Music Video
Skills Audit
Demo Work
Demo Work
Demo Work
Contents
Demo Work
Contents
> Theoretical exploration of the purpose
and application of research
> Secondary research into
music video genres, codes, conventions,
techniques, and theories
> Primary research with the
client to inform ideas development
> Focus group presentation of ideas for
feedback and review via questionnaire
survey
Moving Demo
See the Journal entries for this week ->
This page details all of the primary research tasks that I undertook within this project. Many of these tasks including the demo work and surveys also lead on from research I had initially started within my Secondary Research. So viewing my Secondary Research first may be beneficial. Lots of the work proves my original information I had discovered as well as allowing me to progress from what I had initially researched.
Initial Survey
Below details my review and interpretation of my results from my first survey. This survey was focused on getting information about the aspects of my idea such as documentaries and mockumentaries. This survey was followed up later on by a second survey for the people of my focus group which was focused more on my central idea.
So I began this survey by asking for the ages and genders of the person taking the survey. This allowed me to review my research onto target audience’s and review whether what I had discovered was accurate or not. I had a 50/50 split on gender which was really fortunate as in my secondary research it had revealed gender didn’t affect much so having an even split was better to see whether this was true or not. The age ranges were split a little more with a heavier lean to the younger age demographic but picking up a little more with the 50-60 age range. Although having a slightly lower age majority wasn’t too damaging as this is the age group which my piece would most likely be viewed by. Using these ages and genders as a basis for my target audience, the survey did lean into the same target audience that I had discovered in my secondary research.
The next batch of questions were focused on the people’s opinions on documentaries, mockumentaries and if they’d watch a mixed media mockumentary. The entirety of the 10-20 age group said that they liked documentaries and would watch a mixed media mockumentary. However 50% of them said they did not like Mockumentaries. However based on the reasoning they gave to this, it seems this opinion was more based on the fact that they had not watched many mockumentaries rather than the fact that they disliked them.
Within the 50-60 age group which is the opposite of the last age range there were very divided opinions. Some were positive about all three aspects whereas others were negative about all three aspects. This is quite interesting as this age range is the one near the end and leading out of my target audience, so seeing this divide in opinions could be due to the fact that the older people within this age group were less likely to enjoy these types of media.
This idea is supported by the 60+ age group where documentaries were in a lot more favour than Mockumentaries and mixed media Mockumentaries. This seemed mainly due to the fact that they were more favourable of factual shows. However, this is typically what I expected as the 60+ age group is outside of my initial target audience.
Finally, the 40-50 age range which is from the middle to late range of my target audience was fairly positive, with the majority being positive about all three features. This is good to know as these people would be squarely in my target audience and so knowing they are positive of the mediums is useful information.
Between some of these questions was a question focused on whether the people had any documentaries or mockumentaries that they would recommend for inspiration. Funnily enough, some of the Mockumentaries being recommended were ones that I had previously done research into, with The Office being mentioned several times as well as This is Spinal Tap which I had done some inspirational research into. For the documentary inspiration, ones such as Blue Planet and Seaspiracy were suggested. These could be good inspirations for the visual style of my piece, as this more professional documentary style visuals was the style I was trying to achieve.
My last questions were focused on people's opinions of genre, specifically focusing on the choice between drama and comedy. And I was surprised at the vast majority that said that a mix of both would be what they’d prefer. Although I was surprised, this is good news though as a mix of drama and comedy was the genre style that I was going to attempt to create. And many of the opinions agreed with my thoughts saying that it’s nice to have a mixture, so that different emotions and feelings can be portrayed to the audience.
Initial Conclusions
Overall, this survey was incredibly useful. Although there were some outliers that were less positive of the ideas that I was proposing it was good to see that the vast majority were in support of the ideas I am going to create.
It was also very good in proving my secondary research correct, especially regarding the research into my target audience, which this survey has supported. This now allows me to head into my proper production knowing the exact target audience that I should be aiming my piece at.
Additionally, the individual answers provide me with a better insight into opinions, cause even though someone may have been in support of something doesn’t mean they like it 100%. And seeing the reasoning behind some of the answers was really insightful into seeing what I could adapt my piece to be like in order to appeal to a wider majority. For example somebody said that they only liked Mockumentaries if they were trying to portray a serious issue through comedy. And this is definitely something I can incorporate in my own piece, especially with my plot being focused on the acceptance of the character.
But looking back on this first survey it has definitely supplied me with a good first insight into people’s opinions, and this will then lead into my second survey which will gather people’s further opinions on the actual idea of my piece.
Focus Group
Below, you'll see all the work that went into my focus group. I used this focus group and later on my interviews to split up my target audience and see how they reacted differently to my ideas. The focus group was aimed at the younger demographic of my target audience, mainly focusing on young adults. This allowed me to get collective opinions and ideas from people within this section of my Target Audience.
PowerPoint
Wednesday 23rd March
So then after the meeting I moved into some primary research. Initially, I was going to start with my textual analysis as this is my last bit of secondary research. However, as my focus group has been moved up a day I felt it was more important to prioritise the work I would need to effectively carry that out. So I started with creating my PowerPoint for my focus group tonight. Within this PowerPoint I have included what I felt were the most important features they would need to know. These are; Premise; Characters; Locations; Style; Techniques; Target Audience and Purpose. I chose these features as they outlined all the information about my piece and also are the parts I feel I will benefit most from receiving feedback on. Once I wrote up all the information, I added images as well as a questions page at the end, where I will ask the people in the focus group if there is anything they want to ask me.
Presentation
Wednesday 23rd March
The absolute worst thing has just happened. I just held my focus group. It went on for around 30 minutes, I showed them my PowerPoint and then had about a solid 10 minutes of questions which were super informative. I felt the focus group was really useful on of the best pieces of research I have done so far and I learnt so much from it. But, then the worst possible thing happened. My phone, which had been set up on a tripod behind me to record the whole thing had for some reason powered off. I had used this technique to record my Options Project focus group and it had worked fine and so I thought it would work just as well for this project.
At first I had just thought the screen of my phone had turned off however I soon realised it had completely powered itself off. This meant the recording had cut off after only 7 minutes of recording without me even noticing. This is absolutely horrible as it means the recording has cut off in the middle of my Style page. This is only the 5th page meaning 3 other pages as well as the 10 minute questions which I found the most useful were not recorded. I have absolutely no idea what to do as I feel I can’t do it again because then it won’t be genuine as I’ll know the questions beforehand. But I also can’t not show the evidence cause I found it so useful and not including it would be extremely annoying.
It’s also currently 8pm and I’ve still got to upload all my work to WIX so I can’t even email a lecturer and ask for their help. My best bet is to ask any of my lecturers tomorrow and try to get help from them. As I’ve said this was one of if not the most useful bit of research so far and not having it all recorded is horrible. I have no idea what I can do now so I guess I’m just going to have to wait till tomorrow and see what my lecturers say.
Thursday 24th March
So as I explained in my last Journal entry, the recording of my focus group cut off after around 7 minutes of recording, cutting out the latter half of my presentation as well as the entire question section. This was quite a large blow to me as I found the focus group one of my most important and informative pieces of research.
I also think I know the reason for why the video failed. During my gimbal demo task, my phone powered off due to its storage becoming full. I think this was most likely also the reason my phone powered off yesterday. The only good thing about this happening was that I was able to catch this situation early, if the same thing had happened while I was trying to film my proper production it would have been disastrous. Because it’s happened now, I’ve been able to fix the problem and now have about 40% of my storage free which should be more than enough to complete the shots I will need to shoot on my phone.
So, today I asked Nigel about how I should approach the handling of the situation as I have lost the evidence for the last part. Nigel agreed it was a horrible situation and thought that the best way to handle it would be to write up about what happened in the rest of the focus group rather than doing it again. I agreed with this, as if I did the focus group again, I would be prepared for the questions, whereas at the time I had to really think about the questions which helped me to understand and develop my own idea more.
Luckily, one of the people within the focus group made notes on the questions they asked so I am able to discuss some of the questions I had to answer. I have also displayed the image of their notes, but I understand their handwriting is a little hard to read so I’ve added a version where I’ve tried to translate what they wrote.
Below I have described what happened during the rest of the focus group in order to justify its use as well as being able to tell you what the video cut out on.
So, the video cut out 7 minutes in while me talking about my style page. For the next 5-10 minutes I continued presenting my powerpoint which included the pages on techniques, target audience and purpose. The information I talked about during this was mainly consistent with what is on the slides and so refer to them for detail about this. Additionally, I discuss the full powerpoint again in my interviews, so refer to those videos in order to better understand what I was doing during this time of my focus group.
This is then when I moved onto the question section of the focus group, which I found the most beneficial part of the focus group. For reference to how this section was carried out refer to my interviews. I simply allowed the people within the focus group to ask any and all questions they had and I answered them honestly, there were certain times when the questions were things I hadn’t considered and so I had to think about them before answering, but this allowed me to better develop my idea as these questions made me consider things I hadn’t thought of before.
As I said earlier one of the people within the focus group made notes on the questions they asked so I am able to discuss some of the questions I had to answer.
​
So one of the useful questions that we discussed was the length of the piece. I explained I was aiming for around 5-10 minutes, likely looking at the lower end of that spectrum. The question was then extended when they asked if that length of time would affect the story or character development as typically doc/mockumentaries are quite a bit longer. I said that I thought this would not be too much of a problem. I had considered this, and responded saying that because of the shorter timescale, whereas other documentaries would have several threads of narrative, I would focus more on one as well as making sure that each scene contributes to the narrative. I also explained that some of the side characters were there in order to further the character development of Cody and they asked whether that would lessen their character development. I said that yes this would lessen their character development, but as the piece is focused on Cody, he needs to be the one who receives the most character development and I felt in this circumstance using lesser character to build up Cody’s character more was the best way to make sure the narrative was just as strong as a regular documentary even though it has a shorter timescale.
We also discussed my use of animation and whether my character would be 2d or 3d. I explained that Cody would be 2d as I was using rotoscoping techniques, although he was 3d in the sense that if he turned around you’d see the back of his head, but visually he will be 2d. I also made sure to get across that he would be interacting with his 3d environment even though visually he looks 2d.
Finally, we also discussed my approach to genre and how I planned to incorporate both comedy and drama. One of the questions was focused on how much each of the genres would contribute to the piece. I said that I wanted to try to achieve a roughly 50/50 split between the two genres as I didn’t want either genre to weigh over the other one as I felt the balance between the two is what would help keep the piece enjoyable throughout but also making sure the more emotional moments hit hard. The people within the focus group were quite happy with this response and agreed that they’d like a good mix of both as that would keep it entertaining.
Unfortunately, I’m not able to discuss all the questions that were asked, and not everyone kept notes of their questions so I am not able to show all of them. However, hopefully through this, my review of the focus group and my initial conclusions you’ll be able to see the use and benefit I gained from this focus group.
Hopefully, through the videos of the interviews you’ll also be able to see the way I answered questions as well as seeing the types of questions that I answered in there, as there will likely be some crossover between the two.
Initial Conclusions
Even though I had some problems with the focus group, I still found it an absolutely useful experience. For starters, delivering my powerpoint to a group allowed me to better understand how to explain my ideas out loud to other people, this is something I have struggled to convey in the past. But explaining it, with the support from my powerpoint, allowed me to better understand the idea myself, as well as being able to explain it better to others.
And even though it’s not in the video, the questions section was one of the most useful pieces of research that I have completed so far. Many questions were brought up that I either hadn’t considered or not fully explored before, and these questions forced me into properly thinking about these other aspects of my idea.
Finally, completing this focus group will allow me to progress with my idea, particularly within the pre-production stage and using the questions and information I have learned from this focus group, I can start to develop my idea even further. I’ll make sure to keep in mind all the questions and possible negatives that people brought up within the focus group and make sure to use them to improve my idea even more.
Interviews
Below you’ll be able to view the entirety of my interviews as well as being able to read how I’ve reviewed their usefulness as well as what I’ve gained from this task. As my focus group had been aimed at the lower demographic of my Target Audience, these interviews were aimed at the higher demographic looking at people in their Middle Age. Reviewing the results from the Focus Group and Interviews separately allows me to draw conclusions from each and understand how different people from throughout my target audience react differently to my ideas.
Thursday 24th March
I have just finished doing my interviews and I feel they have gone really well. And thankfully, now that I have fixed my storage issue, the recordings went absolutely fine. I will write more about how the interviews were useful and what I have gained from them in my review tomorrow, but just to say quickly, once again the question section was really useful in allowing me to develop the idea of my own piece and also being able to properly explain it to someone else was really good.
Coming off the back end of my failed recording of my focus group, I knew I needed to execute these interviews effectively in order to make up for some of the lost content.
The structure of the interviews went very similarly to the structure of my focus group. I showed the participants my powerpoint about my piece, explaining everything I was doing, and then at the end of the interview, I allowed them to ask any questions that they may have had regarding my project.
I felt this was an effective way to structure it as it had worked well for my focus group, and also you’ll be able to view these interviews to see how the rest of my focus group was carried out after the camera cut off.
However, unlike the focus group, these interviews were one on one as well as being able to take place in person. This allowed for a lot more personal interaction as well as allowing me to see face to face how people react immediately to hearing and seeing my idea. In this aspect, the interviews were more helpful than the focus group as being able to speak to and see the person helped me in discussing my ideas and I felt it easier to convey my thoughts and research when I was able to see the person in real life.
But very similarly to the focus group, the most useful part of my interviews was the section on questions. As I had hoped, there was some crossover between the questions in the focus group and interviews. These involved questions on the length of the piece as well as the design of the character, specifically whether he was going to be 2d or 3d. Hopefully, through these videos you’ll be able to see how I responded to these questions in my focus group. But this crossover is also interesting when looking at my Target Audience as it shows that even though they were at the two different spectrums of my demographic they were both asking the same questions.
However, there were also questions brought up in these interviews which weren’t brought up in the focus group. Specifically a question about the diversity of my main character Cody. This was something I hadn’t really considered before the interview as I was mainly working on the actors that I’d be able to acquire. However,it’s definitely something I feel I could’ve put more thought and research into and now that it’s been brought to my attention, I hope to take this idea forward into my pre-production and maybe try to expand and search for more actors that I could potentially use.
Initial Conclusions
Overall, these interviews were incredibly useful. Very similarly to the use of my focus group, the questions that were brought up were very useful in allowing me to better explain my idea to other people as well as having things brought up to my attention that I hadn’t necessarily thought of before.
Seeing the different ways that the people within the interviews reacted differently to the people in the focus group was also useful as they were at different ends of my target audience. Seeing the similarities helps to assure that my target audience research was correct but also seeing the differences will help me to understand which parts of my piece will appeal more to the different audiences within my Target Demographic.
And this is something I can definitely take into Pre-production, as I can try to include parts that will appeal to different ages within my target audience, so that hopefully the finished product will appeal to everyone within my Target Audience.
Follow Up Survey
Below shows my review of my second survey. This survey was sent to the people who attended the focus groups and interviews. My first survey was aimed at gathering people’s opinions about the style and aim of my piece. This survey was more focused on gathering people’s further ideas now that they have seen, understood and asked questions about my idea. The purpose of this second survey was to provide me with feedback from my Focus Group as well as understand how people responded to the ideas I proposed. This was also partly done through the questions section at the end of the focus group and interviews.
Similarly to my first survey, the first two questions of this survey were focused on gathering the ages and genders of the participants. This was to further prove my target audience which I was already fairly confident about thanks to my initial survey. There were only two distinct age ranges here as I had tailored my interviews and focus group accordingly. My focus group was tailored to the lower end of my target audience, being young adults. Whereas, my interviews were specified to the higher end of my target audience, being middle aged. This allowed me to see how the two spectrums of my target audience reacted to my idea after hearing it properly.
The rest of the questions were then focused on how people felt about my piece, as well as anything they personally would change or adapt. The first question was simply a yes or no on whether they liked my piece or not. And it was really nice to see that 100% of the people said that they did like the idea.
The next two questions were then asking what people liked and disliked about the idea. There were quite diverse reasonings for why people liked the idea. Some saying that there was a clear message, or they liked the relatability of it. And others saying it reminded them of a children’s TV show they used to enjoy.
Then looking at what people disliked about the idea, some people said there was nothing specific they disliked about the idea. This is good to hear, but at the same time restricted the amount of constructive criticism I received. The other people mentioned worries of how the balancing of genre would work in a short film as well as how the length of the piece would affect the development of side characters. I discussed the length of my piece with most of the people in the focus group and interviews and from these I have realised that making sure I can achieve everything I want to do in a limited time scale will be something I will have to think about and plan carefully. Additionally, the genre was something I’ve been thinking about myself a lot as balancing the genres correctly is a big priority to me. But thanks to this primary research, these issues have been highlighted to me early on in the process. This means, as well as my own research I have done into them, I can take these ideas forward and make sure, especially in the pre-production stage, that I give them the required amount of thought so that my piece does come off better for it.
The penultimate question was focused on if they felt there was anything they didn’t understand or I could have explained better in the research. Everyone said no here, and that’s good to hear that everyone understood the ideas and information I was trying to convey. This also assures me that the research and powerpoint I created were useful and made a difference in my development of this project.
The final question was asking whether there was anything people would change if they were creating the project themselves. This was aiming to gather a more personal response and understand how individual people would change my ideas. However, the majority of people here said that there is not much they would change. This is good as it goes to show that my idea was well thought out, researched and presented to these people. However, I was hoping to gather more data on how my piece could be improved. However, one person did mention that I could try for a more diverse casting. And this is a question that was brought up in one of the interviews. Currently my casting is based around the actors I know I’ll be able to use, and this does limit the diversity and amount of people I can include in my piece. However, this is a good point to bring up, and definitely something I can look into and try to improve going forward with this project.
Initial Conclusions
This survey was a lot more targeted and focused than my initial survey so I had expected very different styles of results. Although the questions were more limited, they were also more focused on the sort of data I needed to gather, after I had completed the focus groups and interviews.
And I definitely think the data and opinions I gathered from this survey has justified its usefulness. Understanding how people feel about my idea, especially what they like/dislike is very useful as it will allow me to take this information forward and make sure to tailor the rest of my development to things that I know my target audience will be more invested in. The same thing works in the opposite direction where I can make sure to avoid adding or changing anything which may then make people dislike my idea more.
Finally, similarly to my initial survey, this survey was good in providing evidence for the validity of my secondary research. The codes and conventions, genre and many of the things that surround my idea were crafted from the secondary research I had done. And seeing that these ideas were being supported and receiving positive feedback is good in showing that my secondary research was effective.
Demo Tasks
Drama
Thursday 17th March
Originally, I had planned to spend the entire lesson working on my proposal and bibliography, however Danny offered a small workshop for people who were planning to do a drama. Now mine isn’t strictly a drama but it is within the same category so I thought it would be a useful thing to participate in. In the workshop, Danny ran us through the behind the scenes and job roles that went into shooting a scene. We included the actors, camera operator, director, first assistant director, clapper board operator and boom operators. We were each designated positions and I was given the boom operator, but I was also able to see how all the other jobs worked as well. I think the most important thing I learned from the workshop was how the flow of command works on the set. The director is in control, who then indicated to the first assistant when to call first positions. And then the camera operator instructs the clapper board operator before starting. Understanding the importance of each jobs was a really good thing to learn about, especially as I hadn’t considered some jobs such as the clapper board before. But overall, I will definitely keep this workshop in mind when I am doing my own shoots as well as this workshop can count as my research. And acts as a good jumping off point for my further research.
Initial Conclusions
Although this wasn't a planned demo tasks there is still some initial conclusions I can take away from it. Just having gained a bit more hands on experience on some of the equipment was really useful and understanding how a proper set actually works was useful, and will help me remember all the jobs I'll need to be doing while working on my own production. Overall, I'll make sure to keep this demo task in mind while I'm working on my own production.
Lighting
Wednesday 23rd March
Before returning home to work on the Textual analysis I attended one of the Technician’s workshop. This workshop was focused on lighting. I felt this was a useful workshop to attend as if I’m trying to achieve a professional look within my Mockumentary then learning how to properly use the lighting equipment would be beneficial.
The Workshop took place in the studio where Ash took us through how to use the lighting equipment as well as going through the basics of three point lighting again. I had already learned three point lighting, but having a recap of it and making sure my knowledge was all up to date was important. For instance I had forgotten the rough brightness each of the three lights needed to be on, but I now remember the Key light is 100%, fill light is roughly 50% and the back light will depend on the effect you are going through.
I also had basic knowledge of how to use the lights, but Ash introduced me to this app they have on the Ipad which you can remotely control the lights from. This was amazing, as it meant you could control the colours, saturation and brightness of the lights remotely. I had known you could change the colours of the lights but I had never figure it out until now.
Finally, Ash introduced us to the studio lights on the ceiling of the studio. This was useful to learn about as I had not used these before, however, it is unlikely I will be recording in the studio so I am not sure if I will use these lights within this project at least. But it’s still good to learn about these lights as it means if I change my mind and do want to work in there, I will know what I’m doing.
Initial Conclusions
Similarly to the drama demo task, I hadn't originally planned to do this task, although it was still very useful in providing me with more information or skills that may benefit me for this project. Lighting will be quite essential if I'm trying to make my piece look professional and so attending this workshop will definitely have improved my skills later on down the lane. Also just being able to have a mess around with the lights was good just to give myself a refresher of how to use them.
Gimbal
Thursday 24th March
I think I’ve discovered the problem that led to my focus group not being correctly filmed. This morning before College, I started my gimbal demo task. This is when I discovered my problem. While I was filming using my gimbal, at one point, my phone just powered off and stopped recording. When I turned it back on, I realised it was due to the fact my phone storage had become full. This had meant the video I was recording didn’t save and meant I had to re-record the gimbal demo task. Based on what happened today, I think the same thing must have happened yesterday during the focus group. I haven’t gone to College yet, so I will still ask one of my lecturers when I get there. I will describe less about what I did in my demo work here as during the videos I describe what I am doing and the uses they have.
Initial Conclusions
The gimbal task was quite useful though. I already knew the basics of how to use the gimbal, but it was quite useful to recap and I also learned quite a few ways of how to use it and not to for specific things, which I discuss further within the video. For example, the zoom is quite slow so for fast zooms a different camera would be better to use. However, as long as I fix my storage problem, which I am currently working on then the phone and gimbal should be absolutely fine to use for my project.
The main goal of this demo task was to mainly check if the gimbal and my phone were good enough to be able to be used for this project. And I definitely think that through the videos you can tell that I thought they were definitely sufficient enough. There were certain things like the footage not being entirely focused at a couple of small points but at the time I was focusing on the gimbal and not the focus so in the real thing I would pay a lot more to the focus. I didn't actually notice till I was reviewing the footage that when the phone turned upside down, the shots are also upside down, while filming it looked normal. However, this is easily fixed in post by simply adjusting the rotation of the footage, but learning about it now will save me a small shock later on in the process.
Ebsynth
Thursday 24th March
The final thing I was able to do before College was film my videos for Ebsynth. I wasn’t able to animate them yet due to the problem with the gimbal task which led to me losing a lot of time. I’ve filmed 5 videos for the Ebsynth, all of which are different stages to test Ebsynths capabilities. The first stage is me sitting relatively still and just talking. The second is me sitting and talking but using hand gestures. The third is me standing relatively still and talking. The fourth is me walking and moving around slowly. The final one is me moving around more erratic and faster. These 5 stages are planned in this way to be able to test Ebsynth’s capabilities. From what I learned from my research, the more movement in a scene, the harder it is for Ebsynth. So in my stages, I’ve increased the movement of each one, and hopefully later tonight when I animate them I’ll be able to discover what Ebsynth is able to handle.
I then finally moved onto my Ebsynth demo. Ebsynth is absolutely amazing. I had a little trouble with it near the beginning as it kept crashing. However, I soon discovered that this was due to the naming of my files. For the best results simpler names like 00001 should be used and then it will run fine. As I had lost some time figuring out how to use Ebsynth, I couldn't do all 5 stages that I had planned, so instead I reduced this down to 3. This being stage 1, 3 and 5 as I felt these would be best to help me learn but also to test Ebsynth’s capabilities.
1 and 3 went excellent with only 1 keyframe being used in each. They were both relatively smooth as I was fairly stationary but the face movement looked quite good. There were slight glitches such as in 1 the right eye becomes slightly cross eyed near to the end, but these are thing that would be easily fixed with just one more keyframe. And the best part is that to produce each shot it took just under an hour. So about 20 seconds of content per hour is amazing, especially when it’s animation.
Shot 5 was a lot more complex but I decided to only use 4 keyframes of each side of my body just to see how Ebsynth would handle it. Obviously, it definitely didn’t turn out perfect, but this was more of a test to see how it would handle it rather than for it to turn out perfect. This also helps to give me a better understanding of how many keyframes are needed for certain movements. As it seems that the more complex the movements and the more angles there are, the more keyframes are required. However, it is still faster than rotoscoping so with more practice and primary research into this I hope I can improve my skills a lot before my production occurs.
Stage 1
Stage 3
Stage 5
Initial Conclusions
Overall, this demo work has proven that Ebsynth is definitely good enough to use in my proper production and by doing this demo task I have started my journey in learning how to properly use it. With more time and practice it should work out really well for the proper production and allow me to include a lot more animation within my piece.
I've also done things wrong in this demo that I would like to continue practicing on and improve to make sure I don't do them again. For instance in stage 1, the hair seemed to weirdly flip at the top instead of cut off like I drew it too. And stage 5 obviously went quite wrong, but its also taught me how using multiple key frames affects Ebsynth. As the results it produced was separated into 4, one for each keyframe and this meant overlap was created which had to be fixed in post. But even though all this went wrong, it's good to get things wrong now as it will allow me to work on it over the next couple of weeks before my final production and really learn how to use it properly so that in the real thing, my animation will look a lot better.
Equipment
Friday 25th March
At the end of the lesson, I moved onto my demo work task, which included me looking into the camera, tripod and audio equipment that I could potentially use.
The equipment I used for this demo was a DSLR Canon 600d, a tripod with gimbal head, a shotgun mic that connects to the camera and an audio recorder. The point of this demo task was just to have a test with the equipment, learn how to use it properly and evaluate whether I think it’ll be good enough to use in my proper production.
I set up the rough composition of the camera to resemble that of a documentary interview. Commonly the person is sat down slightly off centre to the camera. This wasn't essential to my demo tasks, but I just felt it was worth getting a little practice of framing an interview.
I made quite a few mistakes in this demo, mainly due to me not being used to the equipment. But I think it’s actually more beneficial to make mistakes now as that means I’ll know how to fix them and remember not to do them again in the future production. For example, about halfway through, I was worried that it didn’t seem like the shotgun mic was picking up any audio. After talking with Ash, I discovered that this was because I hadn’t actually turned the shotgun mic on. Obviously this is a very silly mistake. However, I had not used a shotgun mic that plugged into the camera before so I had not realised it needed to be turned on. But I’m definitely going to remember that now cause it was quite an embarrassing mistake.
Because the mic wasn’t turned on I had to redo a lot of my tests. In each of the videos I explain what I am doing, but to explain a couple briefly here, I did tests on how the different audios sounded. Including using the raw camera, shotgun mic and audio recorder to record the sound.
I also did a little test of the gimbal, just checking out how it works and how I could possibly use it for my piece.
And finally, I did some tests with the camera, I framed most of my shots in an interview style framing as this will be quite a common feature in my piece. It was a little hard to do as I was working alone but I think it definitely turned out quite well. I also did a little walk around just to see how handheld footage would look. This was made as a comparison to the gimbal and I think from this I’m definitely going to use my gimbal as the handheld stuff was a lot rougher.
I summarise my thoughts a lot better in my initial conclusions, but to add a section here as well, thanks to this demo task I now know how to properly use all this equipment, and it’s quite likely I am going to use all of this equipment in my actual piece. However, it is likely I will use a regular tripod unless I specifically need a gimbal head, simply as I find them easier to use and have a lot more experience with them.
Aside from that this demo task has definitely improved from my secondary research that I had looked into equipment and I will definitely make sure to remember this for when I’m picking out my equipment for my final production.
Ambient Noise Test
There's quite a big difference between the two mics, especially when it came to this test, looking at how it records the ambient noise. Although the Audio Recorder was clearer with dialogue it was basically silent when listening to the ambient noise. Although if the audio recorder was used for the dialogue, there was also less ambient noise so linking the shots could be done with the audio recorder. I think this test shows that as long as you use the same mic for ambient noise as you do for dialogue then the linking between the dialogue should work fine.
Gimbal Capabilities
It was my first time using the gimbal on the tripod so that is probably partly why the movement is a little shaky and less subtle than I would have liked. But to be honest, I don't think the gimbal shake added too much and I think because of this demo test it'll be less likely that I use the gimbal shake in my actual production. I think just a static interview shot would look more professional.
Handheld
I think this demo task was definitely effective in assuring me that I want to use my phone gimbal. Although the footage's shakiness wasn't terrible in handheld, I definitely think the gimbal shots looked a lot better and a lot more professional which is what I am aiming for. I think the camera is still good but I think it's a lot less likely that I will use it for any handheld or tracking shots.
Raw Camera VS Audio Recorder
I was surprised at how decent the audio from the raw camera actually was. The voice was clear and one of the only real problems with it was the room seemed to echo a bit. However, I think it's fairly safe to say the audio recorder did sound better, I think it could've been slightly louder but this can easily be solved by either me holding the recorder closer to me or just by turning up the volume in premiere. But I think this test definitely showed that the audio recorder was better.
Shotgun Mic
This was simply a test of the Shotgun Mic by itself as I have not used it before. I think the audio quality, especially the dialogue is fairly solid when using the shotgun mic. However, what I have realised, which is quite consistent with all the shotgun mic's recording is that the background and room noise is quite noticeable. There is definitely a slight buzz in the background. This is not terrible and I will probably do some research and see if its possible to remove this, but it's definitely something to keep in mind.
Shotgun Mic VS Audio Recorder
I think both of these mics are fairly solid. As I mentioned in the shotgun mic test, there is a slight buzz in the background. This is not present on the audio recorder and so the audio recorder handles that better. Although what the shotgun mic can do that the audio recorder can't is the fact that it's out of shot. This is a benefit for interviews and if the buzz can be removed the shotgun mic may be better use for interviews. However, the audio recorder dialogue is clearer so would be better for use in narrations and voiceovers. The last thing to keep in mind is that the audio recorder should be close to the person speaking as it seems to have less of a range than the shotgun mic has.
Shotgun Mic VS Audio Recorder Moving
I mentioned quite a lot of the differences between the two mics in the demo task above, but this one shows how they both handle movement. I was surprised at how well the shotgun mic handled distance, which was a lot better than my previous test on movement of the audio recorder. However, as its a shotgun mic, the distance needs to be in front of it as you can tell when I go behind it, it struggles a lot more.
Obviously, the audio recorder can move with the actor or person talking which is a benefit, however, from this recording it's worth keeping in note that it picks up on clothes rustle or wind which could quite easily ruin a recording.
Initial Conclusions
All of these equipment demo tasks were definitely useful, especially when it came to deciding whether I want to use the equipment or not. Lots of my tasks revolved around audio, I think from my results I will definitely prioritise using the audio recorder and the shotgun mic. I think if I can find a way to completely remove that buzz from the shotgun mic recordings then the shotgun mic would be perfect for interviews.
I think the audio recorder would be quite good for further away shots where the shotgun mic wouldn’t be able to pick up the audio or for moving shots to keep the audio consistent. However, I think in these circumstances I would use a shotgun mic connected to the audio recorder as this would allow for things such as clothes and wind to be picked up slightly less. Additionally, when using the audio recorder I want to find a way to conceal it from the audience. From these tests I’ve noticed you have to hold it fairly close in order to pick up good quality audio. But constantly having it in shot, in my opinion, would ruin the illusion. So this is something I want to take forward and try to find a solution.
From these tests I can conclude that the camera will be good enough to suit my needs. However, I think it is likely that I will go back to using a regular tripod. I think the gimbal movement that this tripod provided didn’t really add anything significant to the shots and were just more of a distraction. Coupling this with the fact I have more experience with the regular tripods, I think using a normal tripod will result in better framed shots.
Evaluation
Thanks to my completion of my secondary research, I was able to move into my Primary Research. The main aim of my Primary Research was to prove many of the things I had discovered in my secondary research, as well as gathering much of my own data and problem solving any troubles I may run into.
And so I started my primary research with an initial survey, this survey was focused more on the styles and influences of my idea rather than the specific idea itself. This supplied me with lots of people’s opinions into the parts surrounding my idea, which I could then embed into my further research and development. And additionally, this survey was quite helpful in proving my target audience was correct, that I had found out in my secondary research.
From this initial survey, I was then able to move forward with a focus group where I’d be able to gather more people’s opinions as well as allowing them to ask me questions. I created a powerpoint for this research, where I compiled all the information about my piece as well as the things I wanted to include within it. I then presented this to my focus group. This is where I hit a bit of a wall as my phone cut off about a third of the way through my focus group meaning a large majority of it was not filmed. Initially, I was very worried about this as this was a huge and extremely helpful piece of research and not having the footage of it was quite distressing. However, after talking with Nigel, he said the best way to counteract this problem was to write up everything else that had happened. So with this evidence as well as the notes one of my participants made, I was able to gather up my focus group a bit better. But even without the trouble, the focus group, and especially the questions I had to answer in it really made me have to think and develop my idea even further.
Whereas the focus group was aiming at the younger age in my target audience, my interviewers were aimed at the higher age bracket. The interviews ran essentially in the same structure as my focus group but luckily this time my recordings worked fine. The interviews provided me with a lot of similar uses that the focus group did, with the questions being raised becoming very helpful in my own understanding and development of my idea.
From the back end of the focus group and interviews I sent a follow up survey to all the participants. In contrast to the first survey, this survey aimed at gathering the people’s opinions now that they understood my idea. The results from this survey were also incredibly helpful and provided me with evidence of what people liked about my idea as well as anything they may feel could change. And these are all ideas I can take forward and work with.
And finally, I completed some of my favourite research, demo tasks. I started with two demo tasks that I hadn’t originally planned for. This being demo tasks on drama and working on a set as well as a demo work on lighting. These were run by the lecturer and technician and weren’t something I was originally aware of. But they were still helpful in providing me with technical knowledge into more equipment and procedures that I could use within my piece.
I then moved onto my own demo tasks, starting with testing the Gimbal. I already knew how to use my gimbal and was fairly confident that it would be sufficient for the sort of shots I wanted to use it for. And this demo task helped to prove its usefulness and assured me that later on down the line it would work well with my production. This demo task also led to the discovery of what went wrong with my focus group recording as well as then letting me solve this, which is important as it means the same thing will now definitely not happen during my actual production.
Arguably one of the most fun parts of research was my demo task on Ebsynth. This was the software I had discovered in order to animate. I ended up doing three levels of difficulty to test the software and the first two went fairly flawlessly with only using one keyframe. This was incredible as it meant I could create about 20 seconds of animated footage in under an hour. The last test was where I really pushed the boundaries of what I thought it could do. I used 4 keyframes, one of each angle of my body to see how it would cope. Although it definitely struggled in some places, for only using 4 drawings and being produced in about an hour, it’s still incredible. And in my actual production, using only a couple more keyframes, I’m fairly confident that footage could become just as good as the other two. I’m still planning to do more tests with Ebsynth so that by the time I get to my production I will be very confident in what I’m doing.
And my very final piece of research was a demo task into the equipment. To provide my planning of this demo task, I used the secondary research into equipment that I had already created. This meant I already knew what I needed to test thanks to the research I had already done. These included tests into Audio, camera and tripod features. From these demo tasks I’ve been able to finalise a lot of the equipment I want to use as well as providing me with more challenges that I’ll need to solve in order to achieve my final goal.
In conclusion, Primary research picked up where secondary research left off and was important in proving lots of my already completed research. And now thanks to all my findings I can go into my pre-production stage knowing that my idea is even stronger as well as having learned lots of new things that will mean I can develop my idea even further from what it was.
