During the progression toward finalising project 2, a variety of hurdles were encountered in regards to the sketches. Firstly, one of the sketches called ‘Camera Acknowledgement‘ was designed to demonstrate a clear contrast between the camera being acknowledged and therefore having a presence in the real world situation, as opposed to being completely observational similar to the idea of a ‘fly on the wall’. For this to be an effective exploration in relation to our concept statement, the presence of camera would have to contribute to the narrative / non-narrative. When filming, out of poor preparation I captured Errol performing the same skateboarding trick twice over, being sure to look at the camera and gather attention, however not communicating a clear exploration of narrative. In hindsight, the subject in the sketch should converse with the camera man and say things which clearly indicate the camera’s involvement in the situation. For example, I think the subject should yell out “are you recording, are you read?” [perform the trick] “did you get it?” in order to highlight an exploration of staged events and what effect that might have on the narrative / non-narrative form. Immediately I begin to think about notions of realism and how elements of documentary style might be explored (which correlates with the case study as it functions as a hybrid of skate video and informative documentary). Noticing this hurdle, I decided to re-film the sketch with myself as the subject in order to increase the amount of presence the camera had on the captured event and therefore more closely address the concept statement and studio prompt.

Also, without delving into it too much, another problem arose in relation to the ‘Perspective of Narration’ sketch which was designed to contrast first person narration with third person narration. I originally filmed the two contrasting perspectives from two separate camera angles but didn’t change the content. Moreover, the subject completed the same actions identically in both perspectives. However I became more interested in highlighting the affordances of each perspective by showing how bias and exaggeration can become involved. This was only demonstrate-able through contrasting different content that resembled these notions. For this reason, I also re-shot this sketch in order to create a clear contrast between the two perspectives and how that completely redefines the narrative / non-narrative. See ‘Sketch 4‘ for more information.