Videomaker – Learn video production and editing, camera reviews › Forums › Technique › Miscellaneous Techniques › anyone using a jib?
- August 14, 2007 at 12:05 PM #37064
I wish I could put a poll on here to find out how many people use jibs in their productions.
This question is prompted by the recent viewing of the Jim Cramer tirade on CNBC. He was being interviewed by one of their reporters and at a certain point he goes into a big rant.
Well, on the third viewing of this clip I started noticing the camera movement from the solo camera. It was on a jib, or was a jib (which is correct?) and the camera kept moving back and forth during the entire interview.
Is this excessive movement condoned at all times? I’ve seen some good uses for a jib, but this excesive movement (I feel) detracts from the business being performed on screen.
Was this camera movement on the interview an idea from an "out of touch" director, or is it done to make a production more interesting?
I am very interested in hearing the thoughts from as many of you as I can. I believe that this (the interview) was a poor use of that equipment, but I’ve seen this happen too many times to believe it’s not the norm.
Thank you very much.
- August 16, 2007 at 1:32 AM #164311TechnoFXParticipant
I’ve only used a jib arm once, but I do agree that it can be used well. You bring up a good point about artistic license in regards to video, though. Sometimes, I guess people think they’re doing something that they think will look good, but it ends up being too much. There are a lot of cases of overdoing it in some productions.
Sometimes, the camera movement detracts from what’s happening on screen. But it doesn’t just happen with jibs, it also happens with zooms, whip pans, going in and out of focus, and many others. I understand that it’s all for effect, but sometimes people just take it too far, which is probably what happened in the interview. The director may have been "out of touch" or just overzealous. I believe they may have been trying to make the interview more dynamic, but good intentions don’t always work out.
- August 16, 2007 at 9:27 AM #164312
Thanks for the comments. Some years ago in a college class on Broadcasting the professor showed a film about Marshall McLuhan ("The Medium is the Message"). Most of the film was McLuhan sitting on a stool with a generally dark background, but some kind of colored lights. (This was 25 years ago, so please excuse my fading memory.)
I wasn’t really interested in what McLuhan was saying, but listening to him was even more difficult when I became aware of the movement of the little colored lights in the background. McLuhan looked as if he was sitting still, but the camera was moving left to right. To me that was distracting, and where I was half-listening before I was then totally distracted.I now wish that had been a class on camera movement and then we could have learned what that move was all about.
Are there anymore opinions? I am still interested in learning.
- August 16, 2007 at 10:57 AM #164313MicrochipParticipant
Seems to me the norm today is:
Clips shown for a very short duration
Rapid movement from one clip to another
Showing over the same clip again and again in rapid succession
Most of the programs I view are outdoor adventure / nature programs so that’s where my observations are. I’ve also seen TV dramas filmed in "shaky cam" mode with the camera almost flying from one actor to the next depending on who’s speaking. My preference is for steady, tripod shots but since these seem to be the norm, there must be an audience for it.
- August 16, 2007 at 11:02 AM #164314
I know what you mean. The "one camera fits the entire scene" doesn’t impress me.
Did you see the film, "Good Night and Good Luck?" They used two cameras during a given scene and switched back and forth. Also, a camera would pan over to the next speaker. Once the camera stopped too soon and had to continue the pan to the speaker fixing focus along the way. Now that was good!
Thanks for the response.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.