Talk:Single-camera setup

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Filmmaking, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to filmmaking. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.

1 Multiple Cameras in Movie Production
2 Sex and the City
3 Merger Proposal / "Don't get it" just by reading this article alone...
4 Incorrect information
5 pictures/diagrams

[edit] Multiple Cameras in Movie Production

I wonder if it's worth mentioning that situations in movie production where multiple cameras are necessary. The most frequent one that comes to mind would be a stunt that's too expensive to be repeated, such as the destruction of a building (Lethal Weapon 3 or Terminator 2 where 11 cameras were used to film the destruction of Cyberdyne HQ) or an elaborate chase scene (True Lies). A rather unique example is the Bullet Time scenes from The Matrix, which were captured by an array of still cameras triggered sequentially.

Perhaps this might be more appropriate content for the multicamera setup page, but the statement on this page ("...unlike film producers who almost always opt for single-camera shooting"), though it does allow for exceptions, seems just a bit too absolute in my opinion. --Ktakki 02:31, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sex and the City

Is it really a single camera show? I thought I remembered them using multiple cameras especially during the conversations the 4 women have at meals. --ʀ6ʍɑʏ89 03:05, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

That's possible, but the bulk of the show is definitely single-camera. Perhaps you could track down an account of the conversation scenes that clarifies how they were shot? --Jeremy Butler 12:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merger Proposal / "Don't get it" just by reading this article alone...

I didn't really understand the difference between single-camera setup and multi-camera setup by reading this article, whereas I did understand it better by reading the multi-camera page and this article ( http://www.dailynews.com/entertainment/ci_3195096 ) where it described the family dinner table.

I think the main distinction between the two is that multi-camera is really more like watching a play where the cameras are like viewers looking through one of the "walls" of the room (because the cameras are there and you have to avoid having the cameras shoot each other), but in single-camera you can shoot things in real settings and have a complete 360-degree set. The diagram on the multi-camera wiki article shows that really well. I think it's really difficult to understand why one is better over the other in certain situations until you understand this point. Actually much of this article was difficult to understand until I finally got the distinction, so I think it needs to be made earlier on more clearly.

That's a really good point. Why not merge the two articles into one main article on camera-setup, with much more focus on comparing and contrasting the two options. --Robb0995 00:46, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

The two articles should not be merged, they should merely link to one another, which they do. Format 20:27, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I vote against merging. For one thing, what would the merged article be titled, "Camera set-up" or "Single-camera and multiple-camera set-up"? The former is too generic and the latter is too cumbersome. I can't think of a good, descriptive title for a merged article. In contrast, the two original titles ("Single-camera set-up" and "Multiple-camera set-up") are commonly used and their meaning is widely understood. The articles properly refer to each other so the reader can bounce from one to the other with minimal hassle. --Jeremy Butler 12:22, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Let me ask this of more experienced Wikipedians. Is there a way to create an article called "Single-Camera vs. Multiple Camera Set-Up", move all of the compare and contrast content of these two articles into it, and then embed the new article as a section in each of these articles. I have no idea if this is possible, but I'd envision a single-camera set-up page that would then display single-camera specific content, followed by (or preceeded by) the new article shown on the same page. In that way, the compare and contrast content would be maintained in only one place, but the concerns above would be addressed. --Robb0995 19:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, I did a little research and see that we could use transclusion to acheive what I described above. It sounds like there's some debate on whether or not transclusion is an appropriate choice, so I'll still ask here before charging ahead with any changes. --Robb0995 06:17, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Removed merger proposal as all votes were against merger. --Robb0995 08:57, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Incorrect information

The shows "Malcolm in the Middle" and "Scrubs" are listend in both the "single-camera setup" and "multi-camera setup" pages, which is obviously contradictory. I would think "Malcolm" is a single-camera show and Scrubs a multiple camera show. Anyone know for sure?

While I don't have any first-hand information, Scrubs is almost certainly a single-camera show given its visual style. Taken in combination with the fact that it is filmed in an actual hospital building (no missing "fourth wall"), I have no doubt that it's single-camera. --Robb0995 08:03, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Just looked at the reference on multi-camera, and if you'll look closely Malcolm and Scrubs are identified as Single-camera shows on both pages. --Robb0995 08:06, 30 September 2006 (UTC)