Really complicated shoots
Scenology, Shooting Films — By Adele on 27 May, 2009 11:14 pmMy subdrop has receded somewhat, as subdrop does, and I seem to be capable of coherent thought again. (As coherent it ever gets with me, anyway.) So I can tell you some stuff about the actual shoot, instead of going on about the high drama inside my head.
This was a highly complicated shoot. I could sympathise with its complexities even though my part in all of this madness consisted of no more than going through the script the night before, then turning up on location and doing my thing.
Spanking shoots can be divided into several categories by complexity:
- Minimalistic: A camera on a tripod, manned by the same guy who’ll be doing the spanking, if he can figure out the remote control. (I steer well-clear of these, because they feel too much like a filmed one-to-one.) Or just a single camera that comes with an actual live camera person. The plot is agreed ten minutes beforehand, and looks, if anything, like filmed role-play.
- Normal: Two or three cameras set to record the spanking from different angles, then to be cut together by editing. Enough lights to make the spanking visible. A stills camera, used afterwards to avoid the flashing and clicking from disturbing the film. A plot is agreed beforehand; the scenes are blocked out and walked through before the cameras roll.
- Quite sophisticated: All that, plus a script or a rudimentary storyboard, and at least one person who’s been to film school in some capacity or other. Night classes for two weeks count. Oh, and a silent stills camera complete with a photographer.
- Really quite bloody sophisticated: what we had last week.
That is to say, three cameras, a director of photography who’d spent god knows how many hours storyboarding the film on actual storyboarding software; (at least) three different types of lights; (at least) two different types of mikes (not once did I hear the usual “Speak up Adele, love”, because a boom mike? kicks ass); a magic travelling cupboard that goes over the radiators in the period scenes and magic tape to disguise light switches; a hair and make-up person with a portfolio longer than the collected works of Balzac; a stills photographer who sneaks into the smallest cracks between the furniture to get the most flattering angle; and, and, and. The cameras get moved a crazy number of times during a single scene, just to get that sinister shot of Tom looking like Mephistopheles (filming time: 40 minutes; screen time: 2 seconds), or a little heart-rending shot of Pandora and me brushing hands as we assume positions for the Caning of Doom (filming time: 20 minutes, screen time: 20 seconds if that).
There was an amusing episode when the number of cameras had miraculously grown compared to the storyboard, and the crew ended up in an increasingly rowdy debate about where in the cramped room all the equipment should go to a) avoid appearing in shot, b) not be in the way when Tom swings the cane, c) actually do the job of lighting, amplifying and filming us. The vanilla camera guy bursts out in frustration: “Who cares! This is porn!” Audible intake of breath all around the room. Camera guy, hastily: “I mean, art, of course, art, but still, guys…”
The price of all of this techno-paradise is that the film is shot a tiny little piece at a time, so there’s some serious concentration involved in snapping back into character. I was doing OK for most of it. But after a good 40 minute camera-moving break between our caning and the shot where we’re miserably standing with our skirts up as Tom walks out of the room, my reserve of misery was empty. I begged Tom to tell me something mean. He leaned to my ear and whispered: “Mean, mean, mean…” This might have actually worked, the giggles jolting me back to life, but he did go on to say a few mean things, which worked even better.
That said, I’m getting the feeling that the film is going to come out so prettily lit and shot, we could have been the most useless trio of kinksters on the planet, and still it would be a film worth watching. Or maybe not. I’m just easily impressed with technical kit and the guys who run it. Even if they don’t think much of arty porn.
Share on Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
16 Comments
I wonder how often that camera guy will film something people will enjoy as much as this arty spanking porn. And it just wouldn’t have worked without the right menacing look from Tom.
How long did your topping scene take to shoot?
I’m with You Adele, I’v been a still camera and vidio cam operator at a totally professinal studio for 3 weeks now. Man what I have learned! I was that Guy sneaking about grabbing the stills, to the guy screaming never flash when the film is rolling to the newbie. My reward for this. Use of a professinal studio and We’re offering all the models a chance to do somthing completely different. film at eleven!
Indy, I’m not actually sure how long the topping scene took. My memory is that we blasted through it. There were at least two breaks, but I don’t recall there being a need to do much complicated moving around. If you don’t count the initial setting up, it all took maybe an hour and a half, plus a little pick-up shot afterwards, which took maybe another twenty minutes. But it’s quite blurry now, due to me having to focus like mad, and ignoring all external stuff other than direction.
It is really interesting to read about what is going on back the scenes. Please more dear Adele
Erik
I love reading shoot reports. This sounds amazing, exhausting, and satisfying. I’m still snickering over “Who cares! This is porn!” and “mean, mean, mean.” Thanks for sharing it with us.
I am too, caroline. That was so funny. What’s his problem? Porn can’t be as well done as possible? He doesn’t sound much like a professional.
This was such an interesting post, Adele!
Hugs,
Hermione
Ah well, to be fair to the crew, this level of “artistic porn” can cause a considerable amount of cognitive dissonance in those who don’t share the exact same set of reference points/obsessions.
Hey Adele, a personal qustion if You don’t mind. How many times have You been on the set the shoot ready to start and Your the only one who relizes that: the lighting is off (a shadow in the wrong area) the sound gear is in the improper place, espesialy in the scene, Someone has left somthing in the scene that wasn’t there before, Someone has taken somthing from the scene that should be there. Or one of My favorites: The Actress is the only one that notices that Camera one and camera two are going to be in the scene at the same time! I’ll bet You have many more of these. please share.
I don’t, actually, Csheriff – I’m really unobservant (and pretty bad at taking photos as a result of this). My only one in the last shoot was noticing an undisguised light switch (in 1911, that would be a bit strange). I’m sure I must have picked up on stuff before, but I can’t remember anything in particular.
Fascinating stuff, but I hope you’ll eventually allow questions about what was going on inside you.
Sure, Krampus. I’ll talk about that next week some time.
Thank you, Adele.Re your twitter on wooden spoons – I think they’re probably what is called a talking point, which will allow spanko-inclined persons to half-identify themselves. Incidnetally – am I right tin thinking that wooden spoons weren’t used for spanking in the UK or US until fairly recently? I seem to remember a ather silly piece of research in the 50s which showed the wooden spoon occupied much he same place in Czech middle class family customs as the hairbrush in the Anglois-=Sxon world.
Did I just miss the part where you say what producer and title this was?
Ah, in the previous posting: The Roué production tentatively titled “Lost Causes”.
“the scenes are blocked out and walked through before the cameras roll.”
I’ve clearly done very few normal shoots then…
Wow, really? Most of the NSI shoots I’ve done had at least rudimentary walkthroughs.
Hmm.
Maybe Lucy trusts you more…