• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

Question about composing OTS shots.

H

harmonica44

Sort by date Sort by votes
Often times in straightforward OTS shots, a portion of the side of the actor's head is blocking out a part of the frame. Since a good portion of the frame is the actor and the person he in his dialogue with, there is little room for the background and surrounding area, which can indicate that the character (whose face is being seen) is trapped in some way. Either by the character, or a situation that the two characters are involved in. Because the actor is blocking the background, it gives the audience the feeling or being trapped or with little options.

By moving the camera to the side, we are opening up more of the location to be seen by the audience. Using OTS shots such as these are rather used to establish dialogue or establish the character who is being spoken to instead of to evoke the feeling of entrapment within members of an audience.

Sometimes there isn't much motivation behind OTS shots. Sometimes they are simply there because shots often times indicate what is going on in a situation. Often times OTS shots tell the audience "dialogue!" for example.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It can show the relationship between the two characters as well as the discourse unfolds. Speaking directly to one another shows a stronger connection than if the characters are turned more away from one another.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay thanks. However, those more frontal OTS shots are used in a lot of movies where their characters aren't trapped and it's just casual dialogue scenarios. Is it just been used incorrectly then more so?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Holy shit, have we considered the possibility that the director and/or DP simply framed it up to look nice? Everything doesn't have to have a deeper meaning (and most things don't).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yep, which is why I started my comment with "It can…" It is one of many possibilities.

It's filmmaking, so there are a veritable plethora of motivations behind the choices made on any given shot. (Last sentence directed toward the thread than toward you specifically CrackerFunk, I realized on re-read that it sounded a little condescending when paired with the fact that it's a response - not the intention, just furthering your thought).

Cracker Funk said:
Holy shit, have we considered the possibility that the director and/or DP simply framed it up to look nice? Everything doesn't have to have a deeper meaning (and most things don't).
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yes, and no. Framing and composition with intent is a litle more than making it look nice. While compromise is always at work (especially in the low budget arena), when I was studying cinematography, my teacher would pause my project we were screening and ask me questions about the frame (why did you choose this angle, why not wider, why not tighter, why did you close off the subject, why is the subject so open, why a level shot, why the low shot, why, why, why)...The right answer was never "it looked nice". Camera movement was scrutinized even more. He was nearly impossible to satisfy, but the rare compliment was a treasure. He came from the world of film, when every frame of 16 or 35mm cost real money, and taught us to treat every shot as though it cost $1000 and the camera was not there to capture the story but to tell the story.

Granted, there are far too many films with camera choices made from the perspective of "that looks nice" and you may be right that most don't have deeper meaning. but my guess is that the likes of Spielberg, Howard, Nolan, Cameron, Scott, etc, and their cinetographers/DPs rarely used the phrase "that looks nice" as the deciding factor in how to frame the shot.

Cameramen and camerawomen make nice frames, Directors and their Cinematographers tell stories.

Cracker Funk said:
Holy shit, have we considered the possibility that the director and/or DP simply framed it up to look nice? Everything doesn't have to have a deeper meaning (and most things don't).
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
gpforet said:
... my guess is that the likes of Spielberg, Howard, Nolan, Cameron, Scott, etc, and their cinetographers/DPs rarely used the phrase "that looks nice" as the deciding factor in how to frame the shot.

Cameramen and camerawomen make nice frames, Directors and their Cinematographers tell stories.
Click to expand...

My guess would be that the top echelon directors instinctively combine "looks nice" (or composition, if you prefer) with deeper meaning, and work with DPs/Cinematographers who have the same instincts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0 Downvote
I personally think "It looks good is a great starting point!" Later, all the nuance and artsy stuff can be added… but building a sense of "looks good" vs. "looks bad" is an important skill in a visual medium. I also had a prof who NEVER wanted to hear "because it's a cool shot." But we did it anyway -- because if it's a cool shot, you can use it later to figure out why it looks cool.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Cracker Funk said:
Holy shit, have we considered the possibility that the director and/or DP simply framed it up to look nice? Everything doesn't have to have a deeper meaning (and most things don't).
Click to expand...

Your comment sparks this thought, but it should answer the main question as well. The viewer makes the meaning, not the creator. So yes, everything does have deeper meaning, as long as one viewer thinks so
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Here is the actual scene from your first posted example.

Notice that at a certain point in the scene, (:42) when Bond asks her an important question, the angle shifts a bit to square her up more directly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnlsoaZ5xMo
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The closer you are to straight on, usually the closer you feel to the actor, but this isn't always the case. If you force the audience to get too close to an actor before they're ready for it will make them uncomfortable (which is good to know if that's your aim). The more to the side, the more the audience will feel they're just an observer rather than part of the action.

The angle chosen can be for many reasons. It can be done to help tell the story and get the right feeling. Sometimes it can be for more practical reasons (to frame something out - though cheating the shot is usually a better option).

Different angles and differing shots combined with other factors have different meanings to the audience. You should use the appropriate (combinations of) shots for each scene you shoot. OTS is a very commonly used tool, especially during dialogue, that you should learn to use well.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Also, I'll just suggest to try very hard to think of ways you can do the dialogue scene without over the shoulder shots. OTS is often necessary and if you have great actors with a lot of character in their faces, it can be great.

However, try to not always use OTS. Can the two characters be walking and talking? Can they be working on something together that allows them to always have both of them facing the camera?

Here are two examples. Here is a scene from Woody Allen's Crimes and Misdemeanors. It is a four minute dialogue scene that is VERY crucial to the movie.

It is filmed in only two shots with no OTS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZQ5qKpUk08

Notice though, that this method takes more rehearsal as actors have to hit marks and the carmera has to follow.

Here is another example of a dialogue scene from Fargo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-XEHwUBubk

After the police officer gets out of the car, it is all one shot. What I have always admired about this scene is that it is one of those types of scenes that everybody always says you should not have in your movie: the strictly expository scene. However, the Coen brothers made a classic, funny and memorable moment.

Notice, though, in both these instances, the characters are pretty much standing or moving around the whole time. Once you have characters seated, say at a bar or a restaurant, it is hard not to use OTS.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top