Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

Oh okay thanks. What I could do is throw rules out the window and just use whatever shot I think is emotionally appropriate at that particular moment in the scene, no matter what any rules, say, if that's best? I am just worried that it would be seen as possibly too avante guarde or drawing too much attention to itself, if give myself complete free rein though.

Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

Have a look at this, since it about getting material for the edit and how you're going to tell the story,

Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

Brian interesting video thx for sharing

Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

I think Ryan needs to change his "also known as" to az állandó kérdező (Hungarian)

Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

Thanks. I saw the video before, but it refreshed my memory to see it again now. Thank you very much. I felt that my editing so far is better than my shot decisions, perhaps.

Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

There is so much teaching material online, I don't know why you aren't picking up on all the information out there and using it.

It used to tough to find anything, now it's so easy to find the stuff a filmmaker needs to learn in order to make really good films.

All that is required is applying it, Don;t rush, trying to shoot scenes as fast as possible, if you;re not getting performances go again, attempting to draw things out of the actors. You're not shooting on film, so the costs are minimal.

The only way you'll get better is by practice, not asking endless questions. Experienced crews are those that have already made most of the mistakes and learnt not to make them again. The really good ones will made a mistake or go too far, but you don't notice because it's in a detail..

Soft shots can happen to the best focus pullers, they just happen more rarely and they usually call them out at the time, even if that annoys the director.

Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

Oh okay thanks. Well the only reason I have to keep to not take too long shooting is everyone's time and availability. Lately I've been trying to known out a page of dialogue per 30 minutes on average, so I don't go overtime in people's schedules. But is that too fast?

But there are other filmmakers that can get a whole feature length movie shot in a week, which is even faster than I am shooting it seems.

What I could do, is just shoot a scene I am planning in only two mastershots, and cut back and forth between those two. Is that enough coverage, or do I need more in case of any continuity flaws? Or is two masters enough?

Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

Is that good or bad? How many questions are too much?

Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

Well what I could do is shoot a scene in just two shots only and hope for the best. Perhaps that is all I need for a scene of a few minute scene is just one master, and a revers master.

Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

But are they worth watching? Are they cinematic or are they just talking heads?

If that's the standard of performance you're getting in 30 minutes a page, you're going too fast. You need really good actors to work fast, something you don't have.

Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

Yeah I was thinking of doing more rehearsal time next time, in order for the performances to be better when working fast during shooting, if that's better.

Well, what I could do is not follow any coverage formulas at all, and just shoot the shots I want only, with no back up coverage. However, is this a good idea, if I am still amateur at filmmaking?

Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

It depends if you're a highly skilled amateur or just learning.

Re: Shooting for the edit vs. too much coverage.
 

Well I could try it and see how it goes.