Wow, Directing is hard... but fun!

[wheatgrinder]

I just directed my first "anything" with humans that were not my wife or kids!

Here is a preview: (cheesy sound FX not withstanding)

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


Wow, that was much more intimidating than I though it was going to be... People actually EXPECTED me to have ideas and opinions. Thank goodness they came with their own! I was overloaded in technical details to be very helpful in specifics...

The biggest personal challenges and shortcomings this showed me today:

• Talking about objectification with female talent is challenging.
  In my head its easy to say things like, "can you do that in a more alluring way?" but face to face with a living breathing person, I felt like it came out creepy and awkward.
  
  
  
• Giving helpful acting advice is a must.
  I have NO IDEA how to talk about this effectively with actors..
  Buying myself acting classes for Christmas!
  
  
  
• Breath, and use check lists!
  I did good on my shot checklist, this kept me on track and got all the shots I wanted, done early!
  I did NOT run my own Camera Operator checklist and forgot some VITAL steps that resulted in degrading my images.
  
  
  
• Tracking where "we" are in the script\story is vital:
  It surprised me how many time I did NOT know what the next line was or where we were in the script. I knew EXACTLY where we were in shooting, but it was way out of temporal order and even though I SWORE I had the entire script memorized, it fled from before my mind on the day.

Things that surprised me in a good way:

• Separate Sound and Video systems ROCK! I'm never going back to running mics into the camera!
  
  
  
• Even inexperience crew are incredibly helpful. I pressed into service someone who was just riding along with a fried, she ran slate for me and saved the shot multiple occasions.
  
  
  
• I'm a pretty funny guy (yeah, but looks don't count), had em laughing on several occasions, mostly at my own expense.

 

[IndieBudget]

Wait, what are you talking about, the actors and their performances? If so, it is the actor's job to bring the performance. They should have the character fully fleshed out, based on what's in the script.

Bullshit ! I disagree !

The director shouldn't have to spell out every minute detail. Yeah, the director should be opinionated, and have a clear vision, but the collaborative process is vital.

Ohh...... nevermind, I agree. Carry on, Sorry. Carry on !


Some talent available for Indie production sometimes aren't that talented and the director must drag it out of them. OK, and some of us directors aren't too talented either. I love it when the talent is in the groove on the part w/ the script giving them their character and how to portray it OR they drag out of me what they need. I'm learning the first thing most actors want and usually express a need for is a solid script. Give them that and good sides on the part and watch the magic. Give them a lesser script and then they will be hungry for more info. I'm learning ( slowly ) that as a director, I must convey what is needed to the talent for them to give me what I need for the scene, shot & or story. Otherwise I'm just playin around. I have MILES to learn in this area.

 

[wheatgrinder]

regarding acting classes.... for me its like this..
Iv been married for 18 years, I forgot how to communicate emotions verbally with anyone who cant already read my mind...

Probably its pretty clear I fall on the cinematography side of the line that CF draws, though, I am convinced it CAN be done... I just need to take the time.. only a few improvements in my process would have yielded EXACTLY what I wanted.. I think a AD would have filed in the gaps on this little project.

 

[Cracker Funk]

I guess I shouldn't say it can't be done. But I can definitely say I've never seen it done successfully. On other people's sets, I've seen directors devote all sorts of time and energy to cinematography, while practically ignoring the talent. And in watching a number of one-man-director/DP shorts, I've seen so many that look gorgeous but are seriously lacking in content, what with pacing and feel, etc.

I guess my main point is don't forget about the directing side of directing. In my opinion, this should be priority #1.

 

[Papertwinproductions]

Yep, I've done that before (made bone-headed mistakes by just forgetting to do something). I've contemplated having a checklist, but I think that might be overkill. Perhaps you just create a routine to go through before each shot. You know, like it's typical to say "Quiet on the set. Roll Camera. Action." Maybe you have lines that you speak aloud, to yourself, first. "Focus, check. White-balance, check. Shutter-speed, check. ISO, check. Frame-rate, check. Whatever-you-think-should-be-routine, check." If you say the same thing enough times, that would function as a checklist, and you wouldn't need an actual physical checklist on paper.

I have to disagree with you on this point, CF.

Even with numerous "Preps", days or weeks, I'd sooner enter the shoot with a checklist/breakdown/shooting script, rather than without. Personal preference, maybe. Especially if you're shooting in numerous locations within the same day, with interchanging Cast, Crew, Equipment, Props etc. It is very likely problems will occur somewhere admist the havock. Atlhough I will have been inseperable from the script for months, knowing it from start to finish, and very likely if asked of, be able to recite to you our entire routine and plans immediately. Even so, i wouldn't enter a shoot knowing a problem could arise that may have been avoided with the use of checklists.

It's a "Safety-net" for me, personally. But i know those i've worked with, especially DP's, Lighting. Props, were also prone to consult our "Safety net". It's structure, that, in the circumstance of what is a balancing act, allows the Director a-lot of freedom. Meaning, although he still may have to refer to those using the Checklists, it is likely that they will have made their own conclusion upon the instructions set, leaving the Director to pursue his vision, and use well the time he has, elsewhere.

Differing approaches, i guess.

 

[chilipie]

I guess I shouldn't say it can't be done. But I can definitely say I've never seen it done successfully. On other people's sets, I've seen directors devote all sorts of time and energy to cinematography, while practically ignoring the talent. And in watching a number of one-man-director/DP shorts, I've seen so many that look gorgeous but are seriously lacking in content, what with pacing and feel, etc.

I guess my main point is don't forget about the directing side of directing. In my opinion, this should be priority #1.

Steven Soderbergh? I'm not surprised that you didn't think you could do it successfully with a crew of two - whenever I've DPed I've fulfilled the roles of at least three or four people. I might have a hand from a couple of PAs, but that's not really the same as dedicated crew; there's no way you could successfully direct and have to prep the camera, pull your own focus and set up most of the lights, I agree.

However, I think it's easy to forget that everyone needs to delegate - a good DoP is as important to the director as a good gaffer is to a DoP. The last project I worked on (as gaffer) had a budget of <£1,000 (about half of which went on accommodation), and although none of the crew were paid and many were very inexperienced, everything ran like clockwork because of the delegation.

Anyway, I'm not entirely sure where I'm going with this, but I think my point is that when you've got crew members that you can trust to do something well and do it how you like it, you'll have a lot more time (and peace of mind) to get on with other things.

 

[Cracker Funk]

I have to disagree with you on this point, CF.

Even with numerous "Preps", days or weeks, I'd sooner enter the shoot with a checklist/breakdown/shooting script, rather than without. Personal preference, maybe. Especially if you're shooting in numerous locations within the same day, with interchanging Cast, Crew, Equipment, Props etc. It is very likely problems will occur somewhere admist the havock. Atlhough I will have been inseperable from the script for months, knowing it from start to finish, and very likely if asked of, be able to recite to you our entire routine and plans immediately. Even so, i wouldn't enter a shoot knowing a problem could arise that may have been avoided with the use of checklists.

It's a "Safety-net" for me, personally. But i know those i've worked with, especially DP's, Lighting. Props, were also prone to consult our "Safety net". It's structure, that, in the circumstance of what is a balancing act, allows the Director a-lot of freedom. Meaning, although he still may have to refer to those using the Checklists, it is likely that they will have made their own conclusion upon the instructions set, leaving the Director to pursue his vision, and use well the time he has, elsewhere.

Differing approaches, i guess.

No, actually I don't see any evidence that you or I disagree. I only see that one of us (maybe me?) has misunderstood what wheat is talking about, in this instance, when he mentions checklists. I took it to mean that on particular shots he forgot to adjust the exposure. Or maybe he forgot to manually set the white-balance. I thought he was talking about basic camera-operating procedures, which should be routine every time you press record.

Dear God, I wouldn't ever advocate entering a shoot without a great deal of organization. Frankly, I'm shocked that you think I would make such an argument. What do you think I'm wingin' it over here? What you mention isn't personal preference - that's just basic preperation. But that's not the kind of checklist I gathered wheat was talking about.

 

[Cracker Funk]

Steven Soderbergh? I'm not surprised that you didn't think you could do it successfully with a crew of two - whenever I've DPed I've fulfilled the roles of at least three or four people. I might have a hand from a couple of PAs, but that's not really the same as dedicated crew; there's no way you could successfully direct and have to prep the camera, pull your own focus and set up most of the lights, I agree.

However, I think it's easy to forget that everyone needs to delegate - a good DoP is as important to the director as a good gaffer is to a DoP. The last project I worked on (as gaffer) had a budget of <£1,000 (about half of which went on accommodation), and although none of the crew were paid and many were very inexperienced, everything ran like clockwork because of the delegation.

Anyway, I'm not entirely sure where I'm going with this, but I think my point is that when you've got crew members that you can trust to do something well and do it how you like it, you'll have a lot more time (and peace of mind) to get on with other things.

I agree, completely. My comments on this are only intended for those productions that have a very small crew, wherin the DP is also the gaffer and key grip, and the director is also the AD and script supervisor and camera operator. That's too much for one person.

 

[Papertwinproductions]

No, actually I don't see any evidence that you or I disagree. I only see that one of us (maybe me?) has misunderstood what wheat is talking about, in this instance, when he mentions checklists. I took it to mean that on particular shots he forgot to adjust the exposure. Or maybe he forgot to manually set the white-balance. I thought he was talking about basic camera-operating procedures, which should be routine every time you press record.

Dear God, I wouldn't ever advocate entering a shoot without a great deal of organization. Frankly, I'm shocked that you think I would make such an argument. What do you think I'm wingin' it over here? What you mention isn't personal preference - that's just basic preperation. But that's not the kind of checklist I gathered wheat was talking about.

Ah, thank heavens for that! I wouldn't think it of you, either.

I was just wondering whether or not it was a question of having the Checklists etc. on set. I did think it perculiar.

Faith restored!

 

[wheatgrinder]

none of this is meant to be argumentative, and I know Im still a noob, though maybe a second class one.. so just ready my stream of consciousness knowing that its worth every penny you paid for it!

well I WAS referring to a camera check list.. not exposure issues, which I was ontop of, but close enough..

In regards to DP or Director.. Perhaps were missing the "scale" factor here...

Certainly the size of the production must be a factor in how you do this. As far as it goes, saying I SHOULD "have a DP" or "be a DP" is only academic argument when faced with the reality of not having another human to rely on. The FACT that many of us have to do it all our selves cant be ignored, and rather than treat it like a problem, I think of it as an advantage... less cooks in the kitchen, less competing egos.. etc..

I am unwilling to give up on visual quality for the needs of directing. Conversely, I realize and this effort has shown me, that more directing effort needs to be applied to help the talent and crew do the best they can, which I knew intellectually, but had not really prepared for..

I believe folks at my level have a distinct advantage, or at least have a force multiplier.. we have UNLIMITED time to research, write, plan, organize, edit and tweak. Utilizing this edge we should be able to produce HIGH QUALITY content, which I am DETERMINED to do..

I had planned this more than any other project to date, I had blocking diagrams, previs, shot lists etc.. I executed what I planed, I had not PLANED to need a camera check list, I mean, I love my camera, I read the manual in the bathroom, why on earth would I need a check list.. well, silly me, cause Iv got a mind like a sieve thats why!

 

[Cracker Funk]

I don't think a friendly discussion, in which two people don't completely agree, is anything closely resembling being argumentative. This kind of discussion is perfectly healthy, in my opinion.

Anyway, if it's simply not an option to find a partner who can take some of the directorial and/or DP duties off your hands, I fully understand. You gotta work with what you got.

I think you're very wise to stress that you've got all the time in the world to prepare. I agree fully that preparation is your best friend. Preparation is important for everyone, but I think especially for those of us that have to work alone (relatively speaking).

And actually, you made me think of something that I don't believe I've shared with anyone here, yet, in regards to my non-cinematography for "Antihero". It wasn't plan-A. It was plan-B.

You see, I did have a deadline looming. A self-imposed deadline, but one that was very important to me, and if I had a chance to do it all again, I'd stick with it. Anyway, haphazard slap-dash cinematography was not what I had originally intended.

My original plan was to do the vast majority of my DP work in advance. In preproduction, I'd scout every location, extensively. I'd have stand-ins for every scene, and light it all in advance. I'd take extensive notes, draw maps and diagrams, instructions for setting up all the lighting. That way, by the time we got on set for shooting, it'd be mere minutes to look at the notes for how I set it up before, and just repeat what I had already done. It wouldn't require the time that is normally spent tweaking this and that, and experimenting here and there, etc.

What went wrong? I couldn't finish the damn screenplay! I was working on rewrites all the way up to the first shoot. I do of course have a full-time job, so my free-time is limited. And all the time that I wanted to spend location scouting and advance-DP-ing got eaten up by screenwriting.

So, maybe I'll alter my wording in my opinion. I do not think it's possible to successfully direct and DP on the same day. But if you can knock out the bulk of your DP work, in advance, I think it totally can be done.

Whichever route you take, I do have faith in you. You're one talented mo-fo!

Cheers.

 

[knightly]

I personally find that I make worse output when I try to do everything on set. I've worked at assembling a team of regulars who crew my shoots and we've attacked division of labor to the extent we could do so. I can only multi-task so much, then the machine breaks and the fluid leaks all over the garage... messy.

 

[wheatgrinder]

knightly, et all..

Where do you draw the dividing line? If you could only have one more person besides your safe how would you best utilize this person?

 

[knightly]

One person running the camera, one on the sound. I'd prefer no less than 4, director, camera/lighting, sound, AD (to keep the set running) while the director directs.

 

[Cracker Funk]

Knightly speaks, wheat listens.

C-Funk is chopped liver.

 

[wheatgrinder]

Chopped Liver.. NEVER!

OK.. so you have SOUND guy.. now +1 human.. what does the new HUMAN do?

 

[Cracker Funk]

Chopped Liver.. NEVER!

OK.. so you have SOUND guy.. now +1 human.. what does the new HUMAN do?

I think the answer to your question depends very heavily on the capabilities of the individual you are able to partner with. Obviously, if you have only one other person, you'll have one person on camera and one person on audio. But of course there's plenty more that needs to be done, and how you divide those tasks should (I think) be determined by you and the individual.

I think a two-person crew should be a bare minimum. There were a few times I had to work camera and boom, myself, and I absolutely hated it. Never again.