EXTENDING THE WARRANTY: GETTING MORE OUT OF YOUR CAMERA

It's obvious but I feel it needs to be said: a better camera doesn't guarantee a better video. I've been involved with enough of them to know that in competitions rarely is the winning entry the one with biggest crew and most expensive gear.

The inverse is true, too; in general a half-decent camera can hit above its proverbial weight class. Practically ever year a movie is shown at Cannes that really shakes things up. One documentary used old footage from a family camera and cut together on a $50 editing program caused major ripples some years back.

There are limits, of course. From the side of technical fidelity, you can think of camcorder shopping as flirting with the law of diminishing returns. There is no upper limit to how much can be spent on a camera, but generally speaking the higher you go in price the more you have to spend to get a significant and noticeable jump in quality.

The fantastic thing about videomaking is that the audience neither knows nor cares about technical specs. If anything I find people simply assume it's 'better than what I have' and leave it at that. Heh.

And while not all cameras are created equally (a good camera really does make a difference), there are ways to get more out of yours regardless of the price tag.

Don't believe me? Need proof? This video and this video were made with the same model of camera.

Yeah.

ZOOM DIFFERENTLY
When you hit the zoom button on your camera the pieces of glass inside the lens are physically moving further apart. This effectively making the lens longer, or more telephoto.

Most often this is used as simply a way to get closer to whatever you're recording. Moving in from a Long Shot to a Medium Close-Up, say. If you instead move the camera back so that your Long Shot STAYS a Long shot, some interesting things happen.

If you're scratching your head as to what a Medium Close-Up is, I covered shot sizes in a previous article.

The first thing you'll notice when you've zoomed in is that space is compressed. Jimmy, standing 3 feet behind Bob, appears about the same size as his friend. If you zoom out and move close enough that Jimmy is again in a Long Shot you'll see Bob appearing closer. A Medium Close-Up, say. It's all about ratios and distance from the camera.

The second thing that happens is that the area in focus, the depth of field, becomes narrower. If you have your subject move away from the background until he is the only thing in focus, the audience attention is more sharply focused on the subject and the shot is more intimate.

I won't go into too much detail as to why, but the depth of field is all about how open the iris is. On most consumer camcorders there is no way to control the iris manually. If you shoot somewhere with a lot of light, such as outside on a bright day, more of the frame will be in focus. If you shoot somewhere with less light, such as inside, the depth of field will be tighter. Knowing what's going on inside your camcorder means you have more control of your image.

STOP SEEING EYE TO EYE
The most common place people will place the camera is at eye level. Sometimes this is appropriate. Sometimes it's not. Even just getting the camera lower to the ground will often completely change the feel of the shot. Or a few feet higher.

Famously Orson Wells dug a hole in the floor of a set to get the camera lower to the ground. You probably don't need to go that far.

SK8ER B0Y
If there is a mantra of this blog, I'd like to think it's "Everything communicates.". Half of what makes movies feel cinematic is the way they move the camera. From a simple dolly to those smooth sweeping shots of expansive vistas. And while you don't have access to the tens of thousands of dollars of equipment the big guys do, I'll bet you've a buddy with a skateboard.

Or a car.

A wheelchair.

A shopping cart.

The basic principles still apply; wheels on a smooth surface gives you smoother movement than hand holding it. And if you want a crane, think outside the box. If you're setting is in a playground, why not get a couple people on one end of a teeter-toter smoothly lifting you on the other end with the camera?

Your ultimate goal is to make the camera man invisible to the audience. If that happens, it ultimately doesn't matter if you achieved it with a $10,000 a day rental package or a broom handle and some duct tape.

Of course, most of the above methods still require an operator physically holding the camera and soften any vibration. The final word on that? Lock elbows to your side and move the camera with your whole body.

FINAL WORDS
Camcorders are pretty incredible pieces of technology regardless of their price points. You're holding in your hands the culmination of 100 years of film history. Pretty cool stuff, all in all. The best thing you can do is push back against the comfort zone.

Give yourself permission to make mistakes.

Play.

Huh... Camcorder. Camera Recorder. I literally just got that. Why is it that all the cool sounding words have such lack-luster etymologies


This article is dedicated to Joshua The Anarchist for his comments on articles previous. He's got a pretty good blog of his own. Comments are what keep me writing this blog. If you like what you read, consider posting something simply to say so. It really does make my day.

Hey! Let's make this fun!

Post a comment saying what you'd like to be drawn as and the next article I will draw up to three commenters as they so desire to be drawn!

HOW LATE IS TOO LATE TO SAVE YOUR VIDEO?

There is a great quote*: "Every movie is made seven times and involves both sets of grandparents."

While this is a great way of expressing how incredibly difficult and involved the process of making a feature film is, this has very little practical value from the perspective of WHAT IN THE F^CK DOES THAT MEAN?!! The traditional stages of making a film are Development, Pre-Production, Production, Post-Production, and Distribution. I guess the other steps are about... financing? Is he treating conception as a different step than writing? I don't know.

But the idea that each step in the arduous process of movie making in and of itself is weighted more or less equally is one I can get behind. For the purposes of this blog, I'm going to say this: EVERY MOVIE IS MADE THREE TIMES.

The first time when it is written.

The second when it is planned and filmed.

The third when it is edited.

That isn't exactly brain surgery, but it's useful to think of these steps as separate. Each of these steps require a radically different set of skills to do, yet each has a HUGE effect on the finished video. So let's go into it, shall we?

MAKING YOUR MOVIE THE FIRST TIME: WRITING
When you stop and think about it, the written word is diametrically opposed to a movie. It literally is a different medium. A camera can't capture someone's thoughts. A written story needs to spend time explaining in detail what intuitively comes across on screen. A camera is always doomed to show too much. Etc.

The process of writing a script for a video is often one people find tedious and frustrating. There's always the temptation to jump the gun and start shooting the second you reach 'Fade Out', but here's the thing; no matter how brilliantly it is filmed a bad script can't make a great film. The reverse is true too; Chinatown is a better script than a film.

...I can't really tell you how to write a good script within the confines of this article, but here's what I can say: writing is re-writing. With few exceptions a first draft is never so good that a second or third pass can't improve it. In more professional circles, it's not unheard of to do a couple dozen (my record is twenty-two). Subsequent drafts you want to edit for brevity, clarity, pacing and flow.

Everybody's process is different, and you have to find your own. Mine involves cue-cards.

MAKING YOUR MOVIE THE SECOND TIME: FILMING
From the placement of the camera to the set up of the light to the pacing and performance, anything happening in front of the camera shapes the experience. Everything communicates.

If you place the camera low it makes your subject feel more imposing. That might be appropriate introduction to your villain.

Or a parent from a child's perspective.

Or for delivering a fact about superheroes.

The same line can take on different meanings if it's instead filmed from a high angle. Or with different line delivery.

MAKING YOUR MOVIE THE THIRD TIME: EDITING
You ask ten different people to take the same footage and cut together a scene and you will have ten different scenes. Clever editing can hide issues with performance and production. Creative editing can make an otherwise bland video suddenly interesting. You can give a video a distinctive look and feel simply in how the footage is assembled.

And yes, if you've got a troubled film, a show can actually be saved in editing!

...Okay, lemme give a tangible example.

This episode had no script. I had a list of points I wanted to make and had structured a rough guideline around them. Everything else was improvised.

In editing I found I had some major issues with the footage I had shot. More than half just didn't work well on screen. I ultimately ended up rewriting everything in post. Lines were used out of context. Ideas were dropped entirely. It was a challenge, but it was a satisfying one; I kept pushing to get the film down to it's leanest and most engaging. And what came out looks nothing like what I planned it to.

I was able to do that because I shot with an eye to give me options in the editing room. I had changed up delivery in the different takes. I had shot non-sequitur sequences. I had shot the same content from a second, tighter angle.

What a lot of budding filmmakers do is essentially edit while they're shooting; they'll only film from each angle however long they think they'll need. They'll only shoot one take. That's all well and good if the end film works, but it often won't. And if there's no coverage, it means you're stuck. Or it means re-shoots.

But really the point to take away from reading this article is that each step of the process you are making the film anew. Not until you press export on the project and put it online are you done. And that can be a wonderful, wonderful thing.

Now it's your turn. Do you have a video where you completely changed direction after you'd written it? Or filmed it? Post about it in the comments! Next post will be dedicated to the author of the best comment.


*Sadly I do not know who made this quote save that they are a filmmaker and likely European. ...hey, by show of hands; who actually still remembers what this note is referring to?

FILM SCHOOL ABRIDGED - THE CHEAT SHEET

A while ago I started a little side project called 'Lens Cracker'. I always liked the idea, but I never really did much with it save for a rough cut of the pilot. Consider this the magnum opus.

Early this October I set out with the lofty goal of the basics of Film School into a single 8x10 sheet of paper. This is what I came up with.

THE FILM TECHNIQUE CHEAT SHEET

I like it, frankly. The information on here, though certainly not all-inclusive by any stretch of the imagination, is indispensable in any on-set situation. It's designed as a tool. People to print out and keep in their pocket whenever their shooting. The problem is that it's only a reference sheet; it's only helpful to those who already know what everything means. Chances are good that most reading this blog won't.

So let's change that.

Starting next week I'll be posting bite-sized explanations of everything on this sheet. It'll take a while, but it gives me an excuse to post more regularly.

Cheers for now!

Oh! And post any comments or questions and I'll address them in following installments.

GUEST ARTICLE: HOW TO MAKE AN INTRO (CTG TV)

I approached several people about using their intros after the last article for a follow-up and a possible video tie-in.

Karen Demsko of Color the Grayscale TV blew my away by writing the following about the approach she took to make her very effective intro.

Coming up with the CTG TV intro, was an interesting experience, in that I was able to come up with an idea myself, without any outside interference.

Meaning I had free reign, creatively. Boo ya.

However, though I had the creative freedom to fly like an eeeeeeeeagle, I still followed the same process of creation that I always do.

The first was to ask myself “What am I looking to see?” I jotted down design ideas and thought about what CTG TV represented to me and how I wanted to convey my feelings and ideas to my audience.

From there, I took these ideas and made about four to five rough drafts, sketching out ideas and doing very basic storyboards.

More times then not, I buffet style through my ideas and come up with a Frankenstein of a project that I am truly proud of.

Something to note as well: I had to be aware, at all times, of my tools, abilities, and time.

As much as I may have longed to have a professional grade intro sequence, I may not have had the time (due to work or other priorities), the tools (such as certain computer software), or general artistic ability to create what my imagination might have cooked up.

Next was to figure out what music I wanted to use.

This seems like an odd one to add, but it’s one I feel I need to add. The likelihood that my intro would be silent was slim to none.

Music and/or voices can be one of the more challenging aspects of the creation process. I say this from my own personal experience, as I am not musically inclined. Places like istockphoto are a great for finding music that you can use (though it will cost you), but if you happen to know somehow who plays or creates music ask them for help! Having such a valuable resource should not be overlooked.

The next step was to storyboard.

People tend not to do this and I’m not exactly sure why.

Laziness perhaps? I can’t be entirely sure, but this process always, always, ALWAYS helps me further down the line (when shooting footage and animating).

This helped me organize my vision and the music down into one coherent idea.

Last, but certainly not least, was to actually get down to the nitty gritty and start production.

With my preproduction out of the way, it was time for me to get cracking on the intro.

I set up my camera and lighting so that the first two shots would have the light needed in order to look good in the gray-scale color scheme I was going to make. The third shot, in retrospect, could have been lit better, but I’m still pleased with the results.

That was the easy part. Now came the hard part. Animating.

The entire animation was done in Flash (yes I know what your saying: “what were you thinking?!” this was before I could acquire Adobe After Effects) and took about two solid weeks to complete. Making sure every patterned ribbon (there were four), every ball (there were eight), and every swirly line (there were three) was exactly the way I wanted it to be and matched the part of the music when the animation would appear. This intro was to encompass my entire brand in one short, complete burst and I knew it needed to be just right. I wanted the colors to be vibrant (representing the vibrancy that my shows would hopefully be), the logo to be revealed over a small period of time (building a small amount of anticipation that something awesome was just about to start), and, most importantly of all, to leave just as quickly as it came. I wanted it to be a small burst of something, but nothing that lingered too long on the screen.

After this was finished, I went into postproduction and I took both my live action shots and my animation and lined them up with the music in Final Cut Pro. And viola! The project was done!

Thanks so much to Karen for agreeing to do this. Check out her show, Animation Domination, if you haven't already.

...I have no idea why the formatting is so wonky.

It's at this point I should dedicate this to Montag for a talking about his own minimalistic approach to making an intro... does that even work with a guest article? Oh well.

SEVEN DEADLY SINS OF THE HOMEBREW VIDEOMAKER: TITLE SEQUENCES

Hey all, welcome to the second installment of my series on the common mistakes in Homebrew videos. In case you missed the last one... you should check it out.

Blatant self-promotion? Eh, why not.

A note about this article; though this could certainly be applied to a variety of different internet video series, this issue is most apparent in reviews.

Join the conversation below and suggest your own deadly sin!

DEADLY SIN NUMBER TWO: REGARDING TITLE SEQUENCE
I don't care how much you like that song, there is no purpose served in having a two minute intro to a ten minute video. Every second spent playing clips from previous episodes is a second the video is making an audience wait for fresh content.

Though it would be easier, I can't advise against title sequence universally; the reality is while a great title sequence can keep an audience interest sustained in an otherwise average review series a bad title sequence can turn the same audience off in their first episode.

The real problem is that most of those who use them don't actually understand the purpose of a title sequence. If you've got a show, be honest; do you actually know why you have a title sequence, or are you just including one because everyone else has one?

The Purpose of a Title Sequence
Guild regulations require that the key creatives be credited near the beginning of a film or television show. In all likelihood, this is where the practice would have originated.

Though movies had them in some form or another since the early 1900s, the title sequences of the homebrew scene really have their origins in television if only because episodic television, like serialized reviews, use the same title sequence in each episode (where a movie's will only be seen once). We can begin there. The following list should not be considered all inclusive, but is a start.

1. A title sequence is intended to set the tone for the show.
   
2. Every episode of an average TV series will have different writers, directors, and in the case of shows like The Outer Limits cast and settings. The title sequence gave a sense of cohesion and familiarity to the series.
3. A title sequence gives a buffer of time for those people coming in late to the program.

The third entry, as you can imagine, is the one that absolutely doesn't apply to videos for the internet.

Common Misteps in Homebrew Title Sequences
On the internet, the audience always starts the video at the 00:00 mark. Unlike the makers of Buffy or Batman, you know absolutely where the audience starts your video. Add to that the acceleration of attention spans and well... The reasons for a long title sequence on the internet are greatly diminished. There will always be exceptions, but think in the neighborhood of 30 seconds as a maximum.

Some other practices which diminish the effectiveness of a title sequence include but are certainly not limited to:

• REPETITIVENESS. Doing a montage of clips from previous episodes where each shot consists of the host talking or gesturing from the same camera angle. This highlights the limitations of the show. It also can send the message that the host is trying too hard with even having a title sequence.
• BAD MUSIC CHOICE. More than anything else in an intro, the music chosen becomes tied with the show. Choosing something that's over-used or something that's at odds with the tone and concept of the series really will leave a bad taste in the mouths of your audience. Plus, you know, that whole copywrite thing.
  
• BAD CUSTOM MUSIC. Commissioning a song for your video to avoid Copywrite issues is very admirable. Unfortunately most often a videomaker will go with the first musician who's willing and not the person who's the right choice for the role. This often leads to a song that's painful on the ears because of the musician's limitations or a song that's a sharp contrast to the tone of the show.
• HAVING A TITLE SEQUENCE. Not every show needs a full title sequence. Sometimes a title and a music sting is enough (What The Fuck is Wrong With You), and sometimes a video doesn't need so much as a logo (Nostalgia Critic).

Tips for Making a Good Title Sequence...?
There's not much I can say here, really. The reality is there's no magic formula because every case is different. To do it justice, I'd have to do some case by case looks at title sequences which work (and which don't).

Honestly, that may well be something that needs more than just an article. At this point I turn it to you, guys: is there any reviewer or videomaker who'd be willing to let me publicly do an analysis of their title sequence? Any volunteers can contact me in any way they can find to do so, including by posting in the comments or by e-mail: bdmacdonald.films@gmail.com

To be continued...?

This article is dedicated to Darren Maher for being an awesome dude and posting intelligently on a previous article.

Because, I do that. Comment people!

SEVEN DEADLY SINS OF THE HOMEBREW VIDEOMAKER: MICROPHONES

I spent a lot of time thinking about the most noticeable mistakes made by those in the Homebrew scene; this is the first of a series of seven articles looking at that. Or eight. Or twenty.

My blog, my rules baby.

Feel free to join the conversation and suggest your own deadly sin below!

DEADLY SIN NUMBER ONE - USING THE CAMERA MICROPHONE
Regardless of the quality of your camera, the attached microphone is not designed to give you good audio.

No really.

See, microphones are designed for different purposes. There are different pick up patterns and frequency ranges, each designed to record in specialized ways. The more expensive the microphone, the more specialized its use. A microphone designed for a drum set isn’t going to work as well in recording a trombone, and vice versa.

And your built-in camera microphone? It’s designed to pick up everything indiscriminately. You, the dog in the next room, and even the motor of the camera itself are all picked up with equal importance. Even in a best-case scenario, you’ll end up with a permanent hum from the camera’s mechanisms.

But there is a way to optimize the sound you get from any microphone: placement.

Makes sense, right? How close the microphone is to the subject effects how well that sound is recorded.

To give you some idea, your average directional shotgun microphone used on professional movie sets is at optimized distance at 2 feet from the actor’s chin. It’s not a perfect comparison, but it’s a decent ballpark.

The basic set up for reviewers is more likely to place the camera at least 6 feet away from the subject. Other videomakers will often go further. Are you beginning to see the problem here?

Of course, it’s always possible to place the camera to optimize sound quality, but then you’re highly limited in what shot’s you can get. Essentially, you’re being held hostage by the microphone. And even with the most optimized placement, you're still not going to eliminate the hum from the camera’s motor.

MICROPHONE TIPS
No getting around it, anyone wanting to make the jump into video making of any kind needs a separate microphone if they want good sound quality. There are several approaches you can take to get better sound. I’ll avoid the more obvious options such as lapel or hand-held microphones and get into more outside the box suggestions.

- Remember, it’s more about microphone placement then microphone quality. And just because a microphone is more expensive, doesn’t mean it’s best for your needs. I’ll reiterate what I said previously; as microphones get more expensive, they get more specialized. Do your research, and don’t be afraid to talk to an expert.

-You can take a page or two from the big boys. That carbon fiber extendable pole holding the microphone is called a boom. If you’ve a friend you can rope in, duck tape and a broom handle will give you the same function.

-Going back even farther, in the late 1920’s filmmakers would hide microphones in various props such as flower pots and have the actors perform the scene around them. This would likely have to be built into the concept of the show, but this can help to improve the audio quality while keeping the microphone invisible.

-Record the sound separately and after the fact. When filming the highly influential El Mariachi, Robert Rodriguez would have his actors re-do their lines immediately after he cut. In this way, the rhythms and pacing would be fresh in their minds. In editing, he would cut to another shot when the dialogue started to go out of sync. No reason you couldn’t do the same.

-Godzilla dubbing. Similar to the last tip, except the videomaker makes no attempt to sync the audio. Again, this has to be incorporated into the show concept, but in the right hands this could have a lot of potential.

TRIBUTE TO THE HOMEBREW SPIRIT

I have and will continue to be critical of many individual elements connected to the Homebrew Videomaking scene, but that should never be confused as disdain. I support this movement and what it represents. Beyond the obvious idea of the underdog and burgeoning filmmaker, my reason is simple: nearly every important movement in film history has it's roots in a rebellion against the status quo by someone embracing the same spirit I see in the Homebrew Videomaker.

THE BROTHERS LUMIERE AND EDISON
It's hard to say who got to it first, but these were the people we owe for the medium of film. And while the Lumiere Brothers created far and away the most interesting shots, it was Edison who embraced the medium as a way to tell stories. Also Edison was the first to make home movies.

So here I solute the innovators, the craftsmen, the insane entrepreneurs who got out there with their crazy inventions and laid the groundwork for an entire medium.

EISENSTEIN
At the birth of Communist Russia, and at the time when Communism was still full of idealsim, this guy had the crazy idea that editing was as important in filmmaking as the writing or the shot composition. This guy's theories, and the films he employed them in, are still used in film classes.

A toast to the revolutionaries.

THE FRENCH NEW WAVE
Rebelling against the vapid glamour of Hollywood productions, the leaders of this movement set out with micro crews and smaller budgets and broke every rule in the book. Hand-held camera? These guys did it first. Jump-cuts? Right here. Not everything they did worked, but the homebrew scene owes much to these guys.

Respect to the rebels.

MTV AND THE MUSIC VIDEO
The early days of MTV, music videos weren't exactly reknown for their artistic prowess. Prominent working directors weren't exactly knocking down the doors of musicians to make a music promotion vehicle. That role went instead to the guys who did. People like Spike Jones and Michelle Gendry weren't especially skilled in the technical department, but they had ideas and broke many-a-rule to make them happen on shoe-string budgets.

In one famous case, Spike Jones wrapped the camera lens in a sandwich bag so he could do an under-water shot. Ballsy.

Props to the ballsy gentlemen of the MTV age.

HOMEBREW IN THE INTERNET AGE
There is a quote that someone made; an artform can't be considered an artform until it's available to everyone. This, they proposed, was as true with paint as with music. If that's the case, then it's only been in the last 10 some odd years that we've seen the artistic legitimization of both animation and movie-making.

It's an exciting time.

It's a time when more videos are uploaded online than produced for television (at the 2008 rate of upload, it'd take 60 days to upload to youtube what American television stations took 60 years to make).

It's a time where ideas matter more than production values.

And yes, it's even a time where a reviewer can be a bigger draw than the media they review.

So here I celebrate the spirit of the Homebrew.

Author's Note
Why hey there! As stated in the previous post (part 2 of which is coming at some point), this article is dedicated to Pugsly6338 for being the only person to actually post a reply to my last article. Good for you, Pugsly6338!

CONFESSIONS OF A TGWTG REJECT

Hello, I’m B D MacDonald and I am a recovering TGWTG Reject. It’s been two months since my last cameo.

That’s how these things are supposed to go, right? A thin veneer of false sincerity stretched over snide sentiment? Snarky comments to paint an ugly picture in broad strokes? Hm.

No, sorry, I can’t do it.

As much as I’ve fought it in my career choices, I am son to a teacher and grandson to two; critical thinking is kind of hardwired into me. And yes, I am a TGWTG Reject in the sense that I’ve unsuccessfully applied to the website ‘That Guy With The Glasses’ and I’ve done so three times. But that’s not really what the term refers to, is it?

A ’TGWTG Reject’, as used by detractors of the site (and the forum community grown around it), is an obese man-child cam-whore living at his parent’s house who regularly makes poorly-produced 30-minute videos ranting on movies, games or toys in the quest to become internet famous and get enough ad revenue to live off of.

I can tell you that the reality is rarely like that. In fact, the diversity of the homebrew review scene is staggering. There are artists and army veterans, English majors and Engineers, web designers and opera vocalists. There are single parents, couples, gay men and women, and... well yes, even some virgins.

I’ve spent two years in this community actively breaking it down to its components to understand it.

This blog is a place for me to express the theories and philosophies I developed over that time.

• What are the limits of free use?
• Why a title sequence can actually hurt a show.
• How soon should a video capture attention? How often does it need to renew that attention?
• What are the limits of review?
  

It’s a place for me to address misrepresentations of what really is a unique sub-community.

• Who are the people behind the videos?
• What are the stories behind the people?
• Why do they do what they do?
  

It’s also a place for me to talk about the underbelly of that community.

• Where does fandom cross into obsession?
• The bottomless pit and the diminishing pot of gold.
• The problem of ego.
• Double standards.
  

Allow me to extend an invitation to you, dear reader, to take a different look at the unusual world of the home brew videomaker. Whether you love the culture or hate it, I promise you’ll find an interesting debate here.

B D MacDonald is a freelance videographer and filmmaker. His other blog, Trenchcoat Anti-Critic, is far better written, he promises.