Shooting Two Cameras vs. One

[Mark Allen]

I'm putting this question out there for those who have experience shooting both single camera and dual camera location shoots (not sit-coms).

 

I've only ever shot single camera - but I'm very curious about the logistics of shooting dual camera. I realize all situations are different - but I'm wondering on the whole which tends to get the shots in the can faster.

 

What are the key problems? Does the additional complexity in lighting overwhelm the advantages of getting two shots done at once? Are most people doing wide and close ups when doing two camera or are they actual covering two primary angles at the same time?

 

Thanks in advance.

[warzabidul]

There are different contexts in which to use dual cameras and the context dictates the type of use of the two cameras. If you're shooting a theatre piece then one camera would be wide whilst the other one is for close ups. This way intercutting is easier. If you keep them both rolling throughout editing is greatly simplified.

 

Problems are that you need to think of two angles, have two crews, light so that it's correct from two angles and at the editing phase you may have a lot of extra

material which takes time to view before the editing.

 

I'm sure someone else can answer in more depth.

[Mark Allen]

I'll clarify the context. I'm really asking exclusively about scenes or entire movies which might normally be shot single camera. For example, the TV show 24 uses at least 2 cameras if not 3 at times and yet that show is really a "single camera" show in Hollywood terms.

 

I'm also aware that some features are starting to shoot two cameras - and my question is really about the production ramifications of that.

[Michael Nash]

Once you get the practice of it and have a crew that can help implement it, it certainly makes things go faster (up to a point; too many cameras and too much action still take time to deal with). If you're just starting it, there's a learning curve. I used to be a little afraid of it, but now I love it can't shoot with only one camera! :P I shot with three cameras yesterday in a tight space and had to apply "glamour lighting" to the subjects. I've been doing multi-camera almost exclusively for a year now on a variety of TV and feature projects, both as camera op and DP.

 

There was a thread about this a while ago so check the archives. There was also an article in AC within the last year.

 

The TV show 24 goes for a more realistic and contrasty lighting scenario, so it's less critical for perfect key, fill, and backlighting for all cameras. That's not to say that lighting and blocking aren't still important, there's just more leeway.

 

Features have been doing it for years, and it boils down to the preference and working methods of the director and DP (not to mention the network or studio). Some directors and DP's don't like multicamera, and refuse to do it. Others are completely the opposite. If you can create the right rythm with the coverage and crew, it can be great.

[warzabidul]

George Lucas is shooting with multi camera set ups.

 

short documentaries about how George Lucas uses two cameras for episode III

[Matt Pacini]

In my own personal limited experience, it creates more problems than it solves.

 

1. It's hard to light so everything in different directions looks good.

2. It really limits camera movement and composition, because you're always in danger of seeing the other camera.

3. You burn up TONS of film.

 

So my conclusion was, it's great for editing, because the footage from that second camera is in perfect sync with the other (I'm not talking about crystal sync-sync, I mean, it's the same actual performance being captured), but it's just not worth it for the constrictions to shooting style, to me at least.

[David Mullen ASC]

The problems you describe are why I use 2-cameras sparingly.

 

But now & then, it's not much of a compromise to run two cameras, like to get an over-the-shoulder and tighter close-up at the same time (as long as you don't mind long-lensed "dirty" close-ups -- i.e. still a bit of the shoulder, unless you put it more off-axis that the wider camera and shoot the close-up more from the side.) I will be doing a feature soon with a child actor as the lead, and therefore have limited set time with the actor, so two cameras may be the only solution to getting more coverage. Plus matching will be easier.

 

My favorite thing is to use the B-camera as a long-lensed, tight, "wild" camera, not so much for more dialogue coverage but to grab anything that looks interesting -- small details for cutaways, etc.

[Michael Nash]

In my own personal limited experience, it creates more problems than it solves.

 

1. It's hard to light so everything in different directions looks good.

2. It really limits camera movement and composition, because you're always in danger of seeing the other camera.

3. You burn up TONS of film.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But there are specific solutions to those specific problems:

 

1. Don't try to light and shoot every direction at once; stick to one "side" of the room at a time and "turn around" as usual. Try to do shots that are less than 90 degrees apart when lighting is an issue. If you can light for a dolly or panning shot, you can light for two cameras that might ocupy the #1 and #2 positions of a moving camera.

 

2. You're not in danger of seeing the other camera if you take the time to compose your shots around them. ALWAYS set up for the "A" camera first (usually the wider shot), and then squeeze in the B camera around that. A wise DP taught me that, saying, "if you try to set up for both cameras, you destroy your life."

 

3. Don't roll on what you don't need. If you only need the head of the scene on the B camera, have B cut when it needs to. If the B camera only needs the end of the scene, have it start rolling when it needs to and then tail slate that camera before it cuts. And if you really don't need the extra coverage for a scene, don't shoot it.

 

Another advantage to having 2 cameras is that the B unit can "leapfrog" and get cutaways and pickups in other rooms, or get set up in advance for the next scene. It helps to have an astute B camera operator; someone who can act as 2nd unit DP so that they will look out for their own lighting and framing issues while the A unit works on theirs.

 

The feature I gaffed this summer carried 3 camera bodies, had one DP/A cam operator, one B camera operator, one 1st and one 2nd AC, and a loader. The 2nd AC acted as the B unit 1st, and since they shared the same lens set it wasn't as difficult for them as it might sound. The only shortcoming with that scenario is that someone other than the 2nd AC had to slate most of the time (I think everyone on the crew did it at one point or another). Ideally you'd have a dedicated 1st AC for B unit. It also meant I operated "C" camera when it was needed, and someone else camera-savvy pulled focus for me when needed.

 

On a tight feature schedule, having two units can really speed things up. Trust me. ;) But I agree it can create issues, and isn't right for everyone or every project.