PROD!

• The distinct phases of production – What processes did you go through to make the video project? (pre-production, production, post-production) How did the video sketching process work/not work for you? How would you do it differently next time? What did you learn?

My production process began with viewing alternate online videos and sketching. I saw a Gotye video clip which particularly inspired me, and gave me the idea to integrate my interest in drawing with stop motion. I began by sketching various elements which jumped out to me in the poem to get a bit of inspiration. The idea of the eye which would ‘bleed habanero’ was a focal point for me and my ideas grew from there. I then proceeded to sketch story boards and compile shot lists to clarify by ideas. Following this, we shot the sketch which was a really great experiences for a couple of reasons – I became acquainted with shooting stop-motion, and the group realised that this form of 2-D stop motion was going to be considerably shorter than Mel’s shoot. As such, I knew there was great opportunity for me to implement other practices and mediums into my film. Following the Sketch shoot, there was a lot of organising and list making for the final shoot which, pleasingly, was a one day shoot. My post-production process became integarted with the final stages of my produciton, as after viewing the clips on a computer I realised I needed something interspersed between the clips. As such, Tom and I filmed title cards I’d written, containing prominent lines from the poem. I then proceeded to edit the clips and add sound/colour grade.

• A critical analysis of what you produced. What worked well? What did not work well? What has worked/not worked in relation to the translation of the poem and the poet’s intent?

I feel really pleased with the quality of the illustrated stop-motion. I feel the sequences in the film with the eye drawing and the rose painting were particularly successful. Similarly, I was happy with the way the title cards turned out and felt these added a cohesion to the piece which had not existed before. What I feel could have worked better was the way the brain sequences were shot. I think the brain aesthetically looks great, however I wish I had thought more strategically in terms of executing how the brain would fall, disintegrate, etc.

I feel happy with the integration of the poet’s intent with my own aesthetic and practice. As we were never able to contact our poet, the interpretation is entirely my own, but I feel honours the original work.

• An understanding of what you have been making in relation to the online video aesthetics being explored. What type of online video aesthetics do you think your video work explores? What other online video works are similar? How would you categorise the type of approach you used to make the video work? (animation, stop-motion, documentary, drama, hybrid etc) This inquiry should respond in some way to the readings provided.

My video work echoes the form of 2-D stop motion and illustration. I looked to a variety of online video aesthetics while composing my piece, including works using ink, cut-outs, illustrations and painting. In many ways I feel my video work was more inspired by the practice than the outcome, as I sought to integrate as many textures and techniques as possible to push commonly held conceptions of 2-D stop motion to a new level. I sought to achieve this by interacting with mediums which would give the piece a third element, in camera. Such practices included pastels, charcoal, ink/water, and unconventional camera angles.

• A personal description of how your practice has developed. What have you learnt as a media practitioner?

This experience was hugely challenging and rewarding for me. I knew little about stop motion prior to creating this video, and as such I was learning on the job. I felt really pleased that I was able to deploy my interest and skills in illustration, and bring this to an online video work. I found the experience fulfilling in ways which I have not experienced on any other project during my degree. It was incredibly inspiring to watch external video works and consider ways to integrate such practices into my own work. As such, I feel the experience has benefited me as a media practitioner, as I have developed methods to translate my ideas into my works, in a timely and costly fashion.

Further, I feel I’ve developed my technical skills. My understanding of cameras has changed, as has my post-production skills. I feel far more confident using Final Cut Pro and Adobe After Effects than I had before, and as such, this process was incredibly rewarding.

So yesterday Mel, Tom and I shot Video C in building 6 at RMIT. I tried to be as organised and prepared as possible as I was hoping for the video to be a one day shoot and didn’t want to let down the rest of the group should any unforeseen events arise. We decided to begin with shooting the brain scene as the lamb’s brain was currently sitting in a cool pack in my bag. I had planned for the the seen to unfold beginning with the head cut out and red drops running down it in the way of construction paper. I had cut out some red ‘blobs’ beforehand but had neglected to note that one second of footage is equal to 25 frames, and therefore the 7 cut outs I’d made weren’t going to cut it (pun intended). So we began by cutting out some extra blobs and decided it would speed up the process to have them overlap one another.

After shooting this, the head cutout would fall forward to reveal the brain behind it. I had brought a small container thinking we could prop the head cut out on top of it and sit the brain behind it, but the cut out was too small and therefore couldn’t hide the brain. This meant we again had to improvise, and ended up taping the cut out to the paper while poor Mel had to rotate the cut out by hand. We then faced the problem of giving the illusion that the brain was falling down the page. We opted for a ’sliding’ option where we dropped some ink behind the brain and moved it down the page in small, stop-motion increments. I stupidly picked up the brain to begin cutting it for the disintegration sequence, and then realised in stop-motion you cannot move ANYTHING. As such, we had to re-position the camera (and brain). We opted for an arial view and, to Tom and Mel’s disgust, proceeded to cut segments off the brain whilst mixing in ink. After the conclusion of this scene, everyone was ready to get out of the room for some fresh air and lunch.

When we returned back after lunch we shot the rose painting scene and the rose lifting scene. I was kicking myself after I began painting my pristine red rose with dark purple paint as it appeared black on camera and eradicated any sort of outline of the rose. Perhaps it will look better on the computer?

We then went to the eye drawing scene which was old hat after our sketch, but the ink running was new. I’d tested the ink running at home and was really pleased with the effect, but it was incredibly difficult to execute for the camera without any hands/shadows. We did the best we could with close ups and cirque du solei movements around the eye, as well as tested various ink drops so we would have options in editing.

By 3pm we called it a day! Apart from a few hiccups it was a fairly breezy shoot. I feel we all would have worked better had it been under different circumstances – it is difficult to be energised and motivated in the middle of an assessment period. Ultimately, the proof is in the footage..

Mel, Tom and I met today to discuss the shoot next week. As I’ve been preoccupied with other assignments due before the PROD video, I didn’t have much to update/show the group. As such, the meeting was predominantly concerned with compiling a list of supplies/equipment we would need for the shoot. Please see below:

Oct 28, 9am

To buy:

• brain
• off-white A2 paper x 3
• string
• scissors
• stanley knife
• fishing wire/regular wire
• different coloured paper (for head cut-out)
• foam sheets
• paint – red, purple, white
• knife (for brain)
• chopping board
• ink
• paint brush

To book:

• tripod
• dedo kit

To do:

• test brain
• cut out head (& red blobs)
• draw rose

To bring:

• food

As far as what I need to get ready before the shoot, I need to cut out the shapes for the head and drops, test the ink idea, test the brain idea, and draw a rose which can be coloured in. I’m feeling a little overwhelmed but the fact that our Sketch shoot was really quick makes me think that the illustrated portion of the video will run smoothly, and therefore we’ll have time for any hiccups/more time consuming segments.

So today in class we showed my video Sketch. I felt the feedback was fairly positive, for me personally I feel the movements are a little too quick so for the final shoot I would like to draw smaller segments at any given time so the product will include more frames. Seth likened the illustrations to Ralph Steadman and suggested I look to his work for some inspiration/ideas. I hadn’t thought too much about the sound yet, I had a piece in mind but it is copyrighted so I’ve known I’d have to find something else. Seth suggested I could use voices which would act as a soundtrack as well as commentary, which I think is an interesting idea but not sure if it will be in keeping with the aesthetic that I had in mind. That said, I am planning to test out a few tracks and see what works best. Similarly, I haven’t really thought too much about integrating the lines of the poem. In my head, it’s all visual without words. However, once I shoot the piece I feel it may need something extra, or integrating title cards could lengthen the piece if that becomes an issue.

We are planning to shoot a week from next Friday (October 28th), and I am hopeful the shoot will just take one day. Prior to shooting, I’m going to need to buy and test some more art supplies, as well as test the lamb’s brain idea. Aside from that, I just need to book equipment and work out a shot list to ensure we move as efficiently as possible on the day.

1. Blog at least once a week

I was generally able to maintain this criteria. Due to the nature of PROD, the videos were predominantly self guided between check points (ie sketch due dates, video due dates). In light of this, our group worked at a pace that was convenient for us, which sometimes meant not meeting every week. Therefore, some weeks I did not have too much constructive feedback to blog about. However, I did attempt to maintain an influx of information via online videos I found inspiring etc.

2. Attends and is punctual for group meetings

I attended every group meeting I was able to. Unfortunately, with Mel’s video I was unable to shoot the sketch as I was working and was sick the weekend of the shoot so was unable to participate for circumstantial reasons. However, I attempted to maintain communication with my group via the group Facebook page, independent research, etc.

3. Completes independent work assigned by group

I feel I was successful in this criterion. I assisted as much as possible with my group’s project, and when it came time to produce my video I ensured I had all the equipment (ie drawing utensils, paper) and theoretical framework (story boards, referential media) necessary to create the work.

4. Actively contributes to group members’ projects

As aforementioned, I was unfortuantely unable to assist with much of Mel’s work, however I attempted to rectify this by becoming more involved with Tom’s video. I also sought to maintain a dialogue with my group members via the group Facebook page and through conducting independent research.
5. Endeavour to troubleshoot issues as a group to reach a conclusion everyone is happy with

Fortunately, within our group we didn’t have any major issues which needed to be attended to. The group was predominantly on the same page and supported one anothers’ work and creative vision. However, we all made concerted effort to collaborate on our respective videos and make suggestions on ways to improve.
6. Practice self directed research into outside materials

I probably could have done more of this but when stuck for ideas or when looking to make suggestions to my group member’s projects, I did look online at sites such as YouTube and Vimeo, as well as watch past years’ PROD! videos for inspiration. Further, I endeavoured to maintain a visual diary where I could test out ideas and get inspiration.

What do you think you could have done better?

As aforementioned, in future I would hope I would be able to attend all production sessions. Additionally, I think I could have made more of a concerted effort to research independently and document this research. It may have been helpful to create a group blog where we could post these findings, as a lot of the time they ended up on our group Facebook page, which isn’t as easily accessible.

So today we shot the Sketch for Video C which is essentially my video. I know Mel and Tom were feeling a little anxious about the prospect of filming another stop motion film as Mel’s ended up being quite time consuming. We were all pleasantly surprised by how quickly the shoot went. Me and Tom had to leave by 12.30 and we were finished well before then. We filmed in one of the old rooms down the bottom of building 6, which is where Mel’s video was shot. We put a tripod on top of a table and rigged it so it was facing down, and i sat at the table drawing while Tom took photos. The only thing I found difficult was not making too long or quick a movement within one shot – if I moved too quickly, I risked my hand appearing in the frame, and if the segment I’d drawn was too long, it wouldn’t produce as nice an effect. That said, looking at the photos at the end of the shoot I was pretty happy with how they were looking but it’s still difficult to tell how it will appear once loaded onto the computer. I was really pleased with the product of Tom’s idea to alternate shot angles; I think the photos we took side on looked the best.

The main things I learned from the shoot was to do with equipment/medium. Today I just brought some coloured pencils, a black marker and some pastels. The pastels looked great on the screen but for the tear-drop I think some ink or watercolour which will run would look better, as well as add another dimension to the piece. Also, we forgot to book Dedo lights for this shoot and as such the images were coming out a bit shadowy/inconsistent. I’m going to try experimenting with some different mediums prior to the final shoot and hopefully we can integrate a few textures.

I was fairly unclear on the rest of the video until this morning when I had a brain wave. Tom suggested we could play with the conventional ’stop motion’ format by having elements fall out of the frame etc. I decided it would be interesting to have a cut out of a head fall forward with a brain behind it. Seth suggested I could use a real brain which I think would add a great element to the piece, which will otherwise be hand-drawn. I need to investigate lambs brains and see if using one will be feasible. Overall, I was really happy with how the shoot ran though and I’m hoping the final shoot will be as efficient!

• The distinct phases of production – What processes did you go through to make the video project? (pre-production, production, post-production) How did the video sketching process work/not work for you? How would you do it differently next time? What did you learn?
Seen our group decided to delegate each memeber a segment of the poem whom they would be responsible for directing, most of the production phases were orchestrated by Tom. Initially, I had a bit of difficulty understanding what exactly his vision was. He showed me some time lapse videos which he was inspired by which gave me an idea of how the forest would appear aesthetically, but I still struggled slightly to understand how the actors would fit into this.

In light of this, I think the pre-production phase shooting the sketch for this video was fundamentally important. Not only was it crucial for logistical reasons (i.e. understanding where exactly the shooting location was, how long it would take to get there), but also for collaborative. Seeing the site (R.J. Hamer Arbetorum) in person allowed me to better articulate the aesthetic Tom sought, and therefore allowed me to contribute more constructively. Additionally, the sketch was important for practical reasons, as we were able to test some of the effects Tom had brainstormed. This was paramount to the production of the video as we were able to figure out what wouldn’t work, what would look strong and what we would need to best execute such techniques (i.e. a bucket, a towel).

I really feel the final shoot wouldn’t have gone as smoothly without going out to the location to shoot the sketch. We felt so much more comfortable in the location, which is really important when directing actors, and it enabled us to create a more concise shot list, as we could envisage what sequences would be shot where. I honestly can think of little which would have improved the actual shoot. The actors worked really well together, we had a small but efficient crew, and the shoot ran really smoothly.

We left the post-production up to Tom but I felt like it was positive for Tom to request feedback after he completed a rough cut. While I appreciate the importance of remaining true to your own idea and aesthetic in creative endeavours, I also feel collaboration can be a really positive thing, particularly in editing. I know from personal experience that when you’re sitting with a lot of footage which you feel is all great it can be torture to make cuts. In light of this, I felt it was positive to have three people in our group so we could lend a critical and constructive eye when necessary.

• A critical analysis of what you produced. What worked well? What did not work well? What has worked/not worked in relation to the translation of the poem and the poet’s intent?
It is difficult for us to comment on whether this video is a true translation of the poet’s intent seen we were never able to be in contact with the poet, but I do feel this was a very effective collaboration of our vision with the poet’s. I know Tom was mindful not to make his appropriation to literal to the story, and for that reason I feel this video was very successful as it was a true melding of creative minds. I loved the way Tom was able to integrate the idea of time with visual components, and feel it was a great way of articulating an ‘Alice in Wonderland’ feel without being too literal.

I feel what we’ve produced is very innovative and has a clear point of view, which is fundamentally important when trying to create an experimental video. As articulated in a previous post, I think some more fine-tuning and colour grading will really lift the piece, but as a whole I’m really happy with how we were able to translate Tom’s initial vision into the finished product. Tom was really skillful with developing techniques to generate in camera effects which would be feasable, yet effective.

• An understanding of what you have been making in relation to the online video aesthetics being explored. What type of online video aesthetics do you think your video work explores? What other online video works are similar? How would you categorise the type of approach you used to make the video work? (animation, stop-motion, documentary, drama, hybrid etc) This inquiry should respond in some way to the readings provided.
I see this video as being a sort of documentary-experimental hybrid. The video was shot using essential non-actors in real locations, integrated with some real time footage (ie. time lapse, nature shots). In regards to online video aesthetics, I think the video is a really innovative exploration of video effects. I see online videos as a kind of tangible spectacle which grabs your attention in a very shot time span. I think we were able to successfully achieve this aesthetic using Tom’s creative approach to in-camera effects. Watching the video, you wonder how the effects were executed, and I think this level of involvement from the viewer is a vital component of online videos.

• A personal description of how your practice has developed. What have you learnt as a media practitioner?
I feel this video has definitely improved my technical competency somewhat, as I know Tom was kind of self-taught and learning as he went, which required me to undergo a certain level of education too. This video also opened my eyes to the benefits of thinking outside the box. Tom made a concerted effort to execute technqiues and effects which he knew were feasible in terms of his resources and time constraints. As a media practitioner starting out, I see this as an invaluable commodity.

Today in class we screened our second group videos. I knew Tom had been editing over the weekend and I had seen some of the footage from the shoot and the footage of the time lapse (which Tom had shot by himself on Saturday), but hadn’t seen it cut together until last night. I know from Tom’s perspective, one of the difficult practical aspects of the post-production for this video was that all of the shots which he wanted to reverse (which was quite a few), had to be rendered which took ages due to the quality of the footage.

Tom sent me a rough cut last night and I thought it looked great but gave him some ideas about clips which I thought could be cut. I know from past experiences it can be really difficult to edit footage when you’ve been sitting with it for so long, particularly when its footage which you feel is of a quality that you don’t want to cut. I felt like some of the edits in the video were too quick, and I felt one of the overarching criticisms of Mel’s video was that it was too short and you weren’t able to appreciate the work which went into the video. I advised Tom to make some clips longer and delete some altogether. For example, there were a few shots of Helena independently in one part of the forest, which were then intercut with shots of Ben from another part of the forest. I felt these clips were a little disorientating and detracted from the mood which was building towards the final scene. Tom was really receptive to my suggestions and when he sent me the second edit I really couldn’t fault it.

In class today I felt the reaction was mainly positive. I think external points of view felt the suspense of the piece could have been built even more, maybe by including more frames of pure black, or maybe by cutting or re-ordering footage. Another suggestion which I know Tom was already aware of was that the video needs to be colour-graded to make the whole thing feel a little more cohesive. All in all, I felt the criticism was really constructive and there wasn’t anything so negative that we would need to make drastic changes.

So yesterday we all got up bright and early to drive back to Belgrave to shoot Video B. The section of the poem required us to incorporate two actors, although we’re thinking of them more as models as there is no dialogue and we want them to remain quite anonymous. We recruited Tom’s brother, Ben, and Mel’s friend, Helena, as actors. We all piled into my tiny Honda Jazz and drove down at about 5.30 yesterday so we could ensure that we got some good light as we knew it was going to be a fairly sunny day.

Helena and Ben confirmed themselves to be ideal actors straight away, as we made Helena wear only a light sundress and Ben a t-shirt, while they walked barefoot up a hill in the national park. Mel, Tom and I were all rugged up in multiple coats as it was so cold, so I was in awe of how game both the actors were. We moved pretty swiftly through these establishing wide shots of the actors entering the forest.

We then moved further down into the forest for the leafy location, as we knew this area would get more sunlight than the pine tree area and we wanted to avoid sun exposure for as long as we could. Filming in this location required Mel and I, and occasionally Ben and Tom, to shower Helena’s body with leaves, pull leaves away, cover her in tree branches, etc as we attempted to manipulate the look of the leaves so it would appear that the forest was swallowing her up. Helena was such a good sport, her energy exceeded all of ours and she took great direction which made the shoot really fun and efficient. By about 10 oclock we were all feeling a bit hungry and seen we had gotten all of the leaf-related footage bar one shot, we decided to take a break for some food.

After this we went into the pine-tree forest to get the shots of Helena and Ben, or the male and female characters of the poem, interacting. As Tom wanted the characters to remain fairly faceless and anonymous, the embraces really just included a bit of hand holding and hugging while Tom panned around for some close ups. We then got shots of Helena pinned up against a tree as Mel and I prodded her with branches to make it look like she as being pulled away from Ben and taken prisoner by the forest.

After this shot we were pretty well done, we went back to the leafy part of the forest to get a couple more shots Tom wanted and were so happy that we had shot here first, as in the hour or so since we had last been there, so much sunlight was coming through the trees. Also, being at the location so early meant that we didn’t see any people until we were in the last half hour of shooting which was great, as we didn’t actually have permission to shoot at this location

The shoot went so smoothly and was really enjoyable, and I feel that was really a testament to the quality of the actors and our small crew. Everyone was in good spirits despite the fact it was early or we were tired and it meant the shoot was really efficient and we were on our way home by 11.30. I can’t wait to see the footage!