The class watched two YouTube videos which can be found in the 'example post'. We established codes and conventions of a television documentary by focusing on camerawork, sound, mise-en-scene and editing of the actual interview.
Account of filming the documentary
Our interview took place in the Recording Studio, Joe (the interviewee) sat on the left of the frame and so the interviewer (myself) sat to the right of the camera (controlled by Charlotte). We tried to follow the codes and conventions of filming an interview. The topic for the interview was mobile phones, so the mise-en-scene was a technology-based background of a studio.
Cutaways were planned and linked as much as possible to the answers given by the interviewee. They were filmed around our school, in places such as: the common room, corridors, recording studio and break-out areas.
The filming was straight forward as we used a tripod to steady the camera in several of the cutaways shots.
Editing - Screen grabs
We edited the interview using Adobe Premiere Pro editing software. It was easy to develop the basic skills to use this package successfully, as we all helped each other to complete the video.
The video had to be uploaded and imported into the program before editing, and then we separated the interviewee's answers and the cutaways. The answers were simple to pick out because we dragged a chunk of the video into the editing area and cut the questions and mistakes out straight away. The cutaways use different effects such as speed/duration changes and cross-cutting of images
The beginning of our video shows a title, this was done with an icon found in Adobe Premiere Pro.
We used the volume levels to adjust the background- instrumental music, which we imported after the video was nearly complete. When the interviewee is talking, the music should drop a level so that it is still in the background but not as loud. Also, the background music with the cutaways was deleted by unlinking the audio to the video.
Once the video was complete, we exported the file so that it rendered and became suitable to upload to the internet. Logging on to YouTube, we uploaded the video ('phone interview') under my login 'A2EMILY'.
The video is embeded below.
Finished Video
Evaluation
Our Interview aimed to follow the 'Codes and Conventions of filming and editing interviews'. The group all worked together to create a first successful attempt of a mobile phone interview. The beginning shot, was filmed in medium close up with the interviewee's eyeline level with the interviewer, three quarters of the way down the frame. The interviewer was sat as close to the camera as possible on the right hand side, and so the interviewee was therefore positioned the oppposite side, to the left of the frame. The interviewee was positioned in front of a workspace and not a light source or large window. We followed these conventions which made the frame look carefully structured and thought about.
However, a weakeness of our interview is that the mise-en-scene of the interview was incorrect. The radio/recording studio was irrelevant to the topic of mobile phones; if we were to do our interview again, as a group the mise-en-scene would be decided and made relevant to the topic for example: using mobile adverts or posters as a background image.
Another weakness of our interview is the answers given by the interviewee (Joe). The answers given were relevant but lacked detail. Also, conventions stated that the questions had to edited out, so that the answers given had to make complete sense by themselves. However, the answers given didn't do this all the time and sometimes were confusing and less clear about what he was answering. To ensure this problem would not happen again, repeating the question at the start of an answer would give clear indictations to what the answer will be about. In addition, the interviewer (myself) could encourage the interviewee to give more information through prompting them with statements such as: "Could you expand on that please?" or "What did you think about that?".
The cutaways filmed seemed relevant to the answers given by the interviewee (Joe). The cutaways worked well in the sequence as the length of time given was suitable. However the final fast-motion cutaway was a bit too fast and didn't capture enough focused images of the mobile itself. In the editing process, we explored and used different tools to show variety within the interview. It was also a way to experiment and try out the software tools. Also when editing, an overlap of the cutaways and speech from the interviewee would be good to show that there was an actual link between the two things.
The background music used was a definite strength for our interview because we had an instrumental track playing so that no attention would be lost by lyrics of a normal song. The instrumental track was Jason Maraz - I'm Yours. The levels were slightly off-balanced at some points, as they were to be lowered when the interviewee spoke and maybe a bit louder for the cutaways. As a group we would help each other to use our skills and alter this weakness, when given this opportuntity to create another interview again.
Overall, my group and I, agree that our first attempt of an interview was successful as we tried our best to follow the 'codes and conventions of editing and filming an interview'. However, the weakenesses that I have highlighted can easily be altered and improved, which would hopefully show a successful and strong example of a media interview.
