Tips for Beginning Documentarians
So I have learned a few things about this art and I thought to share, hope this helps to all you young whippersnappers wanting to teach and excite the world.
Every rule is breakable and bendable depending on circumstance, but for the most part these are the things that have worked for me.
In my first doc Crossing Nogales, I had a bit of angst and jealousy for all the photographers that came about with fancy equipment and would stay for a day and think they got something real. In retrospect I realize I was young and broke. I was armed with a Canon Xti with a kit lens and a crappy audio recorder. I thought I was at a disadvantage for the lame equipment. I still believe I was at a disadvantage quality wise, but for what I was trying to do and the sketchy and dangerous situations I was putting myself in, I realize that I could not have done it with good equipment. Really I might have lost my life if I had nicer equipment.
If I had gotten robbed or beat for my Xti, it would have been fine. I could have easily handed over my camera and been sad, but gotten over it with ease. I would have never had the guts to go out into the graveyards where migrants were sleeping with a $4000 rig. Or to go alone into a big group of desperately poor migrants with my flashy expensive 5D Mark II, it wouldn't have been worth the risk. Furthermore, it would have changed the dynamics a bit, there might have been more animosity towards me having nice things then there might have already been.
If you are shooting a doc about monks, or your local neighborhood that is safe, then by all means use the best you have. But if you want to do a doc about homelessness or MS13 then you better be prepared to be robbed and deal with it.
I have been working on a bigger doc called The Idiocratic Life. I have a big 5D Mark II and a 70-200 IS that usually stays secure in my trunk. My 60D with its kit lens is perfect for on-the-go interviews and it does not weigh me down. It is versatile for most everything and it is less intimidating when I put it in front of someone's face.
I find that the quality is not as good, but for the footage and the ease at which I get shots, I can let go of that little bit of quality to get the job done. Truly, content is king and I would rather have the story and every aspect of the story then half of the story with less comfortable people, a broken back and nicer color and contrast.
So run with a cheap T1i with a kit lens, but keep your mind sharp and know what you are going for, don't sweat the small difference in quality. This concept will keep your mind at ease, your subject at ease and it will save you thousands of dollars and keep your feet light and moving.
Don't rush. If it is necessary and it is a fleeting moment, then rush if you must. The hardest part of documentary is the psychology of it all. I always felt there should be a class on the psychology of getting people relaxed enough to open up to you and share their personal life in a emotional way.
Be completely honest if you can. If someone asks what your intention is, tell them. If the answer sounds negative to you, it is your job to make the person see it in a positive light. THis trick requires logic and reason. You have to find the benefit in truth and make the subject realize that by sharing their story with you, they become part of something bigger, bigger then either one of you can perceive. You have to know how to defend what you do and you have to truly believe it is important, if you don't or you can't, then you should probably not be doing it.
Never deny that you can manipulate the story, When someone suggests that you can, never argue that point; it is offensive to their intelligence, and hopefully the people you want to talk to are intellegent.
Really, you are showing people themselves in the third person, and regardless of how you edit or manipulate the story, they might not be comfortable with it. Some people simply are not comfortable with themselves and you have to acknowledge that.
If you are interviewing someone and you are totally on board with what they are saying and you think they are completely right, simply shut -up. Just let them talk. However if you disagree with what they are saying, wait for them to finish or come to a good pause and explain briefly how you or someone else could perceive it differently. Chances are that the audience well be seeing the same holes in their thinking and they will want resolution. When you are in disagreement, then you are in a perfect position to help find that resolution. Remember not to rush though, perhaps the subject knows of the holes in their logic and they are about to defend it either way. Find that thin line between having faith in the subject and letting the moment (and passion of the moment) pass.
When you agree completely, what have you to offer in your thoughts other then gratification to yourself or the subject?
It is good to acknowledge agreement, and encourage the subject. Your duty as a journalist is to make the interviewee realize that they have something important to say and that you respect their time and thoughts. Aside from that, I am minimalist in interviewing technique. Everyone has something to say, just give them a subtle push in the direction you want them to go, and then wait.
Ethics is a difficult matter. There is a line between respecting an individual and wanting to show a larger story for the benefit of society as a whole to produce change. Lately I have been on many communes and I make it a point to be very up-front with everyone as soon as I meet them about what I am doing and I give them the opportunity to opt out if they choose. If they don't want to be filmed then you should respect that.
I have broken the rule a few times though. When I was photographing migrants sleeping in graveyards I simply could not ask. Am I to go up to some poor migrant and wake them up from their slumber that they probably took a long time to find considering their uncomfortable circumstances? I felt the photo conveyed a strong sense of the trouble and hard times they go through, and I wanted to evoke empathy and understanding. To me, this outweighed the disrespect I caused by not asking permission.
Once I was in Skid Row working on a documentary about mental illness. There was a woman receiving medical treatment on the street and I didn't want to disrupt the process by asking, so I filmed. We were right in the heart of Skid Row, on 5th street, surrounded by hundreds of homeless people and one big black man started yelling at me, "Exploitation Sir! That is what you are doing! You are an exploiter!"
I went into flight or fight mode. Here was this huge angry man yelling at me, (and justifiably so) in the middle of this huge crowd of people who at many points in their life have been exploited. I began to run away, but I stopped. I had a short second to myself where I questioned my intention and method and decided that I was not exploiting anyone. So I turned around and walked up right to the man and we had words. Finally we came to an understanding of eachother. Our blood was still boiling an I appreciated the passion and boldness of this man to call out what he thought was an injustice, so I asked if I could interview him. It ended up being the end of this documentary and the man was very passionate. My focus was off and the camera work was shoddy because of all the pressure I was under, but like I said before, content is king.
You must always be prepared to defend and stand up for what you do. To say proudly that you are a documentarian. Don't be overly defensive, but when some is being accusatory you must embrace the argument with open arms. Don't get angry and respect their concerns, but never back down.....unless of course violence may break out.
Some of the best advice I got was from Gary Weimberg of Luma Productions. I was trying to figure out how to get access and interviews from people that don't necessarily want to be interviewed and he told me this;
Why should anyone want to let you and a camera in?
It is your job to:
1. accept that the privacy needs of the subject of your doc, and their need
for respect and honest treatment by you, as more important to them than
your goals, and you earn trust by immediately showing them that you are
already treating them with respect and genuine appreciation when they object
to your idea. If there is no genuine common ground between you and your
subjects as to why a doc should be made then there is no reason to make
it. If there is a genuine common ground, then if you treat people right,
they will see the common ground and ... Voila fewer closed doors.
2. if they object to ³the media of the 70¹s², it is your duty to show them,
thru your sincerity, that you are not ³the media of the 70¹s.² what went
wrong then? Why are you different? Who are you that you are worthy of their
trust?
3. ok, that being said, there will be closed doors still. Embace it.
That¹s the job of the documentarian.
