1. Who did you work with and how did you manage the task between you?
We did the video brief. This task focused on continuity and involved filming and editing a scene in which one character enters a room and has a conversation with another character. I worked in a group with Brandon and Maisie, and we were able to work well together to complete the task.
During planning, we didn't worry too much about who was going to do what. For the most part, we worked together, sharing our ideas about location, techniques we could use, shot types, etc. Maisie did the most work on the storyboard, although her work was based off decisions we made together as a group.
When it came to filming, none of us were keen to act, but Brandon and I ended up acting. I was in every shot, meaning I didn't get a chance to work with the camera, which I would have liked, but there wasn't really anything that could have been done about this because unfortunately the sequence did require actors and there were only three of us. Overall, the dynamics within the group were good and we managed the task well between us.
2. How did you plan your sequence? What processes did you use? What theories did you try to take into account?
We didn't spend too long planning, but we did dedicate enough time to it so that when it came to filming, we mostly knew what we were going to do. We began our planning with a group discussion. At first, we were a little stuck for ideas, but in the end it was Brandon who came up with the idea of two characters having a conversation based off of song lyrics, which we agreed was a good idea because it would allow us to not worry too much about things like the script and narrative and instead focus on continuity techniques, which were the most important thing.
After deciding what was going to happen in the sequence, we made a storyboard to establish what the different shots would be. A storyboard was essential in order to properly plan our sequence - when it came to filming we knew what we were doing and we had a basic idea of what it would look like after the edit. It made it easier for us to follow the principles of continuity - for example, we could see before filming whether or not we were breaking the 30-degree or 180-degree rule. We also had a shooting schedule so we could see where we had to position the camera and how many set-ups we needed, making filming a lot easier.
We didn't do a floor plan or a walk-through, and had to move some furniture during filming, but this wasn't really a problem. I don't think that any more planning would have made much of a difference.
Our main priority was ensuring that our sequence followed the principles of continuity. This is why we chose song lyrics to be our dialogue - this way, we didn't get too distracted by the narrative. We did, however, have to choose a song that would make some level of sense when being spoken. We chose Taylor Swift's "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together" because the lyrics sound somewhat like spoken dialogue. Genre was a relatively important theory to consider during our planning - we couldn't do anything too serious if the dialogue was going to be Taylor Swift lyrics. We decided to make our sequence a comedy, except maybe it isn't quite funny enough to call it that. It doesn't really fit into an obvious genre, but since continuity was the most important aspect of the task and the sequence is only 19 seconds long, this isn't much of a problem.
3. What technology did you use to complete the task, and how did you use it?
To film our sequence, we used one of our school's video cameras (Canon DV30) with a tripod and headphones. This was very exciting because at my previous school, although we did use video cameras, there was only one tripod so we didn't use it very often and there were no headphones or external microphones attached to the camera, so this felt very professional. We obviously used the video camera to film the sequence, and the headphones were useful for making sure that the sound worked. The tripod was essential because without it we would not have been able to keep the camera still and have steady shots. We also used a clapperboard, which made editing easier because we could see which shot and which take it was without having to watch it, so we didn't have to go through all the shots to find what we needed.
To edit our sequence, we used Adobe Premiere Pro. It wasn't my first time editing, but I had only ever used iMovie before. Premiere Pro looked more complicated at first glance, but it wasn't too difficult to get the hang of, and it actually seems better than iMovie and is in a way more simple. In the timeline, there are two video tracks and two audio tracks. Having audio tracks made it easy to adjust the sound and make sure the dialogue flowed between the different shots.
Before editing, we watched through the different takes and chose the best ones, then dragged them into the source monitor. With each take, we cut it using the in and out points so that you couldn't hear the director saying "ACTION" or "CUT" or see the actors before they were acting. After cutting each shot, we dragged it into our timeline, sometimes adjusting it to make sure we had good match on action. Once our shots were edited together, we slightly adjusted the colour, increasing the contrast and lowering the brightness so that it looked clearer and stood out more. This was useful since during our filming we couldn't really control the lighting.
We had a good experience with editing and mostly stuck to our storyboard. We divided the editing equally between us so that we all got a chance to edit.
4. What factors did you have to take into account when planning, shooting and editing?
One factor we had to take into account was where we were going to shoot the sequence. There are three rooms in the media block and one corridor, which all three groups in our class needed. We had to make sure we were all going to be shooting in different rooms, so we asked where other groups were filming before deciding on our location. We knew that all we needed was a classroom, so it didn't matter so much which classroom that was. During filming the different groups took turns shooting in the corridor. Another factor we had to take into consideration was background noise, and we had to close all the doors to make sure the sound of people talking in other rooms could not be heard. Also, the media department happens to be right next to the music department, and sometimes you can hear people playing music through the walls. We couldn't do anything about this - it's not like we could tell them to not have their music lesson. Luckily, we couldn't hear music through the walls on the day of shooting.
Since we were using a media classroom as our location, we didn't need permission to shoot there, and we also didn't need any props for our sequence, so we didn't have to worry about this. However, the desks weren't arranged in a way suitable for our sequence and we had to think about where we would move them. This didn't take much time to sort out, though - we only had to turn one desk around and push the others forward so that they weren't in the shot.
The only other factor we had to take into account was who would be acting. None of us wanted to act at first, but it was eventually decided that Brandon would since he is the only one of us who takes drama. Unfortunately, on the day of filming Maisie had lost her voice, so despite my non-existent acting skills, I ended up acting, too. For our sequence, it wasn't especially important who would be acting because the dialogue was not race or gender specific and it didn't really matter so much if the acting wasn't good.
5. How successful was your sequence? Please identify what worked well, and with hindsight, what would you improve/do differently?
I think our sequence was quite successful. For the most part, we followed the principles of continuity, so it makes sense for the audience. During the characters' conversation, we didn't break the 180-degree rule, always staying on the same side of the imaginary line so that the characters didn't suddenly appear to be facing the opposite direction. We also used shot-reverse-shot, allowing the audience to see the conversation from the perspective of both characters and feel more involved in the conversation. Other shot types are used, including a panning shot that follows the character to the door, a master shot that shows the audience the location and introduces the other character and his reaction, and a medium shot showing both characters sitting at the desk from another angle. The sequence is smoothly edited and not disrupted in a way that distracts the audience from the story.
There is one point in our sequence where the principles of continuity are not followed. At 00:12, when the sequence cuts from one over the shoulder shot to the other, match on action is not used. Brandon's arms are folded in the first shot and open in the second. Luckily, this isn't too noticeable and the sequence still makes sense, but if I were to redo this task, I would make sure that the actors had not only dialogue planned out but also body language to ensure that this problem could be avoided.
Another part of our sequence that I would improve is the final shot because it seems too short and ends too abruptly. Since this shot ends our sequence, it would have been more appropriate for it to last a couple of seconds longer. We only realised this when we were editing, but by this point there wasn't much else we could do. We could have used another OTS, but when we tried this, it looked like even less of an ending. It would have also been better if it had faded to black rather than stopping suddenly.
Initially, there was another shot in our sequence: an OTS of the first character opening the door. When we were editing, we realised that this was a jump cut and the sequence didn't really flow. For this reason we decided to cut this shot from our sequence. Because we were able to cut it out, it wasn't really a problem. Overall, I think our sequence was good. It met the brief and apart from the issue with match on action at 00:12, it remained continuous.
6. What have you learnt from completing this task? Looking ahead, how will this learning be significant when completing the rest of your foundation coursework, do you think?
I have learnt that the principles of continuity are a lot harder to follow than you would think! Before starting A Level Media Studies, I understood that the concept of continuity was important, but I wouldn't have been able to complete this task successfully because I wouldn't have given things like match on action much thought, and I had never even heard of the 180-degree rule. After learning about the principles of continuity, it still seemed to me like something that would be relatively easy in filmmaking. Our task wasn't too difficult, but when planning our sequence we were met with more continuity problems than I would have thought. The task was good practice for planning and shooting something taking the principles of continuity into consideration, and when completing the rest of the foundation coursework, I will be more aware of the importance of continuity. Our sequence was mostly successful, but there were some faults and next time I will make sure that we don't make the same mistakes and the rules of continuity are followed.
When it came to filming, none of us were keen to act, but Brandon and I ended up acting. I was in every shot, meaning I didn't get a chance to work with the camera, which I would have liked, but there wasn't really anything that could have been done about this because unfortunately the sequence did require actors and there were only three of us. Overall, the dynamics within the group were good and we managed the task well between us.
2. How did you plan your sequence? What processes did you use? What theories did you try to take into account?
We didn't spend too long planning, but we did dedicate enough time to it so that when it came to filming, we mostly knew what we were going to do. We began our planning with a group discussion. At first, we were a little stuck for ideas, but in the end it was Brandon who came up with the idea of two characters having a conversation based off of song lyrics, which we agreed was a good idea because it would allow us to not worry too much about things like the script and narrative and instead focus on continuity techniques, which were the most important thing.
After deciding what was going to happen in the sequence, we made a storyboard to establish what the different shots would be. A storyboard was essential in order to properly plan our sequence - when it came to filming we knew what we were doing and we had a basic idea of what it would look like after the edit. It made it easier for us to follow the principles of continuity - for example, we could see before filming whether or not we were breaking the 30-degree or 180-degree rule. We also had a shooting schedule so we could see where we had to position the camera and how many set-ups we needed, making filming a lot easier.
 |
| 1 page of our storyboard |
 |
| Our shooting schedule |
Our main priority was ensuring that our sequence followed the principles of continuity. This is why we chose song lyrics to be our dialogue - this way, we didn't get too distracted by the narrative. We did, however, have to choose a song that would make some level of sense when being spoken. We chose Taylor Swift's "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together" because the lyrics sound somewhat like spoken dialogue. Genre was a relatively important theory to consider during our planning - we couldn't do anything too serious if the dialogue was going to be Taylor Swift lyrics. We decided to make our sequence a comedy, except maybe it isn't quite funny enough to call it that. It doesn't really fit into an obvious genre, but since continuity was the most important aspect of the task and the sequence is only 19 seconds long, this isn't much of a problem.
3. What technology did you use to complete the task, and how did you use it?
To film our sequence, we used one of our school's video cameras (Canon DV30) with a tripod and headphones. This was very exciting because at my previous school, although we did use video cameras, there was only one tripod so we didn't use it very often and there were no headphones or external microphones attached to the camera, so this felt very professional. We obviously used the video camera to film the sequence, and the headphones were useful for making sure that the sound worked. The tripod was essential because without it we would not have been able to keep the camera still and have steady shots. We also used a clapperboard, which made editing easier because we could see which shot and which take it was without having to watch it, so we didn't have to go through all the shots to find what we needed.
To edit our sequence, we used Adobe Premiere Pro. It wasn't my first time editing, but I had only ever used iMovie before. Premiere Pro looked more complicated at first glance, but it wasn't too difficult to get the hang of, and it actually seems better than iMovie and is in a way more simple. In the timeline, there are two video tracks and two audio tracks. Having audio tracks made it easy to adjust the sound and make sure the dialogue flowed between the different shots.
Before editing, we watched through the different takes and chose the best ones, then dragged them into the source monitor. With each take, we cut it using the in and out points so that you couldn't hear the director saying "ACTION" or "CUT" or see the actors before they were acting. After cutting each shot, we dragged it into our timeline, sometimes adjusting it to make sure we had good match on action. Once our shots were edited together, we slightly adjusted the colour, increasing the contrast and lowering the brightness so that it looked clearer and stood out more. This was useful since during our filming we couldn't really control the lighting.
We had a good experience with editing and mostly stuck to our storyboard. We divided the editing equally between us so that we all got a chance to edit.
4. What factors did you have to take into account when planning, shooting and editing?
One factor we had to take into account was where we were going to shoot the sequence. There are three rooms in the media block and one corridor, which all three groups in our class needed. We had to make sure we were all going to be shooting in different rooms, so we asked where other groups were filming before deciding on our location. We knew that all we needed was a classroom, so it didn't matter so much which classroom that was. During filming the different groups took turns shooting in the corridor. Another factor we had to take into consideration was background noise, and we had to close all the doors to make sure the sound of people talking in other rooms could not be heard. Also, the media department happens to be right next to the music department, and sometimes you can hear people playing music through the walls. We couldn't do anything about this - it's not like we could tell them to not have their music lesson. Luckily, we couldn't hear music through the walls on the day of shooting.
Since we were using a media classroom as our location, we didn't need permission to shoot there, and we also didn't need any props for our sequence, so we didn't have to worry about this. However, the desks weren't arranged in a way suitable for our sequence and we had to think about where we would move them. This didn't take much time to sort out, though - we only had to turn one desk around and push the others forward so that they weren't in the shot.
The only other factor we had to take into account was who would be acting. None of us wanted to act at first, but it was eventually decided that Brandon would since he is the only one of us who takes drama. Unfortunately, on the day of filming Maisie had lost her voice, so despite my non-existent acting skills, I ended up acting, too. For our sequence, it wasn't especially important who would be acting because the dialogue was not race or gender specific and it didn't really matter so much if the acting wasn't good.
5. How successful was your sequence? Please identify what worked well, and with hindsight, what would you improve/do differently?
I think our sequence was quite successful. For the most part, we followed the principles of continuity, so it makes sense for the audience. During the characters' conversation, we didn't break the 180-degree rule, always staying on the same side of the imaginary line so that the characters didn't suddenly appear to be facing the opposite direction. We also used shot-reverse-shot, allowing the audience to see the conversation from the perspective of both characters and feel more involved in the conversation. Other shot types are used, including a panning shot that follows the character to the door, a master shot that shows the audience the location and introduces the other character and his reaction, and a medium shot showing both characters sitting at the desk from another angle. The sequence is smoothly edited and not disrupted in a way that distracts the audience from the story.
There is one point in our sequence where the principles of continuity are not followed. At 00:12, when the sequence cuts from one over the shoulder shot to the other, match on action is not used. Brandon's arms are folded in the first shot and open in the second. Luckily, this isn't too noticeable and the sequence still makes sense, but if I were to redo this task, I would make sure that the actors had not only dialogue planned out but also body language to ensure that this problem could be avoided.
Another part of our sequence that I would improve is the final shot because it seems too short and ends too abruptly. Since this shot ends our sequence, it would have been more appropriate for it to last a couple of seconds longer. We only realised this when we were editing, but by this point there wasn't much else we could do. We could have used another OTS, but when we tried this, it looked like even less of an ending. It would have also been better if it had faded to black rather than stopping suddenly.
Initially, there was another shot in our sequence: an OTS of the first character opening the door. When we were editing, we realised that this was a jump cut and the sequence didn't really flow. For this reason we decided to cut this shot from our sequence. Because we were able to cut it out, it wasn't really a problem. Overall, I think our sequence was good. It met the brief and apart from the issue with match on action at 00:12, it remained continuous.
6. What have you learnt from completing this task? Looking ahead, how will this learning be significant when completing the rest of your foundation coursework, do you think?
I have learnt that the principles of continuity are a lot harder to follow than you would think! Before starting A Level Media Studies, I understood that the concept of continuity was important, but I wouldn't have been able to complete this task successfully because I wouldn't have given things like match on action much thought, and I had never even heard of the 180-degree rule. After learning about the principles of continuity, it still seemed to me like something that would be relatively easy in filmmaking. Our task wasn't too difficult, but when planning our sequence we were met with more continuity problems than I would have thought. The task was good practice for planning and shooting something taking the principles of continuity into consideration, and when completing the rest of the foundation coursework, I will be more aware of the importance of continuity. Our sequence was mostly successful, but there were some faults and next time I will make sure that we don't make the same mistakes and the rules of continuity are followed.
No comments:
Post a Comment