Ryan Elder
Forum Replies Created
-
Okay thanks. When you say burning in black padding, you mean the black bars on the top and bottom, like putting them in permanently?
-
He’s really good! Everyone says he’s the greatest though. Even in film school everyone says he is the greatest to have ever lived by a few. I think he’s really good, I just don’t get why so many think he is the best, when there are a lot of really good other ones out there too :).
-
Oh okay thanks. What pixels aspect ratio in the actual pixels should I choose then? I’ve been doing square pixels this whole time, but is that right?
As for choosing 873 cause it can be divided by 4, what does dividing by 4 have to do with it?
-
I’m not sure what tripod I have since it was given to me used, out of the package and all, but it has a neck on it that goes up and down within the legs, so if the eye level is not quite right, I can easily raise the neck up and down, and it’s a lot easier than having to readjust the legs often.
Perhaps a tripod like that would be a good choice, but I don’t know the name of that kind.
-
Okay thanks, but there is no wrench on the timeline. I am using Premiere Pro CS5.5, so maybe there is no wrench in that version?
-
Also there are other times in editing, where I wanted show a side profile shot of a character, talking to a full on front shot of a character and cut back and forth between the two different shots.
But would audiences find that jarring, or would the eyelines still match? Cause I’ve never seen an editor cut back and forth between a full front close up, and a profile close up before.
-
Oh okay, I thought that Gosling’s character felt a disconnect from her so it would be okay to show her as disconnected by keeping on the OTS shot.
Then you would maybe show close ups of her later. But I still haven’t seen La La Land yet, and only going by the one scene I saw, and don’t know the whole movie.
But there are times in editing where I want to show a further away shot of one character from another, to show that one character is disconnected. But wondering if that would be too much of a rule breaker, since I almost never see editors do it, especially for a longer amount of time in a scene.
-
Okay thanks. But this is the formula I was asking if I could break, cause it seems almost all editors want to match shots all the time. If one character is on an OTS, then the character must be on an OTS, and then if cut to a close up for one, then you have to for the other.
It’s just I see it all the time, and was wondering if I could do it differently, especially if one character is on a different emotional field than the other.
Like in that scene for example, Ryan Gosling’s character has more of a problem with her it seems, than she does with him. So why not use close ups of him, but still keep her at an OTS distance, since she herself is acting at a distance to him? Wouldn’t that make sense?
But instead, the editor feels like he has to follow certain rules or certain traditions, and I am wondering, can they be broken?
-
Okay thanks, but you say I am okay with the bare minimum, when in fact I am not and want to upgrade. What makes you think I’m okay with it?
-
Okay thanks. I see what you are saying, but sometimes I feel the lenses do not look right for every shot. The short film I shot last week, I settled for a 35mm lens, even though I really wanted something wider for the type of shot.
Or how for other shoots I settled for wider even though I feel the shots could look better if they were on a longer lens. So I feel that I am not wasting money.
It seems that some other filmmakers are okay with a bare minimum if quality. Like when it comes to cinematography, they feel that as long as they have a camera, a lens, and some lights that is enough to make the movie.
And technically it is, but I feel like I could be doing better, rather than just doing the bare minimum. Isn’t good to an extent, to want to produce the best movie I can rather than just shortcutting the bare minimum every time?