Unit 35: Multi-Camera
Task 1A
Multi-camera productions use more than one camera to capture each shot and scene from different angles. This means the directors and producers have more freedom and choice in the shots used, which comes in very handy for creating a linear storyline. Multi-camera techniques can be used for live events, public events, and studio programs. Conversation scenes are filmed in one take and which is a large benefit to an actor's performance. This is why multi-camera setups are used on sitcoms:
Generally, the two outer cameras shoot close-up shots or “crosses” of the two most active characters on the set at any given time, while the central camera or cameras shoot a wider master shot to capture the overall action and establish the geography of the room. In this way, multiple shots are obtained in a single take without having to start and stop the action.
Types of Programme Techniques:
Multi-Camera production almost speaks for itself and is used for the majority of day-to-day television programs and films we watch. For example sitcoms and soap operas, talk shows, sporting events, and newscasts. The majority of Multi-camera productions use 3 or more cameras that are constantly rolling catching reactions rather than having to run a scene over and over again. Here are a few examples of programs that use multi-camera drama
Studio Productions
Game shows: The Channel 4 hit entertainment Game show Deal or no deal is hosted by Noel Edmonds.
Magazine Shows The One show Hosted by Alex Jones, Matt Baker and Chris Evans, and aided by a team of top reporters. It is a live magazine program featuring topical stories and big-name studio guests.
Talk shows: A good example of a popular British talk show would be Jeremy Kyle. It is a prerecorded studio program that has a multi-camera set up that focuses on Jeremy Kyle himself the audience and the people in which he is interviewing or should I say provoking
News: The new again is a studio setup using a multiple of cameras and then if they are showing an outside broadcast a multiple of cameras will cover that story, for example, if something is going on outside 10 downing street there will be a camera focused on the reporter and a camera keeping a safe wide shot of the whole area so nothing is missed.Sitcoms: A lot of sitcoms are studio based but some scenes are filmed in real locations, for example, the sitcom friends is based in an apartment but there are a lot of scenes that are filmed in central park
Live Events: Football matches – Sky sports use around about 24 cameras at a football game. The cameras positioned around the stadium to ensure that everything is being covered from the crowd reaction to what is actually going on the pitch.
Olympics: I couldn’t even estimate the number of cameras used for the 2012 Olympics as there were so many events going on at different times and places within the arena that there would have been a certain amount of cameras focused on the 100m sprint while other cameras focused on the long jump.
Types of Programme Techniques:
Multi-Camera production almost speaks for itself and is used for the majority of day-to-day television programs and films we watch. For example sitcoms and soap operas, talk shows, sporting events, and newscasts. The majority of Multi-camera productions use 3 or more cameras that are constantly rolling catching reactions rather than having to run a scene over and over again. Here are a few examples of programs that use multi-camera drama
Studio Productions
Game shows: The Channel 4 hit entertainment Game show Deal or no deal is hosted by Noel Edmonds.
Magazine Shows The One show Hosted by Alex Jones, Matt Baker and Chris Evans, and aided by a team of top reporters. It is a live magazine program featuring topical stories and big-name studio guests.
Talk shows: A good example of a popular British talk show would be Jeremy Kyle. It is a prerecorded studio program that has a multi-camera set up that focuses on Jeremy Kyle himself the audience and the people in which he is interviewing or should I say provoking
News: The new again is a studio setup using a multiple of cameras and then if they are showing an outside broadcast a multiple of cameras will cover that story, for example, if something is going on outside 10 downing street there will be a camera focused on the reporter and a camera keeping a safe wide shot of the whole area so nothing is missed.Sitcoms: A lot of sitcoms are studio based but some scenes are filmed in real locations, for example, the sitcom friends is based in an apartment but there are a lot of scenes that are filmed in central park
Live Events: Football matches – Sky sports use around about 24 cameras at a football game. The cameras positioned around the stadium to ensure that everything is being covered from the crowd reaction to what is actually going on the pitch.
Olympics: I couldn’t even estimate the number of cameras used for the 2012 Olympics as there were so many events going on at different times and places within the arena that there would have been a certain amount of cameras focused on the 100m sprint while other cameras focused on the long jump.
Concerts-
Live concerts are one of the most common and used examples of multi-camera filming. Rock Bands, Pop artists and rappers dominate these and are shot a lot of the time outside on a stage along with a huge audience.
My chosen three Program Formats:
Live: “Boro FC”
My chosen example of live events in multi-camera production is going to be football. This sport is one of the most watched things on television in the UK. Not only that but most people want to watch the game live because they are generally fans or want to know how the game was going instantly. This means that the footage had to be edited live using multi-camera techniques.
I have decided to focus on the football club Boro FC, a local team known across the country. The build-up to the game itself can vary from camera angles. Boro Riverside Stadium is where the live editing would be carried out. Other stadiums a lot of the time are responsible for representing the club because of away games.
A lot of the important shots are actually even before the game has started. Commentators and football analysis people such as Jamie Carragher and Gary Neville talk before, after and sometimes even when the game is playing. These shots are the typical interview style shots were three angles are used, two facing the commentators and another one to have a full shot of them. While the commentators are talking about things such as players, managers, and the stadium, the shot usually cuts to whatever they are talking about life. This is usually on players when they are warming up before the game but are on the pitch and are still hearing what the commentators are saying about them. This gives the audience information as well as being able to see things live at the same time.
Along with shots of the commentators, in every professional football match especially within the Premier League, the footage cuts from either the commentators or the game to a live interview. This is a lot of the time on managers or players that did well in the game and can happen before a game to give the audience an idea on what they are feeling as well as after the game and feedback from the team’s point of view.
When it actually comes to the game itself, there are very typical shots of it which are extremely common in football. The first and main one is the birds’ eye, a high shot in the middle of the stadium. This shot is stationary however pans left and right whenever following the ball. The reason it is high is that it shows the audience watching the whole game and can interpret the game meaning they can watch the style of play, watch runs, attacks, how the defense is structured and many more. Apart from this shot, there are a few occasional close-ups on players who have played a key role in the game or are focused on them. This normally happens when the player has been booked, being substituted, taking a free kick and many more. These are all usually still high shots however are zoomed on the player to make a medium shot/close up of the person to highlight him from others. The typical football match on TV such as Boro, ends on a commentator or looking at edited highlighted parts of the game and then fades out onto the adverts.
There are many reasons for a live Boro FC game to have multi-camera use. The main one is to keep the audience interested in the use of different shots. The live aspect also means that the audience relies on multi-cam techniques to know everything that's happening.
Live: “Boro FC”
My chosen example of live events in multi-camera production is going to be football. This sport is one of the most watched things on television in the UK. Not only that but most people want to watch the game live because they are generally fans or want to know how the game was going instantly. This means that the footage had to be edited live using multi-camera techniques.
I have decided to focus on the football club Boro FC, a local team known across the country. The build-up to the game itself can vary from camera angles. Boro Riverside Stadium is where the live editing would be carried out. Other stadiums a lot of the time are responsible for representing the club because of away games.
A lot of the important shots are actually even before the game has started. Commentators and football analysis people such as Jamie Carragher and Gary Neville talk before, after and sometimes even when the game is playing. These shots are the typical interview style shots were three angles are used, two facing the commentators and another one to have a full shot of them. While the commentators are talking about things such as players, managers, and the stadium, the shot usually cuts to whatever they are talking about life. This is usually on players when they are warming up before the game but are on the pitch and are still hearing what the commentators are saying about them. This gives the audience information as well as being able to see things live at the same time.
Along with shots of the commentators, in every professional football match especially within the Premier League, the footage cuts from either the commentators or the game to a live interview. This is a lot of the time on managers or players that did well in the game and can happen before a game to give the audience an idea on what they are feeling as well as after the game and feedback from the team’s point of view.
When it actually comes to the game itself, there are very typical shots of it which are extremely common in football. The first and main one is the birds’ eye, a high shot in the middle of the stadium. This shot is stationary however pans left and right whenever following the ball. The reason it is high is that it shows the audience watching the whole game and can interpret the game meaning they can watch the style of play, watch runs, attacks, how the defense is structured and many more. Apart from this shot, there are a few occasional close-ups on players who have played a key role in the game or are focused on them. This normally happens when the player has been booked, being substituted, taking a free kick and many more. These are all usually still high shots however are zoomed on the player to make a medium shot/close up of the person to highlight him from others. The typical football match on TV such as Boro, ends on a commentator or looking at edited highlighted parts of the game and then fades out onto the adverts.
There are many reasons for a live Boro FC game to have multi-camera use. The main one is to keep the audience interested in the use of different shots. The live aspect also means that the audience relies on multi-cam techniques to know everything that's happening.
Public events: “The Royal Wedding”
My chosen example for Public events in multi-camera techniques is the Royal Wedding between Prince William and Kate Middleton. This is one of the biggest Public events in modern times because it represents the historical moment of our country. This took place on 29th April 2011. The ceremony was broadcast all over the world and was a national holiday for the British Public. The footage of the ceremony lasted over three hours and during then; there were many different techniques and shots that were used. The main reason that multi-camera techniques were used was that it was a historical event and needed to keep the footage interesting. The cameras that changed kept the look fresh and kept the audience hooked.
During the ceremony, cameras followed the groom and the bride everywhere and the distance was incredible to keep shooting live using multiple cameras for three hours. A lot of the time, multi-camera filming will be made up from the spot from the director and the vision mixer however for an event as big as this; much planning was done to create the perfect video and live footage. There were many places that the ceremony was filmed. A lot of these at the start were seeing all the royal family members and other nations leadership members arrived to act as the audience in the church. Almost all of this was high shots which occasionally zoomed on a specific set of people in whom the presenters would talk about. There were also a lot of helicopter shots to give a bird’s eye view of the church, the royal cars as well as simply the crowd. These further give the appearance of the event being bigger. The shots usually had a long duration and had a slow pace editing style pace. This was to set the scene as emotional rather than to keep it up beat and fast.
My chosen example for Public events in multi-camera techniques is the Royal Wedding between Prince William and Kate Middleton. This is one of the biggest Public events in modern times because it represents the historical moment of our country. This took place on 29th April 2011. The ceremony was broadcast all over the world and was a national holiday for the British Public. The footage of the ceremony lasted over three hours and during then; there were many different techniques and shots that were used. The main reason that multi-camera techniques were used was that it was a historical event and needed to keep the footage interesting. The cameras that changed kept the look fresh and kept the audience hooked.
During the ceremony, cameras followed the groom and the bride everywhere and the distance was incredible to keep shooting live using multiple cameras for three hours. A lot of the time, multi-camera filming will be made up from the spot from the director and the vision mixer however for an event as big as this; much planning was done to create the perfect video and live footage. There were many places that the ceremony was filmed. A lot of these at the start were seeing all the royal family members and other nations leadership members arrived to act as the audience in the church. Almost all of this was high shots which occasionally zoomed on a specific set of people in whom the presenters would talk about. There were also a lot of helicopter shots to give a bird’s eye view of the church, the royal cars as well as simply the crowd. These further give the appearance of the event being bigger. The shots usually had a long duration and had a slow pace editing style pace. This was to set the scene as emotional rather than to keep it up beat and fast.
Studio Productions: “The Jeremy Kyle Show”
My chosen example for a studio production is a television show called “The Jeremy Kyle Show”. This show, presented by Jeremy Kyle, haves him resolving a feud between family friends or individuals, whether it would be an argument, a problem a person is having and or more. The whole of the show is filmed in a studio within one building. The main shooting area is the main hall which is reasonably small with a small crowd of people watching Jeremy and the interviewees. This is usually in the form of a low shot to play on the host being bigger than those on stage and watching.. The way this particular show is filmed is like a typical interview style editing were cameras usually just switched between two or more interviewees on the stage. A lot of these cameras are stationary however pan and tilt a lot of the time on specific people. It is very common in this show that a person would walk behind the stage and try to get away because of normally stress, however, Jeremy usually follows along with a cameraman who is doing traditional one-handed camera tracking shots.
The main reason for using Multi-camera techniques in this show is because it overall keeps the audience interested. Also, from switching from one person to another in an interview style editing, the viewers are seeing one person at a time to give all the attention on that one person and then switches. This gives the audience an idea on who to give the attention to in each shot. It also shows more in the studio such as different people, the audience and many more things. In terms of the positioning of the cameras, there is one on top of the studio for a high shot and then there are a few just in front of the stage for close-ups as well as cameras at the back of the studio behind the audience which gives a long shot and gets a full shot of the studio, Jeremy, the interviewers as well as the audience itself.
My chosen example for a studio production is a television show called “The Jeremy Kyle Show”. This show, presented by Jeremy Kyle, haves him resolving a feud between family friends or individuals, whether it would be an argument, a problem a person is having and or more. The whole of the show is filmed in a studio within one building. The main shooting area is the main hall which is reasonably small with a small crowd of people watching Jeremy and the interviewees. This is usually in the form of a low shot to play on the host being bigger than those on stage and watching.. The way this particular show is filmed is like a typical interview style editing were cameras usually just switched between two or more interviewees on the stage. A lot of these cameras are stationary however pan and tilt a lot of the time on specific people. It is very common in this show that a person would walk behind the stage and try to get away because of normally stress, however, Jeremy usually follows along with a cameraman who is doing traditional one-handed camera tracking shots.
The main reason for using Multi-camera techniques in this show is because it overall keeps the audience interested. Also, from switching from one person to another in an interview style editing, the viewers are seeing one person at a time to give all the attention on that one person and then switches. This gives the audience an idea on who to give the attention to in each shot. It also shows more in the studio such as different people, the audience and many more things. In terms of the positioning of the cameras, there is one on top of the studio for a high shot and then there are a few just in front of the stage for close-ups as well as cameras at the back of the studio behind the audience which gives a long shot and gets a full shot of the studio, Jeremy, the interviewers as well as the audience itself.
Advantages of multi-camera:
Disadvantages of multi-camera:
Task 1B
Planning Multi-Camera Productions
When using multi-camera production, there are many roles that people would have when in production of filming, each of which is vital to making the finalised or live footage look the best. Below is the most common in Multi-Camera techniques.
Camera Operator: This is most likely the most used job in the process because there are many camera operators in multi-camera techniques. When doing other filming roles, there would usually not be many cameras working together so closely and at the same time when in multi-camera production, they do. These can be operated manually by a person which is normally seen in things like Music performances when people are on things such as dolly cameras and wearing black so attention from the audience (If there is one) is not focused on them. The cameras can also be simply controlled by a computer which can be seen a lot of the time in studios which usually take form in a high shot. Each camera operator has the responsibility of being ready to have a decent shot ready at all times as well as being able to listen and do whatever the director says at all times. There are also different types of camera operators. There are usually two or more stationary cameras, handheld cameras and almost always a safety camera which takes the form of a full shot which never moves and remains stationary.
Vision Mixing: This is the most uniquely assigned role noticeable in multi-camera production compared to other roles. The person who is the vision mixer is the person who actually edits the performance live. Although the editor, this person a lot of the time has no freedom to choose anything that happens as this role is given to the Directors whom of which would spend most o the time with the vision mixer, telling him/her on how she wants everything to be during the performance. The style of the footage is thought imagined by the director however the vision mixer is the person who actually presents this by editing. The mixer is the person who operates the style, pace of editing, fades/transitions, switching between cameras and much more and is, therefore, a huge part of the team.
Directing: This role is one of the hardest roles in multi-camera production. This person acts as the artist of the team who (basically) is in charge of everything. He or she tells everyone how to perform and what to do throughout the performance. In pre-production and practicing, the director has the responsibility to let everyone know what to do and how everything is going to be filmed. When doing the actual filming for real, the director will mainly be with the vision mixer, telling him/her on when to cut to different shots, what to add, the pace of editing and more. When she is not with the vision mixer, the director will usually either check be telling the floor manager to check on the crew and the rest of the team, whether it would be to see if everything is ok, let them know if something is wrong or a heads up on what type of shot the director wants next.
Floor Management: This role is important for communication between the crew within a performance. The floor manager is the crew member who communicates and delivers a message from one person to another in performance. The reason there is such thing as a floor manager is that it is vital for everyone to remain on their own station such as camera operator on their cameras and the vision mixer as well as the director in the editing room or station. The main message sent is from the director to the camera operators which are usually to check up, give a heads up on what the director wants or the odd chance they are doing something wrong. Sometimes, a camera operator may use the floor manager to tell the director if something is going wrong with the camera in which the director would then tell the vision mixer to not use that particular camera or in extreme cases, go to the safety camera if everything starts to become worst. In a way, the floor manager is the director’s personal runner and acts as the link between communications.
Task 2
Proposal for two five minute shows on the topic of the 91st Oscars nominations and winners.
I plan to put together two five minute shows based around the nominations and winners of the 91st Oscars awards. The first show shall showcase the nominations, and the second will show the winners of the awards, each show shall have the personal opinions of both myself and my co-host, Thomas Raby. The aim of our show is to discuss the best and the worst of what the Oscars has to offer, we will go into detail about nominations/winners that we feel are out of place, as well as movies from the year that we feel were ignored when they were deserving of the award.
Our show shall focus on viewers aged 14-21 as we feel our particular presentation style, delivering the information with some humour and comedic elements spread throughout the show, will be best suited to the young adult audience. We aim to inform viewers of the past year's media, including information on the actors, films and social debates that have taken place in Hollywood and in the film sector. We hope that we will draw in an audience that wants to stay informed, but does not have the patience for a four and a half hour show, with this in mind, we aim to move swiftly through each category, keeping things light and humorous to keep our audience entertained. As mentioned in my file I intend to take inspiration from RedLetterMedia and their dry, tongue-in-cheek style delivery.
The show will be filmed on a set with a designed theme to promote our topic of the Oscars, we shall have cutouts, movie posters, and memorabilia and we shall use a multi-camera setup which we shall cut between for when either of us has something to say as well as the wide shot. In the edit, we shall also overlay trailers and images of the movies/actors and any controversial news stories that have been released around the actors/films. Each show will be around five minutes long, a time that I feel should allow both Thomas and me to voice our opinions and to inform our audience.
Task 3A
Application for the role of editor in for this year's Oscars Rundown.
Josh Wilson
05/03/2019
Mrs. Kelly Fairhurst
Stockton Riverside College, Harvard Avenue
Thornaby, Stockton-on-Tees, TS17 6FB
Dear Mrs. Fairhurst,
I wish to apply for the role of editor for this year's U-Films Oscars Rundown Multi-Camera assignment.
The reason I am applying for this role within the project is that not only is it extremely important to the completion of the assignment, but it also removes me from my safety zone. As you can see from my CV (attached), I have experience with a few different job roles, directing being the most prominent. I feel very comfortable in these roles, therefore they don't push me as an individual in the way I'd like them too. Editing is a trait that I, prior to my place on the Film & Television course, had no previous knowledge or skill in. Over the past year, I have practiced editing through multiple avenues, whether it's my own short film, videos/promotions for third parties or my own documentary and I believe that this practice has brought me to a level that far exceeds others involved with the multi-camera project.
My ability to direct/act etc. also plays a part in this skill set, I can process information and decide whether it would translate well enough to an audience and whether what is being presented on the screen represents the intentions of the project at hand. My versatility will also allow me to help out with filming in between editing, and my ability to work and communicate in a team allows a clear and precise plan of action to be put into place and carried out.
Thank you for your time and consideration, and I look forward to discussing my application for this role with you further.
Yours sincerely,
Josh Wilson
Task 3B
For the multi-cam project, I took on a variety of roles. My first job was the sound operator for numerous Oscars rundowns for U-Films. I took on directing for both Thomas Burton and Luke Smith's and Adam Cowperthwaites and Ben Smith's rundown, my own rundown and also took point directing the Harry Potter segment of our Oscars Intro. I proposed and planned the Blade Runner aspect of the intro whilst also providing ideas of others. I took charge of editing both mine and Thomas Raby's predictions and post-show Oscar's rundown videos - making sure they were released on time in conjunction with the set timetable. I took charge of the paperwork aspect of the multi-camera project, I drew up all of the storyboards for both the Intro sequence and the pre and posts shows. I drew up location paperwork as well as risk assessments. I spent a majority of my time along with Adam Cowperthwaite and Olivia Reed making sure that the paperwork was indeed finished and completed to the best of our abilities whilst simultaneously finishing our own folders and completing our own projects.
Working closely with the Make-Up department helped me realise just how important pre-planning for productions really is, had we not created a time table and stuck to it, the Oscars intro segment would've been a catastrophe to film. The process also showed me the importance of time management, as working with such a strict schedule became stressful at times - but confidence in our set time table helped see us through and all of my own personal work was completed in time with no issues. Once again had we not pre-planned everything, I do not think this would've been the case.
Task 3C-1
To start with, me and Thomas Raby went through a planning process where we brainstormed individual ideas for the show - finally landing on a more humour orientated production in an attempt to not only make the project more fun to film, but to interest an audience that might not usually care for content related to the Oscars.
This was our plan going forward, to make the project accessible to a larger audience, which would in turn help to spread the name of U-Films and it's content to a wider audience.
I decided that a scripted approach to mine and Thomas' project simply wasn't going to work. This isn't to say I didn't use or write any script altogether, but instead of creating on to reference word for word during filming, a creating a simpler one that just reminded us to stay on track with the topic of conversation during filming (to help make the editing process easier).
Onwards with the planning process, I decided to take inspiration from RedLetterMedia, a production company located within Milwaukee in the U.S. The team put up videos online that consist of move reviews, skits, and projects they've worked on. Their ability to create a comedic video that also informs the viewer on topical points within the film industry has always been one of their greatest selling points, so I jumped at the opportunity to create something even remotely similar as i believed it would be the perfect match for the U-Films channel and Oscars content we were in charge of producing.
When it came to set, I wanted to create something that seemed relaxed, almost lived in. The reason for this was due to me wanting the audience to feel comfortable like they're watching two friends talk versus two students reading from a script in a bland setting. I drew up a storyboard that included seating and positions, as well as props such as Blu-Rays, movie posters and bottles of beer.
We began filming our rundown straight after Olivia and Danniella's Fashion Rundown, once we got the set together and got ourselves into position, we gave Adam Cowperthwaite directing duties and began filming. Filming went on for around 40-50 minutes, covering all aspects of the Oscars nominations with every category being covered. I should've definitely referenced the structured script more, as the duration of filming became an issue in the editing process. Overall though it went very well and we moved onto the editing process.
Due to Thomas' lack of knowledge with editing, the job came to me which i thoroughly enjoyed doing as it allowed me to place the humorous spin on the video that i'd propositioned since the inception of the idea for our Oscars rundown. It took a while to edit but early starts and late nights allowed me to get the video up on the U-Films channel in time in conjunction with the set upload timetable for the individual videos. The video did very well and achieved our job of reaching a wider audience.
Our film and upload schedule for the videos. This was very strict, through hard work I got my video out on time.
Moving on to the after show, we were a little rushed for time on this one and it showed in our set construction.
earning aim C: Carry out a role in the production of a multi camera programme in a recognisable genre and format
C1 Management of the production process and periodic review
• Production management:
o production meetings
Throughout the production process, we all as a team sat down to discuss the development of our multi-camera projects, including both our Oscars Intro work and our Oscars Rundown/After Show planning.
Throughout this process, we created detailed mind maps and brainstormed ideas that would go on to form the foundation of the project. Production meetings were essential to the work that was being carried out. For example, there isn't enough equipment for everybody to use all at the same time, it requires teams, sign-outs, and communication with what's happening. We assigned specific dates for filming - starting with the Oscars Intro.
Separate from team production meetings, I and Thomas took time out every couple of days to sit down together and discuss what it was we were planning to do with our Oscars shows. This involved the conceptual stage, where we discussed information and the style of format. We then moved onto the presenting style, set design, dialogue, etc.
It was important for me and Thomas to communicate as a team, if we hadn't - I believe the shooting process would've been far more taxing and time-consuming
o rehearsal, refinements and adaptations
Due to the strictness of the schedule and the sheer number of people contributing in such a short amount of time, there was no time for rehearsals - this meant we had to refine our plan down to the very last detail, making sure we were on task and aware of what each other were contributing to the project at hand.
o contingency plans.
In case we were unable to get enough time to film exactly what we wanted - we wrote up a contingency plan, consisting of a much shorter, altogether different kind of show that would be quick to film and edit (the polar opposite to the primary idea). We would remove any unnecessary cuts or editing that we deemed irrelevant to the points being made, we would put showmanship on the backburner in favour of information for the audience. Luckily due to sufficient planning, we were able to designate ourselves more than enough time to film our Oscars Rundown.
Unfortunately, the same can not be said for the Oscars Post-show, we had stayed up the previous night to watch the Oscars live in order to get our videos out as soon as possible - a negative side effect of staying up all night, however, is sleepiness, more specifically forgetting important props and any shoot plans. As a result, we put the contingency plan into effect and continued onwards. The difference between the two shows is stark and is a fine example of when planning goes both right, and wrong.
In case we were unable to get enough time to film exactly what we wanted - we wrote up a contingency plan, consisting of a much shorter, altogether different kind of show that would be quick to film and edit (the polar opposite to the primary idea). We would remove any unnecessary cuts or editing that we deemed irrelevant to the points being made, we would put showmanship on the backburner in favour of information for the audience. Luckily due to sufficient planning, we were able to designate ourselves more than enough time to film our Oscars Rundown.
Unfortunately, the same can not be said for the Oscars Post-show, we had stayed up the previous night to watch the Oscars live in order to get our videos out as soon as possible - a negative side effect of staying up all night, however, is sleepiness, more specifically forgetting important props and any shoot plans. As a result, we put the contingency plan into effect and continued onwards. The difference between the two shows is stark and is a fine example of when planning goes both right, and wrong.
• Monitoring progress against original intentions.
When it came to monitoring our progress against our original intentions, we used my original proposal as a reference point. We also researched dozens upon dozens of RedLetterMedia video as Thomas wasn't as familiar with them as I. All in all I believe the monitoring process went extremely well and our final shows represented exactly the kind of tone and style we were going for, at least for the first show.
C2 Production tasks and self-evaluation
• Production and activity logging:
o live recording on location or studio
o assignment of team roles
o production diary describing production activities and team roles, including own response to direction.
• Self-evaluation of final product:
The scene is supposed to convey a sense of regret and sadness, of course without the context of the film supporting the scene it loses this meaning. However, I do think it looks stunning and I jumped at the opportunity to recreate it.
Blade Runner 2049: Oscars Intro Review
When proposing a movie scene for the U-Films Oscars intro, I immediately wanted to do something from Blade Runner 2049 – a film with some of the most beautiful visuals in cinema. Now obviously I didn’t believe we’d be able to replicate the simplistic yet intricate nature of the cinematography featured in 2049, after all, it was shot by legendary cinematographer Roger Deakins (who finally won an Oscar for his efforts).
For me. 2049 represents the pinnacle of cinematic achievement and motivates me in this industry, there’s a handful of films that have that kind of effect on me and this is definitely one of them. I initially was also going to use Drive (2011) and the elevator scene but the more I thought about it, the more I realised it would be way more effort than it was worth trying to pull it off (timing elevator doors, even finding an elevator big enough, etc.) so I landed on this. I also found Drive to be a little too violent for a wider audience and considering we wanted the Oscars Intro to reach as many people as possible it really wasn’t viable to use a scene that contained so much violence/gore.
I decided to pick one of the most iconic scenes from the film, which features the lead protagonist, K, gazing upon a giant holographic advert. We believed that thanks to the new lights and colour filters that had just been purchased for the group would convey this lighting effect pretty well. Issues we of course had was the lack of ability to A. Replicate the hologram and B. Feature a fully nude woman.
We decided to focus on Officer K and the lighting of the shot. I’d be taking on the role whilst Olivia Reed and Adam Cowperthwaite filmed. We shot from a number of angles attempting to recreate the scene shot for shot. First things first, however, we needed make-up. In the scene, the protagonist has been badly beaten and whilst standing out in the rain, dried blood from his forehead drips downwards. Bernadette Allan from the make-up course within college provided the effects.
We used the green room as the location for the shoot and had a black drape placed over the green background to replicate the darkness of the scene. We placed the light directly above my head and placed a purple filter across it, creating a filtered effect that could then be amplified in post. I believe we did the best we possibly could with what we had, and the final piece actually looked very nice. In post, the colour was bumped up whilst the audio used was taken directly from the scene we were replicating – the final edit looked great and I was very pleased with how it turned out.
Josh & Tom’s Oscars Nominations Rundown: Review
For mine and Tom’s rundown, we wanted to do something a little different – rather than follow a formulaic setup, we wanted to poke fun at Oscars, ourselves and film in general. The main reason behind this was because we wanted to keep the audience engaged throughout and talk about films in a way we love versus reading from a pre-planned script and hoping for the best.
It’s for this reason that, the only written aid we had was the award nominees – I & Tom were confident enough in our abilities to talk about film that we didn’t need a script. I did, however, wrote up a sheet of bullet points reminding us where our next topic should lead too should we begin to lose focus but we never found ourselves using it.
Inspiration for our work came to me a few months before we’d even started planning, as I knew we’d be doing this eventually. I wanted to do something in a similar style to some of my favourite YouTubers/Filmmakers RedLetterMedia, a film production group based within Milwaukee, Wisconsin who create skits (as well as actual films) for YouTube based on new film releases/older films.
I believe it went very well when it came to editing it took a while to chop down the nearly hour-long footage to a watchable 20 minutes of content but I had fun doing so. Being able to edit this kind of project allowed me to use some of my editing skills that I otherwise wouldn’t be able to use at all.
For both the Rundown & Post Show we had the same approach to humour, though the post-show had to be out a lot quicker, and Tom had given editing duties to me the day before as he was unable to edit the video after splicing it together via multi-cam due to a lack of knowledge with Premiere Pro. This meant I had to start editing the footage the next morning and have it finished, rendered and uploaded onto YouTube in time. This greatly reduced the editing I could do, but I still did what I could and tried to have fun, using the Oscars stream to the best of my ability.
o fitness for purpose of final product outcome
I believe the final product more than met the criteria for this unit. The aim was to demonstrate multi-camera techniques both behind and in front of camera - I believe both the Oscars rundown shows and the Oscars Intro did this perfectly. They do exactly what we set out to do - create an informed piece of media that provides information to the audience in an entertaining, professional format, conducting in a way that resembles working in the industry. The final products once uploaded online have all been received very well.
I believe the final product more than met the criteria for this unit. The aim was to demonstrate multi-camera techniques both behind and in front of camera - I believe both the Oscars rundown shows and the Oscars Intro did this perfectly. They do exactly what we set out to do - create an informed piece of media that provides information to the audience in an entertaining, professional format, conducting in a way that resembles working in the industry. The final products once uploaded online have all been received very well.
I believe the audience reviews were very positive, as you can see the like/dislike ratio on the U-Films YouTube channel suggest that the product provided was up to the required standard. There were many positive comments towards the production of the Intro and the snappy humour and editing of the Nominations & Predictions Rundown. I notice the correlation between the views and likes of our pre and post Oscars show. I believe this has a lot to do with my previous comments on a rushed production on the second half. I don't believe the second one captured as much interest as the first - but it's good to have the comparison available to us, to understand where we went wrong. Overall though reception was very positive.
o comparison with similar products
o own role in contributing to the product outcome
o peer review
o own strengths, weaknesses and plan for skills and knowledge development
Comments
Post a Comment