Finally, the envelope for Project Brief 4 has been and sealed, in other words, we have reached the end. There has been a lot of learning that has taken place over the course of the project, especially considering that it was a group effort, which means there’s always more than one perspective to take into account.
Luckily our group was very dynamic, everybody brought a specific skill forward which was vital in creating the final project. From the earliest meeting we all established that video production was our collective strength. Due to this we ended up creating a video product which was new and adventurous. Before I further elaborate on this; the collaborative contract needs to be mentioned. Throughout our first and second meetings we constructed a contract which outlined the role and responsibilities of all the group members, additionally there was a plan for conflict resolution. We were fortunate enough, as mentioned previously, to not need conflict resolution at any point. However the roles and responsibilities got us to think about how we would go about creating the video. This was very helpful in assisting the process of arranging the production timeline, we simply split up the work and consulted on when it was to be delivered, at the convenience of the person responsible.
This initial planning as well as the synergy between cooperative group members allowed us to easily create our meetup times for our soon to be ‘choose your own adventure’ video. The early meetings also gave us time to come to the same vision as to what the final product would look like, we all understood the basic concepts of using Youtube annotations and what was practically possible; yet another strength of all having a video production background among group members. This made the conceptualization and writing process a fluid process.
Due to the divided workload and the constructive collaboration the whole project was easily filmed within three main meetings. Once this was done the post production process began, we used Facebook as our communication platform, constantly sharing footage, suggestions and ideas, this meant that the final project was truly one born from group collaboration.
However, this post production stage is also where i believe there could have been improvements. Although we did decide on who would be doing the editing I believe the post production work load was not evenly distributed. It is arguable that certain group members did have more time to contribute to the project, so this was the way the work naturally distributed. The way it ended up being structured was that one group member mainly worked on the editing. The others provided feedback and helped with the paperwork and filming process. Although this might be unevenly weighted it sadly does make sense. Editing is a very personal process, often when too many people edit the same project there is a loss in consistency of style. Thus, in a way it was for the benefit of the final project that one person did the editing. It allowed for there to be a consistent tempo and visual feel to the work.
The final product created I believe did achieve the initial goal of the project. It provoked thoughts about the ways we use and notice media in our daily lives. Given more time the project could go into further detail and have more choices and commentaries, however, as a starting point it achieved its goal.
Overall, this project has been a very constructive group assignment. With contrast to other group work it was painless and efficient. I believe that the final product created will be well received and has created a platform for future development.
