_edited.png)
31 Mar 2022 | TEL111 Origin | Action Learning Report | 1220 words
In this module, my aim was to develop and demonstrate the key skills required to produce a short factual film.
The team and I began the process by composing a list of potential subjects our film could centre on. We then examined each idea and ranked them based on the quality of the possible narrative and the likelihood of fixing the contributors. Our favoured idea was a local HIV activist who had founded an organisation for the LGBT community but all our attempts to contact him were unsuccessful. Just from this, I learned that arranging contributors can be more complicated than I first anticipated and that it is useful to have alternative plans, especially when working within a specific time frame. We began making contact with our second idea, Jezebel, a local tattoo business. I also conducted some research into documentary production and it seems ‘the strongest ideas are often the simplest’ (Lees 2010). Our concept was straight-forward, yet had enough weight to express a meaningful story.
Initially, we had plans to film the shop exterior and their logo but by the time Jezebel had confirmed they were willing to participate, it was too late to apply for permission to film in that public area so we compromised and decided on shots of business cards or artworks with their logo on instead. During the pre-production stages, time is crucial; I learned that there are many different aspects to consider when producing factual films, with risk assessments and location agreements being the most time consuming. We met with Jezebel prior to the shoot to discuss the risk assessment and discuss our plans. As Jezebel offer body modification services, we worked hard to obtain all relevant health and safety information, both for our safety and to also take into consideration when booking the equipment. This involved finding out where needles are stored and disposed of, which chemicals are used and how they are stored, and understanding ‘hot zones’, which the staff described as the area around clients after skin has been broken in any way. We also took measurements of the interior, taking into consideration our equipment and where it could be placed to not obstruct fire exits. We knew we were going to be interviewing two people so we settled on two radio microphones and decided against using a microphone and boom pole as this could block pathways and possibly distract the artists. In terms of the kit, we needed to be as flexible as possible during the shoot in case of any unexpected occurrences. This is an aspect largely relative to documentary - ‘the advantage of shooting drama over documentary is that you have complete control over what will happen in front of the camera’ (Bamford 2012). Even though we took both a camera and tripod, we were fully prepared to switch to handheld recording, in case the shop became busy or if there just was no space for the tripod.
Next, we thought about the structure of the overall story. The staff had such vibrant personalities so we decided the film would centre on them as individuals and their working relationship, rather than just the business. I learned that establishing a relationship with clients ahead of the shoot lets both the crew and contributors feel more relaxed in their roles. It’s important to consider how open the contributors are and ‘how much they are going to let you into their lives’ (Glynne 2012). Together, we compiled both a rough shot list and a list of interview questions we felt would give us a solid outline of the story. As we were working with clients not affiliated with the university, we aspired to be as efficient as possible, especially as our time in the studio was fairly limited. To support this approach, we further adjusted our questions so we were capturing key information first and then any extra information in the remaining time we had. Preparing these details beforehand was very effective in having the shoot run smoothly, so this is definitely an approach I will use in future projects.
Throughout pre-production, only one member was in contact with Jezebel which resulted in some miscommunication within the team. The day before the shoot, we heard that only one of the staff would be at the studio and that we would not be able to film the interviews that day. Therefore, we only took one radio microphone, a directional microphone for atmospheric sound and decided against using studio lights. However, both staff were there and as well as a client so we then had to further adapt our equipment to accommodate this. The team and I made the decision to use the radio microphone on the quieter person, with the directional microphone capturing sound from both people. This way, we knew that we would have the best sound quality. As I learned from my research, a lot can be done with audio; if we made the audio quality as high as possible, ‘it would make an excellent voiceover in editing’ (Chasse 2019). As for the visuals, I did not like the overall composition of the interview shots as I felt the background was ugly but this was the best location in the shop for lighting - we had to compensate for not bringing studio lights.
Many of our creative choices were made during the editing process. We had to sift through the interview rushes to find the points we thought were most important to add to the two-minute edit. Transcribing the speech aided us significantly during this process. We also had a lot of good B-roll footage and together, we chose the shots we thought looked the most visually pleasing and complimented the interview nicely. At the colour grading stage, I did a lot of colour correction, as well as some more creative adjustments that enhanced the unique aesthetic of the shop. The team and I found that our interviewees actually speak quite slowly in the footage which added to the difficulty of composing the two-minute edit but following feedback from our peers, this actually sets a really good pace for the film. I added some short pauses in their speech to give the audience time to process information - In my research, I learned it is important to ‘allow space for viewer reaction’ (Rosenthal and Eckhardt 2016), and to not overload the viewer with information. Feedback regarding the pace and level of information was mainly positive. We also heard that the music we included was a little too loud at certain points and made it difficult for certain words to be heard but this is something we were able to easily fix. The saturation of the colour was also increased slightly to enhance the shop's colourful interior.
This module has provided me with many new skills and insight into producing films, even if they are not factual like this one. Communication is the ultimate skill in this industry. From this, I also discovered that the amount of effort put into the pre-production stages often determines the overall success of a project. I would like to be more creative in the future, taking visual aesthetics into mind rather than focusing purely on the technicality. I plan to take everything I have learned from this module to future projects, whether they are academic or professional.
References
BAMFORD, Nick. 2012. Directing Television : A Professional Survival Guide. London: Bloomsbury.
CHASSE, Betsy. 2019. The Documentary Filmmaking Master Class : Tell Your Story from Concept to Distribution. New York: Allworth Press.
GLYNNE, Andy. 2012. Documentaries-- and How to Make Them. Harpenden: Creative Essentials.
LEES, Nicola. 2014. Greenlit Developing Factual/Reality TV Ideas from Concept to Pitch. London [U.A.] Bloomsbury.
ROSENTHAL, Alan and Ned ECKHARDT. 2016. Writing, Directing, and Producing Documentary Films and Digital Videos. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Author: Bethan Radford
Module: TEL111 Origin
Assessment: Action Learning Report
Classification: 1st / 72%
Degree: BA (Hons) Television
Submission: 31st March 2022
Words: 1220