For this post I looked at the chapter: Life does not tell stories: structuring devices in documentary filmmaking  from Creative Documentary: Theory and Practice by Wilma de Jong,  Erik Knudsen & Jerry Rothwell. I decided upon this chapter because it seemed to begin looking at the production side of documentary and though that it would raise some questions and ideas I could continue to explore throughout semester.

When discussing the structure of documentary it is so often explained with links to fiction. Surely the separation between the two is minimal yet why do we segregate them so as a viewing audience and as producers? Throughout this particular chapter the de Jong constantly refers to fiction films as examples for both the structuring of documentaries themselves and also how they segregated into sub-genres. However, the notion that they are separate identities is constantly reinforced as if they are mutually exclusive. When examples of documentaries that blur the line are mentioned it’s as if they are a pure anomaly of the documentary form.

What makes these two genres so different they both typically contain actors, a narrative and have a director at the helm of production. This segregation was central to our theoretical stories in True Lies last semester yet I’m now eager to explore this from a practical viewpoint. I decided to particularly focus upon this chapter to see how production practices and traditions reflect this discussion present within theory. It’s obvious from this excerpt how central fiction is when thinking about non-fictional content, yet in essence is there really fiction content? Having exhausted my capabilities of a scholar on this topic I’m eager to explore it from the view of a filmmaker.

In reference to class last week we watched a variety of Lumière clips each with it’s own varied degree of realism. Even the first filmmakers grappled with the fiction/non-fiction duality. Once a camera is present, what is captured is selective and is no longer the complete truth. The Lumière’s are also a perfect example as they often wielding a great degree of control of their subjects and aimed to capture a particular shot.

Moving back to the excerpt, the last section of the chapter on short documentary appeared to give the best practical advice. Earlier on in the chapter the various discussions of structuring were something I was familiar with from last semester but it was beneficial to read about which circumstances these structures suit. The overarching theme of the chapter seemed to be to ensure structure and formal decisions were chosen to best suit the content.

It also appears that all of these structures can be thought about and planned for in pre-production yet it is the content that is captured for a film that ultimately directs how the film ends up being structured. It seemed to be wise to have a fair idea of how you want something structured so that in production you aren’t lost without an idea of some end point. I doubt that this end point envisioned is ever realised but it seems to be a very practical consideration.

I was keen to read about advice for short documentary films however the section seemed to amount to the fact you need to be specific and concise. It was interesting to explore how wider themes can be explored and arguments made use a specific small-scale story. These smaller narratives become embolic of far wider issues that would be near impossible to explore in a short documentary.

Last semester I strayed away from a studio I believed would be heavily theoretical which turned out to be very practical. I am somewhat frustrated at my myself for that decision.  Instead I spent my studio exploring narrative, transmedia and creation of story through other platforms. I really enjoyed the studio and relished the freedom it provided in exploring the conceptual groundings of story. At this point in my degree I feel that I have a fairly grounded understanding of the principles of production, and I feel that I have a firm grasp on the theoretical aspects  associated with shooting and constructing a product in editing.

This semester I’m intent upon improving my technical capabilities and production skills. Sometimes I still feel relatively lost when standing behind the camera and I want to find the confidence to call myself skilled (to an extent). I’m eager to get a solid grounding in crewing for video production, so that I can then explore other avenues to expand my abilities. Not only am I excited to explore the intricacies of camera but also to explore audio recording and to learn more about sound in the context of film. I also hope that this studio will provide me with skills I can then translate to either interning or crewing on other people’s productions.

I found a great passion for documentary last semester and I’m incredibly eager to create my own documentary content and to further expand my knowledge of the genre. Alongside my existing love for drama I found the opportunity of this studio particularly fascinating. The documentaries that I enjoy most typically blur the line of non-fiction and fiction and to explore these boundaries through production is an exciting prospect. I think it will be beneficial to explore the production methods of both forms and then to explore how these methodologies can be mixed or translated to the other form.

In terms of the Studio Brief I think that by exploring the rationale behind protocols will provide a beneficial balance of theory and practise. We are no longer looking at theory and practice as separate identities, instead exploring how one is indicative of the other.

Allowing the content to determine our course without necessarily making a commitment to one form or the other. This is a concept I find really intriguing and the slightest bit confusing. I’m quite eager to explore this and to develop an understanding how this form blending (or maybe free)  production can be achieved in particular through creating our own content.

Returning to the Lumière brothers is an incredibly worthy exploration. Having first properly studied their work in the earlier stages of first year, to review their actualities is a treat. I now feel I have a greater appreciation for what they captured in their short snippets of life and in particular their framing and shot composition.

After completing our own task of capturing ‘actualities’ regardless of the years and technological developments between our work and the Lumière’s some links were evident. Most noticeably the way, in which action is framed, in the Lumiere brother’s instance they were trailblazers. In our instance we are trained content producers aware of film theory. Viewing the Lumière’s clips just after capturing our own revealed our fantastic their composition and layer of a frame was. Considering they were the first filmmakers they used both line and balance to fantastic effect. What was also intriguing was that although separated by a great number of years our clips shared trams, busy streets and the unavoidable pedestrians glancing at the camera. Even in 2015 people still find camera’s intriguing and their behaviour changes when realising its presence. Surely by now people are more desensitised to cameras, everyone carries one in their pocket and I’m sure we’re monitored to some extent by CCTV cameras. Why should a camera sitting on a tripod make us feel any more uncomfortable?

At the end of the day I believe that the Lumière brothers did a fantastic job of Exercise 1A (on a number of occasions). The clip below reveals how even in the earliest days of film directors were intent upon capturing the best shot even if it meant weeks between takes.

Recording Audio

Although it has been a while the return of the Zoom recorder is a welcome one. This time it is nice to be using the technology with a greater appreciation of the role that it plays in production and understanding the importance of having a separate and well-recorded audio track. Obviously during this exercise we weren’t all that serious in our approach but I feel that we were still able to capture some good quality recordings. Whilst recording in building 12 (The Hub) we found it was incredibly difficult to get a good signal to noise ratio. There was an excessive amount of background noise mostly due to the hum of a lot of computers. As we progressed through the exercise we noticed this and decided to shift out focus from the open area and moved to the stairwell. In a fairly rudimentary and amateur way we attempted to mix in a live setting, playing with the placement of the Zoom recorder. The skills associated with sound recording for film is something I’m eager to explore this semester as poor audio can be quite frustrating when watching amateur short films. It is for this reason that audio has always been something that has cause me to be somewhat apprehensive when filming.

During the final exercise working with Luke we shot two 50 seconds of footage in an attempt to document a place, event or activity. Overwhelmed with choices, we meandered for half of the time struggling to settle upon a particular subject. Our initial idea of wandering down to Swanston Street allowed us a vast plethora of material; the only issue was then selecting what to shoot. Finally settling upon the expanse in front of the state library we set up intent upon capturing pedestrians as they walked. The shot itself also included the backdrop of the state library and some aspects of QV. Once we set up we felt somewhat pressured for time and in our haste I feel they shot my have been slightly over exposed. At this stage we were more interested in capturing our first 50 seconds.

As we set up to shoot I thought a bit about what Robin had said in class about ensuring that you’re happy with your shot before filming. Ensuring that what you’re capturing is useful and interesting alleviates much of the stress of shifting through countless footage in editing. Reflecting upon prior projects for various subjects it seems that my thinking prioritised quantity over quality. The truth though is that bad footage cannot be saved by editing, what is captured in camera needs to have merit for the final edit to also have merit.

After our first 50 seconds we changed our position this time capturing pedestrians at a right angle to their direction of travel. In doing so, we believed a greater emphasis would be placed upon the walking of the commuters. In our haste once again the exposure of the shot is slightly off. Attempting to compensate for the prior over-exposure I believe this shot was somewhat under exposed.  Due to the fixed focal length we found with the first shot that most things we’re in focus and those walking from a far would then move into focus. Within the second 50 seconds we found that with the new positioning, much more of the scene was in focus and provided a crisper image. The framing of this second shot also provided the sense of a tighter frame, capturing the motion of walking in more detail.