I've included a number of screen grabs that better explain our choices and methods during the editing process.
Our goal was to produce a film that represented the market at different times of the day, in order to do this we shot in this fashion to help us when it came to the edit. This meant that when we came to edit the first job was to select the best looking clips that also contained varying levels of action. Once we had a rough idea of the order we wanted the clips to appear we had to make the creative decision whether of not to make use of cross fades. Being that we hoped our film would appear to be one long journey through the market, initially we assumed that we would crossfade each clip so as lessening the juxtaposition between differing shots. Another reason we assumed this would be the best method was due to our research into Sea Change. Pedlow and King's use of quick dissolves works really well when changing time of day as nothing in the frame changes except the light, giving the transition a very natural feel. This was not the case with our film however, we soon realised that using a dissolve looked messy due to the frame completely changing shot to shot. It also felt like while it looks sloppy, it would have been the easiest way to transition and therefore felt a bit like a cop out.
Following the initial dismay at the realisation that our hopes for a continuous shot would be impossible to achieve, we soon realised that the use of a cut gave the piece more definition and form. We then found that the sometimes abrupt transitions were useful in giving the film a sense of pace. By using clips that contain customers then cutting them so that they 'appear' in the middle of the frame resulted in an interesting juxtaposition of movement; rather than the film getting boring and predicable after the initial tracks, it throws up surprises that grab the audiences attention.
These screen grabs above illustrate where I've used the combination of movement within the frame alongside the movement of the camera its self, cut abruptly to sustain pace.
A drawback to these abrupt cuts is that there are times where they work better than others. This is because it was very hard to put the clips in an order that worked in terms of portraying a rise and fall in people whilst at the same time getting the two clips to flow seamlessly when put back to back.
There are only two places I chose to utilise a dissolve. To introduce the piece, and the transition between the two last shots. We had filmed the lights turing off, a replica of the first shot only in reverse and it was this that we had suggested to end the film with. A repeat of the opening, going full circle in the journey through the market. I still like the idea however it was felt that it may have been to predicable. Instead, I cut all the footage from the begging of the clip of the lights turning down and start the shot with the lights already off. I feel this works better for two reasons, the first being as i have said, its less predictable to end the film with a static shot and asa result gives the ending more impact. Secondly, due to the symmetrical nature of the footage, there is always a central focal point that doesn't move and is never reached. This is opposed in the final shot as its the security guard thats centred and its him, not the camera thats moving. Its also suggested at this point that what the audience has just seen is the journey of this unknown character, satisfying in my opinion as it reveals some context right at the end and leaves the audience wanting more.
An aspect of the film that if I were do it again I would change would be the use of repeated locations at different times of day. The reason we didn't do this was due to the impractical nature of taking the track and setting it up in such a cramped and busy location. A lot of the shots we managed to get were during a two to three hour period, excluding those we shot between the hours of 3-5am. Despite this I feel we have a range of footage that does a good job to portray different times of day. Being the month it was when we shot the documentary, it got dark early, helpful being that the light changed dramatically in the space of an hour. This is evident in some of the footage, particularly when filming in the non-food areas of the market (below)
However, in the food market there is no natural light meaning that essentially the lighting is constant from the moment the main lights are turned on until they are turned off at the end of the day. This meant that the only way we were able to imply the time of day was through how many people we would allow in the shot at any one time. Filming quiet areas to use as early morning shots, then five minuets later shooting a busy area and suggest a new time of day.
Talking of repeating locations, we did use this technique once not that it's very noticeable as its not a technique we relied on. I wanted to include at least one comparison if for no other reason that to see if the audience would pick up on it.
The aspect of the film I'm most please with are the very styled 'Kubrick' tracks. As you can see in the screen grabs above we paid particular attention when setting up the shot that the central focal point was in the same place and that where possible the strip lighting matched up as well. It was crucial that we tried to match them up as it would give us a better chance for smooth crossfade transitions, as it is we abandoned that idea, still, it's the fact that all the shots are framed in the same way that enabled us to use a cut instead.
Our goal was to produce a film that represented the market at different times of the day, in order to do this we shot in this fashion to help us when it came to the edit. This meant that when we came to edit the first job was to select the best looking clips that also contained varying levels of action. Once we had a rough idea of the order we wanted the clips to appear we had to make the creative decision whether of not to make use of cross fades. Being that we hoped our film would appear to be one long journey through the market, initially we assumed that we would crossfade each clip so as lessening the juxtaposition between differing shots. Another reason we assumed this would be the best method was due to our research into Sea Change. Pedlow and King's use of quick dissolves works really well when changing time of day as nothing in the frame changes except the light, giving the transition a very natural feel. This was not the case with our film however, we soon realised that using a dissolve looked messy due to the frame completely changing shot to shot. It also felt like while it looks sloppy, it would have been the easiest way to transition and therefore felt a bit like a cop out.
Following the initial dismay at the realisation that our hopes for a continuous shot would be impossible to achieve, we soon realised that the use of a cut gave the piece more definition and form. We then found that the sometimes abrupt transitions were useful in giving the film a sense of pace. By using clips that contain customers then cutting them so that they 'appear' in the middle of the frame resulted in an interesting juxtaposition of movement; rather than the film getting boring and predicable after the initial tracks, it throws up surprises that grab the audiences attention.
These screen grabs above illustrate where I've used the combination of movement within the frame alongside the movement of the camera its self, cut abruptly to sustain pace.
A drawback to these abrupt cuts is that there are times where they work better than others. This is because it was very hard to put the clips in an order that worked in terms of portraying a rise and fall in people whilst at the same time getting the two clips to flow seamlessly when put back to back.
There are only two places I chose to utilise a dissolve. To introduce the piece, and the transition between the two last shots. We had filmed the lights turing off, a replica of the first shot only in reverse and it was this that we had suggested to end the film with. A repeat of the opening, going full circle in the journey through the market. I still like the idea however it was felt that it may have been to predicable. Instead, I cut all the footage from the begging of the clip of the lights turning down and start the shot with the lights already off. I feel this works better for two reasons, the first being as i have said, its less predictable to end the film with a static shot and asa result gives the ending more impact. Secondly, due to the symmetrical nature of the footage, there is always a central focal point that doesn't move and is never reached. This is opposed in the final shot as its the security guard thats centred and its him, not the camera thats moving. Its also suggested at this point that what the audience has just seen is the journey of this unknown character, satisfying in my opinion as it reveals some context right at the end and leaves the audience wanting more.
An aspect of the film that if I were do it again I would change would be the use of repeated locations at different times of day. The reason we didn't do this was due to the impractical nature of taking the track and setting it up in such a cramped and busy location. A lot of the shots we managed to get were during a two to three hour period, excluding those we shot between the hours of 3-5am. Despite this I feel we have a range of footage that does a good job to portray different times of day. Being the month it was when we shot the documentary, it got dark early, helpful being that the light changed dramatically in the space of an hour. This is evident in some of the footage, particularly when filming in the non-food areas of the market (below)
However, in the food market there is no natural light meaning that essentially the lighting is constant from the moment the main lights are turned on until they are turned off at the end of the day. This meant that the only way we were able to imply the time of day was through how many people we would allow in the shot at any one time. Filming quiet areas to use as early morning shots, then five minuets later shooting a busy area and suggest a new time of day.
 |
| Around 3pm |
 |
| Around 3.30am ^ You can see the problem. |
The aspect of the film I'm most please with are the very styled 'Kubrick' tracks. As you can see in the screen grabs above we paid particular attention when setting up the shot that the central focal point was in the same place and that where possible the strip lighting matched up as well. It was crucial that we tried to match them up as it would give us a better chance for smooth crossfade transitions, as it is we abandoned that idea, still, it's the fact that all the shots are framed in the same way that enabled us to use a cut instead.
No comments:
Post a Comment