Printable View
I've been having a bit of a problem trying to achieve decent close ups of people. Originally, I'd set the camera up near the actors face, but recently I've been setting the camera back and zooming in.
The latter allows me to focus on the face and lose the focus of the background, which I think looks nicer.
But I can't be sure that I'm doing "close-ups" right.
What do you do when you're shooting a close up?
[img]smile.gif[/img]
m0ds
Both will work. Both are correct.
You have both Tele/Wide Angle CUs. They both will do different things and you need to know how to use both. The Wide will distort faces to a degree and the Tele willl drop out the Background due to lack of DOF.
Good Luck
It's up to you what effect you're after- is the background important in the shot? Is there anything to see in the background? Are you concentrating entirely on the subject? Use the type of close-up that best suits what you're trying to achieve.
Alex, perhaps Mods is interested in the photography aspect of filmmaking in addition to the writing and directing. I know I am. He is just trying to ask what method people prefer, and perhaps acquire some tips. No harm.
Alex, I have trouble figuring out why some people have 11632 posts when really they should get out more and do some filming. [img]graemlins/sure.gif[/img]
Nah i'm happy with how I do things, I just wanted to know what was the most common way. My DP-ing has been reviewed by an Empire writer and he found nothing wrong with it.
Yammery, you're right [img]smile.gif[/img]
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ October 23, 2003 10:13 AM: Message edited by: m0ds ]</font>
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Do you have trouble choosing your desert entre?Quote:
Originally posted by m0ds:
I've been having a bit of a problem trying to achieve decent close ups of people. Originally, I'd set the camera up near the actors face, but recently I've been setting the camera back and zooming in.
The latter allows me to focus on the face and lose the focus of the background, which I think looks nicer.
But I can't be sure that I'm doing "close-ups" right.
What do you do when you're shooting a close up?
[img]smile.gif[/img]
m0ds
Picking out your attire for the evening?
Which shoes to wear?
Which end of the camera to look through?
If you said yes to any of the above, HIRE A DP and concentrate on directing and writing.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, if you have time to wonder, maybe you should get out more often, shoot your close-ups, and then either figure out if you like it, or show it to someone. How in the world can we tell you anything with no images to analyze?Quote:
Originally posted by m0ds:
Alex, I have trouble figuring out why some people have 11632 posts when really they should get out more and do some filming. [img]graemlins/sure.gif[/img]
I just had a short film premiere two nights ago, I had my previous film play in approximately 10 film festivals, and have an edited by credit in a video that will be in Blockbuster this winter, and just finished a tribute video about Jane Goodall and am doing color correction on old video masters for a distributor.
What's ten posts a day when I have three forums I moderate plus a couple others I visit?
I type fast.
Gotta Go.
it seems strange that someone who has achieved as much as they say feels the need to make himself feel superior by putting down the efforts of others.
surely if you're as exprienced as you say, you would be able to answer questions with a reply that is informative and helpful.
Alex is alright. Good on ya fella.
I know Tiffen do some close up lens filters. Never really quite understood them, maybe someone can fill me in.
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ October 23, 2003 06:26 PM: Message edited by: redlum ]</font>
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What is being missed here is that Mods has a great topic question, but has presented it in a confusing manner. If you re-read my original response you'll see that Mods could have just said no to the four QUESTIONS I posed. I was being either coy or obnoxous, but my polling question, was a question, not a final label.Quote:
Originally posted by MatJimMood:
it seems strange that someone who has achieved as much as they say feels the need to make himself feel superior by putting down the efforts of others.
surely if you're as exprienced as you say, you would be able to answer questions with a reply that is informative and helpful.
Big difference in my opinion, and the point was to remind people to "share the wealth" when possible.
Incorporate others into your productions if there are others truly willing to participate. Your film looks MORE IMPRESSIVE the LESS TIMES we see your name in the credits.
If I had been a better poster, a model citizen of astute perfection, I would have cut to the core issue and reframed Mod's question in a way that all could have better participated.
Having not done that because I am not nor pretend to be perfect, Mods now hates me and even gave me a one rating.
And Despin, shut up, you'd still have a one if not for my voting you up. [img]graemlins/bat.gif[/img]
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ October 24, 2003 01:04 AM: Message edited by: Alex ]</font>
whether or not you keep the background in focus depends entirely on what effect you wish to achieve... any good photography book will have good examples of shots using both styles...
at the end of the day tho... there are no hard and fast rules when it comes to film making so whatever aspect it is... just do what looks best to you
Hey there.
"And Despin, shut up, you'd still have a one if not for my voting you up"
???
Despin out.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">[img]graemlins/sleepy.gif[/img]Quote:
Having not done that because I am not nor pretend to be perfect, Mods now hates me and even gave me a one rating.
And Despin, shut up, you'd still have a one if not for my voting you up.
[Check out Alex's Super-8 boards for more of the same...]
a close up lens simply lets you stay in focus closer than your normal lens would... useful for extreme closeups of flowers stuff like that where a normal lens would blur
Alex,
no one else had a problem understanding what mods meant in his question and everyone else who replyed provided useful information.
the majority of the people on this board are still learning and teaching themselves filmmaking. by asking questions on this board and attempting things themselves they learn more about the overall process of filmmaking. so 'sharing the wealth' and hiring a DP isn't exactly an option most of the time.
besides, i don't think anyone would be bothered about how many times a name was repeated in the credits if the film was entertaining and well made.
if you started to share some knowledge on filmmaking without trying to put people down, i'm sure that people would appreciate it a lot more. With the success in festivals and with editing work you mentioned above you must have had a lot of experience and plenty of advice to give.
Ah...this site is getting back to the good old days. The ***** fighting, the sniping, the smart alec remarks....ah memories. But then again we were all different people back then...
Anyway...
My advice to Mods is if you are in two minds about a shot, and you are shooting on DV, then go for coverage. Shoot both and choose the best one in the edit. DV is inexpensive and a god send to the up and coming film maker. I swear by coverage and it stops those self kicking episodes when you realise the the shot you choose on set is the wrong one.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why don't you shoot using both methods, and then use both during your scene? You can cut between each C/U for a more interesting look!?!Quote:
Originally posted by k_wor:
My advice to Mods is if you are in two minds about a shot, and you are shooting on DV, then go for coverage. Shoot both and choose the best one in the edit. DV is inexpensive and a god send to the up and coming film maker.
i wasn't having a go at you. sorry if what i wrote seemed like an attack. i was only asking that you where more helpful.
the subjects that you mentioned above are interesting and would of provoked a useful discussion if you had brought them up earlier.
but.
can you explain why you find the idea of an audience not being bothered about who made a film if they enjoyed it amusing. i can understand it appearing more professional if you have a long list of crew members, but shouldn't a film be based on the actual piece itself rather than who made it.
Less is more, basically.
I'll give an analogy and see if you agree.
The first business card most people make has their name REAL BIG.
The second business card a person makes has their name much smaller, AND LISTS ABOUT TEN DIFFERENT THINGS THAT THEY CAN DO!
The third business card a person ever makes usually lists their name much smaller, followed by a more generic term such as
... services.
I call that evolution/maturation.
If you list your name several times in the credits, you may be creating a comet's tail too small for others to want to ride on.
We are talking about the subjective discission making process,
Alex is write either you can make the descision or not (it did come accross in a contemptious way, but hey I've offended everyone on this board).
Which shot you like more or which one tells the story best. Just do it and learn by your mistakes.
Hey there.
Yes yes yes... But what did ANY of this have to do with me???
Despin out.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I completely disagree. It's all worthless information being exchanged because the comments don't relate to any visual image. Any scene can be shot as a close-up with either a telephoto lens or in a wider mode but much closer up.Quote:
Originally posted by MatJimMood:
Alex,
no one else had a problem understanding what mods meant in his question and everyone else who replyed provided useful information.
WHY you choose to do it either way is inextricably linked to wardrobe, make-up, lighting, staging, props, cast size dialogue, script plot points, and even the actors age and physical characteristics.
Nigel's advice was actually off point because being close and wide doesn't necessarily mean wide angle lens, so his point about facial distortion was valid but not necessarily applicable to the original question. Nigel's comment was helpful, but not relevatory, and in the process somewhat confused the issue.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't disagree with that, but my point about having this discussion revolve around actual image stills, still has validity.Quote:
Originally posted by MatJimMood:
the majority of the people on this board are still learning and teaching themselves filmmaking. by asking questions on this board and attempting things themselves they learn more about the overall process of filmmaking. so 'sharing the wealth' and hiring a DP isn't exactly an option most of the time.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">hahahahahaha.Quote:
Originally posted by MatJimMood:
besides, i don't think anyone would be bothered about how many times a name was repeated in the credits if the film was entertaining and well made.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Do you think this was my first post here? My "putdown" was asked as a yes or no question, and could have been easily deflected by a simple no response.Quote:
Originally posted by MatJimMood:
if you started to share some knowledge on filmmaking without trying to put people down, i'm sure that people would appreciate it a lot more. With the success in festivals and with editing work you mentioned above you must have had a lot of experience and plenty of advice to give.
And of course, you've glossed over the part where I mentioned what a great topic this could be if it revolves around actual close-up images being VIEWED and then discussed rather than completely subjective non standard analysis of imagery that is as different from one person to the next as each person's imagination.
i still don't understand.
how does this relate to the film looking more impressive if you don't have your name in the credits much
what has this got to do with closeups?
...and what's this got to do with Despin?
roflmao.
As mentioned. If you are close to the subject with a wide lens, it will tend to distort, so longer lenses are better to use for closeups, especially for women (unless your looking for a distorted effect,) the problem with DV is you have to get so far back to get the background to go soft, that if you're working in s small room, or outside with a large depth of field, you just can't do it. There is an interesting solution to this problem called the softscreen (www.icexpo.com) that works well for certain situations.
But you can also be close to a subject without a wide-angle lens, (between 3-5 feet), and get nice looking non-distorted images, at least you can with a Super-8 film camera. [img]graemlins/film.gif[/img]
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ October 29, 2003 12:27 PM: Message edited by: Alex ]</font>
when you say distorted what do you mean? the barreling effect?
I happen to think that looks nice on closeups, Luc Besson uses it alot.
It also depends on how wide the lens is. I have a fairly light wide, and use a fisheye for exaggerated type of shots. You know, where anyone will notice the distortion.
I'd like to take this opportunity to promote my new film:
THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT DESPIN
synopsis: It's just one 90 MINUTE shot(telephoto), close-up, of Alex. In the DVD I plan on an alternative - close-up(wide angle).
directed by
GREATwarEAGLE
written by
GREATwaEAGLE
edited by
GREATwarEAGLE
cinematography
GREATwarEAGLE
produced by
GREATwarEAGLE
starring
GREATwarEAGLE as Alex
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ November 02, 2003 02:11 AM: Message edited by: GREATwarEAGLE ]</font>
Dude, people are going to think you are me! [img]eek.gif[/img]
Barry Sonnenfeld states in his interview on the Miller's Crossing DVD that wide shots are funny and long shots are handsome, which proves a few things.
1. The look of a shot is highly subjective and you should go with your instincts in editing
2. hollywood will hire anyone
3. some people should not be interviewed without preprepared answers [img]smile.gif[/img]
No comment on the whole conflict thing, we are film fans, film fans love debating everything (no we dont, yes we do, connery,no brosnan etc). just try not to repeat yourselves and get a nugget or two of information out there eh? [img]smile.gif[/img]
and shut up despin [img]smile.gif[/img]
Hey there.
?????
What the **** are you talking about?
And is Alex going to answer the question? Why did he bring me up in this thread??
What the **** did I have to do with anything?
Despin out.
It was a premptive post. Apparently it caught you off guard which means I was wrong.
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ November 02, 2003 09:50 PM: Message edited by: Alex ]</font>
In case anyone misses it, I was able to make the above post and edit it within the same minute.
cool huh! [img]tongue.gif[/img]
That's amazing!
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ November 02, 2003 11:11 PM: Message edited by: GREATwarEAGLE ]</font>