Storyboarding.

[Azmyth]

I'm wanting to storyboard my next feature. I didn't storyboard the last one, and we paid for that in the long run.

My question is, do you storyboard every single angle you plan to shoot? Or, do you just storyboard what you hope the final shots will be in the edit?

 

[craigbowman]

I only use storyboards very early in pre-production to complement the concept artwork. I much prefer to use formal blocking diagrams in conjunction with my shot lists as they are much better suited during production and the notation language much richer in communicating what is going on and planning coverage.

 

[Ted Spencer]

Joseph, have you read "Shot By Shot" by Stephen Katz? It's pretty much the definitive work on the subject, and on pre-visualization in general.

While I have yet to storyboard a shoot (since I've yet to personally shoot a narrative film), but plan to do so very soon, I think I will approach it in a sort of 'expanded comic book' style if you will - shots and angles that contribute in a key way to the storytelling process. I will also include the kinds of motion arrows and text notes that Katz depicts in "S-B-S". The latter goes to some of your question about "every angle" and so on. A single 'board frame can depict/imply multiple angles, POVs and such by use of these kinds of 'dynamic markings' and written notes.

Basically I think the idea is to create as much clarity in the cinematic objectives as possible - to visually walk through the sequence on paper in advance. Of course, what happens on the actual shoot will to a near-certainty vary from the 'plan', but that's ok. Having one will create a very worthwhile jumping off point, and a good deal of it will likely go very much as planned.

Personally, I'm a *very* big believer in extensive, thorough preparation. But also in letting unexpected things happen when they take on a life of their own in a cool way. And it's a very fine line there...

Offered for what it's worth, from someone who has worked extensively on many other kinds of artistic ventures that play out in a very similar way... : )

 

[john threat]

I storyboard the whole damn thing till my wrist hurts.
Then I get one the set and throw the whole deck of index cards out,

Hah

Naw, I follow the cards and nail the mega shots, and then start playing from there, as the DP or others might come up with ideas or a gles and coverage that I see might work once on the completed set.

Sometimes the storyboard isn't possible, or weaker shot than expected. I pick up additional safe coverage, in case post doesn't work it's magic on the storyboards desired shot.

Good when you got every lens you can need in a given situation. Right now I'm working with not enough leness!

 

[vcassel]

Typically, on most industry features, they'll just storyboard the more complicated action in the film--stunts, fights scenes, long sequences of complicated blocking/staging/camera movement.

EDIT: Really, it depends on the visual strategy you and your cinematographer choose to adhere to through analysis of the script. If your strategy is conventional and static, well then there's not much use is storyboarding because your compositional choices are limited to standards--not necessarily a bad thing. If your strategy is complex, then storyboard it in order to wrap your head around it a bit more.

Oh, and +1 on doing blocking diagrams regardless.

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

I'm wanting to storyboard my next feature. I didn't storyboard the last one, and we paid for that in the long run.

My question is, do you storyboard every single angle you plan to shoot? Or, do you just storyboard what you hope the final shots will be in the edit?

I'll probably be storyboarding several of my short film scripts over the next month. I saw a presentation by a 'graphic novel' producer a couple of weeks ago, and basically confirmed an idea I have had, of using Poser to pose characters, then use Photoshop or Painter magic to turn it into a more 'graphic' novel style rather than a 3-d rendering style. I've not had much luck finding a 'free' replacement for Antics which looked pretty good for creating more useful 'storyboards' + 'shot setup/blocking documents', until the developers folded their tents and vacated...

At the moment this is 'free', in that I don't pay myself to do this... and what's more, I feel like I'm moving forward on a project...

 

[memento515]

you knoooowww......I just got my hands on that Hollywood Camera Work dvd set , and there's lots of very solid arguments against storyboarding.

really curious- how did you pay for not storyboarding?

how did you shoot- did you shoot a master and then go in for coverage? I would guess the thing you really pay for is not getting enough cutaways to cover screen direction and other mistakes.

dont mean to throw you off (or the thread)

 

[Batutta]

Storyboarding is one of those things that works for some and not for others. Some like the security of previsualizing, others find it too constricting. Just depends what kind of mind you have. I've been editing for years and years, so I have an intuitive sense of the shots I need to make a scene play. Comparing the directing work I've done that was heavily storyboarded, versus the work that wasn't, I found the storyboarded work to be kind of lifeless. I like the energy of making things happen on set instead of working through a pre-programmed series of shots. That energy makes its way into the scene and keeps it vibrant.

 

[Ted Spencer]

Comparing the directing work I've done that was heavily storyboarded, versus the work that wasn't, I found the storyboarded work to be kind of lifeless.

And there's the rub: planning/preparation versus spontaneity/'happy accidents'...

IMHO one needs to learn how to accommodate/encourage *both*. Have the plan, prepare extensively, but always keep an open mind, and in fact *invite* creativity and 'the unexpected' amongst your cast and crew (to the extent that it is practicable, which is sometimes severely limited for unavoidable reasons). This takes skill though, and leadership. But in my experience, on a shoot (as well as in other media), either extreme - the 'paint by numbers' approach, or the 'just wing it' one, will not reliably get good results (with the possible exception of the latter working well in freewheeling comedies if you have *genuinely* funny people in the cast, which is rare).

 

[Ted Spencer]

you knoooowww......I just got my hands on that Hollywood Camera Work dvd set , and there's lots of very solid arguments against storyboarding.

I have that set too (it's great!), and though I've been through all of it, I must have missed that point. Where/how in it did you find/infer that conclusion?

 

[Batutta]

And there's the rub: planning/preparation versus spontaneity/'happy accidents'...

IMHO one needs to learn how to accommodate/encourage *both*. Have the plan, prepare extensively, but always keep an open mind, and in fact *invite* creativity and 'the unexpected' amongst your cast and crew (to the extent that it is practicable, which is sometimes severely limited for unavoidable reasons). This takes skill though, and leadership. But in my experience, on a shoot (as well as in other media), either extreme - the 'paint by numbers' approach, or the 'just wing it' one, will not reliably get good results (with the possible exception of the latter working well in freewheeling comedies if you have *genuinely* funny people in the cast, which is rare).

Just to be clear I've always had a detailed shot list so I could plan the day and make sure I didn't miss any coverage. There is always a plan, it's just a bit more malleable.

 

[Ted Spencer]

Just to be clear I've always had a detailed shot list so I could plan the day and make sure I didn't miss any coverage. There is always a plan, it's just a bit more malleable.

If it works, it works!

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

you knoooowww......I just got my hands on that Hollywood Camera Work dvd set , and there's lots of very solid arguments against storyboarding.

I'll presume that was by some inference that once the principles of the camera work were understood, some amount of 'storyboarding' would be superfluous, as one would just need only indicate a specific type of camera setup/movement rather than drawing it out...

But one of the benefits of doing storyboards well is... you have the potential for a graphic novelization right in front of you... if all else fails to materialize to get your 'movie' made...

The other use for storyboards is to 'sell' the project to people in a quick easy to grasp way. Handing a script may work... if they read it... but with a 10 image story board, you probably can communicate the story in an 'elevator trip' worth of time... if you ever happen to be found in an elevator with a potential film investor... have it on your iPad or iPhone... just in case...

 

[nosys70]

I can understand that storyboarding has some use in the heavy film industry, but today, you can take a cheap DV camera or even an ipod and shoot all the scenes (in video or pictures) you need in few hours.
Then you can make a raw cut with movie maker to see if the story works.
This way you can see a lot of the invisible thing that a storyboard will never show, like lens behavior, rythm and timing, unwanted shadows.
and if you still need a "comics" for sale purpose, you can draw it from the picture taken.
I suspect that many storyboard are build from preset shots, like in advertisement they got "pack shots" (the best angle to shoot an object)
After all there is not so many ways to shoot two lovers kissing or a driver in a car and many big movies are just taking full scene that "worked" from older movies.

 

[Ted Spencer]

The camera-previz method is fine for set and camera movement practicalities (to a limited extent), but it completely misses the main point - (inter)action with/by the actors. A simple storyboard, even just with stick-figures, rough line drawings, and key action indications, like a child of 10 could do, will enable a much more substantial previsualization of the whole idea. Personally, I think it's well worth the time at all levels of scripted shooting...

 

[DaveD]

For my first feature neither myself, the director nor the DP were talented at drawing, so we did stick figures with different hats so we could tell who was who. It worked well on a project that had so much collaboration (Director and I didn't really know what we were doing so the DP was giving much of the creative input) but I tend to shy away from it now. And not just because I don't want people to see my stick figures with hats. I feel that most of the stuff that is going to go into a storyboard is going to be based on rules and observations. On shoot day there is a kind of energy or texture (difficult to describe but you all know what I mean, we only have words for our 5 senses and this is received from a sort of creative sense) that can't be created beforehand and gives life to the creative path of the film. I find it very powerful to use this energy (or whatever) and don't want to be tied down by a storyboard. You can say to go in with a storyboard and be open to changes but the fact is that once a plan is down that specific on paper it becomes a trial every time you want to stray from it. I agree with Batutta. I like to go in with a detailed shot list and follow my instincts or it seems like a lifeless sort of shoot.

 

[Ted Spencer]

To each his own of course, but given the huge number of truly great films that were heavily storyboarded I think it should be added that for many experts, it doesn't detract from the process at all. I think it's a question of knowing how to use them, and how and when to depart from them.

It's a lot like a musician playing the piano score of a masterpiece by someone like Beethoven. The lesser talent will take it too mechanically as a 'recipe to be followed as written', and the result will almost certainly be the kind of lifelessness you describe. The greater talent will use it to inspire their own interpretation, *giving* it life through an understanding of what's under the surface. So it is I think with any sort of technical/preparational 'prescription' where filmmaking is concerned. Actors in particular must do this as a matter of course to perform the written words (by someone else's hand) as though they were their own thoughts, happening in real time. It's the same process really, with all the same potential upsides and downsides...

 

[john threat]

I love ameile, even seen the storyboard for it?

If you can keep the whole film in your head thst can work, you can go organic, I don't think there is a wrong way to do it.

I like set shots that's are well composed so that often means I'm setting up very close to how the storyboard looks, one time I had to jump off set to take care of an emergency financial situation and the AD got the two set shots from the storyboards perfectly while I was away for a few minutes at the bank.

The storyboards allow me to nail what I need an experiement from there. It also allows me to go back and see what exactly was different in my minds eye from the paper and get better next time out in grasping action and eye lines, etc

 

[memento515]

I have that set too (it's great!), and though I've been through all of it, I must have missed that point. Where/how in it did you find/infer that conclusion?

At the beginning of the set (disc one maybe?) the narrator goes through the drawbacks. The general approach of the entire course is focused on long takes and lots of blocking- having characters move in and out of frame, moving the camera, etc. story boarding these types of shots is impractical , tho it could be done im sure.

I was just curious what problems the OP ran into- continuity I'm guessing? Master Scene technique, Triple Take technique (overlapping action) and the 180 line are tools meant to help with that (explained in 5 C's Of Cinematography, which I hope I can assume everyone has).

I think all approaches are valid and have their place- didnt mean to poo on storyboarding too much- I'm just saying that not storyboarding doesnt automatically mean disaster.

 

[Ted Spencer]

...having characters move in and out of frame, moving the camera, etc. story boarding these types of shots is impractical , tho it could be done im sure.

Have you read "Shot By Shot"? It shows many storyboard frames and sequences that clearly illustrate both a dynamically moving camera and moving actor(s). Some of them are from very well known films, by some of the greatest storyboard artists.

I'm just saying that not storyboarding doesnt automatically mean disaster.

Definitely agree there, and I don't think many folks wouldn't. It's just another tool to be used (effectively or otherwise) by those that choose to.