Is FrameForge worth buying for storyboarding?

[Brian Drysdale]

As a director, having a monitor of a reasonable size on the set helps, the screens on the back of DSLRs are pretty useless other than for framing.

However, the camera crew should know if the shot went well or, if they've got doubts, they should call it out if they want another take, 1st ACs usually know when they've nailed the focus, as should the camera operator. A good viewfinder assists in this.

Given time, getting a saver or second good take was not unusual when shooting film, although sometimes, that was used to let the actors relax knowing they've now got a good take in the can .

[Josh Bass]

Second the monitor. I cant tell you the world of difference between what you can really see on a 7” vs a 17”.

[John Nantz]

Pardon moi … been checking in every once in a while and decided to comment on an earlier post (#280 by Paul R Johnson). Namely, the part about the people involved in this movie production.

Originally Posted by Paul R Johnson

I think Josh has hit something here - we're all giving opinions on this based on the experiences we have and we're not considering that your production will have amateur actors. They may be being paid Screen Guild bottom rates but they don't seem to have experience. The Director also seems lacking so all this talk about the actors needs to be based on their lack of formal training, their lack of professionalism and their lack of plain simple experience. Ryan seems to want to mimic the directorial processes of the greats but without their skills?

I wonder if we've got into the habit of treating master shots as the final rehearsal, but with results that can be used if needed?

What is clear is that Ryan's problems are made worse by the planning bearing little resemblance to the finished products. Too many part-trained people in every role, but horrifically high intentions.

An experience I had a few years ago may similar to what Ryan and company are doing. A group wanted to make a Halloween movie. This was about ten years ago when I was just getting back into video from a long hiatus (dating back to Standard 8 and Super 8 days). I did say long. Picked up a JVC HD7 HiDef cam and was rarin’ to go. Turned out they bought a Canon cam to use as the prime camera and my job would have been to shoot preparation and behind the scenes shots. And this is the important part: The location was in Kitsap County with a population today of 260,000. The city where Ryan is has a population of ~ 270,000. One difference with Kitsap County is that it is reasonably isolated from the Seattle-Tacoma Metro area so doesn’t have all the expertise that a metro area has. There is a Junior College and a local “arts college there but no Uni like Saskatoon has so that is a big difference.

My guess, and Ryan can tell me if I’m wrong, is the makeup of the group I was affiliated with was really what you guys would call “rank amateurs”. But, there were quite a few and with lots of interest. We’re talking script writers, makeup people, actors, audio guys, camera crew, etc. Really quite a few people but nobody paid. I attended a few meetings in the beginning while the discussions were about scoping out how to do it and never got a chance to shoot anything and then other more pressing things popped up in my life that required attention. “At the end of the day”, they did get a movie made and previewed, then shown on the local TV channel.

While Saskatoon has a Uni and a “hinterland population” and would [definitely] have a higher level of expertise available, it is by no means like LA with a lot of Hollywood capability. Paid actors and crew? Don’t know if that was discussed but, if so, and Ryan can comment on this, it’s probably minimal, perhaps a cut above volunteer. Maybe some of the crew will get college credit? Volunteers who want to get their foot in the door?

I apologize for coming in late on this part of the conversation but had to say it and get it out of my system.
-= John =-

[Ryan Elder]

Oh, are you asking if the movie shoots I helped others on were payed or not? They were all free volunteering for me so far. I have had some payed gigs when it comes to doing post work for people, but all my on set experience, was no pay volunteering so far.

[Josh Bass]

Not just that but also the caliber/quality/experience level of people you're working with

[Paul R Johnson]

I'd prefer to work with gifted amateurs rather than graduates who just got through and have no real world experience anytime. In fact, even though I spent a long time out doing education, since returning to real work I've used far more unqualified but really good people. Took me a long time to realise that natural talent cannot be taught in college, but putting a sticker on already good people is often all a college course actually does.

I've got a local lady here who is now over 80 and has two new hips and knees. She doesn't do the Internet, but she's probably got one of the biggest IMDb entries if she bothered to itemise them. She plays character parts either non speaking or the Two/three word response type parts. Her skill, which gets her part after part as background characters is she looks dead right and doesn't draw focus. I bet she could do stunningly useful masterclasses in movie technique simply because she's got experience of being directed by so many famous and also rubbish directors. I watched the awful musical Les mis the other day and spotted her as three different people. Same face, perfectly placed, blending in.

[Ryan Elder]

Well so far, out of the directors I worked under, one of them I guess you could say is a gifted amateur, in the sense that his movies have an appeal that they are so bad they are good, at least that is what others think when they watch his movies that I talked to personally.

I'm not really wanting to make a movie that is so bad, it's good myself, but he keeps making those types, and I think he is aware of it, and is doing it intentionally for entertainment. His movies so far, have not cost more than over $500 dollars each, not counting marketing afterwards.

Another person I worked for, shot their feature for &60,000, and the production values in it are much higher. Better actors, and better much cinematography. I was told if you can't make a good no budget movie, you can't make a better movie with a bigger budget, but I think budget certainly helps though, which is why I am spending more on this one.

[Brian Drysdale]

"Gifted amateur, in the sense that his movies have an appeal that they are so bad they are good" don't confuse the word "amateur" with low quality. A gifted amateur can produce powerfully original work, which is more noticeable in photography, although today, with the lower costs in video production it's now more possible in film.

Most indie films are probably what in the past would be amateur productions because people are making them because of the love of it, not for financial gain. Although, many do have hopes that will get distribution (other than YouTube), but the odds are so low, that the love of it is a bigger factor in the end.

There are professional films that aren't even so bad that they're good, they're just bad. There are ungifted professional out there.

[Paul R Johnson]

Every great professional was an amateur until they started getting paid! The word that describes the poor quality work is amateurish, which does have the negative connotation. Interesting that the people who constantly feed ryan total disinformation clearly aren't into publishing it on forums like this one where we could find out where they get their daft ideas?

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay, I misunderstood gifted amateur then. Well as far as storyboarding goes, I just feel it's safe to get everything from at least two angles, just in case one doesn't work out later it turned out. I can try to keep an eye out in the monitor, I just thought it was better safe than sorry.

But I could try to aim for a one shot and have it be good, if that is how I plan to have the scene in the edit.

[Paul R Johnson]

How do you storyboard for different angles, just in case. If you do one shot until you are satisfied, then why would you shoot again from another angle? Have a plan, and follow it. You cannot shoot everything twice, just in case - this is just strange stuff, Ryan. Were you told to do this by one of the 'experts'?

[Josh Bass]

Ryan, bottom line...shoot according to how you plan to edit.

If you plan to do long wide takes with lots of moving around and few cuts, shoot that way. Don't shoot coverage you only plan to use in an emergency. Only shoot coverage if you're pretty sure you're going to use it.

If you're worried about missing something on set... WATCH THE TAKE AGAIN! When you think you've got it, watch it again. Watch it three times. Hell, crowd everybody around the monitor if there's room and ask everyone to look for problems.

[Brian Drysdale]

Just a warning about too many people around the monitor, you can get feedback about things that are important to their role, but in the greater scheme of things don't matter,

[Josh Bass]

That's true. But someone might see a boom shadow, errant glance right into the lens, leg of a light stand sticking into frame, that sort of thing. Ryan will have to learn to filter and know what the dealbreakers are.

[Brian Drysdale]

I would keep it to the director and DP, then bring in other people if required to overcome an issue. On commercials the agency people usually watch it but having more people probably doesn't add anything to reviewing a take. The DP can usually spot boom shadows, glances into lenses and light stand legs, although they may have already seen them when operating the camera..