P4
REVIEW OF FINAL EDIT:
PRODUCTION PROCESS:
The production process was easy enough, but it was important to stick to the schedule of the calendar, since it had my contingency plans alongside the initial filming plan. The one problem I found was arranging the interview with Professor Rowe, after Woodlands Care centre wouldn't get back to me. Luckily, I got in contact early enough that Rowe could fit me in before his holiday. Something else I was worried about, was getting enough insert shots and whether they would fit with the overall aesthetic of the film. On the other hand though, I had assurance that I knew how to work equipment and I knew what equipment was suitable for which days of filming.
DECISIONS:
I had to make numerous decisions during production and post-production, that ultimately brought the production together. From the start, I had had to make the decision of what mood I wanted people to feel after watching the film and what was the best way to trigger those emotions. With the long footage that I had captured for both interviews, I had to cut them down to the most important and outstanding answers. Unfortunately, i had to cut down a lot of Professor Rowe's footage due to the longer and more factual answers, knowing that the audience may not take in as much information if there is to much technical language. Other decisions that had to be made, was lighting and the positioning of the camera for all footage. I wanted the make the most out of the locations with less space. I decided to use the rule of thirds to frame all interviews so that the audience would be drawn to the subject and less distracted by the background
REVISIONS:
The one major revision that I made during the production process, was the changing of who I was able to interview; Prof. James Rowe instead of Woodlands Care Centre. During that interview, I had meant t take someone to help, yet I had to film it alone due to it coinciding with another film shoot. Looking at post-production, small revisions occurred after restarting my edit numerous times. The final edit had a different outcome from what I had first planned, with different alterations to colour correction and fine-tuning. The placements of titles and facts differed from my original plan due to changes made from other people's feedback. Overall, the revisions in both production and post-production were small and helped to create a piece of work that I could be proud of.
TECHNICAL QUALITIES:
I have used technical knowledge to frame and film interviews and additional footage. Before filming, I was aware of how to frame a subject and with knowledge of aperture and white balance. Upon filming in different locations, I was able to easily adjust ISO and other settings so that the subject wasn't over exposed and so that footage wasn't overly noisy/grainy. When filming the interviews, I made sure to have placement of the interviewee towards one side of the frame with the rule of thirds. It meant that the focus of the audience is captured and it makes the shot more appealing. Alongside the rule of thirds, the lamp behind Sarah Diver, is turned on to balance natural and artificial lighting and adds something to the background whilst she is talking in the foreground. Meanwhile, the LED light was pointed towards the ceiling to bounce light and diffuse it, adding more light than the one lamp in the background was giving.
AESTHETIC QUALITIES:
Aesthetically, I wanted to create a sombre and reflective documentary. I used colour correction in the opening scenes, to lower the brightness and adding a brown tint to age the footage. With the Fuji 125 filter, It seemed to match the mood music in the background and blended well with the downplayed colour-scheme of the interviews. Originally, the changing of the initial opening scenes matched with the keys of the piano, which reached a crescendo. Unfortunately, the music wasn't deemed the fitting piece for the film. One aesthetic element was the way images of the past were linked with the mention of looking back at the past. It gave context into what she was talking about so the audience wouldn't be thrown if the image footage was placed in randomly.
PROPOSED SCHEDULING TIME:
Looking at the target audience and content, the release of the documentary would be as planned. with permission from all those involved, the short film would be able to go to film festivals and released to all ages. This wide target audience would benefit from watching the documentary and hearing from someone affected personally and a medical professional. I would be ready to show people as soon as they were ready, starting from 9th March 2019. Film festivals I had looked at included local events and reaching out to Norwich.
AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT:
I personally think that there are definitely areas to improve on with 'The Decline'. The main footage of Professor Rowe is out of focus and thus unusable. It had so much information to give but with a time limit I had to cut it down to what was important for the audience to know. I would have asked to re-shoot that footage but luckily I had a suitable piece of footage that was in focus. I would also try to get more relevant insert shots fro the documentary, but I was lucky that the natural images set up a certain tone that completed the film and caught the attention of the audience.
PRODUCTION PROCESS:
The production process was easy enough, but it was important to stick to the schedule of the calendar, since it had my contingency plans alongside the initial filming plan. The one problem I found was arranging the interview with Professor Rowe, after Woodlands Care centre wouldn't get back to me. Luckily, I got in contact early enough that Rowe could fit me in before his holiday. Something else I was worried about, was getting enough insert shots and whether they would fit with the overall aesthetic of the film. On the other hand though, I had assurance that I knew how to work equipment and I knew what equipment was suitable for which days of filming.
DECISIONS:
I had to make numerous decisions during production and post-production, that ultimately brought the production together. From the start, I had had to make the decision of what mood I wanted people to feel after watching the film and what was the best way to trigger those emotions. With the long footage that I had captured for both interviews, I had to cut them down to the most important and outstanding answers. Unfortunately, i had to cut down a lot of Professor Rowe's footage due to the longer and more factual answers, knowing that the audience may not take in as much information if there is to much technical language. Other decisions that had to be made, was lighting and the positioning of the camera for all footage. I wanted the make the most out of the locations with less space. I decided to use the rule of thirds to frame all interviews so that the audience would be drawn to the subject and less distracted by the background
REVISIONS:
The one major revision that I made during the production process, was the changing of who I was able to interview; Prof. James Rowe instead of Woodlands Care Centre. During that interview, I had meant t take someone to help, yet I had to film it alone due to it coinciding with another film shoot. Looking at post-production, small revisions occurred after restarting my edit numerous times. The final edit had a different outcome from what I had first planned, with different alterations to colour correction and fine-tuning. The placements of titles and facts differed from my original plan due to changes made from other people's feedback. Overall, the revisions in both production and post-production were small and helped to create a piece of work that I could be proud of.
TECHNICAL QUALITIES:
I have used technical knowledge to frame and film interviews and additional footage. Before filming, I was aware of how to frame a subject and with knowledge of aperture and white balance. Upon filming in different locations, I was able to easily adjust ISO and other settings so that the subject wasn't over exposed and so that footage wasn't overly noisy/grainy. When filming the interviews, I made sure to have placement of the interviewee towards one side of the frame with the rule of thirds. It meant that the focus of the audience is captured and it makes the shot more appealing. Alongside the rule of thirds, the lamp behind Sarah Diver, is turned on to balance natural and artificial lighting and adds something to the background whilst she is talking in the foreground. Meanwhile, the LED light was pointed towards the ceiling to bounce light and diffuse it, adding more light than the one lamp in the background was giving.
AESTHETIC QUALITIES:
Aesthetically, I wanted to create a sombre and reflective documentary. I used colour correction in the opening scenes, to lower the brightness and adding a brown tint to age the footage. With the Fuji 125 filter, It seemed to match the mood music in the background and blended well with the downplayed colour-scheme of the interviews. Originally, the changing of the initial opening scenes matched with the keys of the piano, which reached a crescendo. Unfortunately, the music wasn't deemed the fitting piece for the film. One aesthetic element was the way images of the past were linked with the mention of looking back at the past. It gave context into what she was talking about so the audience wouldn't be thrown if the image footage was placed in randomly.
PROPOSED SCHEDULING TIME:
Looking at the target audience and content, the release of the documentary would be as planned. with permission from all those involved, the short film would be able to go to film festivals and released to all ages. This wide target audience would benefit from watching the documentary and hearing from someone affected personally and a medical professional. I would be ready to show people as soon as they were ready, starting from 9th March 2019. Film festivals I had looked at included local events and reaching out to Norwich.
AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT:
I personally think that there are definitely areas to improve on with 'The Decline'. The main footage of Professor Rowe is out of focus and thus unusable. It had so much information to give but with a time limit I had to cut it down to what was important for the audience to know. I would have asked to re-shoot that footage but luckily I had a suitable piece of footage that was in focus. I would also try to get more relevant insert shots fro the documentary, but I was lucky that the natural images set up a certain tone that completed the film and caught the attention of the audience.
Comments
Post a Comment