FIlm and editing techniques

[samsdmf]

In This Thread discussion of Deadly Obsessions was hijacked by discussion of the 180 Degree rule. We got a bit of interesting discussion going which would be informative for people in the field and any interested observers.
Rather than hide continued discussion in the above thread hijack, this thread should be used for discussion of anything technique related.

Ill start us off an a pretty easy one thats related to the 180 degree rule

The 30 Degree Rule

When changing a camera angle in a scene it should always move by more than 30 degrees. This is to avoid what is known as a Jump Cut
A jump cut is when the shot changes but the camera doesnt (or appears not to) move. Where you may have seen jump cuts in action is in some documentaries. During interviews some filmmakers will simply cut sections of speech out so it looks like the subject has 'jumped' in the frame.
I drew this handy little BBV style Mspaint graph to show the 30 degree rule more clearly


This is an old school rule which can be abandoned at times, any examples of this may be suggested later in the thread

[John Cole]

One departure is the type of cut used by Kurosawa, the axial or concertina cut, where a cut is used along the line of the shot to cut from a longer shot to a closer shot. The opening of Ran has a nice example of this. Hitchcock does the same in The Birds when Mitch's mother discovers the farmer with his eyes gouged out. Rather than a zoom, Hitch uses three cuts along the line to zoom in.

[pryor15]

like John sort of mentioned, the 30 degree rule can also apply to how far away the camera is from the subject, along the same axis. i call it "punching in", which may or may not be the real term

[pryor15]

shameless self-promotion:

a jump cut is often used effectively in French New Wave films like this one (sorry, i couldn't resist)


it's invention is often credited to Godard's À bout de souffle (1960)

according to Wikipedia: "he cut together shots of Jean Seberg riding in a convertible (see right) in such a way that the discontinuity between shots is emphasized. In the screen shots above, the first image comes from the very end of one shot and the second is the very beginning of the next shot — thus emphasizing the gap in action between the two (when Seberg picked up the mirror)."

link

[Dominic]

that was great, Sam!

It's funny, but I know i learned all these rules when I first started out but I rarely ever even think of them anymore. When I shoot something not planned out in advance, I guess I just naturally know what a "good" angle will be in relation to the others I've shot or am going to shoot.

This lends itself to a discussion of "natural talent" or "having an eye" being more important to a filmmaker than simply knowing the rules of such a technical art form.

I can't tell you how frustrated I get when I'm working with a technically proficient cameraman who doesn't have a good "eye." I'll tell him where the shot is but he just never finds it and I inevitably have to take the camera from him and either shoot it myself or show him EXACTLY where the shot is and what the framing should be. Basically, you can't teach instinct.

I know this was a complete hijack of your initial thread and I promise to come back and add a technique soon!

[samsdmf]

[ QUOTE ]
that was great, Sam!

It's funny, but I know i learned all these rules when I first started out but I rarely ever even think of them anymore. When I shoot something not planned out in advance, I guess I just naturally know what a "good" angle will be in relation to the others I've shot or am going to shoot.

This lends itself to a discussion of "natural talent" or "having an eye" being more important to a filmmaker than simply knowing the rules of such a technical art form.

I can't tell you how frustrated I get when I'm working with a technically proficient cameraman who doesn't have a good "eye." I'll tell him where the shot is but he just never finds it and I inevitably have to take the camera from him and either shoot it myself or show him EXACTLY where the shot is and what the framing should be. Basically, you can't teach instinct.

I know this was a complete hijack of your initial thread and I promise to come back and add a technique soon!

[/ QUOTE ]

Its an interesting point, I dont feel it was a complete hijack at all, these conventions are only around so we can develop our own natural 'feel'.
I feel similar to you- I have been using a stills camera ever since I was old enough to handle one (several photographers in the family) and I can reel off a film of images quickly that are all pretty much spot on compositionally.
I guess (as with anything in life) if we encounter a situation enough, we dont need to think about what the correct action is, I guess what a Zen Buddhist would call being Unconsciously Skilled, but that really is yet another thread.

Back on the main focus
Anyone interested in this sort of stuff and who isnt afraid of a heavy read should pick up 'The Warriors Camera'. Its a book on the work on Akira Kurosawa who has already been mentioned in the thread, nd will probably be mentioned a lot more. Its a fantastic insight into the mind of one of the great masters of film- it is not an easy read, but very rewarding.

[Blarg]

Editing books make surprisingly good reading. If you can still find the one by I think it was Ralph Rosenblum, called, When the Shooting Stops, the Cutting Begins, it's very entertaining and illuminating. This guy cut a bunch of really good films, and was Woody Allen's editor for many years until they had a falling out. Great perspective on what the job is all about, great stories about some famous directors and their involvement in the editing process.

[Dominic]

[ QUOTE ]
Editing books make surprisingly good reading. If yuo can still find the one by I think it was Ralph Rosenblu, called, When the Shooting Stops, the Cutting Begins, it's very entertaining and illuminating. This guy cut a bunch of really good films, and was Woody Allen's editor for many years until they had a falling out. Great perspective on what the job is all about, great stories about some famous directors and their involvement in the editing process.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is a fantastic book - very entertaining read. I loved the chapter on Annie Hall, and how the editor really created that film from another, vastly different one that Allen had in his head.

[Blarg]

Bunch of good stories there. Another I enjoyed was how he introduced Woody to the music of Prokofiev, which was such a good fit to Love and Death.

[pryor15]

[ QUOTE ]

I can't tell you how frustrated I get when I'm working with a technically proficient cameraman who doesn't have a good "eye." I'll tell him where the shot is but he just never finds it and I inevitably have to take the camera from him and either shoot it myself or show him EXACTLY where the shot is and what the framing should be. Basically, you can't teach instinct.

[/ QUOTE ]

oh i hate that


the thing about these rules is that at first they sound really restrictive, but more often then not, you'll know the film is wrong, based purely on instinct. it just looks bad.