You're maybe going to have to reconsider lavs anyway - because in most Martial Arts, don't they grab the lapels? You'd be better off with a headset mic for this kind of thing?

Yes there is too much action going for lavs it seems. Well I don't have headsets but if I use those, I thought they would look kind of strange on them though, as you never see people wear headsets during promotional videos, do you? Or at least I haven't.

Or maybe the audience will understand it?

But the lav still has problems with rustling though. Plus, the lav actually picks up the background furnace noise, worse than the mic on the stand, since the mic on the stand is directional, in comparison of course.
Based on a quick Youtube search I see some lessons with a lav and I hear the rustling you’re talking about. I would use a mic stand preferably with a boom (the boom isn’t essential but could be helpful). This will eliminate any hand noise if you’re using on camera mic. Turning off the air heating system is a must even if it’s only for 15 minutes intervals. The standard for audio for a video like this is substantial lower than an ad, interview or movie. All you care about is whether you can understand what he is saying. As far as broll and close ups with lots of cuts might not be necessary. This isn’t a movie don’t make it more complicated than it needs to be.

Lav example
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hWB0Xehv23A

on camera example
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZM_8-c1EqOY&t=482s

Okay thanks. He doesn't know how to switch off the furnace, and we couldn't figure it out. He just really wanted to roll cause of time for the first shoot.

I used a mic stand, pointed in his direction out of frame. But I couldn't boom cause I had to pan and tilt the camera in parts where they would go out of frame if I did not. I could move the camera further back so they will be in frame for the whole fight, and then boom while the camera is rolling, but then they are really far when trying to demonstrate the moves. So I figured it was best to just move the camera with them so they could be closer, and have the mic on a stand, if that was the better choice so far.

Even if I don't need storyboards, I thought they would still help with the difference in framing distances. I was told before, that my shots look like they at the same distance too much and that I need to make the change in distance, more obvious. So I storyboarded so I could see the distance differences, from shot to shot if that makes sense.

In those instruction videos you sent, when he talks about the moves, while demonstrating, are they using a boom or lavs? It sounds like a lav mic, but the rustling is not near as bad as I thought it would be. Are they doing something different?

I mean a mic stand with a boom that doesn’t need to be held like this Superscope LLC - On-Stage SB9600 Tripod Studio Boom Microphone Stand (http://www.superscopetechnologies.com/p-139-on-stage-sb9600-tripod-studio-boom-microphone-stand.aspx)
They sell them in different sizes depending on height you need. It’s something that you should bring with you for solo gigs.

Okay thanks, I've seen those before on other projects I have worked on. Not sure if I can get one in time for this one but I will consider. However, they seem to work on subjects that are still but if he is moving around while talking constantly, won't he go outside of the mics pick up pattern constantly, which would defeat the purpose?

I don't understand why you're having problems with the framing. All you have to do with this type of production is remember the frame size and make sure they're not all the same size, change the lens if you need to and move to a different camera position.

Oh I just thought a visual reference of the frame size would be easier.

For example one of the moves for the next shoot is how to disarm a pistol from someone. I thought I would do this from two angles. One of a side point of view, and an overhead one pointing down. But I don't want the framing distance to be too much the same, so I thought I would draw out the distance differences in both shots as a visual reference to go by, if that makes sense. But if I'm being overcautious then I can ditch the storyboards.

Like I said given the scenario it’s not essential, the boom is more useful for stationary subjects like interviews. Some low end jobs you will not use in your reel all that matters is that the client is satisfied. Let him listen and watch the first installment figure out the furnace for the next one.

As far as framing I would shoot with one angle and would only change the framing if you took a break halfway through to avoid a jump cut. You’re over thinking this.

Oh okay, sure, I can use it for interviews in the future. When it comes to interviews where the subject is sitting or standing still, so far I have been using a stand with a boom on it that goes overhead. It's not the kind where it's a long boom like that one, but a shorter one.

But I guess a long boom overhead, won't work here though, if the subject is moving around constantly going outside of the pick up pattern.

Here's a test edit of the first couple of minutes, so far:

Training video draft widescreen - YouTube

The sound sounds better in the first shot where he is in the mic's pick up pattern cause he is still but then after that when is fighting, he goes outside the pattern, and the mic had to be pulled further back for framing for the fight. The furnace is off and on in between cuts.

The audio is fine although he probably could have worn a lav and just adjust the mix in post to the room mic when needed. Those close ups are not necessary and are too quick. Pay attention to the background they should have signage for their studio behind them. They should also be wearing nice white uniforms because it doesn’t look professional.

This an example of how you should think about the overall look and feel. Research what you think are best way to present them and show them examples. That’s what a director does. You seem to be overly concerned with storyboards and the technicals.

Oh well the thing about the close ups is is that I wanted to cut in between the different takes from the master shot, cause some takes had some things in that were better than others. There are also points where he paused and had to think of how to explain things. So I didn't want to 'jump cut' ahead. So I put in the quick shots to avoid jump cutting. Isn't that what those other angles are for, to avoid jump cutting if I want to cut ahead?

The problem with adjusting to the room mic if needed, is that the lav and the hypercardioid condenser mic sound too different, so I have to pick one or the other for consistency, don't I? I left how they dress up to them and thought it was there show, and I'm just their to shoot it, but perhaps I can suggest it...

I also asked them about the background but they said it's fine and they'll worry about it.

While we’re at any time he mentions feet or anything below the waist I’d want to see that, i.e a wider shot.

Agree with signage and uniforms.

Its just about them looking more professional to whoever theyre trying to attract with these videos. Think about it...if youre looking to take lessons, are you going to go with a place where the guys look like martial arts instructors or the one where it looks like two frat guys?

Image is perception or something. Thats a huge part of why we light and art direct etc. Even though the average person doesnt consciously notice this stuff, something in the back of their mind tells them “this is more professional/amateurish and I believe/dont believe in this message/product service”.

Oh okay thanks. I can recommend the uniforms then. Thanks.

But if I frame the feet in the shot in the master, then they are far away then. But for next master shots, should I frame the entire body in them, from head to toe?

I agree with Josh about the feet. When I was watching it, I was like why is he cutting off their feet. When is he going to pull back?

You can see why eng camcorders with built in servo zoom lens are better for non scripted live events. You can zoom while you’re filming, avoiding jump cuts. There are only two angles of view needed: medium at the beginning and a wide for the action. Close ups are unnecessary.

I was afraid to show the whole body, cause I thought that if I backed up more, than they would be too far away, when demonstrating the moves. Should I show the whole body, even if they are far away for the whole master then? Cause they would have to be twice as far away as they are now then, with the mic even further away out of frame too then, which lowers the sound quality then.

lav the main guy mix it in post with a room mic

use a zoom lens that has a wide. The problem with primes indoors there are physically restrictions.

instead of arguing with us look at the framing of the youtube videos

But the thing is, is that I cannot mix mics, in post, cause they sound too different and you can hear that it's a different mic. I have to pick one and stick to it for consistency don't I?

The lens I used was a zoom lens, but if I zoom back it looks kind of sloppy since the lenses are not made for zooming during video, unless I should zoom anyway, you are saying? But even if he moves to footwork, sometimes it's not planned so should I go wide and show feet anyway for the entire master then?

Sorry if it came off as arguing, I don't mean it sound that way, I was just mentioning some drawbacks that were concerns. Like mixing mics seems to be a problem if you can hear the different, or them being too far away if their feet or shown.

Just asking about possible drawbacks, that's all.

Also in this video before, the feet are not showing, when they are standing up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=285&v=ZM_8-c1EqOY&feature=emb_logo

Please look up "headroom" and the "rule of thirds." You're cutting off the top of the instructor's head way too much in the two-shot.

I wanted to see the lower body and feet when he talked about the opening stance.

There is no more boring way to present two people interacting than with the camera perpendicular to the line of action between them so you see both figures in profile on opposite sides of the screen. The empty space in the middle just sucks all the interest out of the shot. Your master shot should be from an over the shoulder angle focusing mostly on the instructor, but with the other guy partially visible in the foreground. In other words the camera should be about 45° to the right of where it is in this shot.

The closeups are way, way too short and fast.

Full-body compositions are an absolutely necessary part of covering dance, martial arts and many other athletic forms. Don't be afraid of them, but mind the effect of too much empty space in the frame. Cropping to a widescreen format makes it more difficult to fill the frame with human actors.

The sound is not as godawful as I expected but a wireless lav on the instructor would have been much clearer and more consistent. Since you could then turn the gain down some the HVAC noise would have been less distracting. For videos like this I don't think it's imperative to hide the microphones - we know it's an instructional piece and the participants are casually dressed and not playing a role. The dull composition, not decorating the set, or wearing uniforms of some kind, are far more distracting visual elements than a little lav clipped to the shirt collar would be.

All in all, and I don't mean to be cruel here, this would be a decent product for the second assignment I used to give my high school students in the multimedia production class I taught for many years. ("Produce a 'how to' video that teaches the viewer how to perform some skill or process.") It would have earned about a "B" grade, but that's based on the assumption that the students had NO prior knowledge or experience prior to taking my class. For somebody with a film school degree, it's honestly pretty lame.

Don't even worry about "directing" this or any other piece until you learn how to "shoot" it first.

I hope you'll take this in the constructive tone that is intended.

- Greg

Why are you shooting 2.39? It just doesn't work. this is like dancing, you need to show the whole body, so the audience can see all of the move. The kit needs changing, currently they look like a couple of characters from "Animal House"

A number of sound recordists use a mix of lav mic and a cardioid, secret is in the mix. . .

Oh okay thanks. I tried doing an over the shoulder shot, of the other person though but I was in his way since he keeps moving back. I need to give him more space so therefore, isn't a master two shot better to give them more space?

Also, as far as dead space goes, don't I need that deadspace, to give them more room to move around in the shot?

I shot in 2.39:1 so they would be closer to the screen, while giving them a lot more room at the sides to move from side to side, without being further away. I also could go with the original 16:9 framing in the video instead of 2;39:1, if this is better:

Training video draft - YouTube

But as far as doing an OTS shot of the other guy goes, I kept being in the way too much since it's not blocked out and choreographed near as much. Also, you cannot see in the instructor do the full moves and handplacements if you do an OTS shot though.

Greg sounds harsh but he is spot on with every point of his criticism.

I left off mentioning the angle but that’s also true.

I also find that door way behind them distracting. Couldn’t you face them against a plain wall?

Try to look on the bright side, you got another opportunity to fix all that was mentioned.

Sure, no problem with criticism.

The thing about the over the shoulder though, is that you cannot see the full moves, cause the other guy would be blocking some of it though, from that angle.

As for the other shots, being too quick, if I shouldn't put those shots in then, then what should I do to avoid having to jump cut? It was said before to get B roll to cut to, so shouldn't I do that to avoid jump cuts as well?

I don't mean to come off as stubborn and not take suggestions, it's just some of the suggestions mentioned have some drawbacks in them, and feel those needed to be addressed before taking them, that's all.

If they move, pan the camera, 2.39 is nonsense for this, since people will be viewing on 16:9 screens.

If people are moving away, tell them not to, give them an area to work in, if they move out get them to do it again. As the director, short, snappy, but friendly instructions usually work.

Oh okay, well I have the original 16:9, and even though they are further away in it, is it better, or no?

Training video draft - YouTube

As for people moving away, and telling them not to, I did give them those kinds of instructions, but they said they have trouble doing that, cause that is not what Krav Maga is about. So what do I do, if that is the response I get?

It's poorly framed, that gray thing in the background is distracting,. go wider so we can see their stance. Think Fred Astaire movies in the 1930's the person interested in this wants to see the stance and the moves.

Oh okay thanks, I'll show the whole body from head to toe, even if that means they are twice as far away as long as that's okay. I am just afraid the audience might not see the moves as well then.

Youll have to figure out what parts call for closer shots and go back and get those after the wide. So theyll have to repeat the action. Or use multiple cams. There really arent other options.

Okay thanks. However, when I inserted cutaways before I was told not to use them. So should I let a master play out in it's entirety then?

Told by who? Your client or folks here?

What I mean is you use the wide when they talk about footwork or anything below the waist, and tighter shots when talking about upper body, arms, head, etc. Think of where your attention would be if you were in the class and use the camera/edit to draw it there at each moment of the video.

Youre worried about jump cuts...valid, but thats where multiple cams would help.

There are so many things wrong here.
I agree with brian - 16:9, nothing else. Upper body is useless because the legs and feet are required to show complete stance and balance.The hand of the person striking the blow needs to show where it contacts the person. The instructors landing point is hidden.

What concerns me most is that they look like two amateurs pretebding to be experts. Would I take instruction from somebody who dresses and speaks like this? No. In the first clip the guy wears the correct gear. He shows the usual respect and has authority. These two come over as totally unexpert from how they talk, how they stand and how they interact. It's not a training video, more a sparring. It doesn't teach anyone anything. Forget the camera and forget the sound. These two guys are terrible teachers.

The best you can do is go wider so we see both in the frame properly, shot from an angle that shows what they are doing. Audio needs work. They don't have a thick MA wrap around on, and they don't have a little scratchy beard to rub on it, so if both speak, you need two radio packs. Your boom mic could give usable room sound if it's aimed properly, but the hard surfaces make the room lively. From what I see, you and the storyboards are way off the type of shoot these two want to do. As for the furnace - you need to get control and turn it off. I'd also urge them strongly to consider their appearance and the way they speak. Martial arts needs authority of speech, not conversation style. Please shoot full body. Close ups can be useful, but the majority of the time we need the full person.

As for the cutaways you're back to "I was told..." YOU are supposed to be the video expert and they are the martial arts experts, you've gone subservient again. I understand though that they find closeups wrong, and I agree. Unless the close up shows something vital in detail, a full body shot works better.

Oh okay thanks. Well I don't have to use the cutaway shots if they are not good then. However, there are times in the master shots, where he has to pause and then we retake it.

So in order to skip over those, should I just do a fade then, to avoid a jump cut?

The thing about only showing the upper half if it's upper half fighting, that was the original plan, upper fighting only for this shoot, and footwork later, but he through in the foot move unexpectedly. So in that case, should I cut around the foot move and take it out?

If they go off script, get them to do it again.

Well there is more than one take, but each take has it's good and bad parts. So if I wanted to use sections of different takes, but not jump cutting, should I fade it then?

There are a lot of really good comments here and I’d like to make one about the heater noise. The temperature forecast ranges vary from well below freezing to (relative to our area) really cold, like -15ºC on Friday to -33ºC next week so IF turning off the heater is a no-go, here is a thought.

Assume the heater vents are floor or wall registers. If there are only a couple consider this to try and muffle the high-frequency noise. Get a blanket, one of those soft kinda fluffy ones, then thumbtack and/or tape it to the wall and let it hang over a couple chairs, enough so the bottom barely touches the floor so that the warm air can still blow into the room but not without first being being dampened by the blanket.

Since high frequencies from tweeters are more directional than woofers, the thought is that by causing a directional change in the air flow, like having it go into a sound chamber, it will cause a dampening in the high frequencies, hopefully enough to make the effort worthwhile.

Just grasping at straws here. What do you think, too much work for little gain or worth trying?

Maybe all it needs is a star filter. ;-)

and SCENE!

(thread fades to black)

One more comment and then I'll stay quiet.

The entire video seems to have been shot from a tripod with the camera at eye level. That's a good instinct for the majority of shots, but it's boring if the point of view never changes. You need to go high, low and everything in between. Brace the camera against the floor or use a stepladder for high shots if you don't have "proper" support equipment for this. Get under, over, around and inside your character's actions, choosing the angle (up and down as well as left and right) that shows each move most clearly and dynamically. Yes, you'll have to repeat parts of the action and possibly even the narration at times, and the talent will need to be able to do this. If they can't, I'd seriously question their competence as practitioners and instructors of the form. Go a little crazy. Strap a GoPro on the instructor's forehead and show things from his point of view. Put the camera on the floor pointing straight up as they spar around it. Some (many) shots may not work, but you might discover something unique or interesting in the process. Don't be bound by the script or storyboard once you're in the middle of the action. Go close, go wide and go dramatic when you have the opportunity. Get the coverage you need, but trust yourself enough to be a little spontaneous and creative as well. Not everything can or should be planned completely in advance.

A gimbal may help get some of these shots, but even old fashioned hand holding has its place here. A little camera shake looks perfectly natural when the camera moves organically with the action, as long as you don't hold the shots too long. Staying at the wide end of the focal length scale and getting close to the subjects helps too.

If I could make just one suggestion about equipment I'd suggest you try to buy, rent or steal (just kidding) a second camera that is a decent match for the one you already have. Lock it down on the master shot while you concentrate on the closeups and interesting angles. A cheap prime lens will do, and you can get by with even a spindly stills tripod if you don't plan to disturb the camera or attempt any pans, tilts or zooms while it's locked down.

The narrative might flow better if you record the instructor separately as a voiceover and just record natural movement and background sounds during the action. This would go a long way toward solving all the audio challenges of that subject and location.

- Greg

A gimbal may help get some of these shots, but even old fashioned hand holding has its place here. A little camera shake looks perfectly natural when the camera moves organically with the action, as long as you don't hold the shots too long. Staying at the wide end of the focal length scale and getting close to the subjects helps too.
+1 ... nothing wrong with hand-held B-roll with these action shots if one has any sort of ability to do hand-held shots. With everything moving in the scene it should be easy.

If I could make just one suggestion about equipment I'd suggest you try to buy, rent or steal (just kidding) a second camera that is a decent match for the one you already have. Lock it down on the master shot while you concentrate on the closeups and interesting angles.
Yes!
This gig is meant for B-roll.

Edit: #386, Pete - that was so Ba.a.a.ad !

There are a lot of really good comments here and I’d like to make one about the heater noise. The temperature forecast ranges vary from well below freezing to (relative to our area) really cold, like -15ºC on Friday to -33ºC next week so IF turning off the heater is a no-go, here is a thought.

Assume the heater vents are floor or wall registers. If there are only a couple consider this to try and muffle the high-frequency noise. Get a blanket, one of those soft kinda fluffy ones, then thumbtack and/or tape it to the wall and let it hang over a couple chairs, enough so the bottom barely touches the floor so that the warm air can still blow into the room but not without first being being dampened by the blanket.

Since high frequencies from tweeters are more directional than woofers, the thought is that by causing a directional change in the air flow, like having it go into a sound chamber, it will cause a dampening in the high frequencies, hopefully enough to make the effort worthwhile.

Just grasping at straws here. What do you think, too much work for little gain or worth trying?

Oh it's not that because of the weather that we were unable to turn it off, we just couldn't find a switch anymore for it. Perhaps it's in the upper floor of the building, which is locked and we don't have access to.

One more comment and then I'll stay quiet.

The entire video seems to have been shot from a tripod with the camera at eye level. That's a good instinct for the majority of shots, but it's boring if the point of view never changes. You need to go high, low and everything in between. Brace the camera against the floor or use a stepladder for high shots if you don't have "proper" support equipment for this. Get under, over, around and inside your character's actions, choosing the angle (up and down as well as left and right) that shows each move most clearly and dynamically. Yes, you'll have to repeat parts of the action and possibly even the narration at times, and the talent will need to be able to do this. If they can't, I'd seriously question their competence as practitioners and instructors of the form. Go a little crazy. Strap a GoPro on the instructor's forehead and show things from his point of view. Put the camera on the floor pointing straight up as they spar around it. Some (many) shots may not work, but you might discover something unique or interesting in the process. Don't be bound by the script or storyboard once you're in the middle of the action. Go close, go wide and go dramatic when you have the opportunity. Get the coverage you need, but trust yourself enough to be a little spontaneous and creative as well. Not everything can or should be planned completely in advance.

A gimbal may help get some of these shots, but even old fashioned hand holding has its place here. A little camera shake looks perfectly natural when the camera moves organically with the action, as long as you don't hold the shots too long. Staying at the wide end of the focal length scale and getting close to the subjects helps too.

If I could make just one suggestion about equipment I'd suggest you try to buy, rent or steal (just kidding) a second camera that is a decent match for the one you already have. Lock it down on the master shot while you concentrate on the closeups and interesting angles. A cheap prime lens will do, and you can get by with even a spindly stills tripod if you don't plan to disturb the camera or attempt any pans, tilts or zooms while it's locked down.

The narrative might flow better if you record the instructor separately as a voiceover and just record natural movement and background sounds during the action. This would go a long way toward solving all the audio challenges of that subject and location.

- Greg

Okay thanks, it's strange how you say eye level cause the camera was actually at my lower chest area.. I'm 6'1'' so maybe I need to get the camera down below my stomach even then?

I also wanted to do shots from the floor for some other moves, but can do it for an angle for everything from now on just in case. I thought since a lot of it was upper movement, maybe you couldn't see some of the hand placements from the floor. If it were a movie fight I would do it, just wasn't sure about a promotional training video. But I can try!

I want him to narrate, he was just worried that his timing might be off cause he will have to pause when doing the move, and then wait for his narration to be over, but is not sure how long the narration would take. Unless I freeze frame it maybe in post, until it's over. Just not sure how to handle that one, cause he has a point about the timing.

As for how they are dressed, I know what you mean. I did look at them, and think you want to do the promotional video like that? Oh well, it's their show I guess.

But back to the shooting looking like it was at eye level. This is the second project someone said that when it was chest level. If I am 6'1'', and I want a normal type of master shot how low should I have the camera with my height do you think?

eye level means in relation to the SUBJECT. THEIR eye level.

Oh yes I see. Well the instructor in the red shirt is taller than me, and I'm 6'1' where is he about 6'4'' I would say'. So if he is taller than me, how low should I have the camera? i had the camera at my lower chest, which would be at his lower chest than as well if not a little lower. So should I go even lower then?

Eye level can be a somewhat loose term. The further you are from the subject, the less difference small height changes make visually, so "eye level" can be shorthand for something that appears to be a "neutral" height...not looking noticeably up or down at the subject. Approximately eye level might be a more precise way to put it...wider shots, this might well mean lens is at their chest height or thereabouts.

As for how low or high that's pretty subjective and depends on what looks good (backgrounds can change dramatically with camera height, more so than the way the subject looks in the shot. Sometimes we want to see more floor or more ceiling or change the perspective lines to be more pleasing) and, as was said above, what you need to show in a particular shot.

Eye line height is always that of the subject. The audience don't know or care about your height, if you want the camera at an eye line height, it;s not a your lower chest (or lower) unless that's where the eyes of the subject are.

If you want the subject to be be imposing you go lower than their eye line height. However, as Josh points out with wide shots it becomes less noticeable if you're within a certain range of their eye height The camera height can vary depending on what you're showing at the time, e.g. if it's a move with a foot in close up, you could be down at floor level. I thought you were planning to direct a feature film, this is basic stuff.

Have a look at other martial arts videos to see how they're doing it, steal a few ideas.

Oh okay thanks. The lens was zoomed into about 70-80mm, on an APS-C sensor, as I thought during the fighting this would look good while panning along with it. Do you think I should go wider then, so the eye level may be better then?

Since you can't see the moves and seeing the full figure was discussed earlier I would've thought there was only one way to go.

Oh yes, I can pull back and reveal all of their feet like it was mentioned to. But should I go lower than my chest if the eye level is too high?

Please go back and read the whole thread again.

Yes the thread said to go back and reveal their feet right? Are you saying get more B roll?

You're the director.