are two cameras necessary for a feature film

[youngfilmmaker]

Do you use two cameras when you're shooting a feature-lengh/short? Does it make things easier?

[Chicken Warrior]

Depends on what kind of film you're shooting. If it's a standard 'professional' shoot, it certainly speeds things up to have multiple angles in a single take. It's also important if you're encouraging your actors to improvise or you can only shoot the scene once. However, if you're film is more 'indie' styled with handheld camera work, etc., the more equipment the messier.

[cycledesign]

Most 'professional' shoots do not have multiple cameras. You only find multiple cameras on cheaper, quicker shows like sitcoms. Everyone else uses a single camera. You should be using a single camera as well unless you're shooting a live event or documentary.

[Sean Michael]

I had a directing teacher once who said, "Two camera shoots are for %@$#!"

For the sake of public decorum, I won't say more. But you definitely don't "need" (or arguably want) two cameras to shoot a narrative film. Not only does it not "make things easier," but it might just make things harder.

[evildead167]

At times it can be useful, especially if you have enough crew to work the both cameras and a good lighting designer to make sure the shots match. I've shot a small narrative project using two DV cameras. However, we almost always used tripods to help keep the shots lining up in the editing process. I hate how most handheld work looks in narrative films - cutting from one moving shot to another often looks sloppy.

The problems have already been said - the larger amount of equipment makes changing locations and setting up harder. You also shoot more footage making everything more expensive and the editing process more time consuming. It's hard to make sure the exposure and settings match in both cameras.

[Krane]

The problems have already been said - the larger amount of equipment makes changing locations and setting up harder. You also shoot more footage making everything more expensive and the editing process more time consuming. It's hard to make sure the exposure and settings match in both cameras.

If it's a matter of time and/or location additonal cameras could be a plus. Otherwise, with proper preperation additional cameras aren't really necessary.

[Hector]

Single cam all the way.

[lordtangent]

One is enough of course. a second camera can help, but only in specific situations. Don't forget you'd need extra crew to run the second camera and a top notch DP if you want the lighting to work well for both camera angles.

[AngusFindlay]

I agree, one is enough for a feature. I've shot a feature and numerous shorts, all on a single camera. Filmmaking is more fun, but if you end up doing event videography (sports, weddings, etc), two or more cameras can make an impossible project manageable.

[talaash]

Do you use two cameras when you're shooting a feature-lengh/short? Does it make things easier?

Hi all,

This is my first post, looks like a great site.

In order to answer this questions, you need to give a little detail regarding your project. There are many situations where 1 camera is sufficient but by no means ALWAYS the best method.

The person above who was told by his teacher that "two camera's are for ^%&*" has no clue what is involved in shooting an action feature. For example try doing a matrix bullet effect with one camera. Or Watch saving Private Ryan.

TWO cameras are even useful in simple dialogue scenes where you want to get as much information as possible in an intense moment. For example watch a "few good men" with Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson in the last scene. That scene is much easier shot with multiple cameras.

The number of cameras depends on the imagination and presentation of the director.

[Sean Michael]

Hi all,
The person above who was told by his teacher that "two camera's are for ^%&*" has no clue what is involved in shooting an action feature. For example try doing a matrix bullet effect with one camera. Or Watch saving Private Ryan.

Hey, I didn't say it...my teacher did.

Your point is well taken though. I could see certain specific instances in which it might be useful to have two cameras.

I think my teacher's point was simply that in most narrative situations, it is not necessary to have two cameras. And for indie filmmaking, using two cameras may complicate matters quite a lot without achieving much in utility.

[Mal]

The person above who was told by his teacher that "two camera's are for ^%&*" has no clue what is involved in shooting an action feature.

Wouldn't that then be the TEACHER who has no clue, not the person who posted what the teacher said?


EDIT: Oops, you beat me to it, Sean!

[talaash]

Wouldn't that then be the TEACHER who has no clue, not the person who posted what the teacher said?


EDIT: Oops, you beat me to it, Sean!

I apologise, it was the teacher of course I was refering to . My mistake lol.

come to think of it, my comment is just missing a comma lol,otherise it was ok.

[jdsmith19]

To answer your question... No. Two cameras are not necessary for a feature film. But, you can use them if you want. If you are going to let your actors improvise, it will save some headaches for your editor, but your DP is going to go nuts!

Two cameras work well for some styles... Spike Lee uses multiple cameras.

[Chicken Warrior]

And I believe there was a Bjork music video which used 100 miniDV camcorders in a single shoot.

[DaFireMedic]

I've never shot a "feature" film, but for me, it always helps to have a B reel as it gives you not only another angle for post, but additional footage to plug in to the timeline if the main camera misses the shot or just doesn't look right for some reason.

[Avene]

I'm eventually planning on buying a 2nd HV20 to speed up workflow. I'd have one permanently set up attached to a 35mm adapter (currently SG Pro), and the other would be used for steadycam style shots where it would be too difficult to keep a track of focus.

So yeah, 2 could be good, but not exactly for shooting the same thing simulataneously.

[Erik Bien]

That's fairly common in feature production: since time on set or on location is so expensive, many shows will have a "backup" camera body, so they can keep rolling if the camera goes down for some reason. Of course, often the "backup" cam gets pressed into service to get extra coverage of a big stunt, effects sequence, crowd scene, etc. Or if the production is falling behind schedule, the backup camera will go out with a second unit to get shots that don't require the director and the full crew.

[Marshallator]

Its really rather simple, with multiple cameras you can do more in fewer takes, and will have a bit more continuity, but you are less likely to be creative with your shots, so there is a trade off.

[thequads]

wow, i had no idea. I always thought there are at least a 2 cam setup during dialogue, shows how much I know. So are most actors trained to work so many takes? How do amateur actors usually handle these rigors? It would seem on an indie film, the best way to get good acting would be to do less takes that are more of the moment..

[Sean Michael]

I watched the director's commentary of the movie Primer (Sundance drama winner a few years ago). The movie was shot on film with ONE rented 16mm camera, and in order to conserve film, they did pretty much every scene in ONE take. (!) The director said they just rehearsed over and over until they got it right.

The original question asks whether two cameras are "necessary" for a feature. That's simply not the case.

[cycledesign]

wow, i had no idea. I always thought there are at least a 2 cam setup during dialogue, shows how much I know. So are most actors trained to work so many takes? How do amateur actors usually handle these rigors? It would seem on an indie film, the best way to get good acting would be to do less takes that are more of the moment..

If your actors can't do multiple takes of every scene, get better actors. The fact that it all seems so fluid when two people are talking and there are multiple over-the-shoulder angles is because of all the setup and editing. Remember you're creating the illusion that this is all happening, you don't have to shoot it that way.

[SenorKaffee]

@thequads

I just have one HV20, so what can I do to get more than one angle? Repeat the scene, repeat the scene, repeat the scene, change camera position, repeat the scene, repeat the scene, repeat the scene, change camera position.... and so on.

Amateur actors (AKA your friends ) tend to hate that, especially if you don´t communicate why you are doing so many shots and why you really need that special extra shot.

I wrote a blog posting about this topic a few months ago. I´d link to it but I´m currently translating everything back to german.

Have a look at this little DV cassette - 4 hours on the set for about 40 minutes of raw material which will transform into maybe 2 or 3 minutes of the final movie. How is this possible? Let me introduce you to the worst enemy of the amateur film crew.

Nah - not Albert Einstein, the other one. It´s repetition.

Most friends tolerate it when you want them to do strange stuff. Especially with the odd authority a camera on a tripod gives you. Doing strange stuff is fun and refreshening… the first time. But you´re not asking your actors to do it once. You go through 4 or 5 versions of a take to finally anounce that everything was great, but you need another take just to be on the safe side.

A regular film crew faces the same problems of course. But they are not only paid to do this kind of thing, they also expect it. They expect to do the same things over and over and over. Actors must be a pretty stress-resilient bunch.

What I learned this day is that I really need to take more time to optimize my shotlist. Not because I´m too lazy to run around with the camera from place to place. It´s because there is a friend waiting for me to get my act together. A friend complaining that her limbs are dying because her position is a little uncomfortable. No wait, that was half an hour ago - at the moment she is just quietly moaning in agony. Oops.

[thequads]

Ah i see, that makes sense. I've been watching the Hollywood Camera Works DVD set and the way they lay things out would suggest tons of cameras. I guess I was wrong. Is there a training dvd, or internet resource, that shows the real filming process in action?

[nolonemo]

One is enough of course. a second camera can help, but only in specific situations. Don't forget you'd need extra crew to run the second camera and a top notch DP if you want the lighting to work well for both camera angles.

One other thing, if you're using one camera for closeups and the other simulatenously for medium or establishing shots, you'll have a problem with booms mics (and boom holder) showing up in the wider shots (unless you body mic the talent).