if you were NOT using it for the walk and talk.

Emre, I would definitely think that you would know, I'm not an AC, I am just basing this off the shows that I work on. On all of the big Fox series, and the last few features, the ACs have had the wireless FF units that have the monitor on them but I was not paying close enough attention to what exactly they were doing? Perhaps they weren't looking at the monitors, just at the operator and floor marks?

Thanks for the correction.

Dan
 
Hi Dan,
I was thinking that exact same thing about switching back and forth from using the RR and not. While I do think it would be best to always shoot with the RR since it does give a certain type of look beside a shallow DOF with some lenses, my other main reason not to use the RR during the tracking shots are that I could use just a Glidecam 4000 to do the shot, rather than an entire rig.
I was then planning on then doing post-work to the shot in either FCP or Apple's Color to make it match the look of the rest of the RR shots. (such as grain, and that pesky little vignette)

You think that will work? I'm planning on doing some test shots of course - probably later this week.

Oh and "yeehaanow", Just the other day I watched a music video that someone made using the RR and a steadicam with a remote follow focus,

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=119543&highlight=music+video+steadicam

and in the making of vid you can see the person following along pulling focus without a monitor. Now they are using an 18mm prime lens - so it doesn't have that shallow of a DOF. That's what I was probably planning on doing if I were able to acquire the steadicam rig and remote follow focus unit for the shoot.
But for now I'm just planning on shooting the tracking shots without the RR and making the footage match the RR footage in post.
 
The 1sts I know will use the Preston or the Bartech on the walking stuff without relying too heavily on a monitor. Eyeballing the distance based on marks on the floor or the operator maintaining a regular distance to subject is pretty standard.

The wireless FF is a huge asset for the 1st in Steadi situations. I would absolutely try to shoot this type of work on a wider lens (28mm or wider) in close than try longer glass (say 35mm and more) from a distance. Everything becomes less repeatable as you introduce lots of variables and the difference is negligible (based on your example).

On a dolly or in a more controlled scene that plays out over several angles, I'd begin to favor the DOF converter option. Still, you need to maintain a little discipline over the shallow depth stuff and not get too carried away. Better to move the camera in cinematic and subtle ways than try to build your film look entirely on the back of shallow DOF.

It all needs to make sense within the parameters of the scene you're lensing.

e
 
Jus10m said:
Hi Dan,
I was thinking that exact same thing about switching back and forth from using the RR and not. While I do think it would be best to always shoot with the RR since it does give a certain type of look beside a shallow DOF with some lenses, my other main reason not to use the RR during the tracking shots are that I could use just a Glidecam 4000 to do the shot, rather than an entire rig.
I was then planning on then doing post-work to the shot in either FCP or Apple's Color to make it match the look of the rest of the RR shots. (such as grain, and that pesky little vignette)

You think that will work? I'm planning on doing some test shots of course - probably later this week.

Oh and "yeehaanow", Just the other day I watched a music video that someone made using the RR and a steadicam with a remote follow focus,

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=119543&highlight=music+video+steadicam


and in the making of vid you can see the person following along pulling focus without a monitor. Now they are using an 18mm prime lens - so it doesn't have that shallow of a DOF. That's what I was probably planning on doing if I were able to acquire the steadicam rig and remote follow focus unit for the shoot.
But for now I'm just planning on shooting the tracking shots without the RR and making the footage match the RR footage in post.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a good plan!

Dan
 
That's a Bartech FF in that BTS.

That AC might've been trying to stay out of the way on that music video shoot BTS, but she wasn't really where the 1st AC should be. In the final, you see it is a pretty straight-forward track down the sidewalk from the reveal at the bus shelter.

Even on an 18mm lens, she should have been right next to the operator at the lens. In the street, walking beside the operator, would have been the best spot to guage distance. Not behind the operator. Again, I think that comment has to be qualified by the fact that the BTS is a mish-mash of shots taken on the fly.

e
 
Awesome! Thanks for the info Erik.
Yeah I'm guessing that the footage of the BTS if probably from a run-through.

While I haven't used a FF before I've shooting a show (www.breakaleg.tv - sorry gotta advertise!) hand-held for the past 2 years and have had to focus on the fly - so I feel I've gotten pretty used to determining distance. (although I'll be operating the camera in this next project, not the FF, so that really doesn't matter)

On a side note. I do want to say a big THANK YOU for all that have contributed to this thread. Your input has been really helpful in putting together our plan of attack. And you have any other insights or suggestions, please throw 'em out there! This will be the first time using a FF unit on a shoot, so if anyone has experience in this area, please feel free to throw in any advice or suggestions.

Also, I'll be sure to bump this thread soon to show you guys footage of my attempt at cutting RR footage with non-RR footage by tweaking the non-RR footage to look more like RR. And one more just for fun... RR!

And again, thanks guys!
 
Yeah I must say.
This thread has given me new HUGE respect for focus pullers.

TRANSFORMERS
Transformers.jpg


WANTED
angelinaandtodd.jpg


HOLY DAMN!!!
 
puredrifting said:
This all goes back to even using the RR. Unless shallow DOF is specifically needed, I wouldn't use it, but I also agree that if you are going to use the RR on the remainder of the film, regardless of DOF needs, the RR does lend the picture a distinctive look and feel that would be missing if you were NOT using it for the walk and talk.

Emre, I would definitely think that you would know, I'm not an AC, I am just basing this off the shows that I work on. On all of the big Fox series, and the last few features, the ACs have had the wireless FF units that have the monitor on them but I was not paying close enough attention to what exactly they were doing? Perhaps they weren't looking at the monitors, just at the operator and floor marks?

Thanks for the correction.

Dan
Click to expand...

I think it would be nice to create a thread with images outlining best FF techniques that might help a lot of people out there(freshdv for a nice 4 part tutorial as well.) . Every time I would hire a AC and offer them the option to work with a monitor, %90 of them turned it down. They all told me that it makes it too hard to watch the marks, actors and the dial while going back and forth a confidence monitor.

I use a remote FF on everything so the AC can place themselves in form of a triangle to judge the best distance, when possible. They hold up the dial in front of them a use their peripheral vision to watch the marks.

(A little off subject but) I was speaking with Jim Bartell a few months ago and he told me how an AC got pushed off a balcony because he was using a whip and now the production companies were opting out for wireless. Check out Hoarps thread for a inexpensive solution on the way, if you hadnt seen it yet.

Also PS technic has some great new tools that incorporate a monitor right on the WFF. So far there were no takers from my camp.

I too am no AC and have amazing amount of respect for those people that makes my work look so good.

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