Camera Movement

Hey guys,

Take a look at the very subtle but unmistakable movement that happens during the dialouge scene linked below from 'The Departed'. Anyone who has experience working on fiction tell me if that camera movement is rehearsed beforehand or is it a case that the cameraman reacts dynamically to every actor movement from moment to moment? Are there any options to imitate the affect in post?

Hi James,

This looks like the normal "corrections" an operator makes to frames once they're set. Yes it's dynamic aside maybe from some of the big moves in this scene.

In tighter sizes, like when he leans forward and you get a tighter frame and eyeline, you find you need to do more to keep their heads in the frame.

These are just normal camera operating moves to keep the subject in the box.

Some actors will tend to do the same things each take, so you can start to anticipate what will happen. You maybe learn that she leans back on a certain line or he comes forward to pick up the pills.

I've always believed that camera operating is a "performance" just like acting is. You're in the acting space, working very intimately with actors, taking your cues of their performance. Sometimes you're ahead of the story and you know what's coming (like when you pan off to find the incoming bad guys) or sometimes you're more reactive and behind what the actor / character knows, when the camera reacts to story beats after you see the actors do it or to a noise that happens off screen..

These are all elements of performance. Blocking, staging and shooting order are all elements that greatly affect performance too.

I often like to shoot scenes with heightened drama without a rehearsal. However, I've usually seen a block or staging of the actors before hand. You have the cast come back after makeup and wardrobe and them do what I call a line up, so you can see them in the space and with the lighting you plan to use, make any tweaks and THEN shoot the rehearsal.

I do this because with good operators it's very hard to fake operating spontaneity. So if you're doing shots where you want the camera to be more reactive to what the actors are doing, shooting the rehearsal is a good way to do this. And no it's not faster (which is what a lot of producers think) and you have to tell the actors you'll be doing it generally at the start of a show because some actors like to have a few takes to warm up.

The old fashioned logic was to start with wide takes and then work into closeups. Sometimes you tweak the performances and then move into CU's.

I often go the opposite way. Straight into close ups and spend more time there working on the performance stuff and then finish with the "throwaway" shots of the wides. This originally came out of trying to maximise the amount of time available for shooting a scene to the "money", the close up performance. Actors seem to like it too. I worked with a director who would do 8 or 9 takes on the first setup of a scene and tweak her actors, try things out and then decide she liked take 7 and ask the actors to match that and do a single take on the wides at the end. You also obviously need the director's blessing to work this way, it's stuff you work out when you're developing your visual manifesto for a show.

I also like reactive operating and as I watch a rehearsal or blocking I can usually map all the drama moments and beats. This means that I can then mentally jump through those hoops as I shoot, because I know what's coming. I find operators that have coms in also are far better, because they're more engaged by performance. They have my permission to "tag" the important things. I hate inserts of so instead of shooting another setup of the phone getting a text message, it's far better to tell the operator to tag the phone in the coverage or close up. You're building the shot into the closeup rather than forcing a cut to an insert. Having the inserts built into the coverage sets a different editorial flow.

I tend to actively give my operator's permission to do this without my prior permission. I call it visual jazz. It's like improvising in music, they generally can react in the moment. It's like an actor ad-libbing, this is the operator equivalent. Sometimes you get wonderful spontaneous and TRUTHFUL moments when you do this.

Being able to contribute to performance in this way makes you very much a part of the storytelling process.

I was taught this on a comic series I was doing where the lead actress would do wonderful spontaneous things that weren't rehearsed or pre-conceived, the kinds of things you just wouldn't think to do if you're planning it. If you go back and force an actor to repeat comic moments then they get stale very quickly.

Good operating is a highly underrated skill that you'll come to appreciate more and more the longer you shoot. Sorry for the soapboxing, but operating is something I care about a great deal.

JB

You hit the nail square on, John. This has also been my experience, especially in live TV (and live to tape).
Cheers

Yep, just good ole fashion operating and following the actors.

I would not try to do this in post. It's going to look odd and you won't have the same perspective changes you would get doing it on set. Just like large digital pushes or pulls.

Its what we used to do. The show "Hill Street Blues" was a big part of what change that. It was big on delayed reaction, i.e. the viewer would hear something and then the camera would move/react to it. Other shows had done it but that was the show that seemed to make every director for a decade want to be different and do exactly the same thing.
I don't mind what style the director chooses now days, I just love it when they actually give some thought to how the camera work can help tell the story.

When I shot a theatrical production of Sleeping Beauty recently, I shot the dress rehearsal, as well as the premiere, for some of the reasons John stated. To catch the spontaneity and be able to anticipate movement in the live show. The still I posted earlier was grabbed from such a spontaneous moment, unscripted, but it captured the emotional heart of the piece.

Sleeping Beauty 709.jpg (555.56 KiB) Viewed 1515 times

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

May I be so bold as to point out that without a hot shot focus puller you will be wasting your time trying these moves unrehearsed.
I would also like to point out that experienced performers will telegraph a move and will often slow the action down so that the operator can keep up.

Great clip Robert, and some great operating in there.

It's not that revolutionary an idea, we often talk about camera movement being "motivated". A shot can be motivated by an actors movement, and as I like to argue, by the scene psychology.

What I can't stand is what I call mowing the lawn, where you just ping pong a camera back and forward on track just to have movement.

This is also a great clip on "bayhem" which is largely about camera movement and staging.

JB

All excellent answers and advice here thank you everyone