Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?

Paul R Johnson · October 23rd, 2019, 01:19 AM

Wrong. You shoot as stable as you can, and introduce shake for dramatic effect if it's needed, and it won't be. Never accept technical errors and disguise them and justify them by calling it art or realism. Steady is rarely the worst choice

Brian Drysdale · October 23rd, 2019, 01:45 AM

You seem to be obsessed by gimbal mounts, like the Steadicam these will "lock" more onto the horizon rather than the the object your following.

The car scenes in features you show could be using different methods for filming in a car. The second looks like it was shot in a studio, while the first could either have a car mount on the doors (most likely) or the car mounted on a low loader.

On your budget, you want to be looking at how they shot car scenes in the 1970s, although you have the advantage of much lighter cameras. .However, since your technical knowledge seems to be generally poor, get someone who knows what they're doing for this.

Use the car's suspension to best effect and lower the tyre pressure a bit to reduce vibration. Low profile tyres won't help with the ride for filming,

The cameras today are so light that there's a range of options available, you can also hire them in if needed. Don't just rely on your local camera rental company, rent from a grip company

More equipment options,

https://www.cameragrip.com/camera-ca...-suction-pads/

Paul R Johnson · October 23rd, 2019, 02:17 AM

I've had quite a few items from stickypod.com over the years and have given safe and solid results.
https://stickypod.com/2013/03/30/sti...ebsite-update/

Ryan Elder · October 23rd, 2019, 06:55 AM

Oh okay thanks. I've seen those videos before, thanks. I was thinking of getting the camtree, but other filmmakers told me they felt it wasn't stable enough in their experience, and that the Selens was much better they said, if that's true as well... If cameras today are too light, what if I added weight to it?

Brian Drysdale · October 23rd, 2019, 07:05 AM

If your camera is hard mounted to the car, assuming you're not going cross country, you don't need a stabilising device. I've mounted a camera in a racing car without needing stabilising, if anything it was too stable, because you lost the sense of speed and the G forces.

The brand one you mentioned seems to be another suction cup device, there are other makes around, this type of design has been around since the 1970s. It should do the job for what you need, just don't start adding gimbals etc to it.

Ryan Elder · October 27th, 2019, 12:09 PM

Okay thanks, I can do that. In the video though, he says make sure you have camera stabilization on the lens or the body. But if am using a lens without stabilization, and a camera without stabilization in the body, should I not use a gimbal then?

The idea of a gopro was also mentioned before, I'm guessing so you don't have to mount a more expensive camera to your car while driving.

But whenever I see gopro footage mixed in, in a low budget feature, I can usually tell when it's a gopro, cause the camera footage looks so different that it sticks out like a sore thumb. Is it possible to make the gopro footage look exactly like the other camera footage?

Paul R Johnson · October 27th, 2019, 12:52 PM

Ryan, you're getting confused again. Stabilisation in a lens means that minute up down, or left right movements of the camera or the subject within the frame are tracked and mechanically adjusted so that while the lens might be pointing in one direction, the internal components can move the axis a small amount to remove (usually) handheld 'wobbles'. if you are using a mid to long focal length lens, keeping the subject in the same place handheld is hard enough, sitting in a vehicle travelling along a bumpy road, it's far, far worse.

a gimbal mount - on a small servo hand held unit can keep the camera heading and the tilt, when you move - but it does NOT take out vertical or horizontal bumps and thumps. If a camera physically moves up and down, a gimbal mount will actually let you do this happily. It will not tilt, or pan left or right, but it certainly cannot stop a bump moving the lens suddenly up two inches. In a full size Steadicam things work differently because of the arm. It has inertia and momentum. Your school science reminds you that it resists movement, which is why the operator can go up and over obstacles and the camera lens height tries to remain the same. A handheld gimbal mount can be held at arms length, horizontally and then your arm provides the momentum /inertia to try to remain at the same height. Remember the topic when we spoke about slow pans at maximum zoom and the stabilisers works against you? it is looking for movement and a very slow movement in frame gets mistaken for 'shake'.

You need to decide if your circumstance benefits from lens stabilisation or will suffer?

On the subject of car mounts, wide angles are normally the most appropriate, so Gopro works, but watch for the fish-eye effect creeping in. These mounts are usually perfectly reliable with DSLR size cameras, and handicaps. I used one happily with a Sony PD150 camera for years, and that's pretty big. The car type is important. Soft suspension and good dampers is a decent result - a car that has a dreadful ride and worn shocks won't be any good.

Ryan Elder · October 27th, 2019, 12:56 PM

Okay thanks. But the guy in the video said you need to have either lens or body stabilization, so if she said you need then, is it true?

As for wide focal lengths, I want a single shot of the driver, pointing in through the front of the windshield, like this shot in in The French Connection. It's the shot that's in the thumbnail shot for the video.

I'm guessing that was taken with a 50mm or 85mm lens around? Would that be too wobbly, on the Selens car mount?

Brian Drysdale · October 27th, 2019, 01:33 PM

They would've have hard mounted the camera onto the car body on "French Connection". No, you don't need lens or camera stabilization for car shots if you've got good car mounts. However, the rolling shutter on some CMOS sensors may not take kindly to all this if you've got excessive vibration on the roads and fast moving backgrounds.

https://cinephiliabeyond.org/william...ic-excitement/

You'll have to test the Selens car mount to see how well it handles various focal lengths, that's part of the pre-production on a film.

Paul R Johnson · October 27th, 2019, 02:36 PM

I went back in youtube to 11 years ago with SD camcorders, no DSLRs no stabilisation and found quite a few that will show you that clever technology isn't remotely essential. The guy in the video has an opinion. As a camera operator, you need to accept it or not, based on your own judgement. I did a very successful camera shoot with a big ENG sized camera, on a bonnet (hood?) mount, that was so heavy we strapped it down, and the vehicle suspension was the only real isolation. I'll try to dig up a photo.

Rainer Listing · October 27th, 2019, 03:53 PM

Had a chance to talk to and watch some footage from a DOP working on a (for Australia) big budget feature with lots of driving. They mainly used a process rig (car on trailer with lots of camera mounts all over) but for night scenes used simtrav (black outside with moving LED lights, someone rocking the back bumper). What I thought was also interesting, for a few forward shots they mounted a drone to the bonnet (note it was a $150,000 drone with an FS5, still, nice image, and a Mavic Pro or similar should also work).

John Nantz · October 27th, 2019, 04:25 PM

Paul - that was a good vid. Did the pace car had any four-wheel drifts? Bet everybody was having fun.

Ryan - For me, at least, one thing that kinda turns me off when watching a movie is to see something that is fake. (Exception: for example, when watching Antiques Road Show and they find a counterfeit.)

Back in post #793 there were a car clip example of people talking. In the clip example, I think the second one, there was one spot where the driver was looking at the passenger for ~4 seconds. This is a very long time while driving and he's lucky he didn't have an accident. When looking sideways it is natural to turn the steering wheel toward the direction one is looking.

The "devil is in the details". An option might be to have the driver stop for a traffic light or something. In fact, there could be a lot of conversation at that point. Locally there is a major intersection can provide a couple minutes!!!! As a director one can pick an intersection that fits the need in the script.

Another challenge: how to do a stop and go without being a distraction in itself?

Ryan Elder · October 27th, 2019, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale

They would've have hard mounted the camera onto the car body on "French Connection". No, you don't need lens or camera stabilization for car shots if you've got good car mounts. However, the rolling shutter on some CMOS sensors may not take kindly to all this if you've got excessive vibration on the roads and fast moving backgrounds.

https://cinephiliabeyond.org/william...ic-excitement/

You'll have to test the Selens car mount to see how well it handles various focal lengths, that's part of the pre-production on a film.

Oh okay, it's just I will have to purchase the Selens first, before I am able to test it, unless some buyers allow tests first of course, and give you the option of returning it, if you don't like the tests. And I will be most likely shooting with a camera that has a sensor around CMOS size... If the background is moving fast, will the audience notice, as long as they are looking at the actor, and not the fast moving background?

Brian Drysdale · October 27th, 2019, 06:05 PM

CMOS is a sensor type, not a size. Regarding rolling shutter artifacts, it depends on how much vibration etc is occurring and how prone your camera is to them. They can cover the whole image. it may not be an issue, but worth testing before shooting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_shutter

Test equipment like car mounts before using them on a feature film. Reshoots cost more in the end.

Ryan Elder · October 27th, 2019, 06:30 PM

Oh okay, I was told that full frame sensors are worse for rolling shutter, if that's true, and that CMOS was better for it, unless it's still bad?

October 23rd, 2019, 01:19 AM	#91
Paul R Johnson Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lowestoft - UK Posts: 4,044	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Wrong. You shoot as stable as you can, and introduce shake for dramatic effect if it's needed, and it won't be. Never accept technical errors and disguise them and justify them by calling it art or realism. Steady is rarely the worst choice

October 23rd, 2019, 01:45 AM	#92
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? You seem to be obsessed by gimbal mounts, like the Steadicam these will "lock" more onto the horizon rather than the the object your following. The car scenes in features you show could be using different methods for filming in a car. The second looks like it was shot in a studio, while the first could either have a car mount on the doors (most likely) or the car mounted on a low loader. On your budget, you want to be looking at how they shot car scenes in the 1970s, although you have the advantage of much lighter cameras. .However, since your technical knowledge seems to be generally poor, get someone who knows what they're doing for this. Use the car's suspension to best effect and lower the tyre pressure a bit to reduce vibration. Low profile tyres won't help with the ride for filming, The cameras today are so light that there's a range of options available, you can also hire them in if needed. Don't just rely on your local camera rental company, rent from a grip company The Power is in the Mount! DSLR Suction Cup Camera Car Mount Camtree Power Gripper\|View test shots - YouTube $135 PRO Camera Car Mount! - YouTube More equipment options, https://www.cameragrip.com/camera-ca...-suction-pads/

October 23rd, 2019, 02:17 AM	#93
Paul R Johnson Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lowestoft - UK Posts: 4,044	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? I've had quite a few items from stickypod.com over the years and have given safe and solid results. https://stickypod.com/2013/03/30/sti...ebsite-update/

October 23rd, 2019, 06:55 AM	#94
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Oh okay thanks. I've seen those videos before, thanks. I was thinking of getting the camtree, but other filmmakers told me they felt it wasn't stable enough in their experience, and that the Selens was much better they said, if that's true as well... If cameras today are too light, what if I added weight to it?

October 23rd, 2019, 07:05 AM	#95
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? If your camera is hard mounted to the car, assuming you're not going cross country, you don't need a stabilising device. I've mounted a camera in a racing car without needing stabilising, if anything it was too stable, because you lost the sense of speed and the G forces. The brand one you mentioned seems to be another suction cup device, there are other makes around, this type of design has been around since the 1970s. It should do the job for what you need, just don't start adding gimbals etc to it. Selens SK-1 Professional Car Suction Cup Mount Review - YouTube

October 27th, 2019, 12:09 PM	#96
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Okay thanks, I can do that. In the video though, he says make sure you have camera stabilization on the lens or the body. But if am using a lens without stabilization, and a camera without stabilization in the body, should I not use a gimbal then? The idea of a gopro was also mentioned before, I'm guessing so you don't have to mount a more expensive camera to your car while driving. But whenever I see gopro footage mixed in, in a low budget feature, I can usually tell when it's a gopro, cause the camera footage looks so different that it sticks out like a sore thumb. Is it possible to make the gopro footage look exactly like the other camera footage?

October 27th, 2019, 12:52 PM	#97
Paul R Johnson Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lowestoft - UK Posts: 4,044	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Ryan, you're getting confused again. Stabilisation in a lens means that minute up down, or left right movements of the camera or the subject within the frame are tracked and mechanically adjusted so that while the lens might be pointing in one direction, the internal components can move the axis a small amount to remove (usually) handheld 'wobbles'. if you are using a mid to long focal length lens, keeping the subject in the same place handheld is hard enough, sitting in a vehicle travelling along a bumpy road, it's far, far worse. a gimbal mount - on a small servo hand held unit can keep the camera heading and the tilt, when you move - but it does NOT take out vertical or horizontal bumps and thumps. If a camera physically moves up and down, a gimbal mount will actually let you do this happily. It will not tilt, or pan left or right, but it certainly cannot stop a bump moving the lens suddenly up two inches. In a full size Steadicam things work differently because of the arm. It has inertia and momentum. Your school science reminds you that it resists movement, which is why the operator can go up and over obstacles and the camera lens height tries to remain the same. A handheld gimbal mount can be held at arms length, horizontally and then your arm provides the momentum /inertia to try to remain at the same height. Remember the topic when we spoke about slow pans at maximum zoom and the stabilisers works against you? it is looking for movement and a very slow movement in frame gets mistaken for 'shake'. You need to decide if your circumstance benefits from lens stabilisation or will suffer? On the subject of car mounts, wide angles are normally the most appropriate, so Gopro works, but watch for the fish-eye effect creeping in. These mounts are usually perfectly reliable with DSLR size cameras, and handicaps. I used one happily with a Sony PD150 camera for years, and that's pretty big. The car type is important. Soft suspension and good dampers is a decent result - a car that has a dreadful ride and worn shocks won't be any good.

October 27th, 2019, 12:56 PM	#98
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Okay thanks. But the guy in the video said you need to have either lens or body stabilization, so if she said you need then, is it true? As for wide focal lengths, I want a single shot of the driver, pointing in through the front of the windshield, like this shot in in The French Connection. It's the shot that's in the thumbnail shot for the video. The French Connection (4/5) Movie CLIP - Chasing the Train (1971) HD - YouTube I'm guessing that was taken with a 50mm or 85mm lens around? Would that be too wobbly, on the Selens car mount?

October 27th, 2019, 01:33 PM	#99
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? They would've have hard mounted the camera onto the car body on "French Connection". No, you don't need lens or camera stabilization for car shots if you've got good car mounts. However, the rolling shutter on some CMOS sensors may not take kindly to all this if you've got excessive vibration on the roads and fast moving backgrounds. https://cinephiliabeyond.org/william...ic-excitement/ You'll have to test the Selens car mount to see how well it handles various focal lengths, that's part of the pre-production on a film.

October 27th, 2019, 02:36 PM	#100
Paul R Johnson Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lowestoft - UK Posts: 4,044	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? I went back in youtube to 11 years ago with SD camcorders, no DSLRs no stabilisation and found quite a few that will show you that clever technology isn't remotely essential. The guy in the video has an opinion. As a camera operator, you need to accept it or not, based on your own judgement. I did a very successful camera shoot with a big ENG sized camera, on a bonnet (hood?) mount, that was so heavy we strapped it down, and the vehicle suspension was the only real isolation. I'll try to dig up a photo. YouTube (Short URL)

October 27th, 2019, 03:53 PM	#101
Rainer Listing Major Player Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Nowra, Australia Posts: 440	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Had a chance to talk to and watch some footage from a DOP working on a (for Australia) big budget feature with lots of driving. They mainly used a process rig (car on trailer with lots of camera mounts all over) but for night scenes used simtrav (black outside with moving LED lights, someone rocking the back bumper). What I thought was also interesting, for a few forward shots they mounted a drone to the bonnet (note it was a $150,000 drone with an FS5, still, nice image, and a Mavic Pro or similar should also work).

October 27th, 2019, 04:25 PM	#102
John Nantz Trustee Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Seattle WA Posts: 1,254	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Paul - that was a good vid. Did the pace car had any four-wheel drifts? Bet everybody was having fun. Ryan - For me, at least, one thing that kinda turns me off when watching a movie is to see something that is fake. (Exception: for example, when watching Antiques Road Show and they find a counterfeit.) Back in post #793 there were a car clip example of people talking. In the clip example, I think the second one, there was one spot where the driver was looking at the passenger for ~4 seconds. This is a very long time while driving and he's lucky he didn't have an accident. When looking sideways it is natural to turn the steering wheel toward the direction one is looking. The "devil is in the details". An option might be to have the driver stop for a traffic light or something. In fact, there could be a lot of conversation at that point. Locally there is a major intersection can provide a couple minutes!!!! As a director one can pick an intersection that fits the need in the script. Another challenge: how to do a stop and go without being a distraction in itself?

October 27th, 2019, 06:05 PM	#104
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? CMOS is a sensor type, not a size. Regarding rolling shutter artifacts, it depends on how much vibration etc is occurring and how prone your camera is to them. They can cover the whole image. it may not be an issue, but worth testing before shooting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_shutter Test equipment like car mounts before using them on a feature film. Reshoots cost more in the end.

October 27th, 2019, 06:30 PM	#105
Ryan Elder also known as Ryan Wray Join Date: Nov 2017 Location: Saskatoon, Canada Posts: 2,888	Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography? Oh okay, I was told that full frame sensors are worse for rolling shutter, if that's true, and that CMOS was better for it, unless it's still bad?