Some people are complaining that they have seen many produced scripts that are overwhelmed with camera directions when I tell them not to use those.

People need to understand that those scripts are final drafts (not original screenplays) and are rewritten, so of course they will have camera angles because they are necessary.  

I strongly recommend you do not use camera angles in your script(s) unless it is really necessary.

A shooting script is different from a spec script.

A shooting script has been gone over in a very detailed manor to make sure the entire movie scene by scene is laid out precisely as the director wants it.

At this point, the script is more than just the story. It's the directions for the story as well.

A spec script simply tells the story. You actually do the screenplay harm by jamming in unnecessary things outside of the story itself.

Unless the writer plans on making the movie themselves, leave it out. Tell the story, let the actors act and let the directors direct...

Shawn……><

Quoted from coldbug I strongly recommend you do not use camera angles in your script(s) unless it is really necessary.

Agreed. But also, I wouldn't only not recommend it. From what I've heard, never do it. EVER!
If you feel the need to put in a camera angle, just figure out a way to describe it.

Instead of LONG SHOT, maybe something like, In the distance.
Or instead of CLOSE-UP, just describe whatever it is in detail. If you are a good enough writer, the reader will get what you are doing.

Quoted from Steex If you are a good enough writer, the reader will get what you are doing.

I think it's better if the reader has no idea what you're doing. I'd rather not read a sentence and think of it from a director's POV. I just want to read the story. The end. No questions asked.

Implying a Close up shot can be just as bad as saying "CLOSE UP: JIMMY'S BAD AND SOMEWHAT DUCK-LIKE FACE."  Am I making sense, here??

Dan

Yes, you're right, Dan.

What I was trying to say is, if you feel that you NEED a certain shot, for whatever reason, that would be the way I would go.
Of course, I don't do tell the camera what to do in any way whatsoever.
But if there was something the writer felt was extremely important, it would be better than using an actual camera angle/shot.

Quoted from Steex But if there was something the writer felt was extremely important, it would be better than using an actual camera angle/shot.

So, with Spielberg's 'Schindler's List' for example... If you were the writer, you would write that the entire film apart from a certain scene is in black and white. Is that what you're saying?

I can understand where you're coming from. Writer's definitely should get a say in shots that they feel are important. That, for me, would come into the negotiation process, rather than into the actual script.

I would say - unless you're the director - don't make any choices for the director.   At least not in any feature spec script that you intend to pimp.  Chances are that any choices you make for the director won't make it to the screen anyway.  

HOWEVER...

If you're writing a short for this board that a film school student or otherwise indie short producer  might pick up then it probably doesn't matter all that much.   If they're inexperienced then they might even appreciate the help.  Just make sure you completely understand any technical information you provide.

BUT...

If you're writing shorts to practice your feature writing then see the first paragraph.  

What I was trying to say is that there are ways to trick a reader into seeing a certain shot or movement, without actually writing it out. You can do it naturally.

Just off the top of my head, I'll try to give an example:

1) Rachel glances into the mirror over the sink. She pauses. Checks her forehead. A small BUMP. She touches it, winces. She leans forward. Upon closer inspection-- this is no ordinary bump-- it's a tick. It's head dug into her skin. Gorged with blood. Tiny legs wriggling.

-- I know this isn't anything great. But, most likely, with the phrase "upon closer inspection" and describing the ticks movement, it implies that you are getting a CLOSE-UP of the tick. (This would be much better than saying "CLOSE-UP: a tick.")

Quoted from Steex Just off the top of my head, I'll try to give an example:

Now that's funny with an AVATAR like yours!  ;D

Shawn.....><

Haha!
That's why my head looks like that.
I strain way too hard. If only I were smarter.
Maybe I wouldn't explode my head so much.

i totally get the idea coming from Steex.  Here is an example from one of my scripts.  You will see how I avoided the CAMERA direction.

Please do not hesitate to correct me if you see anything wrong.  I love to learn so I don't be dumbfounded.

EXT: CEMETERY –NIGHT

A WHITE OWL- rests on the half-fallen hanging sign that says,

“West Land Cemetery”  

…and it flies away after sensing the danger coming into the area.

here I wanted to focus on the owl.  So I did that instead of CU:

Here is another one:

EXT/INT: WELL- UNDER WATER - DAY

CALM WATER SURFACE of the well- suddenly bombarded by a WOODEN bucket dropping, and splashing through.  Scooping out full of water.

I should have simply written,

"A wooden bucket is bombarded onto the calm water surface of the well, scooping up full of water."

I don't know what made me to do the tweak.  Maybe it's a bad idea.

But the following one is a MUST have CAMERA direction/angle.

EXT: TERRACE -NIGHT

Magnificent view of the gleaming harbor can be seen from the terrace….suddenly…

CU: LEGS OF A BIRD -swoop across the frame---

Landing onto the terrace…..

TRACKING WITH THE LEGS as they TRANSFORM INTO HUMAN’S LEGS-IN LEATHER BOOTS.

THE BOOTS touch down the concrete.

CAMERA SLOWLY MOVE UP TO REVEAL:

Lieutenant Saudakk.


Here, I couldn't find any other way around without using CAMERA direction.  It is very important that the reader must see the legs of the bird before he sees Lt being transformed.  If there's better way in doing this, please advise.

Quoted from coldbug THE BOOTS touch down the concrete. CAMERA SLOWLY MOVE UP TO REVEAL: Lieutenant Saudakk. Here, I couldn't find any other way around without using CAMERA direction.  It is very important that the reader must see the legs of the bird before he sees Lt being transformed.  If there's better way in doing this, please advise.

The way you have written it is not wrong in my opinion, but you could possibly give this a go...

"The boots touch down on the concrete -- Lieutenant Saudakk." - That is how I would write it.

I think a writing style is a very personal thing to have. It's hard to acquire, hard to let go. At the end of the day, writers should have the freedom to write in what ever way they choose. There are no set rules, but there are guidelines. Failure to follow these guidelines will see your screenplay put down incredibly quickly. That's the way it works unfortunately.