Reasons behind shot selection

[david farland]

There are a lot of books discussing the 'how to' achieve basic shot coverage.
These technical books go through various scenes with typical layouts discussing shot selection/blocking choices/anchor points.

Books/dvd's such as........
- Shot by Shot & Cinematic Motion by Katz
- Grammar of the Film Language by Arijon
- Hollywood Camera Work DVD by Per Holmes

But there isn't a lot of information on 'why' a shot was used.

- temporal reasons - Based on how the eye takes in (scans) a scene naturally or otherwise. How does a cinematographer move the viewer to an object of interest with the shot, other than focus?
- story reasons - How does a cinematographer serve story progression when moving the viewer from one object of interest to the next? Reasons for particular establishing shots?
- POV reasons - viewer, character, dominant POV's
- asthetic/style/artistic choices. Stuff that evokes mood, tension, story telling approach, i.e reduced information, filmmakers style...whatever that means.
- Logistical - time/economic reasons.... other than efficiencies of scene shooting order.

Love to hear folk's personal approach to coming up with shot selection.
Any advice/opinions/books would be greatly appreciated.
Dave,

 

[Zach Gray]

Two books have been especially useful in this regard; The Elements of Cinema by Stefan Sharff and The Eye is Quicker by Richard D Pepperman.

Elements of Cinema explains the cinematic devices and provides guidelines for their use. Separation, Orchestration, Slow Disclosure, Montage, etc.

The Eye is Quicker is actually and editing text, but provides a theory for shot selection called 'distribution of information'. It presents the cinematic devices and shots in terms of how the viewer receives, processes, and builds anticipations about events and how that affects entertainment value. Even though it's designed for editors, I found it extremely useful as a director.

First Time Director by Gil Bettman is also a great text. It's got a great chapter on actors objectives, which in turn suggest camera angles that compliment performance.

Directing Feature Films by Mark Travis is another favorite. I use his 10 step script breakdown process which ends with shot selection. It's a great approach to laying an extremely strong conceptual foundation and arcs from which tone-appropriate shots can be derived.

In my own experience, I had shot selection elevated way to far above other types of breakdown. I used to think making films was about a collection of shots. As I've gained experience and perspective, I see that shot selection is an outgrowth of understanding the content of to film at a deep level. (A long and arduous process) Once that is achieved, shot selection comes naturally.

In other words, study cinematic devices, then once you know what your film is really about, you'll be able to pick the appropriate device for the shot.

 

[Joel Kaye]

Love to hear people's approach to coming up with shot selection. Any advice/opinions/books would be greatly appreciated.

Great question, I wish I could give you a great answer. This question is probably a lot like asking how musicians choose their phrasing.

For me, somewhere between studying screenwriting and taking acting classes I see things differently. I know I'm different than other shooters that are purely looking for the coolest shot. I'm always thinking about the intention of the scene, the actor's motivation and emotional place and just try to match it within the context of the overall vibe chosen for the short or movie.

Obviously, the director often has a lot to do with all that.

At my level I tend not to try tricky camera work during emotional scenes other than handheld where the roughness is part of the vibe. Clint Eastwood tends to choose a shot for the emotional stuff and stay there letting the actor perform. Typically one or two takes only. (way easier said than done)

One interesting idea I heard/read somewhere is that there really are no universal truths for cinematography. You establish the rules for your look in your film. Warm tones might be dangerous or peaceful. Handheld could be normal and sticks could be frantic if the action in the frame mirrors the technique.

 

[Zach Gray]

Still thinking.

Another benefit to studying cinematic devices is that they are more about tone - that elusive element pursued by filmmakers. Cinematic devices are more about how a collection of shots are used in sequence to have a cumulative effect that is stronger than the individual parts.

A+B = C. It's not A+B = AB.

 

[Alexis Hanawalt]

This book actually has some interesting lessons regarding what shots end up being used in covering a typical scene.

http://www.amazon.com/Apple-Pro-Training-Craft-Editing/dp/032152036X/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpi_4

 

[XiaoSu Han]

I thought this sounded good:

http://www.amazon.com/Cinematography-Directors-Guide-Creative-Collaboration/dp/1932907556

anyone got that?