Normally you have one camera and shoot the scene multiple times from different angles. However, for really complex action or scenes where you can't do multiple takes (e.g. blowing up part of your set) you'll typically use multiple cameras to ensure you get all the angles you'll need.

A lot of people try to shoot with multiple cameras to save time, but typically it ends up taking just as long as you have to ensure that the cameras can't see each other, that they all have decent lighting, etc, etc.

Yup - one cam shoots scene from ulti angles/reversals. 2 cams can be set up to capture 2-shot and close up, not always the best idea, the dp & director really need to visualize how it'll be cut together in order for this to be worth the effort. 2 or more cams like Mark said if you're going to shoot something that'll cost a ton of money to do more than once.

If you can afford more than 1 camera, go for it 🙂

Steven Soderbergh is known for using multiple cameras in single takes.

quote:

---

If you can afford more than 1 camera, go for it 🙂

Steven Soderbergh is known for using multiple cameras in single takes.

---

I'm in agreement with rugz here. Using multiple cameras can cut production time significantly as well, so if you're on a time crunch this can definitely help.

Essentially if you're in any type of situation where you will not be able to reproduce the event (e.g. documentary situations) I'd advise using at least 2 cameras. Otherwise you'll find that you'll be rapidly moving the camera around as the focus changes (e.g. debate or forum style discussion) and this can create difficulty in the post-production stages of your film.

- Night

Did you know that a feature length documentary called ONE DAY OF WAR used a record 160 cameras?

Whoa, what is the premise of the documentary? 160 cameras were used in a one shot deal or...? More details? I'm curious. Thanks.

- Night

Thats all I know. I read it in a quiz. Theres probably information on it somewhere.