A5 pt2 Studio Review

Posted on by
Reply

Mr. Matchmaker

This group designed a solid foundation to this game show that allowed for a clear and well structured format. Consideration for the visual aspect of this work was noticeable, as the group’s choice of lighting colour, set design and sting graphics was relevant to the typical dating show aesthetic. Considering this was an earlier exercise, technical proficiency was relatively good. Minor errors were evident in transitions between segments, this could possibly to be due to lapses in the communicative side of production. Vision switching was executed with no major mistakes, which allowed for a comfortable viewing experience that didn’t disorientate. I particularly liked the performances by the talent, who made the simplistic format rather enjoyable. Apart from minor tweaks in the technical execution, the only noticeable element that this worked lacked, was presence of music or sound during stings and intros. This would have allowed for a more exciting viewer experience and potentially would have helped with cleaner transitions.

Are You Smart, Even?

Another well-structured show that followed a simple game show format. The use of a Red and green light to signify correct and incorrect answers, consistent sting and lower third graphics that stuck to a clear theme and great host performance made for a very slick final product. I thought the vision switching was very well done, which is evident of good director communication in the control room. Apart from minor camera errors and slight transition delays, this show was almost perfect in its execution.

Thinking With Pictures – ‘Now, this’

This is a short and simple video diary style film that uses B-Roll footage interwoven with spoken pieces to camera. In this work, the filmmaker provides a personal recollection of their experience working on their film titled “CEEBS”. The rawness of this work was an effective element that allowed the audience to feel immersed in the recollection of this journey. The reflection provided by the film maker was captured via a webcam shot, which further personalised the film. Acting as a narration, the audio from the webcam footage was layered under the B-roll footage. This narration adds a poetic element, which blends beautifully with the B-roll footage.  This work provided a genuine feel that didn’t feel overly scripted. The nature of the filmmakers reflection felt very in the moment, which provided the film with a rawness.

Blog Post Three and Four

Posted on by
Reply

3.

My experience in the multi-camera studio space allowed me to uncover and further understand the many facets to this mode of production. Having experienced the preparative stages of studio production while taking part in assignments and exercises across the semester, I now have a deeper understanding of what is required to develop work in this field. As this mode of production is heavily reliant on the many roles that contribute to the overall creation of such work, it is important that synchronicity and a common understanding of goals and objectives is present amount all crew members when developing work in this space. Now being able to reflect on my involvement in assignment two and four,  comparisons can be made between my experience of both individual productions. In weeks leading up to the assignment 2 game show, we were able to experience the different studio roles and familiarise ourselves with the relevant technology attached to each role. This allowed us to further understand the functionality of working in a multi-camera set up environment. Having a detailed plan regarding the on screen content of our game show, meant that everyone involved understood the stylistic decisions we aimed to communicate. However, at this point in the semester we were still quite new to the experience and didn’t consider the complete level of planning required for the successful production of this particular type of work. Looking back at this experience, there were many things we did not do, leading up to the filming stage. As roles were allocated to fellow classmates only minutes before filming began, not enough time was allowed for a complete cast and crew planning session. This meant that most people involved were not properly briefed, which potentially hindered the finished product.

4.

Shared in Week Seven’s modules was a short clip that gave a behind the scenes look into the creation of a Saturday Night Live episode. This clip briefly spoke about the purpose of crew meetings and how preparation for a show of this nature is carried out. Leading up to production of episodes one and two of ‘The Charlie Show’ we were able to follow a similar way of working like that of a Saturday Night Live production process. As assignment two’s game show activity allowed little time for the development stage, which meant there was an absence of a complete cast and crew meeting to briefed all members involved. This was a different story for the assignment 4 production, as we had the luxury of around 3 weeks to develop and familiarise our selves with our allocated roles and gain a more complete understanding of our collective goals and objectives. Leading up to this, each member of the cast and crew were given access to all necessary documentation that specified the relevant information that provided details regarding the shows content, structure, cues ect. This meant in production meetings and rehearsals, we could see how things looked and make amendments if necessary. Comparing the outcomes of activities in assignment two and four, it is clear that a more thorough preproduction stage was a key factor that made “The Charlie Show” the best bit of work made this semester.

 

 

The Charlie Show production reflection

Posted on by
Reply

The particular stylistic decisions that prompted ‘The Charlie Show’ concept saw this production contain a hybridity that spanned studio drama and live broadcast. Having elements synonymous with soap operas, the show’s text exploits themes often seen in the typical studio drama format. Avoiding common approaches the creators of the show produced a fusion that took elements from the studio drama format and components seen in late night talk show style. This concept alone is a creative approach that is not only an engaging format idea, it also considers this studio’s main learning objectives. Requiring a multi-camera set up, set design and live vision switching , the production outcome was driven by the execution of processes seen in live-studio settings and multi-camera environments. This allowed the class to be able to apply all the relevant skills learnt throughout the semester.

Reflecting on the processes used, production quality and outcomes, further development of this work could potentially have some of the out-of-studio segments, such as the ‘Ben on ‘Bowen’ EVS further developed. Understanding that there was limited time to produce and execute these extra segments ideas, further development would see more considered approaches with segment formats and or scripting, depending on if the segments are live, improvised or are fully scripted sequence. Further development in this portion of the show would increase the overall quality of the production. As great foundations, more time would allow for a more thorough application of ideas and more considered production quality.

This production contained many elements that saw the presence of numerous roles that were required to contribute to the success of the overall production outcome. For this outcome to be achieved, the importance of organisational practices and communication was key. As there were many moving parts to this production, it was important that there was consistency among the understanding of all roles involved. As previously mentioned, the importance of pre-production saw much of the cast and crews accomplishments achieved because of a solid foundational understanding of what was required from each person in their role. My personal experience during the beginning of the rehearsal run saw a lack of adequate communication between myself and the the directorial team in the control room. This lack of communication made it difficult to correctly cue the talent on stage and meant there was a few delays when switching to the talent. Understanding the importance of clear communication between both departments, myself, the DA and director made sure to correct the difficulties we were facing during our headset communication. Coming to a clear consensus on verbal cues, what each meant and how they would be communicated, we were able to find a solution to our issues. Ensuring that there was a clear way to specify which studio the DA was communicating with, how countdowns will be performed and when to signal talent who were on camera, myself and the directorial team were able to develop a streamline way of working which allowed for easy application of these approaches when it was time to produce the full episode.

A4 Progress reflection

Posted on by
Reply

Being allocated the role of floor manager for episode one of  ‘The Charlie Show’ was a great opportunity to apply the skills I acquired while working on smaller scale exercises and productions over the semester. My personal experience of Assignment two allowed me to gained a greater understanding of what was required for the successful execution of a live studio production. As a floor manager it was important that I had a thorough understanding of the script, episode structure and audio/visual cues. By having a rehearsal prior to the actual production, I was able to take notes regarding the multiple elements that I needed to consider in my role.  Regular communication with the director and director’s assistant ensured that there was a consistent understanding among both parties about cues, communication with talent and set rearrangement during breaks. While there was written specification of cues and episode structure, rehearsals were used to identify potential issues with logistics. As the floor manager I took note of hinderances to the episodes fluidity and noted these with the directorial team.

For the studio presentation we were required to analyse past assignments to recognise the challenges faced in them, and specify how we intend to apply solutions to potential difficulties in assignment four. My experience with the game show exercise made me aware of the importance of plans and running sheets. This was a common realisation among other groups, who also stated this in their presentations. It was evident that the group who devised the chosen idea for assignment four had considered the importance of this. This meant this all personnel involved in this production were able to operate with a higher level of understanding of structure and that all members involved were working off the same plan. This allowed for effective communication while preparation for the production took place.

Studio Presentation Reflection

Posted on by
Reply

Our group designed a two episode artist spotlight, with the main objective of interviewing and showcasing Melbourne based creatives. Centred around a sit down interview style, we designed the show to follow a series of segments before and after a host-lead interview. Drawing on inspiration from talk shows such as the Ellen Show, we planned for our show to open with an in studio introduction by the host that then flowed into a day-in-the-life style video package, which focuses on our chosen creative. Following this sequence we return to the live studio feed, where the host then formally introduces and welcomes the talent to the stage. From this point the host-lead interview begins, providing an in-depth view into the live of a creative and their experience working in their field. Throughout the interview, EVS graphics will be occasionally sent to the in studio visual feed, as promoted by the interview’s content. The episode then moves to an artist showcase, whether that be an in studio performance or talent lead exhibition. After this, the episode closes with an outro by the host and a closing video montage.

With this well structured episode plan, our group was able to clearly convey our desired outcome and goal. By splitting up each element of the show into presentation segments, each member was able to provide a detailed presentation with clear objectives. From this presentation we received relatively positive feedback from the class and the guests from other studios. The feedback we were given largely spoke about the clarity of idea and our well thought out structure, which was seen to be very clear and able to be executed.

Upon watching the other presentations, I realised the endless possibilities that can come out of creating hybrid material. I was particularly inspired by the group that came up with ‘The Charlie Show’ idea. I was impressed with this group’s way of thinking out side of the box to create interesting and unique material. Through merging elements taken from soap opera material with a typical talk show format, this group created an idea which allowed for plenty of scripted ideas that were still able to be utilised by a live studio format.

A2 – Blog 3

Posted on by
Reply

Coming into this practical exercise I felt rather confident that our preparative work would see us receive our desired result. With a clear understanding of what was required of us to produce our planned aesthetic, we were able to come prepared with our EVS footage, Graphics, music and set design plan. Having planned a solid 3 round structure with two contestants, a judge and a leading host, I anticipated this to run smoothly. Upon viewing the final result of what we produced, I was rather satisfied with the outcome, considering the particular challenges we faced in the control room. My experience in the control room saw some confusion among myself, fellow control room members and those on the floor. From this experience I realised that there were a few gaps in our preparation.

My experience as the vision switcher on this show was quite challenging, as communication amongst the different roles in the control room was hindered by lack of consideration for the control room process. Our production saw the utilisation of stings and graphics that were sent to the onset screen. This worked well, however we would have seen a much better result if we devised a more rigid plan for those in the control room. This would have ensured that there were no awkward delays or quick switches between cameras, due to confusion and sporadic decision making.

Having to consider many things at once, myself, the evs operator, gfx operator, sound room operators and director found ourselves becoming confused due to a lack of synchronisation amongst each other, and with personnel on the floor. Due to the absence of a written plan that specified when to que graphics, evs footage and sound, we found ourselves unsure when to throw to particular visuals. Due to this, we were basing our cues off the timing of the talent. In turn, this affected the overall flow as talent was waiting for cues from the floor manager, who was in communication with us. 

Upon reflection on this experience, I think we did well to produce a final result that maintained a clear structure. Considering we had some difficulties backstage due to a lack of consideration for the execution of technical elements, I think we did well to find solutions in a live setting. Understanding that the nature of live television requires you to think on the fly, our production would have benefited from having a more solid understanding of the duration of each sting and a concise plan for cutting to the judge and host at the beginning and end of each round. However, understanding that the nature and concept of our show was strongly based around improvisation, it was harder to anticipate the exact timing of things. Next time it would be wise to spend more time working out to swiftly manage all visual and audio assets beforehand and place more consideration on the technical execution of the show. Nevertheless, I really enjoyed this exercise. Having a more complex format to manage, I feel like I received many positive takeaways from the trial and error in this experience.

A2 – Blog 2

Posted on by
Reply

In Week Five’s in class discussion my group spoke about the distinctions between game shows and quiz shows, and how among the two, hybridities can be seen when looking at this style of TV production. Both game shows and quiz shows generally have some sort of pay off or incentive that encourages participation. Focussed more on general and academic knowledge, the quiz show generally follows a question and answer based format, while the game show focuses more on skilled based activities, luck and chance and are generally more physical. While this is the case, both elements can be seen in some shows, creating a hybrid of the two formats. 

My group’s discussion also brought up the idea of genre and format and how the two differ. When dissecting text such as movies and fictional television, it is often easy to identify elements which align with particular genres. However, when looking at reality television, particularly the game show and quiz show, we find that this specific style of television is often categorised based on its fictional nature and lack of overt authorship. Though often viewed as homogeneous, many facets of differing reality television formats create distinguishable factors that allow for variation in style. Reality television generally follows particular formats and works within objective restraints. For example, game shows and quiz shows are driven by the frameworks which they follow and are not particularly drama based. However this is not necessarily an explicit element to all reality television. While fictional based television is heavily based on format, it doesn’t mean genre is absent. Depending on the format of particular shows, genre may be what the format is based around. For example, dating shows are romance based and physical challenge game shows may fall under a sporting genre but these elements still fit within the restraints of the format.

A2 – Blog 1

Posted on by
Reply

In Week Four’s reading by Ben Lamb, titled Narrative Form and the British Television Studio 1955–1963, I was particularly interested in the portion of the reading that spoke about how the material design of studio production coincides with the mise-en-scène of fictional narrative forms in sitcoms and studio dramas. This reading spoke about the role of set design and how its basic conventions are transferable across studio dramas and sitcoms. In the case of sitcoms, conservative approaches to set design see the set act as merely a back-drop that provides an identity to the on screen narrative. However, as these types of production are dialogue based, further meaning provided by mise-en-scène has the set and props play a subservient role in the conveyance of narrative. 

As described by the reading, studio-shot dramas and sitcoms are forms of light entertainment, thus sharing similar visual aesthetics. While the role of material design in studio productions is an important element of mise-en-scène, as it provides the narrative with an identity by providing a setting, its main function is to act as supplementation to on screen action performed by the characters. Key features of studio dramas and sitcoms see minimal engagement with spatial depth and have character engagement occur in close proximity. By having action played out in the foreground of the shot, with the use of minimal camera movement and utilisation of mid-shots, it ensures that there is a primary focus on character interaction and dialogue. I particularly found Lamb’s explanation about the occupation of a shot’s foreground as being an important element that maintains character simplicity. With little attention placed on spatial depth and or object within the space, script meaning is tainted by additional action that could possibly provide extra meaning to the text. Lamb speaks about this as being key features seen in Dixon of Dock Green. However this is also consistent with many examples of other sitcoms and studio dramas.