Wetlook World Forum

Current time: Fri 19/04/24 02:04:40 GMT

Translate page FROM -> TO

Translate page TO <- FROM

Message # 743.3.1

Subject: Re: Re: Non wetlook question to a video producer

Date: Thu 31/10/02 06:05:19 GMT

Name: AnthonyX

Email: anthonyx@jowc.net

Website:

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help
with running costs: (you can change amount)

I don't have much experience with video cameras myself, but on the few occasions I've picked one up for "home movie" stuff, I've generally prided myself on the result. Between a little care (as you've described, MK), and the camera's built-in electronic frame stabilizing, I'd like to think my results approach that of steadicam. At the very least, camera shake is minimal enough that you probably won't notice it.

Also... I've seen a fair bit of footage shot by some of our favourite wetlook producers - Wetlook Unlimited (Jim), Wet Kahuna, and Oasis. Their videos include a LOT of handheld shots, and there is very little camera shake... again, I'd say the camera work is certainly steady enough that it is not a distraction (OK, there are always the occasional exceptions). I'd guess their cameras are all equipped with the electronic "steady shot" features and/or they've gotten quite practiced.

My points are:

1 - MK, I agree with you that anyone can make a steady shot with a little practice and/or electronic "steady shot" (I see no real need for mechanical steadycam when shooting video).

2 - "Draw you into the action" camera wobble is added deliberately and excessively in mainstream production... I'd speculate that Hollywood directors/camera operators are doing this using equipment specifically designed to deliver a steady shot - the camera takes a nice steady shot, and they have to go and wobble it up.

3 - I find that I am pretty much immune from motion sickness, and don't get headaches or feel eye strain very often... however all that changes after watching NYPD Blue for only 5 or 10 minutes. Even the super-fast cutting done with most music videos doesn't have that sort of effect on me. Definitely not a rewarding entertainment experience. I wonder how many other people out there would say the same thing.

In reply to Message (743.3)

Re: Non wetlook question to a video producer

By MK - wamtec@compuserve.com Thu 31/10/02 03:39:44 GMT

Website:

As was mentioned, when it is done properly (i.e Saving Private Ryan) this can be a very effective way to make the viewer feel like they are actually there and "part of the action". When it is done amateurishly, ala mtv, it just becomes an irritance or annoyance.

I guess the best example I can think of...would be THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT...i.e. the intent with the wobbly cam there was to make the viewer feel like they are part of the action too.

Personally, I am not a big fan of tripods...especially when it comes to making wetlook videos...cos if the scene is too "static", then it becomes about as interesting as watching a surveillance camera at a 7/11 convenience store.

Of course, if you have the money, the best device to have is a "stedicam" with a shoulder harness, that allows you to "run with the actors" all the while achieving the effect of "floating" with the action due the gyroscopic nature of the stedicam (which is the same thing they use to make helicopter shots look steady)...but even a basic stedicam holder for your average consumer grade camera is gonna set you back about $3000.

The best compromise to make (imho) is not to use a tripod too much (cos then the scene is too static) and just try to learn to be nimble and light on your feet...and follow the action as nimbly as you can. With a little practise...you can easily learn to achieve that "floating" and moving camera style, (walk on the ball of your feet) even without a stedicam system. Some of the cameramen I have work with on my shoots are quite good at this....i.e. learning to walk backwards quite fast while filming smoothly ...while people are walking at you...it requires some practise. This has it's pitfalls too....i.e. several times I have almost fallen backwards in the pool while filming girls parading around a pool.

Anyway....so there are balances and compromises to make when you consider camera filming styles. A video that is all tripod stuff...can look very static and uninteresting. An "action" event can often be enhanced by the "action camera" that is there right in the middle of all that is happening...and the best example of that is Leonmoomin and his video series....cos yes...the camerawork is quite manic...but thats the "ambience" of the style of work that Leonmoomin does...he puts you right THERE and this is why his videos are so realistic.

Done well, and it can be a very enhancing to the excitement of a movie...e.g. all the helmet cam shots from the ALIEN movies....that wobbly around and you never know when the Alien may appear.

Done just for the sake of being hip or cool....i.e. countless music videos and commercials....the only reason they are doing it...is cos the song or product they are selling is boring and uninteresting...so they feel the need to play about with the camera work and editing...just to try and spice up an otherwise boring product. When you have a good song or good product, then you don't need to mess about like this. Just think of all the top 100 best music videos in history (from a production and editing standpoint) and you will not see this kind of malarky....e.g. Take on Me by AHA for example...was a brilliantly conceived and edited music video with a catchy tune to boot.

Thats my 2 cents.....i.e. wetlook can be mundane and boring it the camera work is too pedantic and static...so 100% tripod based videos send me to sleep. I prefer the floating style of hand held camera work (not the jerky style).

In reply to Message (743)

Non wetlook question to a video producer

By RM - Wed 30/10/02 15:23:27 GMT

Website:

Sorry to get off topic but since this is the only place I know where producers contribute perhaps one of them could answer this. What is the deal on network shows and commercials where they purposely jiggle the camera? I don't understand why they do this. In commercials it looks like they hired a 3 year old to hold the camera... very unprofessional. I just saw an episode of West Wing where they are inside the White House (presumably removed from the infulence of strong winds and earthquakes) and the picture is jumping around. I don't get it. What is with this technique? Once again sorry for getting off topic.

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs: (you can change amount)