Media Evaluation Question 4: How did you use media technologies in the construction and research, planning and evaluation stages?
I used a variety of media technologies throughout the course of producing the project, these range from Adobe Photoshop and Premier to web applications and video hosting platforms, these were utilized to present information in an interesting way and to help work on the products themselves.
From the preliminary exercise, which was a same continuity task that was intended to show a character opening a door, crossing a room and exchanging dialogue with another character to demonstrate the 180 degree rule, I have progressed significantly in video production and use of editing software. Whereas on the preliminary and AS project I used Final Cut Pro, the project I worked on now used Adobe Premiere, with equipment with different formats (the cameras that I used for the AS year were all digital, whereas for the A2 project they all used tape (MiniDVs)- with the minor exception of when I needed to use my friend's equipment after I forgot to pick up a camera from college), but the progression is that the quality of video that has been produced is superior and shows a clear progression in regards to the standard of editing, which is of a far more complex level that the preliminary video. Also, the progression is shown in the clear commitment to a distinct aesthetic, that being of the distorted black and white style of the video that is used throughout, this commitment to use the effects of the software confidently shows a progression from the effect-less preliminary video.
This also allowed me to experiment with different cameras and styles during the production, I did this by experimenting with a more heavy duty camera for more static camera work (though I did try make it a bit more mobile) and used a handheld camera to try and get closer to the subject, and create a more fluid cinematography. Though it didn't always work out the way I intended it, it did give me more choice in the edit suite, with many of the improvised experiments turning up in the finished film, this is shown in the focus pulls, the surf rock wave subversion shots, which originally weren't going to be as at the forefront as it appears in the finished video, this was quite spur of the moment after seeing how good the location was , this ended up looking quite effective in the finished video, along with the focus pulls, which provided an interesting way of introducing the character whilst adding to the grimy feel of the video. There were some problems that did need to be addressed using the cameras, mainly that the large camera was quite heavy, so with continued use some of the shots started to get shakier and proved to be difficult to keep steady whilst mobile (shown in the tracking shots), this is why we tried using more handheld cameras to try and solve this, the only problem was that it was at a lower video resolution.
This progression could be attributed to my use of Adobe Premiere during the AS Film Studies course last year, in which Premier was used to edit a short film, this then provided more experience and allowed me become more comfortable with the software and the confidence to play around and experiment with it. Because of doing a short film with it at AS, it made me approach the film schedule in a different manner, as I undershot on that project leading meaning that I had to get creative with the edit to pull it up to the runtime, I had had a similar predicament during the AS Media project (though that was due to the limited time I had to shoot coupled with the set set-up time, 40 minutes) and the fact that the college wouldn't let me use a smoke machine during the production out of fear that it may set off the sprinkler systems.
For the A2 project I had to use Adobe Photoshop more extensively, this was primarily in the creation of the two ancillary products, whereas in the AS Foundation Portfolio it was far more reserved in it's use, being on only used to create a logo for my video (done through initially through free-form drawing and the paint bucket tool, later redone with the rectangle shape tool and inverting the finished image). For the creation of the DigiPak and advert, I had to get to grips more with the use of Photoshop for image manipulation purposes, this was primarily to give the screen grabs from the music video to make them more in line with what is typical of the punk genre in terms of what is commonly used on DigiPaks and adverts. I did this by adding noise to the images on the DigiPak to give them a distressed look that is a convention of album covers from the punk hey day of the late '70s and early '80s on album covers such as Dead Kennedys "Fresh Fruit For Rotting Vegetables" and X "Los Angeles", while on the advert I used the image filter to give the images a "cutout" look that again is in keeping with the conventions of the genre. The only real problems I had with Photoshop was when I was trying to design a sticker for the DigiPak, which was more due to my inexperience with the software.
CamStudio is a display recording software that was used for Question 4 of the evaluation, I had no previous experience with this software, being a portable piece of software it allowed me to move it around on a portable flash drive to record myself using Adobe Photoshop and Premiere. The software was generally easy to use, however it had a tendency to crash when used on the portable version, especially on videos that exceeded 10 seconds.
For recording audience feedback via anonymous online surveys, I originally used FreeOnlineSurveys.com, which was quick, easy to use and had good analysis tools. Although, I had to switch to using SurveyMonkey after it became apparent that after ten days of free service, the feedback became locked on FreeOnlineSurveys.com. SurveyMonkey did the same job and me to get feedback from a wide cross section of people.
YouTube is a large online video hosting platform, I used it to host my music video given that it is the most popular site for viewing music videos according to my audience feedback. I also used it to host the other videos I created for my research and planning pieces and for my evaluation, with it's large database of videos it became allowed access to other videos that I could take inspiration from and use as examples. As a hosting site for my videos I had little problems using it, the only real problems I had with it were the fact that at times uploading took far too long, or it would require the same video to be uploaded twice as it had undergone a problem at some stage of the upload.
My project itself was hosted on Blogger.com, a creative blogging site that I had used previously regarding my AS Foundation Portfolio; the format is easy to use, almost operating like an online version of Microsoft Word with less formatting options (unless you format in the HTML), which isn't a bad thing. Uploading images is pretty quick and embedding off site content is pretty simple; the only problem is that at times when an image is uploaded it can take awhile to format it properly. Another positive of the web app is that it allows my teacher to view my project progress in real time, allowing him to make sure that the project is up to date.
Prezi is an online application that allows the user to create a free form presentation, the site allows you to add text and embed multimedia and present it in a manner that the user sees fit, with the slides moving across fluidly and allowing you to add and take slides without much hassle. I had used this website before during my AS Foundation Portfolio and I haven't had any problems with it, apart from it having a tendency to crash after using it for long periods; I mainly used this to present research into music video generic features and Digipaks.
No comments:
Post a Comment