On a recent video podcast we did an informal interview of an individual (single camera). I see its quite common now to go to black and white or change the colours to duotone when the subject responds to a question.

What are your thoughts on this? Do you like this style? Do you have any tips on how it should be implemented?

Not quite an interview, but a piece to camera I did whereby I locked-off the front-main camera and used handheld to get another angle AND more intensive shots of eyes and mouth.

The 2 angles provided for a neat way of intercutting from descriptive narrative by the speaker to him making a specific point OR a side statement. I colour graded the 2 cameras. No.2 to a wash-grey-red and had the main, No1 slightly Saturated with a black restore Fx. It added to the whole narrative and provided a stylish way into the body of the work which was being described by the speaker.

So, and as you are asking about SINGLE camera work, then maybe the clue here is to truly TRULY listen to the words and identify a change in emphasis - this would proffer a meaning to any colour grading. Changes in ColGrad for the sake of it, relies heavily on the viewer accepting and unaware that there is only one camera. The notion underpinning the lie here is that colour grading is being employed to suggest that there are 2 cameras - when clearly there wasn't. However, it can and does work.

As per the other thread here relating to "camera-wobble" for the sake of it, what HAS become de rigueur relies heavily on the uninitiated being accepting of it and not just downright P-offed by it all. Personally - this for the other thread - I liked the immediacy of the Bourne Ulti. It kept my attention and drew me threw its workings - now watched 4 times! But maybe this IS because i was brought up during the period of the Vietnam War and TV film footage had that lexicon reality about it that I must have carried forward today. I should think likewise for Paul Greengrass.

How we deconstruct any ANY artwork and then reassemble it for the casual./interested viewer/consumer is always gonna be fraught with danger and questionable artistic validity - well, no change there then!!!?

C0olour changes with a single camera - why not? But doing it for narrative reasons will assist in carrying it off. Can it be badly done? Oh yes!!! - And what DOES badly done mean? Apart from what I said above, it is where the casual onlooker SEES the camera work and has stopped being moved/enthused/scared/turned-on by exactly WHAT is being said. - Of course, maybe it is a discourse on the use of Colour Grading with a single camera .. then it would have perfect relevance.

Grazie

Little t add. Like Grazie says' ..... narative reasons.... '

I like to edit and try things out but with all our technological prowess and possibilities we must not forget the complex message we are forming by how we film, edit, and present stuff.

I recently tried some cut aways during interviews just cos someone said they wanted to shoot them - it just didnt work - wrong subject.

__________________
I have one prejudice - I am anti HDV for consumer camcorders.

www.zaskarfilms.com You tube channel 'zaskarfilms'
JVC DV5001e (big cam), Sony PC6E (tiny cam), Vinten pro5, PAG light, SM58, Sony ECM50, Sony C-76, 0.5x convertors for sony, Rode video mic, Vegas 7.

Think about this started. Interviews used to be done by a professional camera(wo)man then production assistants were given camcorders and told to see what they could grab during the interview. (MTV was particularly guilty of getting "runners" to do this. Not only were the poor sods working for nothing, just happy to have something to do with music tv, they were expected to provide footage which could be intercut with professional material). Needless to say their footage was mostly crap so using the Ground Force theory of "make a feature out of it" it was made monochrome in post.
That way it somehow became "intentionally" unsharp, wobbly and badly composed, being in black & White it was "cool".

This has now become quite acceptable in a lot of situations and the use of monochrome has extended in all sorts of directions. What you need to ask is "does this add anything to the interview?" If not, or if you're just using it to spice up a boring interview... then you're on to a loser.

It would probably depend on the target audience of the final product. If you're catering to people with good attention span then it's pretty redundant.

Indeed.

Best avoided I think, having said that I really like the odd very breif cut away that shows the crew during an interview.

__________________
I have one prejudice - I am anti HDV for consumer camcorders.

www.zaskarfilms.com You tube channel 'zaskarfilms'
JVC DV5001e (big cam), Sony PC6E (tiny cam), Vinten pro5, PAG light, SM58, Sony ECM50, Sony C-76, 0.5x convertors for sony, Rode video mic, Vegas 7.

also, don't forget that cutaways are extremely valuable when it comes to editing. Say if the person being interviewed stuttered, or paused for a long time, simply chopping a small section would look awful, however, using a cutaway of say, the persons hands for a second or so, covering a jump cut looks a bit more professional.

you can see some of what I mean by watching some video I did for the BBC here: BBC - North East Wales Wrexham Guide - Your views - on camera