Ahhhhhhhhhhh. Project brief number three! After a week or two of working on this task, it’s safe to say that I’m finally happy with my rough cut. Just kidding HAHA. I’m well and truly done with my final cut and is ready to export and become available on Youtube!

Now before I jump right in to answering the questions about my the video and whatnot, I’d just like to clarify my thoughts and feelings about the process that came along with it. First of all, this is 1000x better than my initial experience with project brief number one. As I am getting more used to the software, the process was a less painful one to go through in comparison to my previous assignments that involved the use of Premiere Pro. Yes, there are a few bumps and grinds that came along with my use but it was easily resolved with the help of me being tech-savvy 😎  (or mainly with the help of Google, really). By the way, I interviewed and filmed my father so credits to him! Now, without further ado, let’s jump right into the questions:

i) What I considered to be the most successful and problematic aspects of my submitted work:

Hm. I actually want to talk about the problematic aspects of the video first rather than quickly unveiling the good stuff. In terms of problems, one of the biggest headache was the AUDIO, which is quite funny actually considering it was one of the most emphasised quality by my tutor, Liam. And it obviously should be seeming as this is an interview task. The audio isn’t entirely bad but you’ll be able to notice it in some bits of the video, especially around the middle time-frame. Ultimately, it was the fault of the camera operator (which was myself) and the only way to fix it was an extensive amount of time, dedicated to preparation. If I have been more better prepared, the following is something I would’ve done for an optimal-quality audio:

• Use the RODE microphone that came with the Sony MC50 whilst I was renting it – it’s that mini microphone that attaches to your shirt! That way, I would’ve definitely avoided the static background noises and the bumps against the camera that ruin the audio.
• Touch the camera less – I felt like I was too involved in terms of controlling the camera, resulting in the “bumpy noises” that you may hear during the video. I was also moving around the camera and may have hit it and the tripod a couple of times. 😣

As for the successful part of the project, I believe it was the variety of media I provided and how I structured the story. In terms of variety, I obviously filmed the interview segment with the Sony MC50 but due to the 1-day rent limit, I was working around the limitation of my time with the camera. I managed to shoot a few cutaway scenes with the Sony MC50, but other than that, I officially shot the cutaways with my DSLR – Nikon D3200. There may have been old footage in the video (for example, my mother and father dancing) but let’s just say that was a super early preparation for this project. 😂  Seriously speaking now though, I was at an extra advantage once I decided I would be interviewing my father, mainly because I have all these resources of him I have in front of me, making it easier to collect which memory/media was appropriate to represent the message/story. I hope you agree with these aspects that I consider “successful” but otherwise, we all have a different idea of how a video can be successful or problematic.

ii) Any key learning discovery I made in terms of the creative possibilities of producing portraits: 

I may have learned a thing or two about not only structuring videos but editing them in a certain way. Reading the feedback from Liam about the structure of my self-portrait video has made me realise that looking over and over your videos is very important instead of overlooking the small details:

“Overall though, the video suffers from a lack of structure and some cuts that definitely need tightening up” – Liam, 2017 

With the task of completing an interview, it was way easier to find the structure, especially with the questions that must be prepared in advanced to obviously prompt the interviewee on whatever topic I was after. Essentially, a key learning discovery I have made (and as you may have noticed I’ve already mentioned a few times) was EXTRA AND EARLY PREPARATION. Yes, I may have procrastinated here and there but never underestimate the power of being organised and prepared. This has extensively helped me in my ability to make creative decisions about when and where I should place certain shots of the film. Of course, starting early is always a good idea. I learned this the hard way with the first project but around this time, I did manage to complete it before the deadline thanks to the extension, but I still have a lot to learn in terms of time management.

iii) What I learnt in the making process that might be relevant to your broader development as a media practitioner: 

During the making process, the only thing that really stuck to me was how clear the story was going to be for the audience. This is probably going to be a very similar answer to question two but the most important thing to me was the message or simply the story my father had to tell. In comparison to the self-portrait this assignment is more straightforward rather than abstract so it was really hard to miss the structure of the video and message. Of course, this further deepens my experience as a media practitioner with this knowledge that I am now able to apply for future assignments and essentially, the skills that I will apply once I enter into the field of media. As of right now, I am still quite unsure about the type of field I may be entering but essentially, this broader development of my techniques and skills will ready me into the crazy world that is MEDIA!

lyreca