I am planning on shooting my next project and got a new DP having seeing and liking his previous work.
He wants to use more than one camera, when I only have one in my budget. He wants to use one in all shots, saying that the editing will be ruined if I do not have all the shots with a camera going at the same time, and positioned perfectly, so they won't be seen in any of the shots, with crew members, ready to move them back and forth so the camera's won't get in each others frame. This wasn't in my budget either. My budget was too do one shot at a time, but all planned out on paper and storyboards of course.
He also says that if an actor makes a mistake on a line, I need to restart the whole scene, and shoot from the beginning from that specific shot where he is suppose to say the line, otherwise the performance will not come off as natural. I prefer to just have the camera in certain places, when actors are to deliver certain sections of the scene. That way those shots convey certain tones, for certain sections of the scene. But he says I must restart the whole scene, every different shot I have in the storyboards, just to make the performance more natural.
Some of the storyboards I have planned, with multiple shots, in a scene, would make his method take weeks to do a scene with just one camera, possibly.
I told him how it creates a lot more time in post, and more shooting time on set. It creates more time in post cause you're going through a bunch of footage you don't need that were not part of the original storyboards, since every shot had a camera rolling the whole shoot. He says that that's required to get the performance and continuity right, and that the single camera will ruin it, even though I've read that pros use single cameras a lot in Hollywood. Even though he has more cameras of different types, it would take me more time in post to color correct it to match, and possibly cost more to get it right, then it would to pay the actors to stick around more on set, for more shots with one camera.
But now he seems very pessimistic about doing it, and looks like he might just wants to get it over with. Is he right, am I being unprofessional, or he being unreasonable to the budget?
He wants to use more than one camera, when I only have one in my budget. He wants to use one in all shots, saying that the editing will be ruined if I do not have all the shots with a camera going at the same time, and positioned perfectly, so they won't be seen in any of the shots, with crew members, ready to move them back and forth so the camera's won't get in each others frame. This wasn't in my budget either. My budget was too do one shot at a time, but all planned out on paper and storyboards of course.
He also says that if an actor makes a mistake on a line, I need to restart the whole scene, and shoot from the beginning from that specific shot where he is suppose to say the line, otherwise the performance will not come off as natural. I prefer to just have the camera in certain places, when actors are to deliver certain sections of the scene. That way those shots convey certain tones, for certain sections of the scene. But he says I must restart the whole scene, every different shot I have in the storyboards, just to make the performance more natural.
Some of the storyboards I have planned, with multiple shots, in a scene, would make his method take weeks to do a scene with just one camera, possibly.
I told him how it creates a lot more time in post, and more shooting time on set. It creates more time in post cause you're going through a bunch of footage you don't need that were not part of the original storyboards, since every shot had a camera rolling the whole shoot. He says that that's required to get the performance and continuity right, and that the single camera will ruin it, even though I've read that pros use single cameras a lot in Hollywood. Even though he has more cameras of different types, it would take me more time in post to color correct it to match, and possibly cost more to get it right, then it would to pay the actors to stick around more on set, for more shots with one camera.
But now he seems very pessimistic about doing it, and looks like he might just wants to get it over with. Is he right, am I being unprofessional, or he being unreasonable to the budget?
Last edited:
