I'm just starting out and I find myself often having to pick between two of the best takes for a lot of takes. Usually the best acted one is near the beginning. But it's not shot as well, cause the actors often improve a little and their faces go off camera. The camera operator, is therefore late in following them as they move. Then there is the other best take of the same shot. This take is not as well acted but the camera stays on the actor, since we discussed after the improve what to do. But we still couldn't get it as well acted. So that's the choice I find myself having to make often. What would you guys often choose? So far I'm more confident choosing the better acted ones, even though the cam was a little off.
Better acting vs. better shooting takes.
- Thread starter harmonica44
- Start date
Without seeing the clips we can't make that call. But with all the editing tools available to you, you should be able to edit together some kind of illusion of a fight with that out-of-focus clip gone . . . you're not trying to fool yourself, only others. How about a quick freeze frame or two to skim a few seconds off the action. Be creative. Turn your mistake into something new and bold!
Good luck.
Last edited:
You mean just freeze the frame, like in The Matrix or something? I am editing it the best I can but it's hard to get the characters from here to there, without it feeling like it skipped ahead, since their positions move so much in between possible angle switches. I will go through it and post what's out of focus after some more editing. I can make the actors look like they haven't moved so far, and maintain continuity in some shots, with some rotoscoping maybe. I will try once I figure out how to do it better.
Next time, remember to shoot your master wide, also known as a safety shot, first. Get it in the can so that when all of your other shots don't work, you at least have it.
Also, you should have a lot of cutaways. In a fist fight in a small space, I'd probably shoot their feet go through frame, some abstract shadow movement on a wall, find something cool on the wall or dresser, shake the dresser so it looks like impact, maybe even the outside of the house. Those are ideas I'd plan for, then on set I'm sure a lot of other stuff would pop up. Now you have some random insert shots if needed.
Also, you should have a lot of cutaways. In a fist fight in a small space, I'd probably shoot their feet go through frame, some abstract shadow movement on a wall, find something cool on the wall or dresser, shake the dresser so it looks like impact, maybe even the outside of the house. Those are ideas I'd plan for, then on set I'm sure a lot of other stuff would pop up. Now you have some random insert shots if needed.
I tried exporting some footage and uploading as an example but have had some format problems in the process which I'm figuring out. Okay basically for one example there is a shot out of focus, during the best performance at that part of the scene. In order to get the focus back I turned up the sharpness almost all the way, till it was good enough. Then next shot comes of the other person talking, then it goes back to the other guy, all of sudden in perfect focus. Will this change from artificial sharpness, to natural sharpness, be distracting to audiences?
Last edited:
Yikes. Probably? But what's more distracting, and how much better is the out of focus take than what you're cutting? Again, impossible to answer without seeing it.
I've never had success sharpening an out of focus image. I've gotten a few stills marginally better, but not what I'd consider passable. I'm interested to see your "artificially sharp" footage and how it holds up.
I've never had success sharpening an out of focus image. I've gotten a few stills marginally better, but not what I'd consider passable. I'm interested to see your "artificially sharp" footage and how it holds up.
Really, I thought it looked bad blown up. But maybe I'm just too picky. What about having to crop? There are at least two images where I have to crop, but what size TV or projector do I need to get an idea, of how much cropping you can do before it makes too big of a difference? If I zoom in one third of the way at least, and crop it looks exactly the same and can't tell the difference, in quality, but maybe it's just my computer.
Last edited:
I don't want to be the bearer of bad news (yeah I know everyone's saying WHAT?) But, chances are if your actors are getting worse as the takes go on, then they probably aren't as good as you think they are.
Actors should improve with each take. Actors getting worse is 180 degrees of the norm. With good actors it's usually 4 - 5 takes before the ball starts rolling. Since you shoot the wide shot first, by the time you get to medium and CUs they should be God Like. With great actors (like this past Sunday) They were spot on by the 3rd take.
Maybe. A lot of times the takes are good on the last couple for sure as well. Okay a while ago, I mentioned how my footage looks somewhat fuzzy after I export it out of Premiere Pro. It still looks that way, regardless of if it's zoomed in or not, or if the shots are in focus or not. It all comes out fuzzy. Is this normal, or what I am doing wrong on the exporting/importing? On the plus side, the footage isn't near as dark when it comes out. Basically the footage always comes out brighter, but with very little tiny lines going across the screen, than when compared to going in. And if I edit a scene, export it, than re-import it, the lines seem to have doubled, but that's only with one scene so far. What's going on?
Well GuerillaAngel said that that one shot looked fine. I dunno, maybe it's normal for Canon T2i footage, to look about as low quality as VHS tape blown up, even though it's 1080p.
Well, a first step to solve the fuzzy&linesproblem would be to quote your export settings.
Maybe it's the compression you use or some other setting that changes the imagequality.
(I was talking about your story about lines appearing in your exported footage, not about the Youtube-link you posted. About that video: you can tell the focus is on the window, but you can get away it. Just because you are just starting, otherwise it would be a mortal sin
. )
Maybe it's the compression you use or some other setting that changes the imagequality.
(I was talking about your story about lines appearing in your exported footage, not about the Youtube-link you posted. About that video: you can tell the focus is on the window, but you can get away it. Just because you are just starting, otherwise it would be a mortal sin
. )The shot doesn't look great because it was out of focus and you tried to sharpen it. That back wall that was originally in focus is nice and crisp.
High resolution cameras and good sensors are still junk when it's not lit, framed, and the scene decorated in a way that makes for a good image. Your shot isn't bad considering the skill level of people involved, shooting schedule and budget. It's unrealistic to expect it to look as good as a copy of Jurassic Park, even if that copy is on VHS.
Not saying this to dog you or anything, just to let you know (again) that you're expecting too much from your first project. It's not going to be a cinematic masterpiece in any way, shape or form, and that's ok! You have to learn this most of this stuff by first hand experience. So finish editing, make all the hard choices (this shot that's framed bad or this shot where the actor's shirt is on backwards) and slap it together, get it uploaded, move on to project number 2.
