Would using a star filter for cinematography be too weird?

[Brian Drysdale]

I'm not sure what you were expecting when covering a training session, but you tend to break things down as you go when covering things like that because you can't repeat actions. Shots of the trainer and students filmed during other bouts cover any unwanted material (changing angle etc) or to compress the action.

You stop filming when furnaces, aircraft or unwanted noise come. Tie clip radio mics are commonly used by one man crews for this type of stuff. although you need to be wary of clothes rustle. If they want to do the actions themselves, creating rustles, tell them the problem with sound, this may involve you being dominant with them, by getting into film director mode. Usually explaining and coming up with an alternative that allows them to strut their stuff works.

A roll won't add suspense during a chase down a staircase, it may add vertigo or disorientation, but it won't give suspense, that will come from the siltation and the relationship with the pursuer(s). It's often the shot that reveals the relationship between pursuer (or where they might be) and pursued that adds to the suspense,

https://www.thefilmagazine.com/shot-...s-marnie-1964/

[Ryan Elder]

Oh well I couldn't use the lavalier mics because they wanted to explain the moves while in the process of doing them and it would have made the audio unusable, cause of rustling and all. I couldn't really stop during the furnace cause the furnace was on for too long and they were on time constraints and really wanted to get it done. I can ask them to try to break down the sections of the moves next time, but even with they do them, they do them differently each time. I think they do not want to choreograph it maybe, and want it to look as if they are spontaneously fighting and constant re-inventing since they are use to that. But I can ask. But since the fight is unpredictable on where the subjects are going to move to, I am thinking perhaps I should frame this video in 2.39:1, instead of 16:9, to give them extra room at the sides to move around, without having to be so further away in the frame. Unless 2.39:1 is a bad idea for such a video?

Oh okay, perhaps suspense was the wrong word and I meant disorientation maybe. It's hard to put it into words, but I know why I want the camera moves.

I've seen Marnie before quite a while ago. What about it?

It may give the wrong impression of me to reference other movies so I will try not to do it for examples from now on. However, it seems that there may be an impression on here, that I am trying to re-invent the wheel, if my choices are called strange. But my choices are nothing new really, and there is no attempting to re-invent the wheel, if that is the impression I have given on here.

[Brian Drysdale]

Read the Marnie article - suspense.

Documentaries have these issues, you have to be tactful and explain that something isn't going to work for whatever reason. This situation seems to about the instructor showing off his stuff, get him to not speak while actually doing the moves, just before and after the moves - you can change shot for these. It's your job to tell him if it's going to be unusable and work out solutions.

You should have more confidence in what you're trying to do, directors don't usually go onto forums going through numerous shots in detail, these should be discussed with your DP during planning meetings,. After all, they're the ones who will have to do it.

[Paul R Johnson]

Watching these videos - and especially the girl gushing about the Air makes me wonder if the art of unassisted camerawork is being replaced by a constant quest to make the camera movement more important than the content. The lift and tilt down Ryan mentioned way back is in this clip as a 'feature' - as if it's som thing worth remembering, and then using. It's just a camera move. It doesn't become a special or celebrated move. It could just as easily be a move left and pan right to reveal ..... The cleverness is more important than the edit. In this clip, for example, I noticed the edit was for continuous audio, NOT ease of viewing. Since when have continual jump cuts become NOT distracting. Every youtube video now just shoot from a single angle and jump cut, ignoring the horrible sensation you get and the absolute obviousness that an edit took place. No attempt to smooth it out, not even an intercut closeup or something to hide the jump.

We're getting obsessive about effects, and immune to good editing.

It also seems clear that these products are fashion. They seem to be used instead of good technique too.

However, I've now watched the clips and if I needed to buy one (which I don't) I know exactly which one I'd buy, not by listening to the rambling and chaotic rubbish they sprout, but by watching and observing and comparing the specs with what I see to analyse the products. So many of these kind of videos are hype and excitement with results that frankly could have been done freehand with just an appropriate camera make me smile. The girl never once demonstrated the features she talked about, and was just obsessed with gushing about this and that in a totally random way?

I also wonder about these people's background and history. Nothing wrong with being young, but when you perhaps went to college, got taught the trendy solutions, then went out into the world and used them - with no background technique, does that make you qualified to give advice - with such a big hole in your knowledge?

Blind leading the blind I feel. I do know so many off these videos are simply based on unsound, unproven opinion. She liked it. She liked it better than the DJI? Had she actually used the DJI or just read the feature list? She mentioned weight in two ways. One was that it was ONLY ...... then later she used the weight to suggest it could be heavy. I don't know, but maybe weight is not always bad?

[Ryan Elder]

Sure I can will try explain it. He said he had trouble trying to get the point of the moves across without verbally explaining them though. But I can show him what the problem is in a rough cut and maybe that will help. But this is why I do not like doing unscripted projects, is because none of the shots are planned out.

We came up with a plan and storyboards beforehand, but then when we arrived on location, the instructor changed his mind about everything and kept coming up with new thing as he went along. For example, we planned to voice over narrate it before, but now he wants to explain it as he does it. I just had trouble talking him into not explaining it while he did it. But he feels he has to pause to explain things. I will also show him a 2.39:1 framed version and see if he likes that better since the fighting can be closer, and have more space at the sides for unpredictable movement.

As for putting the style before the content, I don't intend to do that, I just want to get the equipment and operator equipment budget done, so then I after all that technical stuff is done, then I can concentrate more on the content, if that makes sense. But it wasn't just one video that says the Moza Air 2 is a really good one. There are other videos where operators say it's a very good one for it's price as well. There was on video where they talked about how it had a better follow focus than Ronin but have to keep looking for it. I can get the Ronin S if it's better, I just haven't found anyone who says why it's better though, so I don't have anything to go on that it is.

[Brian Drysdale]

"For the price" is fine, just so long as it does what you require for your shots and if it can handle the camera and the longer focal length lenses you want to use. Since all the videos seem to have wide angle lenses, it's up to you to test them in practice.

I gather the Ronin S claims 85mm as it's longest lens, I gather the Moza Air 2 seems to work as well, but you need to run tests, since all this can involve dealing with menus etc. Of course, the operator is also a factor. Any choices are up to you. plus the selection of appropriate accessories.

I wouldn't storyboard something like that, because things always change, keeping plans general usually works out better. You are the director, so you need to talk the instigator around to something that will work. It may not be what you had originally in mind, but you can't get into a position where you have unusable material.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

Originally Posted by Josh Bass

But does the joystick work like a video game controller? I.e further forward you push it the faster it tilts or does it just do one speed (that the user can alter) regardless? Either way seems like it would lack finesse but then again there are motors for pan and tilt on jibs so it must be feasible.

That same Youtuber that Ryan posted with the annoying jump cuts does a review on the Ronin S. Omg it does inception roll too! (rolleyes). She also covers the joystick, and talks about compatibility issues with being able to control focus or start/stop recording. Honestly any of these review videos can make a product look better or worse depending on their options and the types of shots they’re doing. Like I said before both Air and Ronin are good gimbals. All these gimbals are going to have similar limitations, operator skill is key, and there is plenty of opportunity for overuse or misuse.

YouTube

I was reading about Ryan karate shoot. He keeps trying to plan out everything despite what we say that you can’t do that. Can you believe nothing went according to how planned out on paper. You learn by actually filming. Reading him describing his shoot I’m confused is he filming a commercial for the karate studio or is he trying to insert a sparing session into his movie? Why would he be talking during a fight scene? Doesn’t sound like a lot of directing is going on.

[Josh Bass]

Karate thing and movie are two totally separate projects.

Karate things is an instructional or promotional video for the studio/dojo.

Ryan, Unfortunately many clients do not understand the process of video production and want to do things a certain way, that theyve decided in their head is the best way, and it is not feasible and will make a bad product. If youre going to take on this kind of work—and please know that you directing and not doing anything else would not solve this problem—you have to be able to a) know when this is happening and b) be avble to explain it to these people and find a way, probably on site/thinking on your feet, to solve these issues. If you cant and know youre not good at it, dont take on these types of jobs. Really good producers (what you essentially are on this job in addition to the other things youre doing) are good at this...Ive seen shoots go exhaustively long from producers having to stop and explain and come up with new plans on the spot but they got something everyone was happy with in the end. Some clients maybe cant be salvaged if they wont compromise.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

I actually suggested Ryan do local commercials to build up his skills while earning money at the same time but he said he couldn’t do it because it was too hard. Granted it isn’t easy but it’s best way to learn.

I recently did a promotional video for a Ballet studio. The artistic director knew exactly what she wanted and had a good plan, which made my job easier. I just needed to take care of the execution and technical parts.

A common approach for this type of work is to write up a simple script with the client. Film them talking and then shoot broll that’s relevant to their dialogue. If the audio was as bad as he described he’s going to need reshoot it. This the reality of this type of work is you’re going to need to problem solve the issues found on location. As you become more experienced you can better anticipate problems and come prepared to deal with them.

[Josh Bass]

Yeah thats what I would have recommended...Mcu of instructor intercut with b roll of moves or something but apparently that was not going to work.

[Ryan Elder]

Okay thanks. I actually bot B roll as well, and tried putting some of his voice recording over it. My idea to do voice over may be flawed to though, cause I think I see what the instructor means that he has to talk out the moves, live.

Cause I do to have B roll shots of him doing the moves without speaking, which I told him I would put his voice over. However, the explanation may take too long for the B roll if he is not explaining it while he is doing it. Cause otherwise, the explanation and the timing of the moves cannot be judged correctly.

For example, for one move, he explains how to disarm someone, and then throw them to the ground. The disarm takes some explanation, then the throw takes some explanation. But if he does it without speaking, it's hard to know how to time it to voice over.

So maybe him saying it all live works better in that sense, and I can see what he means. Unless maybe I have him do the moves without explanation and then 'freeze frame' it, until the voice over explanation is completed?

If I record live though for the rest of the shoots, the lavs will possibly get damaged or at least have lots of rustling while doing the moves. But I have to move the camera along with the subjects, so I cannot boom with them. So I had to put the mic on a stand, out of frame. If I had a second person there, than I could boom while someone else pans and tilts the camera to keep the moving subjects in frame. Or I could be behind camera and someone else boom of course.

But a lot of B roll does not match when cutting, cause the instructor and the other martial artist were saying they have a hard time making the moves look the same. For example, a subject could go to the ground in a completely different way from shot to shot.

[Josh Bass]

Then maybe 2 cams, a wide and CU, recording simultaneously. These could both be on tripods BTW.

he talks directly to closeup cam, explaining stuff, maybe demos things with arms etc that require tighter shots.

Wide cam captures the actual moves

He wears a lav.

Make sure he only talks when not moving

Talk, demonstrate, talk, demonstrate, as long he doesnt speak while moving its fine.

You mentioned having to show each arm etc. maybe even more cams shooting different angles and possibly people to operate them to follow movement when needed. Maybe instructor can turn his body to show other arm to cam, keep it down to two cameras. Maybe thats dumb, hard to know without seeing.

Maybe too much trouble but if they cant repeat things I cant think of too many other options. You have to work with him but he also has to compromise for you.

[Ryan Elder]

Okay thanks. I only have one camera and one tripod though at the moment.

I thought about the multicam set up though, and you would see the closer up cameras, in the wide master shot, the way the room is shaped though, unless we had longer lenses to zoom maybe, but I don't think that would be framed well if we did, cause of how the room is shaped. Maybe.

As for a camera on his face the entire time, his face is switching positions all the time, as they are fighting and doing the moves, so I think that a face close up to cut to of him talking while doing the moves, would require a separate operator that could keep his close up in frame more, as he moved around.

Unless you mean a close up of him speaking where he is standing still while talking?

We also were suppose to do that as well, get a CU of him talking while sitting, and talked about it before, but he didn't want to do it on the shoot date though, cause he said he was unable to explain without physically going through it. But maybe if we scripted, perhaps he could memorize it enough, not sure. He's a nice a guy to work with of course, we just have to come up with something that works maybe.,

[Paul R Johnson]

This is a classic case of client being unaware of video and the production people being unaware of the purpose of each shot.

I suggest you get them to build up a list of the 'moves' and what needs saying to support what people see. From my limited experience of martial arts, it plays appears to me that each move is a predetermined sequence. Slo-mo is only worth considering if the normal speed shot does not show how a certain feature worked. The person shooting/directing needs to respond to the client, shoot it in the most obvious way after watching it a couple of times to explore how far the travel is etc. Then you shoot it and show it immediately, getting them to sign off at least verbally on what they see, then you move on. They will say, you forgot the left foot turn, you blissfully unaware, so you repeat and show again. At some point they will say move on. Equally you may want to ask for a reshoot because you see something they didn't. It's a collaboration project. Storyboards, remember, can only be read by people who understand them - so your planning probably confused them.

Almost certainly I would be using a tripod, and not hand-held. It's instructional, not art.

[Josh Bass]

also this clients expectations may simply be unrealistic given the many constraints on time, gear, etc.