I thought the bloggers of DI might be interested in a short video I recently had a hand in creating and during which I got to see behind the scenes at a sensory laboratory.
Chemist Michelle Gallagher, while doing her post-doctoral research at the Monell Chemical Senses Center, became fascinated when she learned of a study that showed that dogs could be trained to sniff out skin cancer. This led her to conduct a series of experiments to determine if chemicals coming off of the skin could identify cancerous areas before they became visible.
I was contacted by ScienCentral.com to shoot the video for a short profile on Ms. Gallagher’s work. We set the date and they emailed me a long and detailed shot list describing the experiment and the many angles I was required to capture. (The complete Call Sheet, as it’s called, can be seen on my new videography forum Fitness Video University.)
Michelle is an affable young woman who, though passionate about her research, was very nervous at first, surrounded by my formidible videocameras and lights. Sunita Reed, the producer and voice of the clip conducted the interview from New York by speaker phone and was quick to put Michelle at ease; a difficult task when you can’t be seen!
We then went from the interview into the depths of the Monell labs. It was a mad scientist’s (and a filmmaker’s!) dream come true with test tubes, beakers and wires, huge humming spectrophotometers and strange smells everywhere! We hastily cleaned up an area to shoot, being careful to remove anything with a brand name on it. Although I had warned the scientists that this would be like shooting a movie and we would have to do several takes of everything, I don’t think they were fully prepared for how tedious and exhusting a shoot like this can be!
We worked for three and a half hours, ended up with one and a half hours of footage and it was boiled down by ScienCentral.com to the one and a half minutes you see here. That’s quite a shooting ratio and will give you some idea of what it takes to put even a short news clip like this together.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1_IZd5HZ3g[/youtube]
Now that the video is posted and my excitement has worn off I begin to wonder…can it ever be too early to detect the possibility of cancer?
I remember reading somewhere that our bodies are constantly producing errant cells that could become cancer, but that most of the time our immune system shuts them down before they do any harm. What if Michelle Gallagher’s new process detects cells that NEVER would have become cancerous and we end up performing needless procedures and possibly scarring otherwise heathly people?
Creating this video has raised a serious question for me. Is it possible to take preventative medicine too far?
Mike: Thanks for the insight on how to make a short documentary. I counted 20 scene segments, meaning that each scene lasts, on average less than 5 seconds. I noticed that some of them were quite short, too, lasting only about 2 seconds (like the dog's nose scene).
I'm wondering whether that is a technique that take advantage of the human tendency to find change interesting? In other words, this video could have been shot with only 5 scene changes with the same verbal information, but I assume that it would not hold the audience attention as well as the finished version? That is my question is change a good thing, in and of itself, for those making films?
And how much chance is too much? Sometimes when I'm watching videos of concerts the constant changes drive me nuts. It's common to see scenes changing every second or two.
I was surprised that your directions for the shoot were so detailed. Apparently, someone knows exactly what they have in mind before the shoot. I'm wondering, though, whether on jobs like this, whether the client leaves you some discretion as to adding your own shots–or do they want simply the shots that they've pre-specified?
Could you also give us an idea of how much lighting equipment you had to haul in for these shots? I'm shot a few videos now, and I realize that I really should bring my own lights, but I don't own any. If I'm just doing video interviews, is there a reasonably priced light that novices like me can effectively use for video interviews?
The Speed of Cuts:
One of the most important factors determining the rate of the cuts is how quickly we can figure out what is going on in a particular shot. For a complex "master shot" where you are seeing several people and many details or a panoramic landscape, a few seconds might not be enough. For a more simple close up (like the dog's nose) a brief flash is all that is necessary for our brains to process the info, “That’s a dog’s nose.” Stay too long on a shot like that and you flirt with inducing boredom in the viewer. "I get it! It's a dog's nose! Move on!"
There is also an artistic/stylistic aspect to making cuts. What kind of feeling are you trying to produce in the viewer? What do you want to emphasize? If you want to induce a languid, relaxed feeling cutting too quickly could work against you.
Here’s a tutorial I made recently about a certain kind of cut, The Jump Cut, and its use in telling a story.
http://www.vimeo.com/1429614
To get back to your original question…how fast is too fast? Check out this Nike commercial. This is about as fast as it gets while still remaining just barely within the limits of human cognition.
http://www.nike.com/nikeos/p/nike/en_US/courage
That kind of quick cutting is obviously used to induce excitement and wouldn’t be appropriate in the Monell clip. The “Sniffing Cancer” video is a news item and as such it adheres to certain formulaic rules that are designed to enable us to quickly and easily take in information.
One of the conventions of the form is that every spoken concept should also be simultaneously illustrated visually. It’s video’s “double whammy” that is one of the strengths of the medium. Therefore, in a video like this the speed of the cuts will also have something to do with the way the voiceover copy is written. Make a point…show it…make a point…show it. Notice how the editor went so far as to find a clip that looked the the researcher was smelling something (in reality she wasn’t) when the voiceover says the word “sniffing”!
Ultimately it comes down to instinct. A good editor has an innate feel for how long each shot needs to be on screen. There is a rhythm to it that is sometimes hard to quantify. When I’m editing I often find myself saying to myself, “Not enough…not enough…TOO MUCH!” and then jumping on the trim button.
The Call Sheet:
The shots are specified but a good cameraman will have his own style and be able to add to the list. For instance, the Tech Sheet specifies that every shot be on a tripod. I was sure to get everything they asked for but, being a documentary guy, I felt more comfortable doing hand held shots for a lot of the detail closeups. I was very flattered that they used many of "my" shots.
Lighting:
For that shoot I used two pro studio lights with reflective umbrella diffusers. I pointed one at the subject and bounced the other off the wall to create subtle, soft shadows.
http://www.markcleghorn.com/wp-content/uploads/20…
But you don’t need to use something that elaborate. Go to Home Depot and purchase two or three inexpensive shop lights with clips.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/182/453355118_8262…
Have a variety of bulbs of various strengths on hand. If pointing the light directly at the subject is too harsh, bounce the light off the ceiling or walls or use a weaker bulb. It’ll take some experimentation to learn how to get it right but it’s worth it.
In the lab shots I used ONE clip-on shop light with a standard 60 or 75 watt bulb to combat the cold fluorescent lights and add a bit of warmth and brightness to the faces. It made all the difference in the world!
Check this out. Although the host of this video is not the most charismatic guy you'll ever see on Youtube, he does have some good tips for cheap lighting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItyfNmhwWz0
Indeed, it is possible to take preventive medicine too far. Case in point: the massive flood of DTC (direct-to-consumer) pharmaceutical advertising that has sent scores of healthy people to their doctors unnecessarily. To some extent, that's their goal: flood clinics with patients demanding prescription medicines and there will be enough doctors who will write 'scripts just to get the PITA patients off their backs. Drug companies also realize that if they can convince healthy people they are sick, those folks will simply shop docs until they find one who'll give them the med they want. There's a good reason why Big Pharma fights hard to stop laws against DTC advertising: it brings them Big Profits.
I don't disagree with you grumpy. However I asked the question of the researchers themselves and here's what Dr. Preti (the older gentleman in the clip) had to say:
"Thanks for the comments and don't worry-here is why.
First: we are nowhere near the level of sensitivity of seeing cancer at the level of one or
several errant cells.
Second: in a time very far from now (and perhaps in a different Universe) phyicians will
perform surgery just on the basis of a sensor response. In our time and space, visual
inspection of the site and biopsies will be with us for a looooong time.
Third: we can all do preventive medicine without seeing Dr. Gallagher, me or any of our
physician colleagues, as there are ample places for advice on keeping skin healthy; if you are
genetically prone to skin disease then frequent physical exams are already recommended."
Mike, do you disagree with me or are you merely making a different point? Seems to me it is the latter.
I'm only allowing Dr. Preti to make HIS point. I thought you might find it interesting.
I thought he made a good point but I do agree with you more.
Mike: Thanks for your suggestions. I'm going to conduct a one-hour interview of a veteran consumer attorney tomorrow. I am going to be equipped with my dual set of clip on shop lights from Home Depot ($8 each) for lighting. I'll report back with how it went.
Erich: Please check out this short tutorial on framing your subject first!
http://vimeo.com/1461280
Let me know how it goes!!
I've written my own tutorial on framing (or cropping) a subject for an interview that I think is worth checking out.
http://fitnessvideou.com/home/index.php?topic=142…