I am currently working on a pretty big project but I'm having some trouble with camera angles. I only use one camera to film. When filming a dialog between two characters, should I film it twice from over each shoulder, and then mash the clips together? I think this is the only way I could do it, Unless I used a really quick camera movement between the two people... but I haven't seen that done since the Bourne films haha. Anyway any help appreciated, thanks!
cinematography Camera Angle Trouble
- Thread starter Beatlesfan1225
- Start date
The problem with going over the shoulder is trying to sync up the character postures. For example, the guy in the foreground may look down, but when you cut to the other angle his head may be up.
Anyway, one camera should be no problem. You can do the over the shoulder thing, but you also have the option to position the camera about 30 - 40 degrees to the side of the actor. 0 degrees would be looking straight at their face and 90 degrees would be side profile.
After the establishing shot of them sitting down or walking up to each other, I try to get two takes of each actor talking - one medium and one closeup - for the whole conversation. If someone's hands are in the wrong place in the medium shot, you can always cut to the closeup.
I use one camera all the time. Check out the booth conversation in this HAPPY HOUR short, starting around the 2:20 mark. I'm fairly close to over the shoulder, but a bit to the side. All this footage was from a single camera. The whole thing was shot in 7 hours.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZTshE45n5I
Anyway, one camera should be no problem. You can do the over the shoulder thing, but you also have the option to position the camera about 30 - 40 degrees to the side of the actor. 0 degrees would be looking straight at their face and 90 degrees would be side profile.
After the establishing shot of them sitting down or walking up to each other, I try to get two takes of each actor talking - one medium and one closeup - for the whole conversation. If someone's hands are in the wrong place in the medium shot, you can always cut to the closeup.
I use one camera all the time. Check out the booth conversation in this HAPPY HOUR short, starting around the 2:20 mark. I'm fairly close to over the shoulder, but a bit to the side. All this footage was from a single camera. The whole thing was shot in 7 hours.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZTshE45n5I
Thanks for the advice. I like how in your Happy Hour whenever the man is talking, it doesn't show his hands. That way it allows you to be making whatever gestures you want to with his hands when the girl is talking, nothing seems out of place. So you shot one person talking, then stopped, moved position, and shot the other person?
So this leads me into my next question, how do I get these multi-shot sequences with one camera in an action sequence when someone is running or jumping? Then do I have to film from different angles multiple times?
Does it look professional for a camera to be moving or zooming at all? Thanks for any help again, I appreciate it.
An actor should be able to repeat the same action, over and over and over again. Rehearsal is when you work out all the kinks of a scene (rehearse right before shooting). Then, get a whole bunch of different angles (this is called coverage). Sure, every now and then, the action won't line up perfectly (moreso often, when using untrained actors). But that's what you got coverage for.
We had a great conversation on this, recently, but I don't feel like searching for it. Do a search for "shooting a conversation scene".
We had a great conversation on this, recently, but I don't feel like searching for it. Do a search for "shooting a conversation scene".
My actors are untrained haha. Anyway, I understand it's good for an actor to be able to repeat actions over and over, but I think I'll just take a shot, switch the camera, take another shot. That seems to work well enough. I am concerned about action sequences though...
Search for the thread CF is talking about.
You'll find that its mostly done using one camera and you'll find all the types of shots you need to take to have enough coverage to edit smoothly.
You'll find that its mostly done using one camera and you'll find all the types of shots you need to take to have enough coverage to edit smoothly.
With something like a cigarette, yes, but there is always some discontinuity. Rusty's hand motions screwed continuity (on wide shots) and I had experienced actors. In fact, you've probably seen my actor, Rusty Meyers, in movies like SILVERADO (Rosanna Arquette's husband) and Wendy's commercials like this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkLTPp0Ujuw
Another thing, I suggest is the "Cutaway." An example would be a shot of the bartender or ex-wife watching the couple. If the continuity was something I was having trouble with, I can cut to a cutaway, at that point. A cutaway can be a dog, cat, bird or anything else near the conversation or action.
Again, I use one camera for action shots. I don't make people fall down too many times, but the key is to get "overlapping action," so you can cut it together. Yes, you get a running angle from the front and from the back.
I suggest you write down or storyboard what shots you need, before going out on location. I try not to do multiple angles of the same action, as much as overlapping shot A into a further point that begins shot B.
In today's movies, people don't need to see every single second of movement. For example, a cop is at home and he gets a phone call about a crime. Do you need to show picking up the phone, putting it down, walking to the door, closing it, getting into his car, starting it and driving it away? No. This can be done in two shots:
1) Phone rings, cop pulls out his cell and looks toward the door or exit.
2) His car starts and speeds away.
If you've seen the car in previous shots, it's no problem. If not, be sure you can see him in the driver seat, and it pulls away.
There's a chase in my short, THREE STRIPE. Start around the 3:45 mark.
Another chase in ROADKILL. Start at the 5:45 mark.
When deciding what shots to use, think of whose Point Of View you are trying to emphasize. In the ROADKILL clip, Devon starts running, as we track with him from the side. Then, we track with the faster Camaro, as it enters the shot. As the Camaro closes in with Claire aiming the gun, I want to have her point of view (aiming) - tracking in closer, from behind Devon.
Once you decide on who would be seeing what, you can visualize the scene.
Zooms used often come off as "video-ish." Most movies use dolly in and out shots, like when 2 guys are at a standoff. Of course, you can zoom in, but cut it like a movie. Don't hold the shot for the whole zoom. Zoom into one guy for a second or two, then cut to the zoom of the other guy. (The motion should be in the editing, as you mix in closeups of gunholsters, people scattering, etc.) You can also try whip zooms, where the action is very fast. (I usually speed this up, in editing -speed ramp - so I don't have to jerk the camera doing it.)
Last edited:
Everyone deals with disconiuity, true, and that's yet another reason to get maximum coverage.
Okay, I'm feeling charitable -- did the search for you. Here's the conversation you should read. Read the whole thing -- especially directorik's posts.
http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?t=26553
Okay, I'm feeling charitable -- did the search for you. Here's the conversation you should read. Read the whole thing -- especially directorik's posts.
http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?t=26553
Thanks for the link. I read through the and I'll apply a lot of that to my next filming, I never get "inserts" like how he says, and I need to start getting some. I don't do enough coverage, and as much as my actors and a pain in the ass and don't like to do things 30 times, I'm going to make them suck it up and do it. Thanks for all the help, this will really help my next shoot
I hadn't read the other thread, until now. Good one! The key post, aside from "coverage, coverage, coverage," was this:
That's a good template that is designed to let the editor shape the scene. Unless, you have the scene planned a certain way, I would recommend this route.
I'm usually shooting for time, so my emphasis is on getting more scenes done, with far less coverage. I'm not saying that's the right way for you, but if you are in a hurry (like a 48 Hour Project), it could be the difference in getting done. THREE STRIPE was shot in a day and you can tell it has a lot of setups.
In the HAPPY HOUR scene, I shot a Master shot of them sitting down, but not for the whole conversation. (I ended up not using it.) It wasn't necessary the whole time. I don't push in, zoom in, dolly in as part of coverage, but rather the one or two shots where I think it's needed - for example, when Rusty sees the videotape, there's a connection made, so I push into both.
The short of what I'm saying is that you can use as little as one or two shots on each actor (CUs and Meds), if you get Inserts of stage business (as Rik said) and cutaways of onlookers (human or not, just an alternate point of view). I knew my CUs would cover any hand mis-matches in the Medium shots.
Another continuity technique I use is to try and start every shot with movement (unless it's a dead body). Most errors happen in situations like this: The characters come together in the wide shot. You cut to closeups and they are standing absolutely still. When you compare the wide and closeups, they don't match because the movement in the wide shot still has intertia (clothes swaying, etc). People don't come to a sudden stop with a cut. I have people step or sit into every shot, even if it's a slight head movement into a closeup. Sometimes, it's easier to cut on movement. This includes action, like a character falling down. When you show that closeup of him laying on the ground, have him do the very last bit of the fall, even if it's his head falling an inch or two.
That's a good template that is designed to let the editor shape the scene. Unless, you have the scene planned a certain way, I would recommend this route.
I'm usually shooting for time, so my emphasis is on getting more scenes done, with far less coverage. I'm not saying that's the right way for you, but if you are in a hurry (like a 48 Hour Project), it could be the difference in getting done. THREE STRIPE was shot in a day and you can tell it has a lot of setups.
In the HAPPY HOUR scene, I shot a Master shot of them sitting down, but not for the whole conversation. (I ended up not using it.) It wasn't necessary the whole time. I don't push in, zoom in, dolly in as part of coverage, but rather the one or two shots where I think it's needed - for example, when Rusty sees the videotape, there's a connection made, so I push into both.
The short of what I'm saying is that you can use as little as one or two shots on each actor (CUs and Meds), if you get Inserts of stage business (as Rik said) and cutaways of onlookers (human or not, just an alternate point of view). I knew my CUs would cover any hand mis-matches in the Medium shots.
Another continuity technique I use is to try and start every shot with movement (unless it's a dead body). Most errors happen in situations like this: The characters come together in the wide shot. You cut to closeups and they are standing absolutely still. When you compare the wide and closeups, they don't match because the movement in the wide shot still has intertia (clothes swaying, etc). People don't come to a sudden stop with a cut. I have people step or sit into every shot, even if it's a slight head movement into a closeup. Sometimes, it's easier to cut on movement. This includes action, like a character falling down. When you show that closeup of him laying on the ground, have him do the very last bit of the fall, even if it's his head falling an inch or two.
With all due respect, I think there's a more effective way to shoot and edit action. For me, it still comes down to the magic word - coverage. If I've got a shot of a dude falling, I'd want to get that same action from numerous angles and focal-lengths or distances. That way, when I'm editing, I can cut as he's only halfway to the ground. For me, that's what cutting-on-action is all about. I feel like it's not really cutting on action, if you don't have the entire action in both shots.
As far as efficiency is concerned, I totally know where you're coming from, feeling the need to get through a shoot in an expidited manner. I've had plenty of shoots where we shot the opposite of coverage - where each shot is exactly what we will use in the edit, cuz we don't have time to shoot more than one angle. This kind of shoot is absolutely not preferable, but I've done it. Even in this situation, I still want overlapping action, as you call it. But in the case of cutting from one shot, at the end of which a dude falls, to the next shot, where he is now on the ground, I would still make my actor take the complete fall twice, and I'd get it from both angles.
So when he falls to the ground, would you maybe take one shot of him in front of the camera, and another shot off to the side so he falls into the shot?
Also this brings me to another question that hasn't been answered thus far in this thread or the other one linked earlier. How long should I keep an angle during a conversation? Should it change to the person who's talking back and forth, or stick on someone for awhile before switching?
Ultimately, editing decides this, but you want to think out beforehand what is important in the conversation. The average shot lasts 3 - 4 seconds and then cuts. You know how that HAPPY HOUR scene culminated with the zoom ins? That was the apex of that interaction.
Does your conversation have a reveal moment or something that twists it? Does it build in intensity? A lot of this depends on the script, though a director can shift focus or make a key moment happen. Figure out this moment and how you will build up to it. This is usually where you will start getting into more closeups and inserts. You see the guy's eyes, he looks at a clock, cut to the clock then cut back - a bead of sweat drips down his forehead, he glances to the side, cut to a lady watching him, cut back to him as he takes a drink, cut to his foot tapping, etc....
What are you trying to get across? I can throw out some examples, but until we know what's in the script, I can't decide how your scene is going to go.
In the HAPPY HOUR scene, I took a closeup, for the full scene (each actor), and I took a medium shot, for the full scene. What some others are suggesting is that you take a Master (wide shot) of the whole scene and dead on (front) angle for the full scene. (plus Inserts, Cutaways, etc.) You decide where to cut in the editing.
That works! It really is as simple as that. Cracker is suggesting many angles, because he wants to create the effect in editing.
Often, the audience wants to see the full action and they want it to look real. If your actor or stunt person can do the fall, it might be one shot, where you follow them with the camera and keep them in frame. For example, you could zoom out wide, which creates depth. Have your camera near, or on the ground, looking up at the actor. He trips and you tilt down so that his face lands right in front of the camera. Perhaps some dust kicks up. The wide angle will elongate him and make the shot dramatic.
If your actor is on pavement, he will probably fall on a pad (just below the frameline). He falls on the pad, but you cut to a closer shot of him landing.
The fall I did was completely fake, he fell onto a bed so I had to edit it around to make it look good. Like you said though, if I did have a real fall with a wiling actor or stunt man, I would just take one take and keep everything in the frame. (This really reminds me of the scene in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid where they jump off the cliff) But, since I don't have a wiling actor, I'll stick to taking a few angles and mashing them together.
It was fake, or did it look fake in the edit? Without knowing the details, like where he fell, why he fell, if other people are involved and if he gets hurt or not, there are still shots you can get to sell it...
Let's say he's hiking with his girlfriend on a narrow foot path. The shots might look like:
1) LS ( long shot) of hikers going up a path, away from the camera.
2) MS (med shot) reverse angle of guy approaching camera, with girl behind him.
3) MCU (med closeup) of guy's right foot stepping on a rock. The rock is not secure and slides...
4) MCU of guy's face - he falls downward out of frame.
5) MS of the two hikers from the side, as the guy falls downslope, towards camera. (There is a matt below the frameline, for him to fall onto.)
6) MCU of girl's face (towards camera) reacting to guy falling. "Rick!!"
7) Falling Wide Angle of Guy's P.O.V. (camera assumes his Point Of View). NOTE: Put the camera on an extended tripod and arc it towards the ground (point of impact). Ramp up the speed in editing if necessary.
Low Angle (on the ground) MCU of guy falling into the frame, hitting ground and kicking up dust. His head stays down. ( This landing can be from a semi-stance position onto soft dirt, pine needles or leaves, so he doesn't hurt himself.)9) MS of girl (camera on trail) Pan with her as she descends to help her guy.
10) Low Angle MCU of guy. He lifts his bloody face from the dirt, groans and winces. Rack focus to the girl descending towards him in the background of this shot.
11) Handheld Wide Angle following behind girl as she gets to her guy and rolls him over. "Are you okay?"
This is how I plan a scene, instead of just filming every possible angle. I have to see the fall work in my head and write the shots down. The guy's POV falling to the ground and the cutaway to the girl allows me to suggest a pretty good impact. A good thud sound effect will sell it. You can make it as intense as you want with insert shots of a fake arm or leg snapping (from a higher fall), etc. Or it can just be a regular old fall.
Simply shooting talking heads is one way...
But, if you want to get better as a filmmaker you need to consider the entire frame, camera movements, foreground information vs. background information. What moves into and out of frames. Storyboard shots that can include more.
If the camera isn't even necessary, and you just want to communicate dialogue, you're basically writing radio theater.
But, if you want to get better as a filmmaker you need to consider the entire frame, camera movements, foreground information vs. background information. What moves into and out of frames. Storyboard shots that can include more.
If the camera isn't even necessary, and you just want to communicate dialogue, you're basically writing radio theater.