Movies and series now often shoot with two cameras. Peter Kiwitt explains the benefits and trade-offs of multiple-camera, single-camera style production.
Multiple Camera “Single Camera” Production
While movies and cinema-style series now both typically use two cameras and shoot more coverage, the added visual burden has brought about additional changes to series. Besides typically shooting at least eight days, rather than seven, some shows also use alternating directors of photography so, similar to series directors, one preps while the other shoots. Above-the-line, some series have added a directing producer to the normal complement of writing producers to help maintain the visual quality of the show. [2]
Before exploring more changes, let us clarify what has not changed. First, barring split screens (such as in 24 [2001– 10]), only one shot is seen on screen at a time. Although more coverage means shots can change more often, each moment will generally only be seen from one take of one shot. Hence, while you do not want to “cut in the camera,” it is still important to have a sense of which shot you will most likely use for any given moment so that you know when getting an extra take to get something just right is worth it. Accordingly, you still visualize the film in the same way: imagining each shot as it appears on the screen in your mind. What changes in your prep is considering where to put the second camera. Generally, this comes down to planning the same coverage you would in true single camera shooting and then adding “bonus” shots (unless there is a way to get two vital shots at the same time, such as a medium shot and a close-up of the same actor). Furthermore, the basic grammar of cinema remains. Although contemporary audiences are more visually sophisticated than in years past (allowing more liberty to be taken with screenlines and eyelines, such as in NCIS [2003 – ]), the basic grammar generally still is, and should be, followed. Even with multiple camera production, there are still instances where only one camera is used. Wide-angle shots, particularly wide shots, can make it more difficult to use a second camera, as it is harder to place a second camera at an acceptable angle where it will not be seen by the camera with the wide-angle lens. Likewise moving shots, such as moving masters and Steadicam shots, can make it more difficult to place a second camera where it will be out of the shot and out of the way and still get something useful. It should be noted, however, that long complicated moving masters have become less common as the average length of scenes has also decreased. They are also harder to justify as multiple cameras and quicker cutting make it less likely any shot will remain uninterrupted for long. In addition, two shots that approach or exceed a difference of 90 degrees apart are less likely to be good candidates for simultaneous shooting. Lighting is generally only ideal from one angle, and matching medium shots and close-ups are generally taken from the same angle. An exception to that are side lit shots at nearly 180 degrees difference (e.g., two actors facing each other), which director of photography Roger Deakins, ASC, BSC has found effective even though he generally prefers to work with only one camera. Having two shots from similar angles that vary greatly in size is also problematic. Lighting continues to be an issue here. Lighting for close-ups is generally carefully sculpted in ways not possible when simultaneously lighting a wide shot. It also presents problems for sound and performance. Boom microphones are preferable to body microphones but placing one close enough for near perspective sound is not possible if a wide shot happens at the same time. Performance for a wide shot and a close-up can also be different. A closer camera can require a subtler performance. In fact, director Donald Petrie has sometimes told actors he felt were projecting too much that the shot was tighter than it actually was to get them to bring down their performance without them becoming self-conscious about over-acting.
Multiple Camera “Single Camera” Production
With that in mind, we can point to some basic guidelines for shooting with multiple cameras, remembering that film is an art and guidelines are not rules. So, as we have seen, lighting, sound, and performance all benefit from keeping the angle and size of multiple shots similar—yet, still different enough to avoid jump cuts (by, typically, changing the shot size by 50% or more). Medium shots and close-ups are usually shot together. Even a “cowboy” and a close-up are further apart than ideal. [3] In such cases, the tighter camera is usually placed closer to the eyeline although there are exceptions. Petrie notes that if you have an over-the-shoulder medium shot and a close-up, and the actor in the foreground turns from the over-the-shoulder into a closeup, it’s generally better to have the over-the-shoulder shot be closest to the eyeline, even though it starts as the wider shot. While the cameras are typically stacked, director John Terlesky sometimes prefers to move the medium shot 30 to 45 degrees off axis while the closer shot remains more on axis so as to create more visual variety in scenes that do not demand the intimacy of having both cameras close to the eyeline.
A second camera also invites more exploration and detail. If, for instance, you are shooting a medium shot and a close-up and you feel you could get a better take for a part you expect to use in close-up, during additional takes you could have the camera that was getting the medium shot pick out details like hands, or add an unmotivated pan, or something else that might be visually interesting. The same strategy could be used when shooting digitally with multiple cameras where there is only one shot you clearly want. In such cases, the “B camera” (which often has the longer lens), can pick out details while the “A camera” stays on the main action. [4]
Whereas most of the preceding discussion is how to overcome the obstacles of using multiple cameras in the cinema form, there are distinct advantages for actors and editors. Actors can, potentially, worry less about matching action, perform the same lines fewer times, and include more improvisation. In fact, director of photography John Seale, ASC, ACS began working with two cameras on Rain Man (1988) in order to capture the ad libbing of Dustin Hoffman and Tom Cruise (Oppenheimer). For editors, multiple cameras means there is always at least one shot that will provide a perfect continuity match. They also benefit from more angles. Robert Wise, who edited Citizen Kane (1941) before becoming a major director, recalled how producers always assumed he would shoot less footage because, with his editing background, he would know what shots he needed. In fact, he would say, being an editor taught him how useful it was to have extra angles. The drawback for directors concerned with performance is that they might be forced to watch the actors in “video village,” rather than by the camera where the intimacy is greater. [5] They also have to split their focus between dueling monitors, making it difficult to focus on reactions.
While emerging filmmakers should understand current trends and look for opportunities to get experience in them, it should be noted that true single camera production is as valid as ever. Unless it solves a specific problem, those working at lower budgets and with less experienced crews are often better off maintaining their focus on a single camera rather than trying to mimic industry production practice.
Related filmmaking guides
- What does a cinematographer do?
- Camera angles in film: a beginner’s guide
- Film directing: getting good performances
Keep learning filmmaking
Want more lessons like this? Join StudentFilmmakers free for live webinars with working pros, and stream on-demand filmmaking classes in cinematography, directing, screenwriting, sound and post.
