Branching out from bodybuilding videos a little and recently shot a play. This is an interesting excerpt from the DVD I made from it.
It was a very low budget production, just an archival kind of thing for the actors, their friends and family. Still, I wanted to do as good a job as possible. We used three cameras and shot two different live performances, cutting them together to minimize audience noise and line flubs. We had a shotgun mic on the camera closest to the stage and a lavalier hanging from the ceiling just about their heads transmitting to another camera. The third camera was running unmanned in the back of the very small theater.
I learned a lot from this and next time I think I would insist on more even lighting across the stage and a chance to rehearse our camera movements with the actors before shooting. We were winging it this time and missed a few key shots because of it.
Let me know how you think it flows, if you think the cutting or the shooting should have been any different.
The audio works well, I thought.
I'm not sure about the comment on the lighting. The snag with the lighting is that there is obviously very little top light. I'm a professional member of the ALD - and have quite a few lighting design credits to my name - so I think I can comment from the perspective of theatrical lighting. Looking at the shadows, we have plenty of hard profile source lighting from the front (which is quite normal) but the angle is quite low, making shadows on the rear walls very obvious. Normally, top light would soften these - especially if they're Fresnels - but top light is minimal, so there are masking issues. UK preference is for sources 45 degrees apart(ish) from the front, idially from a 45 degree down angle. Here, front light is mainly central, and a rather flat angle. My guess is that this is a venue issue. Better lighting positions are not available. One solution would be to replace the hard edged profiles (ellipsoidals in US parlance) with softer Fresnels - this would prevent those very hard edge shadows. The video suggests side light too, so many shoulders have hot spots. All these make shooting video difficult.
I usually reject changing lighting to suit video, when the audience who have paid for their seats are the key audience. Change the lighting to make it better for the video, but less emotive for the audience is short changing them. I guess that in this show, being a 3 waller set, then the designer has gone for white and bright - a bit Brechtian really - very stark. With this play, there are opportunities for light and shade - BUT the set really minits what you can do. Frankly, the set design is a mess. Curtains and pictures? Big empty black windows. Depending on when the director set the scene, as in time of day, then there's so much scope for light coming in from outside, window frame shadows on the wall - wallpaper? If the Director wants illusion - he's got a black backdrop one side - but it should not be lit - light the actors and the space - NOT the black drapes. The subject matter isn't bright and white, it's dark and unpleasant. This is desk lamp territory and gloom - all cliche stuff, but it works.
The acting standard is fine, and they look 'right'. The lighting has just shown up the plain walls and low set height - those lanterns visible are trimmed really low - so are pretty incapable of soft, accurately focused light.
I think what you got was quite good, considering the problems.
Wow, fantastic feedback! I learned a lot! Thanks!
For the record, I think the lighting was a venue issue and if we were to change the lighting for the video I would insist on a private performance. I agree with you about not ruining the experience for the paying customers.
Actually, if you can arrange a private performance then you can get your cameras into prime positions too - so it can almost be TV
To video any form of stage production can be a hit and a miss.
There could be a market for these type of productions. The way they give out brochures at £5.00 a time.
But one would have to use a different technic and research the market.
Nicely covered Mike. You've made quantum leaps in your productions over the last couple of years.
The coverage of this, bearing in mind the limitations of the live performance, was excellent. Great quality, nice smooth pans and framing and cuts that help enhance the drama.
We all strive to make the best of perfromance coverage and will always be disappointed at some aspect. Even if we had a closed set and endless retakes there would always be some glitch on sound or lighting that could be improved, so don't be too harsh when self flagellating with the fish.
Keep up the good work!
Actually, if you can arrange a private performance then you can get your cameras into prime positions too - so it can almost be TV
That's what I was thinking Paul. Get up on stage with them. Start a scene over if they flub a line. Etc.
Nicely covered Mike. You've made quantum leaps in your productions over the last couple of years.
The coverage of this, bearing in mind the limitations of the live performance, was excellent. Great quality, nice smooth pans and framing and cuts that help enhance the drama.
We all strive to make the best of perfromance coverage and will always be disappointed at some aspect. Even if we had a closed set and endless retakes there would always be some glitch on sound or lighting that could be improved, so don't be too harsh when self flagellating with the fish.
Keep up the good work!
Thanks branny. You've always been a big help.