I have a low budget indie project coming up where a lot of the scenes in the plot , consist of characters looking at video footage.

Such as the police looking at surveillance footage of crimes, or the court looking at video recorded statements made by witnesses. Things like that.

So I would have to shoot a lot of the scenes of the video footage, before the scenes, where characters watch the recordings obviously.

But when I do this, do I have to have the video footage, watched by the characters, all color graded with all the post production finished on them, and cannot change my mind in post later therefore? Or is it okay to leave it ungraded, and the video footage, will just grade along with the rest of the footage in the scene, when I grade the whole scene in post?

Normally you would have them looking at an empty green screen on the tablet, phone, etc. with nothing but tracking marks, and all the video playback footage would be added in post.

Okay thanks, but I did that before on my previous project, tracking in post, and adding the screen on later, but after effects keeps failing to track the most accurately, especially if the camera moves, and you can tell there is something off, so I thought doing it while shooting was better, compared to fixing it in post.

Doug is right. And if you can avoid anything coming between the camera and the TV screen like an actor walking in front of the TV or a hand pointing at the screen, the job of keying/tracking in post will be much easier.

Try a sheet of green paper over the screen and green screen that. Then the thumb could move around without the need for tracking.

Having said that, shooting with live videos gives a lot more creative opportunities for the director. Also, the actors can interact with it more, rather than just looking at a green screen, so creating the possibility of better performances. That's key to a low budget production, which usually have less experienced actors and makes all the difference on the festival circuit.

If you haven't got the resources, using a green screen can limit you, it's worth noting that back projection is increasingly being used on digital productions, rather than green screen for certain types of shots,

Video has been shot for decades for broadcast television without any grading in post, so it shouldn't be difficult to the nail the look you want in camera, especially since it has to look like video anyway..
.

Well as far as live video vs. green screen, one example of an actor crossing over is a scene, where a police superior officer is giving a briefing to officers sitting down, and showing them surveillance footage of crimes, with a projector. When pointing out certain parts of the crime scene on the video, he is probably going to cross in front of the projection, or at the very least, his arm will, and you will see it in the master shots for sure.

So for a scene like that, would it be a good idea to shoot the surveillance foot age first?

IMO yes. There are pros and cons to either approach.

In this case, when the actor crosses in front of the projector he/she should be illuminated by the projector, and possibly the image. So that is a strong motivation to shoot screen footage first for this scene, and project it live when shooting the scene.

Such scenes should be tested before you’re shooting with full cast and crew, it can take considerable time to block and adapt a lighting plan so that it provides what you want on actors, yet doesn’t wash out the screen.

Generally, when the on-screen content is important to the story, shooting/editing source footage first does provide the best info for actors’ performances, both for when it’s played back during shots, and when it will be added in post.

OTOH, in some cases the specifics of on-screen content isn’t important to actors’ performances and you have your choice of how to do things.

If you do end up shooting the screen remember to match the hertz to try and stop the banding. Somebody with more knowledge please chip in with what I mean.

This article explains the issue:

https://www.provideocoalition.com/flicker-set-monitors-fail-us/

Higher end video cameras have a control for manually adjusting a correction for this, I suspect you'll have to go into the menu on a DSLR camera for a suitable setting.

Oh okay, thanks, but how do you match the hertz exactly though? Plus I want what is on the screen to look like surveillance camera footage, which is usually at a lower shutter speed, like 1/30th, in the dark at 30 fps, or at least that is what most security camera footage, seems to look like. So I wanted to match that type of camera look, but is that going to cause problems, to get that look?

Just set up the surveillance camera for the look you want. the display will probably be a standard one that plays at the frame rate you shot at. .

A shutter speed of 1/60 of a second on the production camera is a good starting point (that's a 144 degree shutter angle at 24fps). Test the arrangement with the display you're using, ideally before the shooting day to see if further adjustments are needed. The article above goes through the procedures.

Like Seth said, Block it and light it properly first.

The most common problem with a live screen on set is the possible exposure difference between the video playback and the actors exposure. You must get both of them correct. Projectors come in every flavor from dim to nuclear bright. Know what your getting and what you need. Also if you playback on a screened device instead of projection watch out for your lights reflecting off the screen.

Are you ever going to take the surveillance video full screen Ie; the actors are all seen watching it and then the video cuts to your full program screen the viewer is watching. That may have some advantages for you if you plan it?

Kind Regards,

Steve

Okay thanks. You mean cut to a close up, of the video footage? I was going to get close up shots, but I still wanted master shots of the whole scene, just for safety if needed as well.