An RMIT media student reflecting and blogging on her experiences at uni, on making and learning.

I had a good reason to miss it! I was on a shoot today that wrapped at about 8 pm. I’m on sound again, and it’s really very stressful.

I was rather bummed at having to miss seeing everyone’s films completed. In the last few weeks, it seemed as if there was no shortage of Film-TV students to be found in the edit suites, either fine-tuning some already great works, or frantically making last minute alterations. As for ours, I hope it was well-recieved. I am proud of it in the end, even though we had technical difficulties along the way. It certainly hasn’t put me off making documentaries in the future, which is probably a triumph! I just need to learn to get over  my shyness and start approaching people if I know I have a good story.

Of course, Cassie, Celine and Alene were invaluable and great to work with (if we didn’t get ourselves sidetracked by youtube – a very real danger when you spend any length of time underground in the edit suites!). I hope I have the opportunity to work with them in the future.

As I didn’t get to see all the doco’s screened tonight, I’m going to talk about the two that I saw very close to completion, if not already completed (when I saw them last, both groups told me they need minor adjustments – I didn’t see how, but we’re all so picky about our own films.)

First is the documentary that I believe was officially titled ‘Karl’ by Lincoln, Jason, Kieran and Charles. The basic concept it looking at the story of Karl, who late in his life, decided he wanted to be an actor. Karl is such a character, that it’s hard not to love this film. The opening scene in which he plays different characters, all talking about himself, is hilarious, and even though it’s him, and he’s showing off his acting,  Excellent use of cutaway footage, nice clear sound – this is a really enjoyable short doco.

And then there is Mel, Alex, Maddie and co.’s doco about the group of deaf dancers (apologies that I cannot think of the name right now) – I think choosing to focus on three dancers for their story was a smart move – too many people and the film would have seemed crowded and less personal. The use of sound I figured would be very important from the start, and I completely agree with the choice to use subtitles rather than voice over. We watch the screen then, rather than listen, and we can still see the way they use their hands to talk, even though we’re still reading. The music was the perfect compliment.

Well, short reviews and a rather short post to wrap up Film-TV 2. I’m hoping I get a chance to watch many of the other films as well (so far I’ve only seen bits of others – not enough to do them justice, and even the two above I haven’t seen in a few days). And like I said above, I hope to be participating in more doco’s in the future!

Woohoo! It’s not that I don’t like shooting (it’s probably my favourite part of the filmmaking process) but after recording sooo maaaanny interviews it’s a bit of a relief to be done!

But now it’s time to edit. Less woohoo.

After at least a week of capturing and trying to arrange footage into some semblance of a rough/fine cut, I am reminded that it was not my destiny to be an editor. Which is a shame when it comes to this point in our project, because as we were told by Liam, the editing process is really where a documentary comes together. I mean, sure, editing can be just as creative in a fiction film as well, and is an extremely important part of the process (bad editing can equal a bad film) but at least you’re not really trying to create a story in a fiction film. You already know where the plot is going, so you have some kind of inkling which way you will be editing. In documentary, you could very well still be working out what your story is – and we are (working out our story).

So remember when I was losing it the other day over the fact that the mixer wasn’t working for me? It turns out is was most likely the return settings on the camera. My group went out to record another interview with Simon (which I sadly couldn’t attend as it was very last minute and I had to be at Studio A), but unfortunately the sound is unusable for that – completely distorted and horrible sounding. It was the same thing I was hearing on the mixer the other day when I said ‘Stop! We can’t do this!’ but this time it wasn’t picking up on the mixer. The unfortunate thing was, Alene and I had tried to adjust the audio settings on the camera and nothing was happening. Maybe we were just noobs…oh well. For the other five interview, our sound is fine (Charlie’s is a bit soft, but I was being cautious and we can bump it up).

One thing I can say about this whole experience, is that it hasn’t put me off making any more documentaries. In fact, there is one that I want to try to make, but I need my own camera and sound gear first….

Okay, so I’ll give you a chronological order of events.

Friday afternoon – suddenly we realise we don’t have a car to pick up the tracks, dolly, dedo’s, kino, camera, mixer, shot bags and c-stand that we had booked. Eh oh. Frantic call to my mother (who is on holidays at the moment) and she came into the city with the hire car we currently drive after a tree fell on both of ours.

Saturday morning – My Dad took me and the equipment back into the city, and we parked in Franklin St (the closest parking we could get to RMIT, and it wasn’t that bad). Before I started to unload the equipment, I went up to Bld. 8, level 7, to check that my student card opened the studio we had booked to film our interviews/performative  b-roll footage. We had filled in the forms and had our security access updated a couple of weeks earlier, and received the confirmation email. Our cards should have opened the doors. They did not. I texted Cassie, Alene and Celine and we agreed that we should move the equipment to building 9 while we worked out what to do. Quick call to Liam and he tells us to call security to let us in, which is what we did. Then the epic journey that was moving the equipment from one building to another began. Only three of us could do it, because one of us at least had to remain in the studio at all times, or we wouldn’t be able to get back in.

So, after the drama of getting the equipment in and set up, by one o’clock (ish) we were able to start shooting b-roll footage. It went pretty smoothly after that. All of our interviews were scheduled for Sunday. We wrapped around four, moved the equipment to Alene’s car (who lives right near uni) and left, agreeing to meet at ten the next morning.

Sunday – we get the security to let us in, and move the equipment up in quick and orderly fashion. We set up the tracks and the dolly (very exciting and we got some nice looking footage), and in the morning we got two really good interviews. We then broke for lunch, and basically just relaxed a bit. The day was going smoothly.

Spoke too soon.

After lunch and around three, our next interviewee showed up. I connected the mixer to the camera, same as the morning, put the headphones on, and all I could hear, was horrible, horrible static. I had not been freaked out like that for ages! I asked for the second cable, to connect to the mike, but it didn’t change a thing. It wasn’t just happening on the camera return, because when changed the setting I could still hear static. I changed the batteries, still nothing. We tried everything we could think of, even running the mike straight into the camera, but we weren’t picking anything up and couldn’t adjust the audio settings for some reason. Whether the technology failed us, or we somehow failed at technology, I don’t know. This morning we told the techs about it, and they checked the mixer, and it sounded fine. Which is what happened yesterday really. I did nothing different in the afternoon to what I had done in the morning, and good sound failed us. I also knew that if we recorded the interview anyway, it wouldn’t do us any good. It wasn’t the headphone jack. A few weeks ago we took the camera and mixer out to record b-roll around the city, and I heard the same static. At the time I put it down to the headphone connection, because there was no indication on the audio levels that there was a problem, but when we digitised that footage, we had the same static on tape.

GRRRRR!

But, things happen, so we got any kind of cutaways we could of our last two interviewees. We are strongly considering the possibility of simply recording an audio interview with them rather than getting the camera out again. Thankfully, our two morning interviews are perfectly fine and usable. We played them back (yes, we know playing them back isn’t recommended but we had to check) and they sound fine.

If, when we digitise them tomorrow, the opposite is revealed, I may just break something.

If your cuts are jarring, first thing to check is the audio. Cutting a second before the visual cut to lead us into the scene can be a big help.

Well, yesterday we had our interview with Texta, and the day before we interviewed Hazel. I feel both went really well. I’m sitting in the edit suites watching the rushes right now, and they both sound good (nice and clear) and they both looked good visually. Hazels was in a studio, but we went to Texta’s home to film hers (as she was our main interviewee, we wanted her to feel as comfortable as possible – it was more convenient for her to be filmed at her house). Alene and I walked in and immediately turned to each other to say ‘Her house is so cool!’ We wanted to film everything, but the interview was the main thing we had to turn to. As we only had dedo’s with us for lighting, we set up the interview in the kitchen, near a window to utilise the natural light. Texta had told us previously she was worried about the light, and it was a little troublesome. The sun kept scooting behind the clouds (or more accurately, the clouds in front of the sun) and the dedo was only good for fill/backlight, but while we were having a heart attack everytime the light changed at the time, the footage looks nice in retrospect. Alene also had a little difficulty moving around the kitchen, because it was a narrow space, but again, the rushes look fine.

Hazel’s interview was set up in a studio at RMIT with a black curtain, and we used a kino and a dedo. I think it looks quite effective with the black curtain backdrop and this is where we plan to film the rest of our interviews. We have the studio booked for the weekend of the 1st and 2nd of October. We may be cutting it a little fine in terms of getting a fine cut ready for week 12, but we intend to get as much b-roll as possible before then, and possibly some interviews if we can squeeze them in. Alene also took some b-roll of Melbourne and China town a few nights ago. WE HAVE THINGS WE CAN TURN INTO A DOCO! I’M HAPPY!

Have to remember to calm down. We have an interview scheduled for today, and our main interviewee/subject, Texta, is scheduled for tomorrow. It’s all going to be fine. However, I’m once again reminded of how nerve-wracking documentaries are. I’m far more nervous than when we made our short drama/fiction last semester. On the other hand, I have an idea for my own documentary growing in my head. Gah!

In…..

…and out….

We will produce a documentary. I think we made the mistake of being complacent at the start of the semester. 12 weeks seemed a lot of time. Now it’s week eight and we were freaking out a little today. I don’t think any single one of us is to blame for that. It was the responsibility of all of us to remind each other and keep each other moving. However, trying to look positively, we have an interview prepared for Monday. Alene is out shooting some B-roll tonight. We have a shot list of ‘performative’ stuff taking shape. A weekend booked on the first and second of October. In between now and then we will be recording Texta’s interview whenever she is available. She is the main one I’d like to interview. Once we have her, I think we’ll have our documentary, whatever else happens.

Also, is it a sign of my frame of mind if I hear this cacophony of crows calling outside and I immediately run out the door in my socks to record them?

As I type this, I’m watching a television wildlife documentary called ‘Ocean Giants’, narrated by Stephen Fry and about, as the name might suggest, whales and a group of cameramen who go searching for them to film them. At one point, they go looking for Blue Whales, the largest mammal in the world, which they’ve never been able to film before, and they manage to get some brief glimpses of them. Members of research teams accompany them too, trying to make sense of the whale behaviour.

What kind of documentary on whales wouldn’t be complete without whale song?

Of course, there was some absolutely amazing footage of, what I think are, these absolutely amazing creatures. But without the sounds of the whale, the subtle movements of the underwater currents, the splashes as they breach, slapping their flukes on the surface of the water, this doco would have lacked a sense of depth. It would have been much more difficult to for the audience to immerse themselves in the doco, and really enter that world.

The use of sound in documentary is just as deliberate as the use of sound in fiction films. I’ve long since known of the importance of sound in creating an atmosphere or mood, and after today’s lecture my mind was buzzing with ideas for sound in our doco, particularly in regards to the use of silence. Sometimes silence can have just as much impact as a scene with lots of noise or music. I like the idea of alternating sound and image.

To finish off the lecture, we were played a excerpt from Chris Watson and David Attenborough in conversation. Chris Watson is D. A ’s sound recordist – he gets all the amazing sounds to go with the footage we see Attenborough’s series. The sounds that he has been able to capture over the years are absolutely amazing. When excerpts were played, Watson and Attenborough would turn the lights down, allowing the audience to totally immerse themselves in the soundscape. I myself closed my eyes to better hear/feel the effects.

On Wednesday, Alene, Celine and I met up with a guy called Jonathan to have a coffee and do a kind of pre-lim interview for our doco. He was a friend of a friend of Alene’s and we arranged to meet him at Fed Square. Celine and I got there first, and we soon realised we had no idea what he looked like and didn’t know how to recognise him. I was fiddling with the recording levels on the H2 zoom I’d brought and Celine was just about to message Alene for Jonathan’s number when a guy walked past on his phone saying ‘Hey Alene, it’s Jonathan’ – Celine leapt up to catch him so fast I’d barely had time to register he was our interviewee. When Alene got there we headed off to a little cafe to have our ‘interview’ with him. He was friendly and happy to answer questions. He was quite positive about his experiences and said that even though he was aware of racism existing, he hadn’t had  a lot of experience with it personally. I have a half hour recording on my computer right now, waiting to be (possibly) cut down. There was a lot of background noise in the cafe, so while what Jonathan said was really worthwhile I thought, we might not be able to use it. Still, he seems like he’d be happy to talk to us again on camera if we decide we’d like to.

My main concern now is that we nail down what we want for the visual aspect of our documentary – audio is fine and obviously quite important, but if we want to have this performative then we need to get that out of the way ASAP. We should probably pick a weekend to film the visuals we need (minus an interview footage, we are arranging those around the availabilities of our subjects) and just go and do it! Still, I feel much more calm knowing we have Jonathan on board and some form of content actually recorded.

Alene made the note that some of the questions that we asked were a little bit leading – we want to try and stay as neutral as possible (difficult as it may be at times – I didn’t really notice,  focused as I was on the Jonathan’s answers). I suppose this relates to the whole ethical dilemma that we could possibly face as well – we don’t want to force our interviews to say something they don’t want to. As I said before, Jonathan was pretty positive/neutral about the whole thing, and I’d like, if we include his part, to allow that to come across in the final cut and stay true to what we were saying. It was incredibly nice of him to take the time to come and speak to us, and it’d feel wrong to twist his words in any way shape or form. I know that that’s how the rest of the group feels too, its simply a matter of paying very close attention to how we edit the film together.

I’m doing some work with the year 12 VCAL class at my local high school (the same high school I attended in fact) who are making a sort of guide to the school DVD for ESL students – they provide the material, I’m sort of advising and editing it together for them. But that’s not what this post is about, I’m just providing context. The teacher of the class also teachers a year ten elective called ‘Writing for Film and TV’ (its technically an english elective). Now, I did this course in year ten – we looked at a few scripts, wrote our own and then pitched the idea for a show to a class. The course seems to have evolved for a bit, because now they read scripts for film and TV, look at film reviews and they are going to start looking at documentaries too. The teacher asked me if I had any documentaries to recommend for when it came to ‘writing’ them.

Interesting question.

I felt the urge to try and summarise the whole of my “True Lies: Documentary Studies” course in 50 words or less. All I could say was that I’d have a think, but that documentaries came in all different forms and that depending on the type you were going to make (whether it be an ‘observational’ style or ‘expository’ style) there would be more or less ‘writing’ involved. A lot of the times documentaries come down to research and the editing suite. Sure, some doco’s may have a script (historical doco’s came to mind) but I’d tell her I have a think.

A few hours later – epiphany!

Kevin Macdonald’s Touching the Void came to my mind as a good (and interesting) example for a year ten class. This film is basically a mixture of ‘talking head’ interviews and relies heavily on reenactments (at least 90% is reenactments from my memory). But it is a documentary that relies heavily on narrative structure, rather than pro-filmic events (things that the camera needs to capture ‘as it happens’). A lot of writing, planning and pre-production would have gone into this film, and they would have had a very clear idea of how it would come together in the editing suites.