Shooting Hours of Coverage in Film and Why I Never Do It

Many people in the filmmaking community might disagree with me and call me all kinds of derogatory names for saying this, but I never shoot covers. In all my projects, whether it’s a short film or a documentary, I never shoot any kind of coverage for one simple reason: to me, it’s a signature of an amateur filmmaker who doesn’t know what they are doing.

When I go on set, I know all my angles, all my lighting, and all the action. Shooting random angles to cover your ass because of a lack of vision is simply a signature of somebody who doesn’t know what they are doing.

The Argument for Coverage

Coverage in filmmaking refers to shooting a scene from multiple angles and perspectives to ensure that during the editing process, you have various options to choose from. This practice is often taught in film schools and advocated by many seasoned filmmakers. The idea is to give editors enough material to work with, ensuring the story can be constructed seamlessly even if unforeseen issues arise during principal photography.

Why I Avoid Coverage

1.Precision Planning: My approach involves meticulous pre-production planning. Before stepping onto the set, I have a clear vision of how each scene should look, feel, and progress. This includes detailed storyboarding, shot lists, and discussions with my cinematographer and crew. By the time we start shooting, every angle and movement is carefully choreographed and rehearsed.

2.Creative Intent: Relying on coverage can dilute the creative intent of a scene. When you shoot with a clear plan, every shot is intentional, designed to convey a specific mood, emotion, or piece of information. Random angles shot for the sake of coverage can lead to a disjointed final product that lacks a cohesive visual style.

3.Efficiency: Shooting only the necessary angles saves time and resources. Film shoots can be incredibly demanding, both physically and financially. By avoiding unnecessary coverage, I can allocate more time to perfecting each planned shot, ensuring higher quality results and a smoother production process.

4.Editor’s Clarity: When editors receive footage that aligns closely with the director’s vision, it streamlines the post-production process. They can focus on enhancing the story rather than piecing it together from a haphazard collection of shots. This clarity can significantly impact the final product’s cohesiveness and emotional impact.

5.Professionalism and Confidence: Not shooting coverage demonstrates confidence and professionalism. It shows that I trust my preparation, my team, and my vision. This approach often inspires the cast and crew, leading to a more focused and motivated production environment.

Counterarguments and My Response

Some might argue that unforeseen issues on set—such as technical malfunctions, unexpected performance nuances, or sudden changes in the environment—necessitate coverage to ensure flexibility in post-production. While these concerns are valid, I believe they can be mitigated with thorough planning, flexibility, and adaptability on set. Moreover, embracing these challenges and finding creative solutions on the spot often leads to more innovative and compelling filmmaking.

Others might point out that even renowned directors use coverage. However, it’s essential to remember that filmmaking is an art form, and there are numerous paths to success. What works for one filmmaker may not work for another. My approach is a conscious choice to prioritize intentionality, efficiency, and a clear creative vision.