locations Narrator scenes: where to shoot...

[EthicalEgret]

I'm making documentaries for YouTube and I don't know how to decide where to shoot my narration segments. I see that filmmakers are doing amazing stuff with Photoshop's generative fill, so that could be useful for my project, but it seems to be limited to stationary shots.

My current project features two interviews with retired scientists, and lots of historical footage from the 90's.

Do I just say f*** it and film at my desk, or film in any arbitrary scenic outdoor setting? My closest city is San Francisco, so my current thinking is to film something on Embarcadero with the Bay Bridge in the background. It would look nice but it's not relevant for my film content.

EDIT: Actually, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory would be a relevant location that I can get to, but I don't know if they'll let me film there.

 

[sfoster]

You can film the retired scientists at their home. It's common for documentary to film people where they live.

 

[mlesemann]

Actually, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory would be a relevant location that I can get to, but I don't know if they'll let me film there.

Ask them. They might, in certain areas.

Or they might require you to get liability insurance in order to do it. If so, see if that's feasible based on the amount of time you'd need it for and the (probably small) amount of equipment you would have.

 

[directorik]

My current project features two interviews with retired scientists, and lots of historical footage from the 90's.

Have you asked the retired scientists where they would like to be filmed?
They might have a place special to them. Or as sfoster suggested going
to their home might be most convenient for them.

 

[CelticRambler]

I'm confused. Are you asking about locations for your own straight to camera narration (the underlying narrative), or locations for interviews with the scientists (specific contributions to/opinions about the subject)?

If it's the former, you could do the simplest thing and stand in front of a green screen, then key in appropriate stock footage behind yourself. There's no shortage of YouTube documentaries that do this ... which is perhaps a good reason not to do it!

The alternative would be to choose a location that makes an indirect reference to the topic of the video. Let's say it's a project on the use of hydrogen as a renewable fuel generated from water. It doesn't really matter what lab is doing the research, the point you'll be making (at least in your introduction) is that the video is about fuel and/or water - so you can shoot that part of the narration in front of a regular service station, or beside a running bath-tap/stream/lake/ocean.

 

[Nate North]

Lazy advice, but good advice - for a masterclass in making science/historical documentary delivery interesting, look no further than Dr. James Burke.

Connections (British TV series) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Also, dependent on your budget, greencreen can be an effective way to add entertainment value to documentaries. It's how most modern documentary filmmakers get authentic location footage into their documentaries. Basically the fiscal returns on documentaries are rarely enough to justify flying crews all over the world, so it's common practice to key or intercut stock footage, or now generated footage, in order to convey more visual information to the viewer, sans cost.

I'm a specialist in generative AI, and can tell you that getting an exact match for the image you want is not nearly as easy as you would think from advertisements for generative fill would make it seem. If you have specific scenes you need, the first thing I would check is the big stock sites, or on a lower budget, the blanket subscription stock sites such as Envato Elements. If you need something very specific, and can't find it anywhere, send me a short list and I'll use an industrial strength AI to fabricate them for you, and donate them to your project.

 

[EthicalEgret]

I'm confused. Are you asking about locations for your own straight to camera narration (the underlying narrative), or locations for interviews with the scientists (specific contributions to/opinions about the subject)?

Apparently a few people were confused about this. Yes, I'm just talking about the straight-to-camera narration.

The Burke clip looks great, that's generally the idea. Some walking shots would make me happy.

One of my interviewees was at Stony Brook university, and I'm on the wrong coast for that. The other was in military weapons research at China Lake and also the Navy Research Lab. The focus of their stories is on the ways in which bad actors and human biases interfere with the proper functioning of the scientific process and can ultimately lead to consequences on a societal level.

So ya, the main thing is how could I get some walking shots if I can't go onsite? I'm guessing it's not doable.

 

[sfoster]

Sorry about that

I looked at stony brook it's not a marvel of modern architecture or anything.
Walking will be a dynamic shot and if you're moving everyone will be focused on you instead of looking at the background. Find a similar location and as long as the pallette matches nobody is going to know you're actually there or not. Especially if you put the background a bit out of focus. Hopefully someone else has a better idea.

Whats the subject ? Maybe there is something related tangentially ? I lived through the 90s

 

[EthicalEgret]

If you need something very specific, and can't find it anywhere, send me a short list and I'll use an industrial strength AI to fabricate them for you, and donate them to your project.

That's really kind of you, thank you! I'll keep this in mind.

 

[EthicalEgret]

I’m really good with Blender. Maybe a green screen could work, I’m just not sure what scene to create. Maybe a holodeck sort of CG scene.

 

[CelticRambler]

The focus of their stories is on the ways in which bad actors and human biases interfere with the proper functioning of the scientific process and can ultimately lead to consequences on a societal level.

Let that be your guide. These are not very location-specific themes, so you can instead look for "metaphorical" locations inspired by the examples given and/or actual phrases used by your interviewees.

Think of working backwards instead of forwards: identify a real-world illustration of "consequences on a societal level" and start your narration in a location that demonstrates that end-point, with the question "how did we end up here?"

Or look for scenes where people (as individuals or as crowds) are interfereing with any process, and make the link "what these people are doing is inadvertent and has no great effect on the world, but what would happen if certain parties deliberately interfered with a more delicate process?"

If you can find and include shots of the familiar world as we know it, that'll help draw non-scientists into the narrative.

 

[EthicalEgret]

Let that be your guide. These are not very location-specific themes, so you can instead look for "metaphorical" locations inspired by the examples given and/or actual phrases used by your interviewees.

Think of working backwards instead of forwards: identify a real-world illustration of "consequences on a societal level" and start your narration in a location that demonstrates that end-point, with the question "how did we end up here?"

Or look for scenes where people (as individuals or as crowds) are interfereing with any process, and make the link "what these people are doing is inadvertent and has no great effect on the world, but what would happen if certain parties deliberately interfered with a more delicate process?"

If you can find and include shots of the familiar world as we know it, that'll help draw non-scientists into the narrative.

Agreed. I turned to ChatGPT to brainstorm some metaphors.

1. Opposition to new ideas
   • Location: A dilapidated old library or school, filled with dusty books, cobwebs, and dim lighting, symbolizing stagnant knowledge and resistance to new information.
2. Peer review is broken
   • Location: A broken-down bridge or a rickety footbridge. This symbolizes something that's supposed to help one get across to the other side (representing acceptance or validation), but isn’t safe or effective.
3. The passing of time
   • Location: An old, weathered clock tower or a sundial in a garden that’s been overtaken by nature. The idea is to showcase the inevitable march of time and how nature reclaims everything.
4. New evidence
   • Location: An archaeological dig site with artifacts being uncovered or a lab with microscopes and samples, showing the painstaking process of uncovering and studying new information.
5. Clean energy
   • Location: A juxtaposition of a polluted, smog-covered industrial area and a field of wind turbines or a solar farm. The contrast visually represents the move from dirty to clean energy.
6. Persecution
   • Location: A deserted, run-down prison or detention camp, perhaps with a few remnants like chains or barred windows, alluding to the suppression and confinement of persecuted individuals.
7. Our heroes have lost
   • Location: A fallen statue or monument, possibly in a ruined cityscape or post-apocalyptic setting. This would symbolize the fall of once-great ideals or heroes.

I think there's some great ideas here, but this doesn't solve the feasibility question. I do have a large enough garage that I could make a green screen room, but I suspect that making convincing virtual environments and putting me into them is actually a HUGE undertaking because of lighting and tracking and rendering.

To try to find something simpler, I had another idea. If I could use the tracking feature in DaVinci Resolve, I could place visuals into the environment as I walk through it. I'm not sure if this would actually work, but I was just trying to think of something that would actually be simple and not massively increase the level of effort.

I'm currently thinking I would find some outdoor path like a hiking path and use progress along the path, plus the tracked elements, to represent the progress through the story and the issues along that path.

Does that sound stupid?

 

[EthicalEgret]

I'm seeing this for the first time, this might change things for me.

 

[CelticRambler]

some great ideas here, but this doesn't solve the feasibility question.

What's not feasible about picking one or other of those?

It sounds to me like you need to take time to tour your local area (on foot) and have a look at what's available in the way of locations. That'd probably be a lot quicker, easier and cheaper to do than to trying to master a software plug-in that you've only just heard about.

 

[EthicalEgret]

What's not feasible about picking one or other of those?

Because, where am I going to find a dilapidated old library / school, filled with dusty books? Or a broken-down bridge / rickety footbridge? Or an archaeological dig site with artifacts being uncovered? Or a fallen statue / monument? All of these ideas would need to be created using generative fill.

It sounds to me like you need to take time to tour your local area (on foot) and have a look at what's available in the way of locations. That'd probably be a lot quicker, easier and cheaper to do than to trying to master a software plug-in that you've only just heard about.

Thanks, but I've reviewed a bunch of video walk-throughs on it, and I have a lot of experience with 3d and 2d. I'm going to pursue the generative fill approach.

 

[CelticRambler]

Because, where am I going to find a dilapidated old library / school, filled with dusty books? Or a broken-down bridge / rickety footbridge? Or an archaeological dig site with artifacts being uncovered? Or a fallen statue / monument? All of these ideas would need to be created using generative fill.

Ehhhhh ... right outside. A few years ago I compiled a photo-essay "State of the Nation" illustrating the decrepitude of the US's major cities. I have half a dozen pictures from the "SF Bay Area" if that's still your location. I also found myself quite by accident in "a dilapidated old library filled with dusty books" - but that doesn't count because I quickly learnt that it was being prepped as shooting location.

For your purposes, you don't need the kind of intense, highly textural locations being proposed by ChatGPT, and you certainly don't need all of them, only one. In fact, unless the whole of the rest of your footage is on the same level, you'll need to be careful - otherwise these scenes will scream "AI generated" and distract your audience from the narration.

 

[EthicalEgret]

Ehhhhh ... right outside. A few years ago I compiled a photo-essay "State of the Nation" illustrating the decrepitude of the US's major cities. I have half a dozen pictures from the "SF Bay Area" if that's still your location. I also found myself quite by accident in "a dilapidated old library filled with dusty books" - but that doesn't count because I quickly learnt that it was being prepped as shooting location.

For your purposes, you don't need the kind of intense, highly textural locations being proposed by ChatGPT, and you certainly don't need all of them, only one. In fact, unless the whole of the rest of your footage is on the same level, you'll need to be careful - otherwise these scenes will scream "AI generated" and distract your audience from the narration.

Ya, I'm still in the SF Bay Area. Any location tips you can share?

I have this idea of a lighthouse that is replaced by a castle with a moat, it's like the idea of a guiding light which is replaced by a defensive barrier. Not sure how to best use the idea though. There's good stock footage for both, and I could do a simple fade transition from one to the other, but I'm not sure that stock footage will create the desired viewer experience.

 

[CelticRambler]

Any location tips you can share?

Not really - as I said, it was a few years ago, so it's entirely possible the places I saw/visited have been repaired/demolished since then, but based on recent news footage I've seen of decent areas I walked through that since become desolate fentanyl-zombie-infested zones, I doubt there's any shortage. Get outside and walk - you'll find no end of drama and dramatic locations if you leave your phone/sat-nav in your pocket.

But also it's very hard to give specific tips without specific details; it's difficult to fully understand what point you're trying to make in any given minute of narration when you don't give us the narrative!

The symbolism of the lighthouse is good (you must surely have a lighthouse within reach around which you could shoot?) - but instead of trying to work out a pleasing fade from 20th century lighthouse to a mediaeval castle, I'd probably illustrate the point by pulling back/panning down, or have an orbital drone shot, to the waves crashing against the cliffs below, and - you, the narrator - fading into insignificance as the interviews and other footage take up the story.

 

[EthicalEgret]

But also it's very hard to give specific tips without specific details; it's difficult to fully understand what point you're trying to make in any given minute of narration when you don't give us the narrative!

Sure. I won't share the whole script right here, but below is the first major narrative segment which covers the ideas of the lighthouse and the castle with the moat.

New discoveries are not always welcomed by leaders in science. Before a discovery can become accepted scientific knowledge, it has to pass the peer review process and get published. This is yet another critical stage where science can fail.

It's well-established that the peer review process is completely broken.
<Articles about peer review being broken>

And that it impedes innovation by protecting outdated ideas, like it did for economist Richard Thaler.
<Richard Thaler example>

Reviewers are supposed to be good stewards of science, acting only in good faith, but in cases where radical new information challenges the accepted paradigm, reviewers will sometimes work to defend the established paradigm by making unfair criticisms of the ideas which challenge it.

This can happen for a variety of reasons. Sometimes the reviewers are people that built their careers on the old ideas. Imagine that you are a very accomplished, highly respected scientist, who has fundamentally shaped the direction of science over the past 30 years, and you are now tasked with reviewing a new idea that could practically invalidate some or all of your life's work. How would you handle that?

So the lighthouse metaphor relates to "Reviewers are supposed to be good stewards of science, acting only in good faith", and the castle with the moat relates to "reviewers will sometimes work to defend the established paradigm by making unfair criticisms of the ideas which challenge it". The purpose of peer review is for scientists to help other scientists improve their papers, make them better and stronger and more well defended. But if a paper is very bad, a scientist can say "this cannot be improved in it's present form and I can't approve it". This is valid, but sometimes a scientist will conflate this sort of objection with the issue that a new idea is simply wrong.

 

[mlesemann]

So the lighthouse metaphor relates to "Reviewers are supposed to be good stewards of science, acting only in good faith", and the castle with the moat relates to "reviewers will sometimes work to defend the established paradigm by making unfair criticisms of the ideas which challenge it".

This may be a bit too weird, but what if you simply interviewed the scientists in their homes or offices, then incorporated drawings and/or simple animation of a castle with a moat, a drawbridge being pulled up etc? It might also help to incorporate a light touch to a serious subject.