So much of your film’s perceived quality is rooted in shooting not only the best coverage possible, but the right amount.

Unfortunately though, many no-budget filmmakers and cinematographers get things very wrong in this department. Typically either shooting far too much or far too little coverage.

As always, it comes down to finding the right balance. In this case, between:

1. Shooting enough coverage to give you options in the edit
2. Keeping things minimal enough to make your days

These goals are always at odds, as more coverage equates to significantly more time spent on each scene.

Some filmmakers will try to get around this by shooting scenes, sequences, or even entire films in a single take. That’s one way to do it, and done well it can offer a cool stylistic effect.

That said, it has to be right for your story and the tone you’re looking for. Not to mention, shooting things in fewer takes (and without any coverage at all) usually complicates things more. Not less…

For example, it’s easy to keep a 4 page dialogue scene interesting with enough coverage. You can cut between different angles and focal lengths at key moments, and have full temporal control over the scene.

But in a single take, you’re likely going to spend way more time blocking, adding camera movement, and lighting the space. Or alternatively not do any of that, and have a scene that falls flat.

The opposite approach entirely is to shoot multi-camera, and get as much coverage as possible. Even if it means just 1 or 2 takes of everything.

This again can work for the right filmmaker. But personally, I find it too chaotic to work that way.

It’s impossible to give any one shot 100% of your attention when there are 2 or more cameras rolling at once. Not to mention, if you are also directing – the performances usually take a big hit too.

Unlike films shot with no coverage, multi-cam gives you the ability to shape the edit in post. But with an overabundance of unnecessary coverage, it can actually slow down your post process.

It’s never about getting the most coverage, it’s about getting the best.

Every film is unique, and every director and cinematographer will have vastly different tastes.

That said, as a general starting point for no-budget cinematography, I recommend following the 33% rule.

This is a rule I developed while shot listing on a feature film years ago.

I decided to shot list every scene using any idea I had, without any concern of the impact on production. 

Then, I would edit the list by removing 33% of the shots (about 1 in 3). If a scene was broken down into 10 shots, now it might only have 6 or 7.

This exercise gave me the creative freedom to think of unique shots without restriction, but challenged me to select only the best ones.

Often, this led to great new shot ideas, as I would combine 2 or 3 shots into one. Or write something entirely new to simplify things, but also make it more interesting the the process.

As a whole, this method has served as an easy way to strike the right balance with coverage. At least starting out.

More recently, I’ve stopped using a shot list entirely. Now, I do what I call “shot planning”, which is less rigid and more flexible.

But even as my methods have evolved, I still very much factor in the 33% rule. Whether planning out my days, or on set directing in real time.

These topics are explored in far more depth in the No-Budget Cinematography Blueprint, which you can check out here.

For exclusive filmmaking articles every Sunday, sign up for my newsletter here!