I am going through all of my previous blog posts, reflections and method of working and taking notes on the main points/reflections I have made. These will inform my substantial blog post structured around my research proposal and findings. I will also be including screen shots from my scenes.

• This course excites me because we have the opportunity to really focus and practice our skills by working on one scene, rather than a complete film.
• Being able to think about scene construction and the many different ways a scene can be ‘covered’ is really interesting as there aren’t really any rules
• Thinking and experimenting with camera coverage means that hopefully we will all as individual filmmakers be able to find our own ‘style’ or even possibly ‘authorship’ that we can continue to develop throughout our careers.
• This exercise proved to us that focusing our energy on how to portray the relationship between the two characters (by thinking about subtext) and experimenting with abstract shots can create something quite unique and interesting.
• The choice to not show Trent’s entire face makes the audience focus on what he is saying to Duncan, making Trent appear arrogant and cruel, and makes the audience empathize with Duncan.
• Positioning Duncan right at the back of the car with the luggage in frame demonstrates to the audience that he is not regarded as important by his family as well as the world.
• The main reason why I found this scene interesting is because there is no establishing shot of the car or road, rather the opening shot of the entire film is an extreme close-up of a secondary character in the film. This results in a quite jarring feeling for the audience, but as it is so close it draws you straight into the action and forces you to listen intently to the dialogue as you can’t see Trent’s mouth (at all in the entire scene).
• The choice of camera shots and framing allows the directors to give the audience the information slowly rather than all at once
• The camera coverage and shot selections reveal more about the characters and their relationships with one another than the dialogue even does.
• The issue I found wasn’t discussing the camera coverage and possible reasons the filmmakers chose to use certain shots, but rather finding a scene that was ‘unique’ in the way it had been covered. I didn’t think it would be difficult at all to find a scene from some of my favourite films, as one of the main reasons why I loved these films is due to their scene constructions, right? As it turns out I was wrong.
• Perhaps these films stood out to me for the way in which the film as a whole worked together (with the script, cinematography, and performances working together) and the scenes themselves were just building blocks towards the climax with nothing ‘unique’ about the camera coverage.
• Did the director purposefully use ‘simple’ camera set-ups in order to allow the actors performances to shine through? Did the tone and slow-burning rhythm of the films mean that using more complicated camera coverage would distract the viewer from the action? Or were the reasons purely to do with the place and time the films were made (eg; Hollywood)?
• We found ourselves spending more time scrutinizing the script and feeling forced to follow the script to a tee. Every creative shot we came up with was then changed to accommodate the script’s specific actions.
• Other concerns about the location were the cramped nature of the balcony and the noise from nearby construction.
• Having to stick to the industrial model and log our takes also became quite tedious. This process might be helpful for a bigger shoot with more shots (eg; a short film) but for one scene it seemed pointless. When I began reviewing and assembling the shots in post, I followed the log sheet, however I found that with a bit of tweaking to overcome the continuity issues recorded in the log sheet, I could use the lower rated shots and actually sometimes preferred using them.
• The time that we spent planning whilst not on location, seemed to be almost a waste as when we arrived on location and saw what we had to work with we basically started planning from scratch.
• While I did have a clear idea of what I wanted my shot to look like, it did change when we chose the location. The location didn’t really allow for the almost 90 degree pan I had envisioned.
• The camera movement in the entire scene could personify the sound moving around the room and reflecting how it is absorbed by the characters.
• The camera movement could also personify Lionel (the King’s speech therapist). While he is not in the scene, the King’s mind is on his session with him.
• The way the scene is currently, it appears as though the revelation is affecting the Queen more than the King (even though she is indirectly affected), due to the scene ending on her in frame.
• I think having more close-ups of him would allow the editors to elongate the length of the screen time and allow the audience to focus on his reaction.
• By covering the scene in a shot to edit style, not only would there have been more opportunities for different edits in post-production, but the King’s epiphany would’ve been given more focus rather than concentrating on the Queen.
• It was interesting to see how they composed their frames, considering they didn’t have to cover their scene in a more traditional manner. There was a lot more movement in their shots than ours, and more lateral thinking about how to frame the shots. In particular, the shot in which X emerges from the door, was probably their best shot of the day. It was so beautifully composed and framed and they utilized both background and foreground space.
• Simone was really good at communicating, however I found it difficult to follow the storyboard and found myself asking continuously about what was happening in the shot. Personally, I prefer to work off a marked up script or shot list to understand what will be covered in the particular shot.
• As our group was given the brief of covering the scene in a more traditional, industrial, shoot to edit style, we had a few shot-reverse-shots. We also had a few wide shots to allow the action to take place in the area, and using both background and foreground spaces. All of our shots were stationary, except for an experimental hand-held shot we decided to add right at the end of the shoot as we had extra time.
• I think that if my group had gone to the location together before the day of filming, we could have adapted our original thoughts on the coverage to create more interesting or unique shots, while still shooting to edit. Knowing your location extremely well, and even going there with a camera to see how it looks in the viewfinder is really important, as I’ve discovered from this exercise.
• Everything from the space in the location (vast or cramped), the shape of the location, the backgrounds (or lack of), the lighting, etc, can all alter the way you end up filming a scene. As I have experienced through the class exercises so far, when I look at a script and have a clear vision of how I would like it to look, it becomes hard for me to let the shots go and adapt to the requirements of the location. In these situations, my creativity becomes crippled, and I can’t be spontaneous or adapt in the short time I have to direct the scene. The way in which I would like to work in the future, is to not look at the script until I am at the location, possibly with the DOP and/or Producer (or maybe alone), during pre-production rather than waiting until the day of filming. This way I can let the location inspire the shots, and use it to my advantage in creating interesting coverage of the scene.
• In previous courses, I have taken photos of the location with stand-ins as a storyboard, rather than drawing one. I find this works a lot better as you’re able to not only visualise the scene within the specific location, but also when you take a photo you are also able to see how the lighting is and if you need any artificial lights to illuminate the scene.
• The framing of the first shot is also a bit awkward in that if the stairs were more centred in the frame, there would be less empty space to the right of screen and Van could have still walked past the camera. The empty space to the right of frame suggests to the audience that something or someone will emerge from there, however this doesn’t happen and makes it feel awkward and unnecessary to show empty space.
• If this shot was tighter on Cine and maybe even positioned Cine closer to Van, the cuts would flow together better. It would also prevent all of the empty space that surrounds both of them and makes them look small in frame (especially Van).
• I have attempted to create some interesting moving shots through some of the exercises, but have failed to create something impressive every time. I have discovered that I am fairly confident with operating the camera and framing, however my confidence with panning and tilting is quite low. Gaining more confidence in panning and tilting, both with pacing and smoothness may be one of my goals for this semester and something I may try to implement in my end of semester scene.
• Perhaps rather than trying to be too technical with my shot construction, and using lots of movement, focusing on beautiful framing may be a better, more achievable, and sophisticated goal.
• “It was as if each time an actor stood, moved or made a sound in front of a camera a new and different meaning began to be produced.” This careful consideration of directing actors and what each movement or angle to the camera could mean and how it changes the frame is quite extraordinary and something worth investigating in other directors, and also implementing in our own work.
• His working method was to spend half an hour alone on location to get a sense of it and get an idea of what shots he would like to cover the scene. He would then call the actors onto the location and rehearse the scene with them. He rarely has his shots already thought out before going to the location.
• Bazin believes that depth of field allows for ambiguity, and makes the audience more active in their interpretation of the meaning of the images before them.
• Lighting choices will be dependent on the script and the way in which I wish to interpret it. It is also dependent on the location chosen for the scene. My current thoughts are to not worry so much about setting up lights unless it is pertinent to my interpretation of the script and is a mood piece.
• There are already so many other concerns to do with the camera positioning, framing, composition, angles, movement, as well as sound, that adding another element of lighting may become overwhelming. While lighting can add another dimension to a scene, it is not necessarily something that I want to worry too much about and would rather focus on beautiful framing and scene coverage.
• One of the main questions I have going forward is if I want to DOP for my own scene or not. Although I would like to be behind the camera for my own scene, I also think that it may be a bit too much to take on considering I will be directing as well. This has led me to lean towards allocating someone I trust and have confidence in to DOP for my scene, while I direct.
• I have found that the more restrictions placed on the exercises, the more I thrive creatively.
• I feel as though no matter how much pre-production I do, the most beneficial way to research shot construction and framing is by actively filming. The exercises set so far have challenged the way I think as a filmmaker, and as a result I often analyse film or TV scenes and find the shot construction most of the time, quite boring or tame.
• I was convinced that I wouldn’t be able to detach myself from my original vision and see what other possibilities there are in covering the scene. Whilst this may be true, I haven’t tested this theory as of yet. It may be that my ownership of the text actually gives me free rein to create really interesting framing and coverage.
• The relationship between film text and interpretation, and also how ownership may effect camera coverage and creativity of framing. Will I feel more creative and able to interpret a script or prose that has been written by someone else? Will working from prose give me a more interesting set of shots than working from a script? These are questions that I am interested in investigating and testing and if I decide to head in this direction I will ensure that I use the exact same constraints so that the difference in film text is the main factor tested.
• I also thought about how I might feel having a different director work on filming my script, and whether I would agree with Amy’s choices and be thrilled by them, or feel as though my vision had been lost.This will inform the second part of my investigation, in a sense examining the roles and working methodologies of the writer-director VS the director. It will be interesting to see how much collaboration Amy wants to have with me as the writer and her as the director. In my mind, it would be best for us to not discuss our directing choices at all until after the fact so that we don’t influence each other’s work.
• I still want to get a sense of my style of filmmaking and methodology of working, and I’m becoming more aware that in order to do this, I need to step out of my comfort zone and be confident behind the camera. Gabby’s research proposal really struck a chord with me as I can relate to her wanting to gain a confidence with directing and filming. Her presentation really made the penny drop for me that in order for me to get the most out of this process, I need to step up and get behind the camera.
• My movie is born first in my head, dies on paper; is resuscitated by the living persons and real objects I use, which are killed on film but, placed in a certain order and projected on to a screen, come to life again like flowers in water.
  – Robert BressonThis quote really resonates with me, as I have always been told by media teachers even from high school that a film is made three times; when it is written, when it is filmed, and when it is edited. I have found these statements to be true with previous projects I have worked on, where the finished product is always different to the original vision that had been written by the screenwriter.
• It’s important to be aware of how a vision can change over time, and to remind myself that it is not only okay, but exciting to adapt and change my perspective on how to film and edit a scene. The whole process of filmmaking is fluid, and changes are made constantly; rather than being afraid of this happening during my practice, I need to embrace it and reflect on it.
• His discussion struck a chord with me as to how actors can create a whole other meaning behind the dialogue written on the page, and how this may alter or even enhance the writer’s vision. He describes the actor as a collaborator, and that they will bring a performance to the film because of the director allowing them that collaborative freedom. “As a writer I got very used to that because I saw actors create meaning in lines that I never thought or intended.”
• I decided that in order to ensure a clear vision is reflected upon, it was important to note that from the very beginning of the pre-production – the conception and writing. Therefore, I have decided to write two scenes, which will most likely come from film and TV ideas I have jotted down or written rough summaries of; writing the scenes from scratch so that I can also record what I am visualising and imagining the scene to look, sound, and feel like.
• This meant I had to carefully select my shots to ensure the clutter wasn’t framed, which restricted the camera set-ups. This meant that I had to ‘cheat’ the background of the shot of the hands tied and had to be strategic about the door opening shot. During filming, I liked the wide shot of the victim, and decided against doing the close-ups of his eyes darting around the room and gulping, as I felt the wide shot demonstrated his vulnerability. In hindsight, I wish I had shot them so that I had the choice in post-production as to what shots I would like to use or not.
• After doing a sketch shoot of the interrogation scene, I realised that lighting is super important in creating a suspenseful, dangerous mood for this scene. I would like to try and implement a hard yellow light to create interesting shadows on the victim’s face while keeping the rest of the room as dark as possible.
• For the script that I wrote which is set outdoors; I would like to use the natural sunlight to my advantage and in particular utilizing the soft light that comes through the tree branches in the location I want to film.
• While lighting does pose another element for me to consider and think about, the benefits of utilizing it to my advantage are high and therefore I will try and experiment as much as I can with it to achieve the best result for my vision.
• Excited to film own scenes. However, it could also be an insight into my research proposal and discovering that perhaps having more creative control over a project makes me feel more creative and free to experiment with my vision, rather than trying to adhere to someone else’s vision. I feel quite obligated to adhere to the texts he has provided me with as I don’t want to disappoint him and make him feel as though I have let his written idea down. However, I also feel quite constrained by this feeling of obligation and just want to change it up to suit my own ideas. This is a bit of a conflict I am having at the moment and I am wondering whether it might be a good idea to try and film something written by somebody who I don’t know to see whether I would feel the same.
• I would really like to test out different shot constructions, framing, focus pulling and lighting to enhance the scene I have written. While I do have many of my own ideas on how to achieve the visuals I have in mind, I thought it would be a good idea to investigate similar scenes to see what other choices other directors have made. I decided to watch the scenes without listening to the audio so that I could focus my attention on the visuals completely.
• The lighting used in these scenes tended to be quite hard, creating shadows and definition on the characters’ faces, while also furthering character development. In the more creative examples, the director’s choices meant that characters moved in and out of light, creating a dynamic illumination within the scene. One of the main challenges I am facing is trying to create an almost pitch black room with one direct light source but still allowing the camera to “see” the characters move in the dark space. I have found a couple of examples of this, as well as having only a character’s face illuminated and the rest of his body in darkness, almost as if his head is floating within the space.
• Another interesting shot I found was the captor moving towards the camera from complete darkness into the path of the light, creating a sense of uneasiness as well as demonstrating that he is the person to fear in this scene.
• The challenge of creating a scene with very limited lighting to create an almost pitch black setting that will still allow the camera to operate and function well is something I am facing.
• The light source is direct and hard, creating strong shadows and narrowing the illumination to only light a small portion of the character’s face.
• The next shot shows the victim illuminated, while the rest of the room is dark – another thing I want to use for my own scene.
• This perspective shot is quite simple, but effective in demonstrating that there is no escape. This is something I struggled to show in my sketch of this scene as the location only permitted me to shoot in one direction. The set dressing is really dynamic and I definitely want to include multiple perspective shots to demonstrate the victim trying to plan his escape, and the doomed feeling of the reality that he can’t. Location depends on this kind of shot to work and I need to think more creatively of ways I can create something as dynamic as this shot.
• The camera tilt down from the captor’s face to his hand holding the rope/weapon and pans from right to left to reveal him walking towards Bond who is at a 90 degree angle to the camera.
• The Dedo was the appropriate choice for my scene as it can be modified to create a small or larger spotlight and the brightness can also be adjusted accordingly. The barn doors on the light also gave me more control in lighting the offside of the victim’s face.
• In my last shoot, I didn’t do much written pre-production which meant that I became a bit confused as to what shots I wanted or still needed to do on the day. Therefore, I decided to write more detailed notes in terms of what shots I wanted, but also a basic floor plan to understand eye-lines and maintain lighting continuity.
• Unfortunately, due to the availability of the people in my scene, I couldn’t film at night as I originally planned. This meant that the room was not as dark as I wanted it to be as blacking out the high windows posed a danger. The sunlight that came through the windows meant that I couldn’t completely achieve the really dark setting with one light source (dedo) that I intended to.
• Despite not shooting at night, I was quite happy with the effect the dedo light gave compared to the last scene I filmed. Lighting the offside of the victim’s face allowed for interesting shadows that were especially dynamic in the low-angle medium-close up of the victim. Having a lighting source also allowed me to experiment with characters moving in and out of the light, something I particularly liked in the Casino Royale scene, and created a mood and tone that previously wasn’t there.
• As the director of the scene, I chose to take my own liberties in how I interpreted the scene and decided (as you can see in my notes) not to include Rhonda and Chris in this scene as I just wanted to focus on Liam.
• I had some ideas about using a particular location and decided to use my phone to take some test footage and photos according to my shot list. I then decided to just film it on my phone to test my camera coverage choices as a sketch with the aim of re-shooting it in the future.
• I wasn’t very motivated to film this scene as I didn’t have any grand ideas of how to make it visually interesting or unique. I didn’t feel attached to the project and so deciding to film the scene on my phone wasn’t a big issue for me as it would have been if I did for my own text. In a way it felt a bit freeing to not be constrained by large equipment and to just capture the image in a very immediate way, without having to worry about setting the tripod to the correct height, etc. However, this scene has definitely suffered due to my lack of ownership of the text/project as I would’ve taken much more care and probably made more creative choices if it was my own text.
• For this shoot I hired the EX3 in the hope of testing out some focus pulling between the two characters under the tree and the character who is at the car. However, I also wanted to use hand-held to follow the motion of the characters walking so they were kept tight in the frame. I couldn’t really achieve both as I didn’t have someone to focus pull for me, however if I did, I think the shot would’ve looked more interesting.
• The main issue I had filming this scene was the location I chose and the distance between the tree and the car. I couldn’t pull off the shots the way I wanted because I had to try and maintain a tight frame on the foreground of the two characters talking, while also keeping the character in the background still in frame. I think I would’ve felt more comfortable in an enclosed space where there would be lines from structures that I could follow.
• I definitely believe that my ownership of this scene really hindered my vision as I had a clear idea of how I wanted the scene to look, but when it came to putting that into practice, I became frustrated with not being able to achieve what I wanted. Instead of trying to adapt to the situation, I just pushed on and the result suffered from this.
• Despite doing a shot list and floor plan, I didn’t do any pre-production with the camera in the location. This was a critical error on my part as if I would’ve done this, I would’ve realised that I needed to change my plan.
• To create a heightened sense of suspense and to evoke the terror of the victim, it became clear through the process of re-filming that I needed to implement tighter framing as well as re-positioning the actor to the left of the garage rather than the center to create the feeling of a closed and confined space.
• The lighting was a lot closer to my vision than the previous shoots of this scene. I filmed this scene at night and used only one dedo light with a blue gel filter to light the victim. Taking Paul’s advice to position the light more parallel with the victim to create rim lighting gave the effect that everything else disappears into the darkness, which is exactly what I wanted to achieve. The lighting created the intensity and suspense that was missing from the previous versions of this scene.
• I have discovered that creating what I see in my mind’s eye isn’t necessarily something I can achieve on my first attempt, and that I learn best through reflecting on what I have filmed and then working towards improving it. I have also found that while I was always quite motivated to film this scene (as I wrote it), I also couldn’t quite think outside of the box and needed to really push myself to think of creative ways to approach my framing and camera coverage, compared to filming someone else’s scene.