handheld vs steadicam

Brian Drysdale · September 2, 2010

That may not have been Steadicam, they could have shot the running shots from a vehicle. In this case it's a change in the tempo of the scene from rushing through the crowds to running to close the distance to reach that phone. It's like trying to quantify how a piece of music works.

Jim Nelson · September 2, 2010

The thing that's confusing me is that I keep hearing that smooth camera movement is like looking at the scene from the exterior and not being with the character. That's what's bugging me still :(

Brian Drysdale · September 2, 2010

Emotionally you are already with the character. The character is fighting their way past the outside world, there is a constant flow of objects and people but you are moving in parallel, an observer who is on that's character's side and moving with them. It's a change of tone within a movement, if you keep it the same all the way though it becomes boring, you need to change the key.

Jaron Berman · September 3, 2010

Sometimes the two are mixed for performance reasons as well - shaky handheld calls a lot of attention to the energy and style of the CAMERAWORK but often makes it difficult to really concentrate on the actor's subtleties and facial nuances. A cut to a smooth tracking shot continues the motion but allows the eye to focus on the actor more. Using both allows the scene to feel high-energy without missing emotion or performance. Not a rule, just often used for coverage in this manner.

And ignore the people who claim that one kind of camera movement is _____ and another is _____. There are exceptions to EVERY rule, and who made the "rules" to begin with? Does the "copa" scene from goodfellas NOT feel like POV???? That's one of the most famous steadicam shots EVER! And some of the most symbolically interesting steadicam shots are those that start in very objective angles and become either OTS or POV shots. Once a shot begins it doesn't need to stay a certain style. Look at the genius handheld work in Children of Men. You have shots that seem very much objective until something happens - then the shots move and react like an observer - changing the viewer's perception of the scene as a whole and what their eyes focus on within the frame.

Looking for hard-fast rules on this will probably leave you disappointed. There aren't any. It's case-by-case, scene-by-scen, project-by-project and shot-by-shot. Figure out what you WANT to get out of the scene, then start brainstorming how to get there. Find a way to try both styles, see what works and talk to the editor. The only way to know if you made the wrong choice is to see it and say - oh, that feels wrong. Because even if someone here, let's say an A-list highly decorated DP, says "handheld ALWAYS means _____," that may not necessarily apply to the scene you're concerned with. Then what...are they wrong? Are you wrong? We certainly have conventions - which is why a lot of big movies tend to look more or less the way ALL big movies look of a generation. Until someone changes convention.

Another aspect to look at is the edit. I can't edit. At all. I can push the buttons and know the programs but I'm inept when it comes to stringing even a simple 3-shot scene together. Editing is an incredible skill and I can say with no reservation that the best editors have a magical sense of rhythm. It's EXACTLY like music, and a lot of the emotion of a scene comes from the rhythm of the cutting. The selection of shots between handheld and steadicam or dolly or crane isn't always based on simple rules of coverage. It's style and force - what will drive the scene forward or stop it dead in its tracks. Building kinetic energy and cutting to a smooth, "quiet" shot (done a LOT in slumdog) lets the audience catch its breath and stop for a brief instant to consider the scene. It's an editing trick that, when done well, is invisible and very rewarding. So as much as I'd like to think my work on set is what REALLY makes the scene... it's collaborative and without genius editing, even the best shot and planned scenes WILL fall flat and lose all special meaning.

Brian Drysdale · September 3, 2010

Absolutely. Strangely, if there is a conventional, mainstream way of doing a scene, if you do the scene exact opposite way to the convention that also often works extremely well.

Jim Nelson · September 3, 2010

Thank you soooo much for your help. Things are a lot more clear :)

1 last question if you don't mind. What do you mean by objective angles and point of view angles? Sorry if this seems a bit silly, but I just want it to be 100% clear :)

Brian Drysdale · September 3, 2010

Point of view (POV) is the view as seen through a characters own eyes as they see the scene, everything else is objective (although the filmmaker's own subjective vision).

Edited September 3, 2010 by Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale · September 3, 2010

Point of view (POV) is the view as seen through a characters own eyes as they see the scene, everything else is objective (although the filmmaker's own subjective vision).

That is as physically seen.

Jim Nelson · September 3, 2010

So just to sum up so I understand everything:

Handheld camera and smooth camera movement (like the steady cam) can both show franticness, energy, an uncontrollable situation and not knowing what will happen next. Both can make the viewer feel closer to the character by enhancing their feelings. You choose one type of camera movement over another depending on whether you feel it is more appropriate for this particular moment in the scene.

Please let me know if this is all correct. Thanks again for all your help :)

Brian Drysdale · September 4, 2010

Basically, yes.

However, there are various ways of telling a story, so even a static locked off camera can convey same thing. Hitchcock used edits and a few basic camera moves:

Brad Grimmett · September 5, 2010

Jim,

I suggest you watch some movies and decide how steadicam, handheld, or dolly shots make YOU feel in different films and scenes. There is no "right" answer to most of the questions you're asking. It's all subjective.

Stuart Brereton · September 5, 2010

So just to sum up so I understand everything:

Handheld camera and smooth camera movement (like the steady cam) can both show franticness, energy, an uncontrollable situation and not knowing what will happen next. Both can make the viewer feel closer to the character by enhancing their feelings. You choose one type of camera movement over another depending on whether you feel it is more appropriate for this particular moment in the scene.

Please let me know if this is all correct. Thanks again for all your help :)

Why do I get the sense that Jim has a essay that he's writing....?