You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

A LOT of work needed but is camera alright?

Are the shots alright?

Yeah it's cool0%[ 0 ]
Needs Work89%[ 16 ]
Good for semi pros11%[ 2 ]

Total Votes : 18

Posted: Thu, 12th Jun 2008, 10:53am

Post 1 of 26

PLANB

Force: 1312 | Joined: 20th Dec 2006 | Posts: 218

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZfL8USgtE8

Last edited Mon, 10th Nov 2008, 9:21am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Thu, 12th Jun 2008, 1:53pm

Post 2 of 26

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +2

Can you edit your post to give more details about what the clip is? More people are likely to watch it that way.

Anyway, here are my thoughts:
  • Use a tripod. Or, if you don't own a tripod, buy one. It's essential. In 99% of cases, you simply can't make a good-looking film with no tripod.
  • You need to sort out the exposure on your camera - is it set to automatic? If you can, learn how to use the manual controls, or if you don't have manual controls, you'll really need to get a better camera for film-making.
  • Use a tripod.
  • It feels as though you cross the line a lot, and the shots don't feel as though there's any convincing 'drive' to them... they're just random shots from random angles, for no reason. When the character starts walking up the path, the camera is on his left, then you cut and the camera is on his right, then you cut back to on the left again. It makes the sequence difficult to follow for an audience, and just jarrs visually.
  • Your hand-held camerawork needs more practice - the track at the end is decidedly wobbly, and just looks amateurish. If you can't track smoothly, then don't track at all. Use a smooth pan, instead. To do that, you'll need to use a tripod.
  • You cut part way through a zoom. As a rule, don't do that. Don't cut part way through zooms or pans, unless there's a specific reason for it/effect you're aiming for. Otherwise, start from static and end on static, on most occasions.
  • Your shot composition could use work - there's no feeling that any of the shots have been planned, rather you've just gone out and pointed the camera at your actor, and hoped for the best. Plan your angles, storyboard, and try and visualise the scene shot-for-shot before you even pick up your camera and your tripod.
  • On the plus side, it's a simple sequence that makes sense. Man gets out of car, walks to door - so you've at least got the idea of telling a story in a logical manner.

So, in all, I'd say that it needs a LOT more practice. Oh, and you might want to consider buying a tripod.

Cheers,
Arktic.
Posted: Thu, 12th Jun 2008, 2:26pm

Post 3 of 26

Jambuster

Force: 51 | Joined: 12th May 2008 | Posts: 64

Windows User

Member

Ultimately, I agree with Arktic about the tripod, straight away I thought that is what was missing, the First Thing.
I thought your camera angles and shooting (Excluding steadiness) were decent, it sold the effect well, and accompanied with the sound effects - improved on that. It reminded me of older series of 24, where they used similar camera angles, with a Tripod.

Arktic wrote:

You cut part way through a zoom. As a rule, don't do that. Don't cut part way through zooms or pans, unless there's a specific reason for it/effect you're aiming for. Otherwise, start from static and end on static, on most occasions.
Whilst not much experience has fallen my way of camera angles, the effect PlanB was trying to pull off is similar to that of my first feature film. I feel as though it adds tempo and speed to the rising dramatic impact of the scene. If that was PlanB's chosen effect, it was executed well, if not; Follow Arktic's sound advice, and keep them Static.

Whilst I said that the music accompanied the scene well, it seems as though we have a piece that is just tagged on, rather than a composed one for the specific scene. The piece you used sounded familiar to fans of 24, but as they also know, that music is reserved for scenes of Poignant importance, or directly after action.

All in all, work could be done, but a good base for an impressive scene.

biggrin

J
Posted: Thu, 12th Jun 2008, 3:55pm

Post 4 of 26

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

I agree entirely. The jump cuts/edits really need a lot of practice watching 'proper' films to see how shots are planned and edited - pick a great (or frankly any commercial) director and copy them - watch how they compose shots, etc. You'll notice they NEVER zoom, I'd suggest you don't either. When they get closer to something it's always a track, zooms look tacky to my mind.

But, the shot sequence was fine, and if the edit we saw was being used as a short insert into some steady, well-shot sequences, it might have a slight CSI/jump cut montage/something disorientating has just happenned element, but beware it only works if you have steady, solid photography for the bulk of the piece.
Posted: Thu, 12th Jun 2008, 4:00pm

Post 5 of 26

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

pdrg wrote:

I agree entirely. The jump cuts/edits really need a lot of practice watching 'proper' films to see how shots are planned and edited - pick a great (or frankly any commercial) director and copy them - watch how they compose shots, etc. You'll notice they NEVER zoom, I'd suggest you don't either. When they get closer to something it's always a track, zooms look tacky to my mind.
*cough*KUBRICK!*cough*
Posted: Thu, 12th Jun 2008, 4:54pm

Post 6 of 26

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Here's a sneak peak to my newest movie, Boy Gets Home From School, Acts Tough: Part 2!

None of your poll options match my opinion.
Posted: Thu, 12th Jun 2008, 5:12pm

Post 7 of 26

Jambuster

Force: 51 | Joined: 12th May 2008 | Posts: 64

Windows User

Member

Aculag wrote:

Here's a sneak peak to my newest movie, Boy Gets Home From School, Acts Tough: Part 2!

None of your poll options match my opinion.
If you mean this in a negative way, perhaps you agree with me that it needs some work? No slander intended, but I kind of thought there was a poll option for whatever you thought. If you think it's good, then there is options, but otherwise you must think it can be approved on.

A penny for my thoughts.

biggrin

J
Posted: Fri, 13th Jun 2008, 2:43am

Post 8 of 26

EvilDonut

Force: 200 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2008 | Posts: 595

Member

Well in that case I'm making a film called 'Man posts on website, while eating cheeseburger'. I'll make millions!!

d
Posted: Fri, 13th Jun 2008, 4:26am

Post 9 of 26

Biblmac

Force: 852 | Joined: 12th Jun 2007 | Posts: 1513

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

I don't know what I can say that hasn't already been said. I thought the beginning was way to bright, (excuse me for not knowing the big words for it, lol), and also it was shaky so like they said get a tripod, or practice a bit more so it looks more smooth, (however it didn't look that bad). Also I agree, that when you are zooming in or out, let it stop zooming before you switch, (once again I don't know the big words,) but I woudn't mind zooming. Other than that it was pretty good. Oh and when he puts the gun down, it doesn't look like he puts it in his pants, just on his lap. It would have helped if he would have actually placed it in his pants. Overall it needed some improvement. Nice attempt. biggrin
Posted: Fri, 13th Jun 2008, 8:07am

Post 10 of 26

PLANB

Force: 1312 | Joined: 20th Dec 2006 | Posts: 218

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

pdrg wrote:

I agree entirely. The jump cuts/edits really need a lot of practice watching 'proper' films to see how shots are planned and edited - pick a great (or frankly any commercial) director and copy them - watch how they compose shots, etc. You'll notice they NEVER zoom, I'd suggest you don't either. When they get closer to something it's always a track, zooms look tacky to my mind.
*cough*KUBRICK!*cough*
What?
Posted: Fri, 13th Jun 2008, 9:25am

Post 11 of 26

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

PLANB wrote:

Tarn wrote:

pdrg wrote:

I agree entirely. The jump cuts/edits really need a lot of practice watching 'proper' films to see how shots are planned and edited - pick a great (or frankly any commercial) director and copy them - watch how they compose shots, etc. You'll notice they NEVER zoom, I'd suggest you don't either. When they get closer to something it's always a track, zooms look tacky to my mind.
*cough*KUBRICK!*cough*
What?
One of Stanley Kubrick's key techniques was using zooms.
Posted: Fri, 13th Jun 2008, 9:55am

Post 12 of 26

Frosty G

Force: 540 | Joined: 28th May 2005 | Posts: 640

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Yeah, used quite often in The Shining.
Posted: Fri, 13th Jun 2008, 11:16am

Post 13 of 26

Balketh

Force: 344 | Joined: 2nd Apr 2006 | Posts: 224

Windows User

Member

Joss Whedon also used a great deal of zooms in Firefly, and that was unequivocally amazing. He broke a LOT of unwritten rules in cinematography, ones people didn't consider breaking...

*is a browncoat through and through.*

Back on topic: Really, really recommend a Tripod. Really. 100% improvement if you use a tripod, minimum.
Posted: Fri, 13th Jun 2008, 2:02pm

Post 14 of 26

SilverDragon7

Force: 2265 | Joined: 29th Jun 2006 | Posts: 1990

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

It depends on the style of the movie though. You could watch Ocean's Tweleve (which uses alot of zoom and static shots) and then turn around and watch The Bourne Ultimatum (which is pretty much all handheld). Generally mixing the two together don't work.
Posted: Mon, 10th Nov 2008, 9:20am

Post 15 of 26

PLANB

Force: 1312 | Joined: 20th Dec 2006 | Posts: 218

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Arktic wrote:

it's a simple sequence that makes sense. Man gets out of car, walks to door - so you've at least got the idea of telling a story in a logical manner.[/list]
So, in all, I'd say that it needs a LOT more practice. Oh, and you might want to consider buying a tripod.

Cheers,
Arktic.
Well that "man" is frankly...me

Thank you all for that advice, and I have great news

I bought a TRIPOD

biggrin

Yay! I will certainly have better shots now lol
Posted: Mon, 10th Nov 2008, 10:53am

Post 16 of 26

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

SilverDragon7 wrote:

It depends on the style of the movie though. You could watch Ocean's Tweleve (which uses alot of zoom and static shots) and then turn around and watch The Bourne Ultimatum (which is pretty much all handheld). Generally mixing the two together don't work.
Ben brought up that rebuttal too when I also recently mentioned tripods.

As I said then, if you're a young aspiring filmmaker then to me a tripod helps incredibly to get you to think about the composition of your shots.

As you say, there are different styles to match what you envisage best for the movie.

As long as you're conscious you want to emulate Paul Greengrass and go with this handheld visceral style, fair enough.

But don't tell me every kid on this forum who makes a shakey movie has consciously made the decision they want to shoot with this aesthetic because they want their audience to feel as if they're THERE. If we assume this every time a kid posts a movie here, then they're going to learn nothing.

EDIT: Glad to see you bought said tripod smile
Posted: Mon, 10th Nov 2008, 11:23am

Post 17 of 26

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Personally I dislike Picasso's later works. His figures are all messed up with eyes and noses placed wherever the artist thought was right, you know the ones. He was an impressionistic pioneer, and courageous to take that route. Why should I mention this? It supports the post above...

Picasso was also a very very good realistic painter - he trained classically to understand and master the "bones" of art before being able to experiment on top. Greengrass for instance has, I'm certain, used a tripod extensively in the past, understands lines of action, etc so he's then allowed to play with that and stretch/tease the rules specifically because he knows them like Picasso knows how to draw.

Just an aside, I know Stan K's puller for The Shining, must ask him about all that sometime smile But again K had been classically trained, which allows him to test the rules. If an experimental shot hadn't worked he knew how to remedy it.
Posted: Fri, 2nd Jan 2009, 3:45am

Post 18 of 26

PLANB

Force: 1312 | Joined: 20th Dec 2006 | Posts: 218

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Picasso used cubism, showing all perspectives on one 2D dimention on his paintings.

My test movies are looking better with that tripod biggrin
Posted: Fri, 2nd Jan 2009, 4:43am

Post 19 of 26

Thrawn

Force: 1995 | Joined: 11th Aug 2006 | Posts: 1962

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Let me start by saying that a tripod is the least of your worries until you can control your camera's exposure. This may sound abrubt and rude, but the second shot in the clip (at 00:02) is absolutely horrible light-wise. When the whole screen is white (unless wanted for an effect) it's a sign that your exposure is screwed up. The whole clip was prett bad, but that specefic one stuck out for me. Also, the final shot in the clip has potential to be a really cool shot, with the pillars and all. If you can manage to get your hands on a steady cam, or even convert your newly bought tripod into one, and time it just right, the shot could look very professional. Anyways, I liked the pacing of the clip. Keep up the work!
Posted: Fri, 2nd Jan 2009, 7:39am

Post 20 of 26

PLANB

Force: 1312 | Joined: 20th Dec 2006 | Posts: 218

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Thanks Thrawn! biggrin

Your advice is greatly appreciated and you did not sound rude, you did sound honest.

Thanks again mate.
Posted: Fri, 2nd Jan 2009, 4:47pm

Post 21 of 26

Limey

Force: 547 | Joined: 11th Sep 2005 | Posts: 752

Gold Member

I agree with thrawn, because I like the last shot and I think the main problem was the exposure.
Posted: Fri, 2nd Jan 2009, 7:30pm

Post 22 of 26

D3L3T10N

Force: 317 | Joined: 23rd Jun 2007 | Posts: 472

CompositeLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Jambuster wrote:

It reminded me of older series of 24, where they used similar camera angles, with a Tripod.
Have you ever seen 24? The whole thing is like an anti-tripod promo.

I don't think you necessarily need a tripod to get better, I just think you need practice. Definitely learn to control the exposure, but I thought it looked pretty decent aside from that. Just try to get out and film as much as possible. The more you do, the more you'll have an idea of what angles you want and how to set them up before you shoot.
Posted: Mon, 5th Jan 2009, 2:35am

Post 23 of 26

RyanMichael

Force: 310 | Joined: 6th Jul 2007 | Posts: 148

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User

Gold Member

Also, it looked like your actor was going for an intense, cinematic type of movie, so I would recommend color correction. Other than that, and the DESPERATE need of a tripod, it looked pretty cool.
Posted: Mon, 5th Jan 2009, 4:19am

Post 24 of 26

Jabooza

Force: 2743 | Joined: 21st Jul 2006 | Posts: 1446

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Erm... am I not watching the same clip as everyone else (the post was edited so I might not be)? It didn't look to me as if he desperately needed a tripod, I've seen MUCH worse handheld work than that. Actually, his was pretty smooth for being just handheld.

I must be watching a different clip.
Posted: Mon, 5th Jan 2009, 4:25am

Post 25 of 26

Travis Kunze

Force: 1077 | Joined: 11th Dec 2007 | Posts: 500

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Personally, I recommend you get your hand on a tripod if at all possible. Will make things a bit easier for a smaller crew unless your going for the Bourne Filming Method look.
Posted: Mon, 5th Jan 2009, 6:54am

Post 26 of 26

PLANB

Force: 1312 | Joined: 20th Dec 2006 | Posts: 218

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

I said it all along!

I'VE GOT A TRIPOD!!!

I'VE GOT A TRIPOD!!!

I'VE GOT A TRIPOD!!!

Things will be better now biggrin