Kinda true. I’ll make the popcorn.
I'd prefer to have creative and intellectually challenging conversations with like minded professionals. I suppose those type of people don't need advice on a forum and spend their time doing rather than talking about it. I actually had a jib question and needed a primer but it was more expedient do my own research and watch a few Youtube videos.

BTW, popcorn sounds good.

You can find more in depth answers to the questions being asked in a range of other sources. I suspect this is more a form of forum addiction than merely seeking the best solutions, since you'll find those quicker by other means, including using Google,

When making a movie in Saskatoon during January and February, prior EXPERIENCE with the martial arts gig will come in helpful ... remember the heater noise? And for outdoor shots, some equipment may have cold temperature limitations.

Just thinking ahead.

Found this "typical Saskatoon forecast" for [edit: January] 2021:
Big temperatures are ºF and blue ones are ºC
[one more edit: the location will probably require the movie company to pay the heating bill. Also, "experience" is in caps because experience is helpful]

Oh okay, but what's the martial arts gig I had before, have to do with this?

Oh geeze Fargo was filmed in winter. No martial arts either. Yeah those Cohen brothers

I didn't say that changing the location changes the actors, did I? Unless I mislead you, or what did you think I meant?
In the martial arts gig, wasn't there some mention about noise from the heater?

In any event, the facility will probably have to be heated during the time frame, January and February, that was mentioned when it would least cost for renting equipment or getting pro-bono, or less expensive, actors and support staff.

If the location, or locations, have to be heated then that cost can be significant. I lived in an area with similar temperatures and the heating bills were expensive, so something to consider in the budget. Noise from the heating system can be a problem to deal with.

As mentioned, the cold temperatures when shooting outside can be a problem with some equipment so there are some issues to look out for but based on your martial arts gig you already know some of these. Experience is mentioned because there has been a lot written about the value of experience. Every gig can add something somewhere.

Come on man. You're jumping ahead this is material for winter problem thread. All good points. Wouldn't want to be filming in winter.

In the martial arts gig, wasn't there some mention about noise from the heater?

In any event, the facility will probably have to be heated during the time frame, January and February, that was mentioned when it would least cost for renting equipment or getting pro-bono, or less expensive, actors and support staff.

If the location, or locations, have to be heated then that cost can be significant. I lived in an area with similar temperatures and the heating bills were expensive, so something to consider in the budget. Noise from the heating system can be a problem to deal with.

As mentioned, the cold temperatures when shooting outside can be a problem with some equipment so there are some issues to look out for but based on your martial arts gig you already know some of these. Experience is mentioned because there has been a lot written about the value of experience. Every gig can add something somewhere.

Yeah in the past I would try to turn off the heating or air conditioning, but if the people who let you use their location have no control over this, and you cannot find an off switch, what do other filmmakers do? Just get the heater as room tone, and try to cut it down in post?

If they can't switch it off they will record it as room tone. Apart from that, the recordists usually get the mics in as close as possible.

Sometimes things are just very loud. I've had to order some more silent lighting kit, because I can hear the combined fan noise from the multiple units I have, and attempts to filter it out, or use electronics haven't been too successful, so the two close in to the subject have to go and be replaced with silent ones!

Yeah for sure, in the past, I would just record the ventilation sounds as room tone, if need be.

As for deciding how many shots though, a thought has to come to mind in editing, that I did have a problem with before.

Let's say I want to cut out a line or two of dialogue and decide it's not necessary, but the actor is in a different spot in the room all of a sudden now, that you have cut that line... And since the blocking is done the same in each take and in each shot, the line is going to be said at the exact same spot, where the actor is moving.

What do you do then? It was suggested to me before to shoot a reaction shot from another character, who is looking at the actor as he/she is moving, so I can use that to cut around the deleted line. This can be done because the actor's eyes in the reaction shot are following the moving actor.

However, what if the actor in the reaction shot, who's eyes are also following the actor, says a line that also needs to be cut because it coincides with the other dialogue you want to cut? What do you do then? Or is there a way to shoot to avoid continuity errors like this, if you want to cut out lines, if that makes sense?

There will always be discontinuities that you don't expect or plan for, so I always make sure that I have something to use as a cutaway - I think it's rare to not have something that works.

Oh okay, by cutaways, do you mean insert shots? It's just in the past, if I use insert shots to hide a continuity mistake, the cuts to the insert came off as awkward, because the insert was unnecessary, and was only being used to cover up a mistake.

Plus also, other movies will have whole scenes play out without any cutaways to insert shots, so how do they do it, if they want to cut out lines of dialogue, but still keep continuity?

You're flying all over the place, Didn't they teach anything on your film course?

You shoot cutaways as part of your coverage, that's all part of your 3 + 3 stuff that you keep asking about. When shooting you have to ensure that the actors keep their performances consistent Having a continuity person is important or failing that the director should keep a sharp eye it, as should the camera operator.

An insert is different, it just a clumsy way of doing it, sometimes used on interviews because they don't have shots of the interviewer to act as a cutaway.

Oh okay thanks, but the problem with the cutaways, is that the continuity is effected in those if you cut out a line of dialogue as well.

Let's say for example you have a seen in an office, and actor gets up from his desk while talking to another actor, and we walks to the window.

You want to cut out the line that he says as he gets up from his desk and walks over to the window. Only he says this line as he gets up from the desk and walks over to the window, in every shot in the coverage.

What then? You could cut to a close up of the actor, and try to use the other actors eyes to see his eyes move and follow the character to the window with this eyes. Only you cannot use this because he also says a line that needs to be cut as well. What then?

You could use a shot of the other actor reacting to cover the lines that are removed. Their eye movement should indicate that the other actor has stood up, so allowing you to cut back to the actor again as they move towards the window.. The cutting point would be partly dictated by when the actor says the line, it could also be used to shorten the walk to the window

Oh okay thanks, it's just when I did this before on past projects, used an actors eyes to establish the movement of another character, it wasn't enough and the audience had to actually see the character move for it to register though. Unless I am doing something wrong?

Then you did it badly Ryan. An established technique, proven in cinema and tv, so if it doesn't work for a particular shot then there are two components that went wrong. The shot material or the editor proficiency.

The other question of course is WHY the lines needed to be cut, if the edit doesn't work, you have the option of putting them back in or altering them?

Having something work depends on the timing, you need to establish that something is happening for the audience to make sense of it. The person in the chair has to start rising, so you're cutting on the movement, so that the eye following makes sense. A cut working and not working can come down to one or two frames with something like that.

This is the point of doing multiple takes, having a large monitor on set, and carefully reviewing the performance before moving on to the next shot. You struggle writing dialog. The time to fix it is at the writing stage not after you film it. Someone pointed out your problems have to do with doing something poorly. Of course all of this isn't easy.

Oh okay, but there are movies where lines of dialog are cut in post though, when you watch the deleted sections of scenes, so I thought it was standard practice to do this sometimes.

I could show the rising of the actor out of the chair but it's hard to do this if the actor already starts saying the line while starting to rise. Should I not have the actors speak while getting up to make those cuts easier in the future perhaps?

Since we know it's possible edit lines out then it comes down to your lack of execution.

If you filmed him get up, walk to the window and then say his lines, you could have easily removed them.

You ignored bad dialog at the script and filming stage, and now are trying to fix it after the fact in the editing stage but didn't film the proper coverage...

I do wish that you'd watch deleted scenes with interest, and not as if there was something wrong with them. Maybe the lines were removed because without them, the edit looked better, and losing the lines didn't mess the plot line, so it was a positive thing. The Dior just felt that it moved things on, and it was not a repair, which you of course assumed it was. Edit decisions are art, and frankly, I find this hard, so sometimes cutting things to make flow work better, or ease an awkward move are good things to try. If it means losing a few unimportant words so what? You often find deleted scenes that you know when you watch them, we're just pointless and waste time, or just add nothing. Not every edit technique is there for fixing mistakes.

Having the coverage will allow you to remove unwanted dialogue, Scripts are commonly over length and the director may want the editor to tighten things up by cutting out lines that don't work. It's all part of editing, which is another rewrite of the story.

It's also the reason why producers want all those coverage shots,

Since we know it's possible edit lines out then it comes down to your lack of execution.

If you filmed him get up, walk to the window and then say his lines, you could have easily removed them.

You ignored bad dialog at the script and filming stage, and now are trying to fix it after the fact in the editing stage but didn't film the proper coverage...

Oh okay. But what shots would be the proper coverage then in this case for next time? I can't use a close-up because showing the actors eyes following the other after it gets up is not enough possibly. so what would the proper coverage be then?

A two shot will do the job, this is basic stuff.

You can either have it favouring the other person, or the person standing up, the former having the advantage that you don't see the lips moving. Although, if using that, you'd probably need to shoot both in order to establish the window.

Depending on the content, a MCU or CU with the eye movement can be used. All you need is the person rising from the chair, cut to the close reaction shot and back to the wider shot the person now standing and then moving towards the window. Which way you shoot it depends on the power relationship os the two characters.

Oh okay, by two shot do you mean OTS shot, or two people standing side by side in the shot?

Two shot covers a wide range, which you use will depend on the dynamics of the scene. if they're facing each other, usually it's tending towards the OTS end of the spectrum, but being looser in that regard as the shot widens.

They can be filmed from the side, but it depends on the nature of the scene and perhaps this implies the characters being equals.

In one question we're talking about the subtleties of cutting, and job role micromanagement, and then we're talking about film/TV school first week stuff about describing shots by industry standard phrases. If Ryan cannot understand the concept of a Two Shot, he's in deep trouble. Like talking about cardiac surgery without knowing where the heart is!

I would suggest that he reads "Shot by Shot" written by Steven Katz, if he's already read it and still asking these basic questions, he's wanting to do the wrong job.

"Two shot" means any shot with two (and only two) people in it. "Over the shoulder" is a special case of a two shot that focuses mainly on the face of one of the subjects, with the other seen mainly from behind (but closer to the camera).

Personally, I find the symmetrical two shot - two subjects equal in size on opposite sides of the frame, with the camera at 90° to the line between them - to be just about the most boring and awkward composition known to cinema, but if "boring and awkward" are the emotions you intend to evoke, then I suppose it has its uses!

The side on 2 shot tends to be most effective in those diner scenes at a table where two characters are having an eyeball to eyeball face off or a closer in each others faces scene. It only works if it reveals the relationship.

Oh okay, but if you have two characters looking at each other at a two shot, how does that help for coverage, since you can see one talking as he gets up, which you do not want to see, when trying to cut the line?

The side shot two shot isn't there for "coverage" purposes, it's there because it reveals a relationship. There are often other two shots and singles which are used as part of the same sequence. If you've got singles. you've usually got shots that you can cut to if you wish to drop lines or change the timing.

Regarding the chair, if they're talking as they get up, show just enough to establish that they're getting up, If speaking, cut out the sound so that there's just some mouth movement as they rise, the audience is probably looking at their whole body moving than their mouth at this point. You don't need to show that they've got completely out of the chair, just that they're doing so, the other person's eye movement (plus sound effects - exhaling helps to explain the mouth) will assist in letting the audience know that they're rising. Then cut back when the unwanted line is finished. It's surprising what audiences won't see if you do it right, I once had a sound recordist in a quick shot of a crowd and no one noticed.

However, this won't cover an entire speech, only a line as they get out of the chair, Cut back as quickly as possible, so that they appear to be moving from the chair.

If, in the end, none of this works, you may have to live with the line and, in the future, only have dramatically important lines of dialogue when a character is getting out of a chair

Oh okay. Well for future situations like this, where I want to cut out a line, would OTS shots, instead of singles work, to cut around lines, or will the audience still see the person's mouth or cheeks moving in the OTS shot likely, if they will notice, compared to lookin at the other actor?

I do wish that you'd watch deleted scenes with interest, and not as if there was something wrong with them. Maybe the lines were removed because without them, the edit looked better, and losing the lines didn't mess the plot line, so it was a positive thing. The Dior just felt that it moved things on, and it was not a repair, which you of course assumed it was. Edit decisions are art, and frankly, I find this hard, so sometimes cutting things to make flow work better, or ease an awkward move are good things to try. If it means losing a few unimportant words so what? You often find deleted scenes that you know when you watch them, we're just pointless and waste time, or just add nothing. Not every edit technique is there for fixing mistakes.

Oh yeah, I am not cutting out a few lines as repair, I just thought it would the edit would move better without a line here or there perhaps.

Everyone here is missing the obvious answer: every scene needs to have a cat.

The cat sits in a corner of the room/forest/volcano away from everyone else. The cat is aloof. The cat don't give a crap about nuffin'.

Every time a line needs to be removed, cut to a CU of the cat, as if to say "this cat is above your petty human concerns, and cares about none of what is happening here".

Problem solved.

I like your cat idea. Mine was to fly Brian out to direct Ryan's movie but only on the condition he may never ask a question here again.

Good idea, but going by Paul's post length HE'S the most obsessed and so should direct. It would free his soul. Bryan seems pretty chill already.

Yeah but Brian is chill like the cat and that's what's needed. I can't blame Paul it only takes me a few exchanges with Ryan and I've exceed my daily quota and need a day to recoup.

My answer is that Ryan should experiment with his editing and learn from his own mistakes, so find out what works and what doesn't. Otherwise, he'll always need someone holding his hand.

As one of the moderators on another forum advised, Ryan has to go out and make films, so he can learn. It's like trying to learn how to be a bricklayer by just asking questions on a forum, after a certain point you need to lay bricks to progress.

The great thing about this forum is that Brian and I actually met! Out of the two of us, he's absolutely the best director. I'd like to think I'm pretty good at putting out fires. The thing with all of us is that everything we say here genuinely helps other people. I doubt we will ever help Ryan, as to help, he'd need to change how he does things and he's stuck to a path we can't change, but the content if archived would be so useful in places that teach film making. You could use this as so much useful info and an explanation of why things go wrong. We're all educationalists!

kinda. someone would have to comb through each thread and (sigh, wait for it....) edit it.

Unfortunately, Ryan's threads have a non linear structure.

Well he IS known on the web as the Tarantino of forum posters, after all.