Is my director going to ruin his movie?

[harmonica44]

He likes to do everything in one take. Unless the actors screw up, in which case he will start over. He has the actors rehearse like literally 10 times, without the cameras rolling. Then when he thinks they could be ready (or their is just no more time), he turns the cameras on for one full take of the scene. He shoots with three cameras at a time, and gets all the shots he wants with those, in one take.

I'm the boom guy, volunteering. But I feel that this one take thing is going to ruin his sound. He already had to reshoot a scene cause of a couple of words of dialogue that had unwanted background sound, and the PSM could not hear it while shooting.

It seems if he would just shoot more takes he would have back up and wouldn't have to reshoot. I feel that he really should rehearse once, and then just shoot all the rest of the takes, instead of having literally 10 rehearsals before turning on the cameras.

I suggested that to him and he says he doesn't have time to go through multiple takes in the editing and that he has deadlines to meet.

I am also concerned for the sound. He has put so much effort into the camera and lighting portion of the movie, but he nor his PSM, don't use sound blankets. Just a shotgun mic in all these indoor locations which I am booming around, not knowing what kind of different reflections it is picking up, and the PSM is not doing anything about it, if their is. He just adjusts the faders and that's it. But what do you think?

I mean it's not my problem, but I am taking time off work and such, and I want the things I work on, to be good enough to put into a portfolio, so when professionals ask what I have done, I don't have to tell them that it's crap, because of the director and producers.

 

[DDK]

Grain of salt and all that but personally I'd be thankful just to be part of a production. Volunteering doesn't give you any special rights on a set, or anywhere else. You've agreed to do a job pro bono so the voluntary aspect shouldn't factor into anything. And even if you were a paid professional, you're never going to have full control over any production, at least not until you're George Lucas. Many of them will probably end up being crap (although apparently that's subjective) and there'll be nothing you can do about it, so don't put them on your resume.

If you've said your piece to the director and PSM and they haven't listened then I'd drop it. You've done what you can and anything more would be overstepping your bounds as a volunteer boom guy. Grin and bear it, I say, and learn from the experience.

 

[Danielassault]

DDK sums it up well. However, I'd like to add to the one-take thing; It's not a problem if done correctly.

This is actually how indies use to shoot on film days, because film was so expensive. Also, a lot of directors don't do proper rehearsals - It's best to get the actors ready before the day of the shoot, but time and money doesn't always allow it.

If done properly, filming in one or two takes is a good discipline to learn.

 

[MileCreations]

And boom op isn't the sort of thing that you would put in your portfolio in terms of video IMHO. You might list that you've done boom op on 'such and such' but you wouldn't provide your 'crappy examples'

 

[AudioPostExpert]

If the director has tight deadlines to achieve that implies he's working professionally for some sort of commercial distribution. You can achieve commercial audio standards doing just one take but it requires particularly special attention to the sound; a big, highly experienced and very highly equipped professional production sound team to start with and also very good acoustic conditions on set. Most reality TV relies on this methodology for example.

Achieving commercially acceptable standards the way you describe your director working is going to be bit of a lottery and it's going to come back and bite him where it hurts, frequently! To be honest though, it's really the PSM's job to bring this issue and it's consequences to the attention of the Director and do something about it, rather than for you to be getting involved with anyone but the PSM. The fact the PSM does not appear to be doing his/her job (or that the director has ignored the PSM's advice) is just another nail in the coffin for this production. There's not much you can do or that you should do beyond raising the issue with the PSM. This director sounds like he's going to learn about sound the hard way, which hopefully doesn't end his career before he has the opportunity to put what he learns into practise!

There are reason's why professional audio practises and workflows exist and even though they might appear to be more expensive, virtually without exception they have evolved because in the long term (beyond just the production phase of film making) they are actually cheaper and more efficient.

G

 

[rayw]

It's the director/producer's nickle.
Yes.
He's probably going to screw up the film with this approach for most films.
Maybe if he's got an excellent crew.
Honestly, I'd like to give something like this a try. Practice ten times then try to collect it all in one take - but I acknowledge it's high risk.
Basically, it's like shooting a stage play. One take. No Re-dos. That's the discipline.

Ahem...

Today, 02:57 AM
Replies: 16 Are There Any Movies You Are Looking Forward To This Year?
Views: 388 Posted By harmonica44
I'm really looking forward to the Oldboy remake. ...

Today, 12:57 AM
Replies: 6 Would 3D movies look better if they were shot deep focus?
Views: 96 Posted By harmonica44
Would 3D movies look better if they were shot deep focus?
I always think 3D has looked unimpressive in the 3 movies I have seen so far. Avatar, Thor, and The Avengers.

I think it's because the DOF is shallow. The pleasure of the 3D is being able to...

Stay on task, please.

Dude!

Originally Posted by rayw
H -
Get your camera back?
Shoot your street for three minutes.
Select 120 seconds of it.
Compress to 80seconds, AKA increase speed 150%.
Upload.
Post link.

Chop chop!

 

[knightly]

The Boom op listens in the headphones for dialog fidelity... the PSM for background noise and levels. The jobs being split can then be concentrated on more heavily. As the Boom Op though, your chain of communication is through your department head... they talk to the director - it minimizes the distractions for the director on set so they can concentrate on their part - which is being responsible for whether or not the production succeeds. If the PSM sin't speaking up, don't work with them again... or assume that they've stated it and the director has chosen that there are higher priorities... perhaps harddrive space for post, leading to less footage... or limited post time, so less footage would be a boon as there are no options to take time to consider.

 

[harmonica44]

Yeah true. I can ask the PSM if he has an extra headphone jack for me to plug my headphones in as well.

In film days though, since it was expensive, cameras as well, I am guessing they did not use three cameras simultaneously. At least in film days if you screw up, you only screw up while one camera is running, on one shot. This guy wants all three cameras going in one take, so if you screw up, you screw up in all the shots. So at least in film days, if you use one camera, you can restart on the next shot, or something.

 

[PaulGriffith]

Multicamera has been a LOOONG studio practice. It's a great way to do things if you have the equipment and gear to do so. We've done multicamera several times and it's brilliant. Especially if you don't have experienced actors. If they're placed right, you can always cut between two cameras on the same take because the actor is doing exactly the same thing in each angle. In a one camera shoot, if your actor or background actor or light or anything is just a little bit different you have to go to a cutaway to make a cut. Not that cutaways are bad, but it's nice to be able to choose to use one instead of having to to save an edit.

Especially when effects are happening, you want your coverage through multiple cameras because it's often expensive or dangerous to do another take. From what I've read (can't find the source) Nolan had 18 (FILM) cameras running when the Joker blew the Hospital in The Dark Knight. They literally blew a building up in real life, can't do that twice in the same day. During the tunnel chases they had as many as 8 cameras going at any time.

Even in older movies, a 3 camera setup was normal for dialogue scenes. In a conversation with two people you get your two close ups and a wide at the same time.

Lighting is more difficult, as is set design, but in my experience it's often worth it when you get to the edit.


Now, all that said, you should still get multiple takes. It's great to have it good all the way thoguh, but no harm picking up halfway through a scene or whatever if you need to.

 

[TheArtist]

Multicamera has been a LOOONG studio practice. It's a great way to do things if you have the equipment and gear to do so. We've done multicamera several times and it's brilliant. Especially if you don't have experienced actors. If they're placed right, you can always cut between two cameras on the same take because the actor is doing exactly the same thing in each angle. In a one camera shoot, if your actor or background actor or light or anything is just a little bit different you have to go to a cutaway to make a cut. Not that cutaways are bad, but it's nice to be able to choose to use one instead of having to to save an edit.

Especially when effects are happening, you want your coverage through multiple cameras because it's often expensive or dangerous to do another take. From what I've read (can't find the source) Nolan had 18 (FILM) cameras running when the Joker blew the Hospital in The Dark Knight. They literally blew a building up in real life, can't do that twice in the same day. During the tunnel chases they had as many as 8 cameras going at any time.

Even in older movies, a 3 camera setup was normal for dialogue scenes. In a conversation with two people you get your two close ups and a wide at the same time.

Lighting is more difficult, as is set design, but in my experience it's often worth it when you get to the edit.


Now, all that said, you should still get multiple takes. It's great to have it good all the way thoguh, but no harm picking up halfway through a scene or whatever if you need to.

It's true but only because it's special effects. He ALWAYS shot with only ONE camera everything else. And for a good reason : as a director, you need to see what goes through the gate and you can't do that on two cameras at the same time. Nolan is such a believer in this he didn't even have a B-camera team as he didn't see the point of people filming stuff without the director.

 

[PaulGriffith]

It's true but only because it's special effects. He ALWAYS shot with only ONE camera everything else. And for a good reason : as a director, you need to see what goes through the gate and you can't do that on two cameras at the same time. Nolan is such a believer in this he didn't even have a B-camera team as he didn't see the point of people filming stuff without the director.

You can, in video village. Running behind a camera you can't for sure but that's the point of having the monitor set up elsewhere.

I don't doubt what you're saying is true, but just for grins I checked TDK credits IMDB and there are quite a few "B" camera credits (operator, focus puller, loader, assistant etc)

People are quick to knock multi-cam who either haven't tried it, or haven't done it right. We've had as many as 4 cameras on set at once rolling and usually at least two, just depending on circumstances and what we're shooting. There's no definitive right way to make art or make a product, some people can't focus or wrap their minds around two things at once and others can harness and be fully aware of all of it and walk away taller because of it.

 

[darty]

the use of multiple cameras in film started with the birth of cinema and has been standard practice
since then.

lucille ball and desi arnez are sometimes credited with first using 3 cameras for the " i love lucy" show in the 50's, they used multiple 35mm mitchels for their sitcoms.

although it was standard practice in television studios they were supposedly the first to refine it for studio sitcoms shooting on film.

to pull it off successfuly on features you need experienced crews and discipline hence the multiple rehearsals, it gives the crew practice to get the right coverage.

if you are working on sound it is YOUR JOB to advise the 1st ad or director at the end of the take
if you are not happy with that take and give them your reasons. what they do after that
is their decision, your job is then done.

cheers

 

[harmonica44]

Yep I told him and we'll see how it turns out.

That DP I wanted to hire last year quit on me for not using multiple cameras actually. He said that pros using and that's how you get a movie made. Even though he didn't have any crew to be behind all the cameras and we would have to set them up still. I told him that Nolan uses one camera back then when I researched it. And he said that that was BS and if he only used one, he would be fired. Of course I believe it's good to use more during special effects shots, still.

The reason why for my script, that I didn't want use multiple cameras, is that the the cameras kept getting in the way of the others' shots. In close up shots between two people, you could see the cameras in the other shots, and in the master, you can see both cameras that were being used for the close ups. So it didn't work for the way I wanted to storyboard.

 

[Zensteve]

Shine on, you crazy diamond.

.

 

[2001 Productions]

Shine on, you crazy diamond.

.

Thank you, Steve, for my biggest laugh of the day.

 

[darty]

multiple camera's are usually a director or producers decision and depend on budget and the directors style. there is really no hard and fast rule from my experience.

its great sometimes to have 2 or three cameras but you also have to increase your crew numbers.
each camera needs an operator, focus puller. camera assistant loader/downloader, grip etc etc.
more blocking and rehearsal time and more feedback as to whether you got a usable take.

with inexperienced crews this can work out slower and more costly than using 1 camera.

i gaffed on a feature which had up to five cameras at times and it was a dogs breakfast
with other cameras, crew and lighting in shots.

the law of diminishing returns starts to rear its ugly head.

cheers

 

[Alcove Audio]

I mean it's not my problem,

That's right. Your job is to capture great production sound. Worry about your job; if you're concentrating so much on everything else that's going on around you how can you do your job effectively?

 

[DDK]

Shine on, you crazy diamond.

Thank you, Steve, for my biggest laugh of the day.

I wish I was smart enough to get this joke

That's right. Your job is to capture great production sound. Worry about your job; if you're concentrating so much on everything else that's going on around you how can you do your job effectively?

Hey, some of us can multi-task! Why, just the other day I rubbed my tummy while hopping on one leg. I still haven't quite mastered doing the third task in that trilogy though

 

[Sweetie]

Multi cameras is fine. Over 2 productions in the last couple of weeks, we used multi cameras on both productions. It can both be fantastic and a tragedy depending on the crew. On one production it was a god send, on another, I've got mixed reactions.

Sound is important though, so it's important to go ahead if the sound wasn't captured on the first take.

As for the rehearse a lot and then do one or two takes, I had a director that worked similar to that and it worked like a charm. Of course he did extra takes if it was needed for actors, camera or sound reasons. We wrapped well ahead of schedule. Always a bonus.

So, that style of rehearse a lot and do as few takes as possible is fine, so long as you heed the advice of the department heads. If you don't heed their advice, they've hired the wrong dept heads.

 

[knightly]

I'm going to go back and ask what you were recording if you didn't have headphones while pointing the boom? I challenge you to be a camera op of an action scene with a blindfold on... it won't work.

If you're on a hyper cardioid or a shotgun, the pattern means that if you turn the mic a couple of degrees, the "color" of the dialog will shift, like turning the treble knob down on your stereo in the middle of a song -- extremely noticeable!