I'm going to use your questions and turn them into statements by removing theinterrogatives... start thinking this way rather than in the interrogatives... then you'll be a director:
Quote:
Originally Posted by harmonica44
I use a reaction shot, from shot 4, take 3, for example, I am using that to cut away from shot 3, take 2.
That's a decisive statement, sounds like you know your stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by harmonica44
I will have actors play out the scene, every time I switch shots. For small insert shots, such as an actor giving a frightened look, when is is talking to someone, and then notices something on the desk. The point of view will then switch to a shot of the camera, pointed up from the desk, to his face. I don't need to have the actors react the whole scene, just for that shot, which I plan to only use for two seconds. do I?
There, do you feel more confident yet. You know all the answers, you just don't have the faith in yourself yet... stop asking questions and start making statements -- you're teetering over the edge of the hill in your toboggan... it's time to put your feet up and lean forward!
Quote:
Originally Posted by harmonica44
But he says in order for the performance to ring true with the other shots, I need a camera on the desk, the whole time, as well, not able to be seen in the other shots. I also have to use all the same shots, from the same take. Like if I decide to use shot 4, take 4, I have to have every other cutaway I of the same take, while shooting multicam. I cannot mix takes, or the performances will come off as untrue. He says a pro would never mix takes, and the cutaways, back and forth, should all be off the same take.
He should put down the crack pipe and start using google to do some fact checking before telling me my job... I've been paid to do this work, I'm a working professional, and I'd never sleep at night if I had to get it all in one solid take. Tom Cruise said in an interview that he's not that good of an actor, the editor makes him look like it by choosing the right bits of the right takes and mixing and matching them. We're making a jigsaw puzzle by cutting out all the pieces, then drawing on them and making them fit back together afterwards... you want alot of different pieces that can fit to find the right / most convincing one.
Continuity is on the actor, the director and the continuity person (that position exists to make take after take consistent so they can be cut together)... if you have a continuity problem though:
We'll forgive quite a bit as an audience. There are some experiements I was trying to find where actors are changing shirts and scarves between takes, and it's less noticeable than you'd think:
and these... obviously (according to your DP guy) not made by pros -- who would never use separate takes, and therefore never run into these issues: http://www.moviemistakes.com/best_continuity.php
Isn't it the director's job, not the DP's, to stop the shot?
Also, doesn't it depend upon how anal... "precise" the director/DP wants to be?
- Could be a David Fincher type and want thirty takes of every shot and let the editor piece together something.
- Could be an Eli Roth type and get two/three takes and move on.
Third, depending upon the severity of the transgression, can't a flubbed line or movement often be edited or fixed with a cutaway?
Fourth, at some point the actors are either going to straighten up and fly right and get their act together - or - constant interruption of their "flow", erroneous or not, going to have an adverse effect on their performance across a day?
Just wondering.
You've done this considerably more than I have.
And I would like to clarify that I do realize it's primarily the producer's money getting burned with the time it takes to do all this, so by no mean do I advocate letting the actors control the set and go hog-wild waaaaay off the reservation. I'm keen on keeping all the sheep going in the right direction.
TY!
Yeah! Exactly.
I thought this was the norm and marathon four minute take were ABnormal.
Same for the single camera approach, for like... 90% of films.
A slight misstep, part of the line dropped, not delivered the way I want, etc..., I let them keep going. If the line is totally blown i'm yelling "cut". To me it's more a waste of time to keep rolling on a take that is almost certainly going to be unusable than to just start over.
Not mixing takes is about the dumbest damn thing I have ever heard.
Yes, a LONG scene is 3 or 4 minutes. Any longer than that I'd probably split it into a new scene in the shooting script.
Following all the responses to your post I feel like I'm "piling on" at this point...but I can't help it. You should get a new DP. I have seen it often where a DP tries to override a newbie director and it is a bummer. The time to avoid these kinds of situations are during crew interviews. I'll never forget the first feature I shot, I interviewed a seasoned DP who was older and more experienced than me and chock full of himself. I didn't like the ideas he had, and I didn't like his attitude, but he came highly recommended. It suddenly dawned on me that if spending 10 minutes with this guy was this painful, imagine spending three weeks with him?
Looking back on it, I was actually fortunate that this DP showed his colors right off the bat. Better to realize that you are incompatible with someone in the first ten minutes than two days before the start of principal photography.
It's important to find someone who will carry out YOUR vision. I ended up hiring a DP that I made two features with so far. This was our modus operandi: We would go over shots in pre-pro and if he thought a shot suggestion I had could be done better, he would share it with me. I would take it into consideration and "yay" it or "nay" it. If I "nayed" it, that was the end of the discussion. But I also "yayed" a lot of suggestions he had.
When we were actually on-set and shooting, it was the same rule. If he had any suggestions to make, he could do so, but in a discreet manner that did not make me look like an chump in front of the crew and actors. Again, many of the suggestions he made were solid and we went with that. Bottom line is that this DP understood that film is a collaboration, but that at the end of the day it was my vision we were filming...not his.
And just to back-up the other responders to this post, yes, everyone mixes takes, and regarding flubs there is rarely the need to start a scene from the beginning again if you are working with good actors who can keep the energy going and just back up a few lines to pick it up again.
This is what I thought, and I don't know where he gets his info from. I am also co-directing someone else's project but decided to let him have all the final yays or nays, since it was his to begin with, and he's the writer, producer as well. I understand that, and do not want to take over the project.
Could it be that the DP read your threads about continuity and safety shots?
With a second camera shooting a total of the scene that could be covered.
But you anwsered the question already.
You have budget for 1 camera.
If your style is long shots like 'Unbreakable' or 'Russian Ark': you'll need to start at the begin of a scene on every take.
Sometimes you can pick it up on a moment before there was a mistake.
It al depends on the situation.
Anyway, rehearsing is always good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rayw
................
Also, doesn't it depend upon how anal... "precise" the director/DP wants to be?
- Could be a David Fincher type and want thirty takes of every shot and let the editor piece together something.
- Could be an Eli Roth type and get two/three takes and move on.
Linear Mode
