Three Camera Interviews

Barry W. Hull wrote on 3/5/2013, 6:46 PM
I am involved with a project that is going to create a large number of interview videos, using three cameras. We have arranged a production studio that will provide two of the cameras, a Panasonic AJ-HPX2700 P2 VariCam 1080i HD, and a Nikon HD-SLR (not sure which model). I will provide a Sony HVR-Z5U as the third camera. Rental includes lighting and cameramen to work all three cameras.

The Sony has two XLR audio inputs. Our audio plan is to run an Audio-Technica AT899 Lavalier microphone to each person from the Sony, both interviewer and interviewee, using the XLR inputs to capture the audio track on the Sony.

The production studio will download the video files from their two cameras onto an external hard drive for us. Using the multi-camera feature in Vegas, or a third party plugin during editing, we hope to produce an acceptable interview video.

Certainly, there will be a learning curve to this, but right here, before we even get started, does anyone see any glaring problems with this plan? The production studio does this for a living, so surely there will good advice from them, but I would like to have this thought through, first.

I’ve read in other threads about video from multiple cameras getting out of synch within ten seconds or so, we want to avoid that, but not sure what to do to avoid it. I’ve also read about different cameras having different “looks” which can cause a distracting appearance as the video cuts back and forth. Any problems using different cameras, different name brands, interlaced and progressive footage in the same project?

Our finished product does not need to be extremely high-level movie studio quality, but it needs to be good enough so as not to distract from the message. Any cautions from some of you gurus would be welcomed.

Comments

earthrisers wrote on 3/5/2013, 7:31 PM
Wouldn't call myself a guru, but we've done multi-camera shoots, including some interviews...
I've never had a problem with 2 or 3 high-quality videocams getting out of synch with one another, once they're initially synched up in postproduction. By high-quality I don't necessarily mean high-end; we've used, for example, a Sony PD170 along with two Sony FX1000s. (The non-problem with synch somewhat surprises me, actually, or at least impresses me. But I don't know the "technicals" of how cameras internally do their timing. I know we DON'T have time-synch-code as such on these cameras, but the footage from the 3 cameras always stays in synch.)
I have never yet had occasion to synch, say, an FX1000 with a DSLR. So I can't comment on your specific cameras working together.
I don't know the format that your Panny produces, but I assume the Nikon probably gives you AVCHD, while the HVR-Z5U is native AVI, I think. AVCHD probably has to go through some conversion, judging from lots of threads on this forum -- could conceivably have an effect on your synch.
I HAVE had problems with AUDIO tracks from OFF-camera devices not staying in synch. I've never lost synch as quickly as you say, though - within 10 seconds. I don't usually have to resynch any audio-problem track until at least 20-30 minutes have gone by. And most of the time, using a Zoom H4N or even a Zoom H1, I don't even have to resynch at all, in shows of up to about 2 hours. I used to have a synch problem when I used my older Zoom H2.
COLOR BALANCE and "look" between the different cameras can for sure be a potential problem, depending on the visual-sophistication of your audience. Based on a lot of experimentation, I created some FX presets to balance between our old PD170 and the newer FX1000 -- and those are both Sony cameras. Don't know what you might encounter with 3 different cameras from different makers...

ddm wrote on 3/5/2013, 9:32 PM
One potential issue you're going to have is syncing the Nikon DSLR, depending on the model, and how long your interview segments go, you might have to stop and start the Nikon since some of them (maybe all) had a record time limit of 10 minutes or so. Plural Eyes could easily solve that problem, but you will want to get at least a decent scratch track on the nikon.

The other issue will be matching the cameras, they will all look different, even with a common white balance, shouldn't be too far off to fix but you will want to be sure your white balance settings are at least the same, as in Tungsten for indoor etc.

Another question that arises is the DSLR "look", it's depth of field will be different, which can be a plus but you have to account for it. A common use for a "different" camera in a multicamera interview setup is an odd angle with perhaps a behind the scenes look to it, like seeing lights in the shot, that kind of thing, and the DSLR might be better suited to an artsy angle like that. (depending on what lens you have for it).

As far as the shooting formats, the Panasonic, if it's the one I'm thinking of, only shoots to P2 cards with the DVCPro 100 codec. That might be a problem for Vegas, it used to be but Vegas claims now that it supports that (I think). Used to have to have Raylight to edit in that codec. Someone else here should know the latest on that.

I personally wouldn't bother recording audio to a second source if you're using the Panasonic 2700 that I'm thinking of, it's a total pro deck with excellent audio capabilities for your master audio.
musicvid10 wrote on 3/5/2013, 9:35 PM
Two cameras with one good operator are really enough for interviews, IMO.
Barry W. Hull wrote on 3/6/2013, 6:47 AM
Thanks for those replies. As long as the different "looks" are not overly distracting we'll accept the differences. We have enough in the budget for another camera, $1,500 to $2,000 or so, if it is simply too bothersome.

The interviews will range usually from 15 to 30 minutes, a 10 minute max time on the Nikon would not be good, might be the incentive for the new camera. Also, seems cameras from same company might make things a bit less complicated.

ddm, good point, maybe we'll run the XLR inputs into the Panasonic, rather than the Sony. However, I'm comfortable with the Sony, the sound is very acceptable, no issues.

musicvid, when you say two cameras, one good operator, what is your rationale, less hassle, easier editing, less expensive, less to go wrong...? Curious. We like the idea of three cameras for cutting back and forth, and an additional overall shot, but we're also not looking to make this any more difficult than need be.

Any opinions of a good multi-camera plugin versus the capabilities built into Vegas? Have never worked with a multi-camera setup. Also sounds like Plural Eyes is a big time saver for placing tracks properly on the time line.
musicvid10 wrote on 3/6/2013, 7:57 AM
Barry,
In my old age, I've become a "less is more" type, a frightening indicator of creeping conservatism.

But yes to all of the above, with the added factor of peace of mind. Dealing with just one person who's going to set up the stationary cam correctly (leveled!), remember to turn it on, and then work like Puck with the cutaway or shoulder cam is worth their weight in gold.

Sometimes the three cams used on those overproduced network newsmagazine interviews get in my way of enjoyment, when that odd third angle suddenly shows up partway through. If there are multiple interviewees, that becomes a different story. Just sharing another point of view.
Barry W. Hull wrote on 3/6/2013, 8:13 AM
musicvid,

Agreed. Sometimes another fancy gizmo is just another opportunity for something to go wrong. Depending on my level of comfort with the studio, I will keep in mind dropping back to two cameras, one guy earning his keep working both cameras.

I never thought about it in those terms, but now I can picture it, yeah, that third odd camera angle suddeny showing up, almost to let the audience know they have a third camera, big whoop, like the "clever" black and white profile view. I've said to myself, "Why do they do that, looks silly". If we use three cameras I will make efforts to make sure each clip adds, not distracts.
Laurence wrote on 3/6/2013, 9:24 AM
Since I have switched to the micro 4/3 format, I now have a Panasonic GH3 as a main camera, and a little GF3 that I got from Best Buy after somebody returned it for about $250. Lenses are interchangeable between the two cameras and in decent light, the image look is very close. On a two camera shoot, I can use the GF3 on a light tripod for a static wide shot and the GH3 for the manned changing shots with audio. The GF3 picks up decent guide audio on the built in mic for synching with Plural Eyes or Dual Eyes. I have a project in the works where I used this setup for a local musician and the wide and close shots work really well together. I much prefer this to two big expensive cameras and two large tripods.
rs170a wrote on 3/6/2013, 9:32 AM
I've been following this thread with some interest as I've shot probably several hundred interviews over the years. Some have been multi-camera studio interviews (cam 1 on the host, cam 2 on the guest and cam 3 on a cover shot) with one or more guests and others have been single camera on location set ups.
My personal feeling is that it comes down to what you're going to do with it.
As much as I'd love to have a second camera for my location shooting, I have enough troubles getting everything else set up without having to worry about a 2nd camera.
Here are a few examples of some interviews (the first four on the page are mine) that I shot and edited last month. These were all for a banquet that honoured the recipients.
Location interviews
B-roll and stills can help cover a lot of shot changes :)

Mike
musicvid10 wrote on 3/6/2013, 9:39 AM
Barry,
20/20 is the worst about that, imo.
Woops, there's BabaWawa's bald spot again!

I just find three-camera interviews confusing at times.
riredale wrote on 3/6/2013, 9:52 AM
I've done maybe a dozen interviews so my experience factor is not as great as some of the guys here.

I use two Sony camcorders. Perhaps because they come from the same design group, sync is off by maybe 1 frame in 30 minutes. In any event, even if a camera is way off, you can trivially fix it on the timeline by just splitting and moving one of the tracks periodically. Since the drift is probably pretty consistent, you can sync at the beginning, check at the end for the drift, then just space out the corrections. A bit more work for you, but not at all hard to do.

Color matching between different vendors is probably going to be more involved.

I always record audio independently.

It would be nice to have a third camera, if even for just a an establishing shot showing the setting, talent, cameras, etc. I like that sort of thing--show the audience the setup, then show it again maybe once or twice more during the interview. The rest of the time is just the head shots.
Barry W. Hull wrote on 3/6/2013, 10:29 AM
Funny.

Ahhh, lots to think about.

We're meeting with the studio today actually, I want to be able to reproduce the setup, easily, consistently, and I will expect them to be able to do that, after all, it's what they do for a living. They will provide two of the cameras, tripods, lights, background, chairs, desk, etc. ready to go, so hopefully that won't be too much of a hassle. I'll bring one camera and tripod.

Actually, I was probably incorrect when I called these interviews. They are more like discussions, with both people actively participating. That is why I liked the three camera setup because there will be almost equal time on each participant, both talking, interjecting, bantering, not the usual over the shoulder and b-roll of the interviewer and then back to the interviewee.

Mike, great stuff those interviews. I'm already stealing your ideas, the cuts, fades, moving stills, like it, especially the lighting, I want that. Your comment about location and the hassle of all that gear makes sense, but these will be in the same studio every time, same two people, only thing that changes is the topic, cookie cutter approach, so I'm counting on the studio to develop a nice routine.

If we can't make the three camera work, or editing is too difficult, or it looks goofy, or whatever, well, we'll drop back, start over.
ddm wrote on 3/6/2013, 11:26 AM
I blame Barbara Walters for the scale of the 2 person interview. Years ago, back in her heyday, the eighties, when she used to do those after oscar specials, I worked on several of her interviews. What a spectacle. A ten ton grip and a ten ton lighting truck, hours of setup for the sit down interview. The guy I felt most sorry for was the Dolly grip. They set up dolly track in a semi circle between the two wing cameras, and for the whole length of the interview, which would run a few hours usually, the grip would push and pull the dolly from one end of the arc to the other. No picnic for the operator, either, who tried to keep a useable shot the whole time.
rraud wrote on 3/6/2013, 3:52 PM
I'm not a cam op, but have worked with many live and taped multi-cam shoots. For most sit-down interviews, one or more of the cams are locked down and little change is necessary.. and much better than B-cam op with itchy fingers whose constantly zooming in and out and refocusing.
Laurence wrote on 3/6/2013, 7:14 PM
Hence the point-n-shoot sized GF3 on a light tripod in my setup. A point and shoot, but one that with a big sensor that can use fast wide primes... so much easier way than the way I used to do do it!
trombonist wrote on 3/7/2013, 3:30 AM
I shoot 3 camera concerts and interviews regularly. I would highly recommend matching 2 of the 3 cameras. It's just simpler to deal with the overall look with at least 2 of the same camera.The best decision I ever made was buying 3 identical JVC HD cameras. I also have a Sony VG 10 and little NEX-5. The key point is that I can either go with an HD video look with the JVC's or a shallow DOF look with the 2 Sonys. Using the 3rd cam for the artsy shot is a good idea(or handheld) On audio I would probably use a small mixer but would definitely use a Tascam or Zoom recorder for 2 system.
Barry W. Hull wrote on 3/7/2013, 5:46 AM
As it turns out, the studio provided HD-SLR has only about a ten minute run time. We're probably going to purchase one of the smaller Sony HD cameras. Additionally, we'll use the studio's Panasonic Varicam 2700, and our Sony HVR Z5U. We'll have two Sony cameras.

But then, wouldn't you know it, yesterday I loaded Plural Eyes onto a brand new computer that has nothing except Vegas and a few Vegas utilities, BCC and VASST. It was working great, then I loaded QuickTime, so I could drop a .MOV file onto the timeline, and voila, v486 started hanging up. Additionally, the plug-in Beauty Box quit working, no longer registered, lines across the screen. Uninstall, reinstall, all the tricks they tell you about, no luck.

I'm about ready to burn Vegas, go back to doing something simpler, like landing jets on aircraft carriers.
Laurence wrote on 3/7/2013, 7:23 AM
How is the Beauty Box plugin (when it works)?
Barry W. Hull wrote on 3/7/2013, 7:33 AM
When Beauty Box was working, it was fantastic, able to add a very subtle smoothness to skin, without touching the detail in other areas, eyes, etc.

You can crank it up if you need a lot of smoothing, or simply put a dab of "makeup" on the talent. You know how the detail of HD can be a bit overwhelming at times.
rs170a wrote on 3/7/2013, 7:35 AM
It was working great, then I loaded QuickTime, so I could drop a .MOV file onto the timeline, and voila, v486 started hanging up.

The newest version has been problematic for several users so try an older version of QuickTime. I'm using 7.6.8 on Pro 10, 111 and 12 and have not had any problems with it.

Mike
rs170a wrote on 3/7/2013, 8:01 AM
Mike, great stuff those interviews.

Thanks Barry. I always have fun doing the interviews and have learned a lot about life in general from some great people.

I'm already stealing your ideas, the cuts, fades, moving stills, like it, especially the lighting.

Be my guest. I can't stress enough the importance of b-roll to round out an otherwise boring talking head interview.
Here's another one that I'm quite proud of, primarily because of the location and the fact that I had lots of b-roll to go along with it.


Mike
Guy S. wrote on 3/7/2013, 5:35 PM
I can also recommend the Panasonic micro 4/3 cameras and suggest that you consider this option over a Sony (or any other) camcorder.

At work I use the GH1 and GH2 for promo and training videos and they do a very nice job (the GH1 replaced a Sony HVR-V1u). My personal cameras are also a GH1 and GH2, used primarily for interviews. I shoot with older fixed focal length Nikon and Minolta lenses that capture beautiful images with a shallow depth of field so that the background is nicely out of focus.

There's one caveat: these cams don't have XLR inputs, so you'll need to be careful about how you capture audio. Either pick a mic that works well plugged directly into the camera or use an external recorder like the Zoom H1 ($100) or H4n ($220). I've gotten good results outside with the H1 and its built-in mics.

Here's a 20-sec interview snippet (GH1 720p, Nikon 105mm). Audio was captured with a Sennheiser wireless lav connected directly to the camera and as you can hear there's a low level of hiss throughout:
Barry W. Hull wrote on 3/7/2013, 6:44 PM
FINALLY, got this stinkin software running again, although I shouldn't speak too soon, should be nice for karma's sake, lest it bite me again.

I was looking to buy a Sony for no other reason that the same make as my own camera. Also, the numbers 4/3, is that along the lines of 16/9? My videos are all 16/9. Is that a problem in the Panasonic? Seems like it would require a large crop to make it fit.

No worries on the XLR inputs, I will run two mics into my Sony, use the camera microphones simply to synch up the tracks.

This whole video editing stuff is not what I do for a living, but it seems to sometimes take over my life. For those of you who earn your living in this field, one thing I am certain, you are all destined for early graves. I can't imagine depending on the fickle nature of creativity to make a living, I don't have the fortitude. Flying is easy, you take off, go somewhere, and land, or on a really good day, you get to blow something up. But video editing, are you kidding me? I mean, look at Grazie, has he not gone stark raving mad? Just sayin...
Barry W. Hull wrote on 3/7/2013, 7:33 PM
Forget what I said about 4/3, stuupid, just looked up the Panasonic DMC-GH3, seems rather pricey though.
riredale wrote on 3/8/2013, 3:32 PM
Barry, what kind of flying do you do? And you get to blow things up? Man, what a lucky job.

As for Grazie, I've never met the fellow in person, but I understand he's British. I suspect that accounts for a lot of his behavior. You know, driving on the wrong side of the road, that kind of thing.