Alex Donkle

Mixing is far more about the room and the speakers than it is about the hardware. That's the main drive to get into a studio to get work done. Plus having a dedicated mixer on the project is a fresh set of ears and ideas to help you get the best results. That said, if you're dead set on mixing your own stuff get a Pro Tools LE and Mbox 2 (either mini, regular, or pro (pro is the only one that'll handle 5.1 mixing)) interface. That way you can bring the files into a studio later even just for a day to check the mix and still be able to tweak stuff (since Pro Tools is far more likely to be installed in a studio than anything else). Check out http://www.acoustics101.com/ for some basic acoustics knowledge for getting your room into good shape (its run by Auralex Acoustics). For monitors, cheapest I would go is $500/speakers for really good results. High quality just costs money. If you're able to get a day or two in a studio after your mixing session, then you could go cheaper as you can clean up the details in the studio.

How do you guys spot bad 'listening' ? You have to listen and watch them closely. If their thoughts stray even for a second to lunch, their next line, whatever... and you're paying close attention, you'll see it. When I notice things like that feel free to mention it to them since it shows you were watching them and not the lighting or the set design (as many directors are prone to doing during takes). Just a simple "That was good, but there was just a small moment when I noticed your concentration wasn't completely in the moment" can work magic for the scene and the actors trust in you. For consistency, that should be part of the job of agreeing on the character beforehand and making choices before you get to shooting. There are so many choices that need to be made about characters and once those choices are made, it's easier for an actor to get through scenes consistently between coverage angles. If an actors isn't certain of the character's choices, he may choose different ones in different takes and while this can be great for a master shot (perfect for experimenting with ideas if you've got the time) those choices should (in general) be agreed upon after the master shot is finished for closer angles. Granted, sometimes new material just pops out of nowhere and you just have to make it work because it's so great. My favorite example of this is Christopher Walken's lunch scene in Catch Me If You Can. For all the shots before his "2 weeks later she was my wife" line was said loudly and proudly, but on the 3rd take of his CU he broke down into tears during the shot (when they cut back to a MS of him later you can see he didn't cry in that take). It was just so great they kept it in. That shouldn't happen every take or even every scene as it slows the day down, but if an actor really has a strong impulse they should always feel free to follow it on a set. Now as for making material "fresh" every take? That one of the things that separates great, good, and bad actors. Sometimes if you don't like tons of coverage and find and actor that does his best one the 1st takes, that can work for you (Clint Eastwood). Other directors want an actor than can find the same moments on their own again and again with little guidance as they shoot 100+ coverage angles (Michael Bay). And yet some directors want an actor they can mold take after take (Fincher or Scorsese). It's always you're goal to find out how an actor works and accommodate that, but just as many times an actors needs to adjust to how you want to direct them. (Penelope Cruz mentioned how hard it was adjusting to Woody Allen's idea of just doing one take one scenes, and Jake Gyllenhaal mentioned the difficulty in going 20+ takes with meticulous detail when working with Fincher) None of these are "wrong" it just depends how you like to direct a movie.

You're in the same boat as a lot of people and if you're not planning on using equipment a lot, renting is generally the best method for getting high quality audio. And really, finding a sound person with gear is the best as then you'll be getting their experience as well. Everything is relative however and if you're just cutting your teeth on some fun projects and learning, owning some lower-end gear can be invaluable as it'll let you work completely on your own schedule and learn the basics for yourself. Good luck,

Yes a good preamp is going to cost a bit, but a dynamic mic doesn't fix that problem like you imply. Dynamic mics have worse transient response (response to fast noises) and are larger and heavier in general. They output basically the same level and both need good preamps to operate at their best, however a condenser just needs 'phantom power' to operate. +48V generated by the mixer or recorder (most have the option to supply this). This a recorder either has or doesn't have, there's not quality concern here. For fun sound effects and guitars and drums, dynamics can be great, but not for film dialog. You want a condenser and trying to grab an Oktava mk012 would be a great start for interiors, an Audio-Technica AT4073a as a shotgun for exterior (in a lot of wind you'll want at least a fuzzy, slide-on style wind blocker, but swing for the Rode blimp system if you can for med-high wind situations). As for MiniDisk, it's a compressed format with a mechanical component. Going with something like a Zoom flash-based recorded would be much safer as then you don't risk a mechanical error like the disk getting scratched and losing all your work (although you should always backup everything for sound and video no matter what you record to). Plus with something like the Zoom you can record uncompressed wav files that are cleaner. A good clean preamp is another story. The Zoom H4n has good preamps built-in with its recorder, but down the road grabbing a real mixer like Sound Devices 302 would be ideal.

Just curious, but in pre-pro when working out all the gear that's needed, who should actually be the one to make the call about what dolly would be the best choice? Is that part of a DPs job to know?

Just something I'm working on more with a larger crew around me, but I'm curious how the people here handle the choice of talking to actors in private about characters (i.e. pulling them out of earshot inbetween takes) compared to just tossing ideas out in the middle of the set where everyone can listen in.

I think most audiences would rather have a good story and solid acting than dazzling special effects. "Stealth" would be a perfect example of this. If you're looking at a car crash though, as a local towing company that handles totaled cars and see if they could help you out. A friend of mine had them drag a smashed up car out onto a dirt road and then took it back after they'd finished shooting all for free. And it's certainly impressive if you do it right. Like the opening of a "Lost" episode started with someone waking up with a cut over their eye, then the camera pulled back showing she'd been in a car crash. Look ahead and there was a hole in the windshield where her mother had gone through it, and she way lying in the street covered in glass and bruises. A helpful towing company, $40 in fake glass, and a good make-up artist and you could pull off that scene.

Just watching the BTS on Titanic, I noticed Cameron using an interesting director's viewfinder that had a wireless LCD attached to it. He has it in this video between 2:16-2:40 (shooting the dance scene) http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=cM3x4qAc0Dc Closest thing I've found is this... http://media.panavision.com/ReferenceLibra...pvau_finder.pdf But that appears to be strictly on the Australian Panavision website and it also doesn't look like it's the exact same thing. Partly just curious what Cameron was using, but also curious if anyone knows of a non-Panavision viewfinder that could be bought for a shoot? (looking for lens approximations, so just using a regular DV camera isn't what I'm looking for)

The AD was a student, but had worked as a 2nd AD on a couple low budget features (everything in Indiana though, so he may have just learned slightly off-beat standards). We had a DP, but I collaborate with him like Spielberg with his DPs. Namely that I handle 98% of shot and lenses choices, then have him focus on the lighting of those shots. That's actually the first I've heard of a DP scheduling a shot schedule though, everything else I've read lead me to believe that the AD set that up himself. (Actually, if anyone know how he handled creating shot lists on the fly during Schindler's List I'd be very interested to hear about it) In regard to whether the AD was aware I didn't like his preferred way of working 100%, it was mostly left unsaid as when I originally said that I wanted to change the shots and started walking through the new ones (in cutting order), he stopped me and said he really needed just to know the CUs on one characters first, then the CUs on the other, then the other, then the dolly shots, then the handheld shots (in a shooting order)... And talking to him later he said for him to make up a shot schedule without me putting any thought into the shooting order myself, he would want a complete shot list from me a week before at least. So I think every set he's worked on followed strict shot lists basically. I put this together while on set and I probably could've twisted his arm to write down shots as I tell them, then do the entire order himself, but opted against that because since he hasn't worked that way before inevitably there would be some mis-communication and something would be missed (plus having not worked with crew a lot I had some fright that how I wanted to do it was just completely non-pro, something I learned doesn't really matter as long as everyone is on the same page and the results are good). I certainly got a much better handle on how I prefer to direct with a crew though, so on future films I can be very clear in pre-pro about how I like to work and what I'm looking for an AD to do.

That is an extremely broad question in all honesty. For starters, Spielberg in general has much better compositions and shot designs than most other modern directors. Check out Jaws, Close Encounters, E.T., Minority Report... for a lot more of his style. But that's not to discredit some great other works. The Godfather is a great example of strong framing, Lord of the Rings, The Good the Bad and the Ugly, Se7en... Actually, if you want a quick run through of some decent and a couple great movies in a format easy to analyze compositions, check out this site... http://www.leavemethewhite.com/caps/index.php?cat=3 Just screengrabs every few seconds and it's a very quick and easy way to watch compositions of an entire film without getting drawn into the movie by silly things like acting, music, and storytelling... lol.

Something subtle I've noticed about a lot of professional productions compared to student films (or early films in general) is that in static shots for pro films the camera always has a very slight motion to them where as non-pro films generally just have locked off shots. From my knowledge this is because pro films would always have an operator on each shot, but does anyone have any good way of describing this subtle difference? (seems odd to say "I want a static shot, but 99.5% static) Or any tips technique wise for this when I'm operating myself on a larger camera (I'm a director, but like to operate myself on simpler shots when it's a particularly emotional scene. The technique I mentioned isn't hard with light cameras, but on my first RED shoot recently I didn't op beyond the first 2 or 3 shots because it just didn't feel right with the heavier camera)

Sorry if this isn't the right board for this, but if it isn't can you just let me know of a better source for this questions... Working as a director on my first well crewed student short film (most of my shorts are just me holding the camera and doing everything), I had some trouble communicating with the 1st AD about scheduling shots on the day. Normally I shot list and/or storyboard everything (which from what I gathered is what my 1st AD always works from strictly), but for this short I was on the fence so I had a shot list I drew up the night before but deviated from it significantly while shooting. Got through everything in the end but I'm trying to fine tune a way to flow more efficiently in the future. What I would prefer to be able to do is block the actors and have all the camera ideas in my head, then rattle them off quickly to someone for writing down (writing them down myself I end up missing stuff). And being able to describe shots in cutting order rather than shooting order (i.e. I want an overhead shot here, then CU on Fred, then helicopter shot, then OTS on Fred). Is this a standard way of working? Or can most directs think of all the shots, then just reorganize them internally to tell the AD... The AD I was working with wanted me to rattle through every sticks shot on each character, then every dolly shot, then every handheld shot. With a lot of shots and thinking in shooting order instead of cutting order I got rather mixed up by the time I was thinking of handheld shots. If that's just a skill I have to learn for a good shot without a perfect shot list then fine, but should I be able to find an AD that can work in the way I'm describing? (My one, admittedly odd solution, was having a cheap video camera just record me walking around pointing out every camera position/direction we'll be getting, then the AD can just re-watch it pausing and playing the video to write down every shot) But I haven't been on a pro set before, so I don't really know how other directors handle this. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Alex

Just finished my first well crewed short film (3 days, RED ONE, 10 man crew, awesome experience) and during one shot I wanted to have the camera dolly 8ft. around a character as fast as possible. We were shooting on a Fisher 11 dolly and my dolly grip basically explained that between the weight of the dolly, the 1st AC, and DP riding, it was pretty damn hard to get a fast start/stop. And having another person helping push wasn't possible since then you'd have the dolly twisting on the track if there weren't 100% in sync. We did it a few times and I was satisfied, but just for future knowledge, what's the ideal way to pull off very fast dolly moves when you need two people riding with the camera on the dolly. (Thinking of the fast moves in a lot of Scorsese movies specifically, or does he just have body builders for dolly grips?)