Feedback notes from Mrs Allison
Documentary opening Conor O’Sullivan and Andrew Lloyd-Jones
• Subtitles on telephone conversation should be lower case
• Transcript isn’t quite the same as speech
• Main title font and layout could be improved - not appropriate for target audience?
• Conor’s voice over is good but worth a try with an older sounding voice to get more authority
• Soften the start of the mum’s speech – to harsh
• Mic noise on mum’s speech
• Transitions between sections work very well
• Pace is great
• Very good use of different locations and filming styles
• Poster not obvious enough – close-up then zoom out ?
• Rather than screwed up what about blowing in the wind for final shot – more movement
Friday, 26 November 2010
Wednesday, 24 November 2010
Editing
Yesterday myself and Conor learnt how to choose more precise effects whilst editing our production. We both previously knew how to put transitions and effects into our production, however we found out that there is a setting where you can go into the effect with more detail and choose how you want it specifically.
We decided that our CCTV shots could be improved to give the whole night and camera feel to it. Therefore we have come to the conclusion that it would be best if we mix and match with regards to the colour of the shots, therefore we will use some black and white shots and some coloured ones. However we felt that we needed an effect which gave the shots more of a CCTV look to them. Therefore we have been playing around with the different effects and seeing which one gives the best feel for a CCTV shot. In the picture above, we had added the 'noise' effect which we were setting at about 28% which we feel was enough and gave it the whole distorted and blurry look to it, which we were happy with.
We decided that our CCTV shots could be improved to give the whole night and camera feel to it. Therefore we have come to the conclusion that it would be best if we mix and match with regards to the colour of the shots, therefore we will use some black and white shots and some coloured ones. However we felt that we needed an effect which gave the shots more of a CCTV look to them. Therefore we have been playing around with the different effects and seeing which one gives the best feel for a CCTV shot. In the picture above, we had added the 'noise' effect which we were setting at about 28% which we feel was enough and gave it the whole distorted and blurry look to it, which we were happy with.
Wednesday, 17 November 2010
Feedback from first rough cut
In class we each had a piece of paper to fill in with regards to other peoples productions so far.
I have tried to scan these onto the computer to post onto the blog to give the feedback a more visualised effort, however the scanner does not seem to be working at the moment, although i will keep trying to see if it works.
The pieces of paper given to us had listed twelve technical skills which were expected to be seen in each production, therefore there were also columns named 'no evidence', 'some evidence' and 'clear evidence'. Out of the three people who gave us feedback not one of them ticked the 'no evidence' box, which I am happy about, as this means our production is moving in the right direction and we have displayed at least a hint of all of the technical skills needed.
The first person's feedback featured what i feel were very generous comments as they ticked ten 'clear evidence' boxes and two 'some evidence boxes. Although this felt good to recieve such positive information, i felt it could have been a bit more realistic which would have been better. They also made it clear that they thought it would be better to remove the 'Hertford' caption however myself and Conor have spoke briefly about this i we feel it would be better to keep it. They also went on to say our panning shots were 'excellent' and that the mise en scene was 'brilliant' in which we are happy to hear. The last bit of feedback they gave us was they they felt that it would be better to not cut to a close up of the photo of Matthew Evans as it is not suttle.
The second person to give us feedback wasn't so generous and ticked seven 'clear evidence' boxes and five 'some evidence' boxes. This made me think that this person may have looked into our production with more detail which we appreciated. Amongst the five 'some evidence' boxes they ticked the same as one of the previous people which was 'hold a shot steady when appropriate' which made us think we need to look into this more as it had been higlighted by two people and infact the third person to give feedback also ticked this.
This person also highlighted that there was only slight evidence with regards to transitions. However we are not too concerned about this at the moment as we feel the transitions should be put in place towards the very end of editing to make it all come together as a complete piece.
The last bit of constructive critism was that the shots we filmed inside the car were a bit too 'shakey' and that the text could be improved. Since this was made clear to us myself and Conor have refilmed the shots inside the car and we are much happier with how they are now. We were also aware that the text we had used was not going to be our final text, we just placed it there as a template to see what it would look like first.
The last person to give us feedback was our teacher and as expected, they picked up on many more points for improvement. They ticked four 'some evidence' boxes and six 'clear evidence' boxes with two in the middle of both. This was positive as we knew the teachers feedback would be most important and most of the boxes ticked were 'clear evidence'. Our teacher repeated what had been said already with regards to the transistions and the titles, and also the steady shot when appropriate, however they also touched on some other points. These included we needed a close up of the poster, which we were unsure about as other documentarys we had looked at did not show a close up, however we will review the situation soon. Also it was made clear that when Jamie is driving the car, his voice needs to be made louder, which we can easily adjust when we are editing. The last piece of feedback to improve was the titles and how they are positioned, which yet again we were aware of and was waiting to get the font off of the internet and putting it in place towards the end of editing to finish off.
However there was some positives which were taken out of this as our teacher felt the music 'works well' and is 'effective', which we felt too and are very happy with.
Overall we feel the rough cut feedback has given us some much needed information and guidance, and we believe we now know what we need to do in order to complete our production and to hopefully improve it.
I have tried to scan these onto the computer to post onto the blog to give the feedback a more visualised effort, however the scanner does not seem to be working at the moment, although i will keep trying to see if it works.
The pieces of paper given to us had listed twelve technical skills which were expected to be seen in each production, therefore there were also columns named 'no evidence', 'some evidence' and 'clear evidence'. Out of the three people who gave us feedback not one of them ticked the 'no evidence' box, which I am happy about, as this means our production is moving in the right direction and we have displayed at least a hint of all of the technical skills needed.
The first person's feedback featured what i feel were very generous comments as they ticked ten 'clear evidence' boxes and two 'some evidence boxes. Although this felt good to recieve such positive information, i felt it could have been a bit more realistic which would have been better. They also made it clear that they thought it would be better to remove the 'Hertford' caption however myself and Conor have spoke briefly about this i we feel it would be better to keep it. They also went on to say our panning shots were 'excellent' and that the mise en scene was 'brilliant' in which we are happy to hear. The last bit of feedback they gave us was they they felt that it would be better to not cut to a close up of the photo of Matthew Evans as it is not suttle.
The second person to give us feedback wasn't so generous and ticked seven 'clear evidence' boxes and five 'some evidence' boxes. This made me think that this person may have looked into our production with more detail which we appreciated. Amongst the five 'some evidence' boxes they ticked the same as one of the previous people which was 'hold a shot steady when appropriate' which made us think we need to look into this more as it had been higlighted by two people and infact the third person to give feedback also ticked this.
This person also highlighted that there was only slight evidence with regards to transitions. However we are not too concerned about this at the moment as we feel the transitions should be put in place towards the very end of editing to make it all come together as a complete piece.
The last bit of constructive critism was that the shots we filmed inside the car were a bit too 'shakey' and that the text could be improved. Since this was made clear to us myself and Conor have refilmed the shots inside the car and we are much happier with how they are now. We were also aware that the text we had used was not going to be our final text, we just placed it there as a template to see what it would look like first.
The last person to give us feedback was our teacher and as expected, they picked up on many more points for improvement. They ticked four 'some evidence' boxes and six 'clear evidence' boxes with two in the middle of both. This was positive as we knew the teachers feedback would be most important and most of the boxes ticked were 'clear evidence'. Our teacher repeated what had been said already with regards to the transistions and the titles, and also the steady shot when appropriate, however they also touched on some other points. These included we needed a close up of the poster, which we were unsure about as other documentarys we had looked at did not show a close up, however we will review the situation soon. Also it was made clear that when Jamie is driving the car, his voice needs to be made louder, which we can easily adjust when we are editing. The last piece of feedback to improve was the titles and how they are positioned, which yet again we were aware of and was waiting to get the font off of the internet and putting it in place towards the end of editing to finish off.
However there was some positives which were taken out of this as our teacher felt the music 'works well' and is 'effective', which we felt too and are very happy with.
Overall we feel the rough cut feedback has given us some much needed information and guidance, and we believe we now know what we need to do in order to complete our production and to hopefully improve it.
Wednesday, 10 November 2010
Feedback notes
Connor, Andrew
The sound quality needs some fine-tuning to get rid of the crackling and get the audio levels set
Consider an ‘older sounding’ voice over to fit the conventions of the documentary
Consider experimenting with different sound effects for the CCTV footage and applying a time code or date (as a title for each of the cameras)
Consider re-shooting some of the footage in the room to get a smooth pan
Consider getting some more shots in the car of cutaways of hands and side profile of Jamie
The sound quality needs some fine-tuning to get rid of the crackling and get the audio levels set
Consider an ‘older sounding’ voice over to fit the conventions of the documentary
Consider experimenting with different sound effects for the CCTV footage and applying a time code or date (as a title for each of the cameras)
Consider re-shooting some of the footage in the room to get a smooth pan
Consider getting some more shots in the car of cutaways of hands and side profile of Jamie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)