multi camera essay

Multi Camera production formats TASK ONE


Multi camera productions are live performed shows which record within a studio using 3-4 cameras to capture the actors. Some of the first shows ever recorded used the multi camera technique and it is still frequently used today. Multi camera shows are mainly used for TV shows that contain a significant amount of episodes within a series, this is because multi camera productions are a much quicker and more efficient way of recording compared to single camera. They are more useful if a show has a tight deadline or has a higher demand. Examples are shows like Eastenders and Coronation Street which are soap operas and have 4 shows broadcast every week therefore they extremely high demand for shows. Attempting to produce this using single camera would take at least twice as long and therefore the schedule of 4 shows a week most probably wouldn’t be met.

Examples of shows that are famous for using the multi camera formats are
Mork&Mindy which was the first show to use 4 cameras on set instead of the usual 3, this was because of actor Robin Williams dramatic fast moving performance in which 3 cameras weren’t enough to capture him in shot. The second is The Tonight show with Jay Lenno- this is an ongoing chat show in which presenter Jay Lenno interviews famous people it is one of the most tuned into shows in America.

The difference between single and multi camera are quite evident. single camera shows are used mainly on more high budget projects and have a very in depth post production stage as all shots taken in single camera are require to be fully edited once filmed this makes the process a lot more time consuming and therefore requires a larger group of filmmakers at different stages of products. The end result is usually more of a professional standard than multi camera as more time and detail will have been added. Multi camera shows are used when a show requires a speedier production and performs a lot of aspects of post production during filming which speeds up the production extensively. During filming a multi camera there is a vision mixer who cuts between shots as the performance is taking place, compared to doing so once the shots have been recorded. This saves going through footage and choosing which to use in a scene as you would in a single camera production. the end result means shows are produced more quickly and the acting seems more fluid as it is filmed live.

Chat shows are known for using the multi camera setup and for good reason, they follow a similar set of codes and conventions. Chat shows follow a simple yet affective plan for each show mainly filmed in front of a studio audience who are filmed clapping and laughing as the show progresses, the presenter will walk to a center camera and address the audience about what they will expect to see through the show. for example the Jonathan Ross show will begin with this format but will include clips for new bulletins or other popular media happens and use it as a jumping off point to start a small discussion as part of a comedy act. When a guest is brought out there is a transition between cameras which usual have one facing the presenter, one on the guest who could walk in and sit down and one on the audience to capture their reaction.








Multi camera productions are also used frequently to film quiz shows, the multiple camera setup acts much like it would in a chat show with one camera primarily faced at the quests and two more on the presenter and audience. Two shows that are known for slightly changing this format are Never Mind the Buzzcocks which is a comedy panel quiz show and the weakest link which is a general knowledge quiz show. Never mind the Buzzcocks has one guest presenter along with 4 guest comedians or musicians there are two regular panelists. The camera work is very dynamic as there are people on both sides of the set which must be captured, furthermore there are in show games which bring out more guests to stand before the panels this requires a camera to move position completely in order to capture all the guests as well as the panels.
the show is known for bringing on celebrity guests who move around a lot during the show and get out of their seats this means the cameramen have a harder job capturing the whole show and keeping it seeming intentional because sometimes they have to improvise shots. 



The weakest link on the other hand is much more static show with a very different layout to most other quiz shows, there is a presenter in the center of the stage and a number of guests surrounding them. This means the cameras have to almost film the stage 360 degrees around. The lighting is very specific and is used effectively to hid camera peering into shot. There for the weakest link is a much more complicated technical achievement than Never Mind The Buzzcocks. The show also begins with all the guests in place there is no introduction in which guests arrive onto the set this is similar to Never Mind The Buzzcocks. The Weakest Link has a regular presenter whereas never mind the Buzzcocks has a guest presenter every show.







The weakest link starts with all of its contestants in a common room talking whilst music is played over. This is presumably made to seem as if it is back stage. The cameras cut between the contestants as they prepare to take part in the show. The title sequence then starts to roll which will be pre made for the show. once the title sequence is over there is a static mid shot of the presenter Anne Robinson who appears on the screen explaining the premise of the show, the camera then zooms out to reveal a dark set which is lit in the center where the presenter is stood with all contestants in place the camera zooms even further back and looks down on the set. Then the vision mixer cuts too another camera on the floor which crabs from the left to the right as Anne Robinson further explains the show she follows the camera as it goes. There is a light facing towards the ceiling behind each contestant, who can be seen behind the presenter as the camera crabs. There is then a cut to the camera looking down on the set as the lights all dip and go out momentarily. There is then a mid shot of the first contestant who is dramatically and suddenly lit from behind, the camera sharply pans to the left to reveal each contestant in the same ways who all introduce themselves. There is then a quick change to another camera which is on a close up of the presenter, then a swift change to another camera which is crabbing around the set to capture everything

Andrew Sharp

fmp task 1

Documentaries are designed to give an audience a hands on look at a specific subject, question, conspiracy or anything that has enough potential to be debated about. It is important that once an idea has reached the point where it has enough interest to make a documentary about it that the facts are correct. there's nothing worse than reporting on a massive topic and getting all the facts wrong, if a viewer with enough of a back catalogue of knowledge on the subject hears a false piece of information then they will be switched off and pick further holes in the documentaries also as most documentaries are mainly aiming to get across one point of view it is important not to be too bias towards your point. There should be a balance of information towards and for a point of view or the documentaries becomes too one sided. I chose three documentaries to explore these points:

Super size me
Super size me is a documentary were veteran documenter Morgan Spurlock embarks on a 30 day experiment in which he must eat nothing but McDonald's for breakfast lunch and dinner. This is a test in response to an enquiry by the MacDonald head office that there is no proof that if someone were to eat a McDonald's meal everyday that they will have increased health issues. the primary objective of the documentary is too see whether or not someone would suffer from increased health issues if they ate nothing but McDonald’s every day. The documentary starts off with a brief overview on the current situation of obese Americans. They explain that 1 in 4 Americans is obese which is equal to half the adult population of the USA. points are discussed in a voice over as to whether or not this is caused by the fact McDonald's in vast supply across America or that people are not properly looking after themselves and eating food which they should know is bad for them. While there is a balance between the two points of views there is still an overall feeling that the documentary is against the fast food restaurants. this is too be expected as the main objective of the documentary is too clearly see if fast food is ultimately bad for you in long term.

The documentary follows Morgan as he records his health during his experiment. He begins by going to a number of specialist doctors (cardio vascular, dietician e.t.c) to record his health before starting his 30 day binge. the reason to use Morgan is a fair choice because the doctors all agree he is in 'perfect health' for someone his age which means any changes will become clear and will more clearly allow people to see the damage that can be done. In cutaways when the voice-over explains more about the back story to the matter of McDonalds being unhealthy there are several shots of obese people synced in time with the voice over. This makes the impact of what is being said even greater, it gives the viewer visual evidence to help sway towards the side that the documenter is on. this method also can exsadurate the point so that you are even more convinced by what you are hearing, though as far can be told there is no false information given during these scenes. The documentary stays true to its fair test as the results are given at the end of the experiment and the host gives his own opinion as to what he feels about the subject. He tries hard to recognise both sides of the argument but ultimately he wins over one side by proving that McDonalds does in fact increase health issues which tips off the documentary as a success to proving a point.



Loose change (2^nd edition)
This is a critically acclaimed documentary which attempts to piece together the events of September 11 2001 (911) and argues that the attacks that took place on 911 were planned by the American government. It was made by Dylan Avery who is an American filmmaker that has long been questioning the events of September 11 2001 he spent 2 years collecting the evidence he needed to make his documentary.
The documentary explores its point of view with archive footage from news reports, phone camera videos and interviews. Dylan Avery acts as director and also provides a constant voice over with the help of his footage to explain his points. With the voice over pointing out certain things you are obligated to believe what you see, for example if there is a video of a man being interviewed the voice over might mention that they are lying because of their expressions, you may feel forced to believe this because the voice over is the only guide you have. Though the evidence is thorough and correct, there is not a fair balance between the two points of the argument, the documentary is solely intent on their side of the argument. The information is thrown at you with hard research to back it up however there is not much mention to how people who disagree feel on the subject. There are quotes and interviews of people disagreeing but they are made to look foolish as if they are lying or hiding something through what they are saying. This represents anyone who disagrees as either foolish or a liar, it is not a fair way of represent the other side of your argument because both points of view are not equally explored. There is however a good balance of objective and subjective information throughout the documentary.

The documentary has small animations which show typed quotes from people, a variation of both people in government and the public. There are several interviews of people giving their opinions and thoughts on different aspects such as whether or not the towers collapsed from the damage of the planes or from controlled explosion from within the building. This is a very subjective aspect of the documentary which gives it a sense that the information is not just based on what the documenter feel but how a number of people are also involved. Though there are several versions of this film and many recut versions the primary subjectivity that the 911 attacks were emitted from the US government stay the same.


Punks not dead
This documentary is about the argument that true punk is not as popular in modern culture as it was in the late 80s and early 90s. It explores the history of how punk came to be with the small rebellious cults to worldwide trends in music fashion and mainly attitude and representation. It was directed by Susan Dynner and includes archive footage from bands and interviews it also has interviews recorded especially for the documentary with some of punks biggest stars. The documentary really gives you a firsthand look on how the influences of punk feel about the genre. The use of such a-list stars of punk such as Billie Joe Armstrong from green day makes you feel like you are hearing a genuine opinion from a professional it really helps you trust the documentary to report on the right things. The interviewees speak about how the phenomenon grew by going into depth about how the media reacted. There are interviews from bands that started punk such as the Ramones and also bands who are considered to be ‘carrying the torch’ of punk into the modern world such as green day, sum 41 and my chemical romance. This gives a certain balance to the documentary as you are hearing two points of view from two different types of sources who will bring the argument forward and get more of a debate going.

The documentary also argues that the real threads of punk thrive off the American retrospective and that punk should be embraced and even savoured because it has become a blueprint to the world we live in today. This is explored through both public and media attention with on the street interviews with members of the public on how they feel about punk in modern culture. The documentary tries hard not to be bias and identifies that there is a very two sided argument to what they are disusing for it is widely known that punk is disliked by a lot of people just as much as it is liked. The objectivity is clear that punk should be seen as more of a ‘way of life’ rather than a rebellion but it is such a two sided argument which brings in a large subjective aspect to the matter. All people are represented as normal people who are simply stating a point, this is deliberate as the documentary is trying to play on the fact that punk is indeed a way of life. Though the documentary also balances things out by showing the ugly side to punk which is primary the statement that it is a rebellion against the government. There are shots of riots and children swearing which is the stereotypical way that punks are portrayed in the media. There is a huge presence of representation through the media with people slating that the government turn people against punks. The other side is that punk should be seen as a violent rebellion because of the way it changes people. These are all matters which are explored within the documentary and they are all represented with respect for both sides.


















By Andrew Sharp

my band MUSIC VIDEO

Acusator are a 5 member unsigned band from southern England and hail from the town of Fareham, they have been in band for around three years and have had several public appearances in the Southampton and Portsmouth area. The venues in which the band has played live in front of an audience include clubs like the cellars and the joiners.  They are a thrash metal band who has released several songs on their Facebook and MySpace page which are avalible to download for free. They no long have drummer George Pickering (second from right) who has left the bad for personal reasons.

 

The band consists of:

. Bobby Brooks- vocals

. Michael Hanley- Lead guitar

. Alex Marsh- Guitar, vocals

.Simon Mcadden- bass guitar 

 

Acusator will be appearing in my music video to perform their first LP track ‘The pack’ which was released earlier this year and can be listened to on their official Facebook page.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

music video idea

My music video is going to be a series of shots of the band playing. The video will start off with a wide shot of a set within the studio, the band will be at the back of the set with guns in there hands as if they have just finished shooting. In the foreground there will be people lying on the floor pretending to be dead bodies. The band members will throw their guns on the floor and pick up their instruments, the camera will pan towards the band through the dead bodies on the floor, and the guitarist will start playing and eventually be followed by the other band members as the song kicks in. then the rest of the video will be various shots of the band performing the song, the cutting between band members vary at different points in the song to compansate the different instruments playing. for example there will be a close up of the guitarist when the guitar solo is playing. once the song has finished the camera will pan back out following the same path it did for the intro and the people on the floor will pretend to come back to life as if they are zombies reanimating. the band will put down there instruments and pick up the guns again as if they are about to fight off the zombies, the camera will then dip to black and te video will end.

the video will be very dark in colour and will reflect the forboading sense that the song gives you as you listen to it. this will be acheived by having a black painted set and have very sharp lights on the band.

Multi Camera Evaluation

Multi Camera evaluation                                                                           Andrew Sharp




Talk show: Paranormal investigators
Our first show was a paranormal based discussion/talk show in which we had a professional medium come on the show to talk about her experiences. the show started with our host (Scott) introducing the basis of the show and then introducing the first guest  The show had a set which was split in two to accommodate a walkway in the centre in which our host and guests would walk through. There was a raised platform towards the back of the set in which a number of guests were placed who volunteered to speak out about their own experiences e.t.c. the set design was very well done on such short notice for our original plan didn't work due to a lack of material. The end result was a very dirty, grimy looking wallpaper with cobwebs and stains on the wall to make it seem more like a haunted house or just generally something creepy to suit the theme of the show. The set was designed by georgie mould who thought of the idea of using tea bags and ripped wallpaper to give the set its grimy look which worked extremely well in my opinion.

we had a bit of a tight schedule due to the change in idea late on so we had to work fast especially with booking a guest onto our show, we needed someone that we could consider a professional to come on and talk about paranormal activity for it is a rather loose subject which is subject to conspiracy. after several rejections and 'thanks but no thanks' replies from various local mediums and exorcists we finally booked our professional medium gilly H who was more than happy to come on and talk on our show. The pre production stage was a bit all over the place, we had debates over who was doing what but eventually scrapped a fair share of work between us (sort of). We then filmed a pre-recorded segment which would be put into our show which was a film of 8 people going on a 'ghost walk' around Royal Victoria Country Park which is supposedly haunted. The second pre recorded segment was our opening title sequence which was pictures of our guests and host edited into a background with the title eventually emerging at the end.

On the day we had between 2-3 rehearsals which all went relativity smoothly and we were confident that our show was ready. We all knew what our roles were, mine was a camera operator my job was to follow the host and capture his performance throughout the show. I didn’t have an incredible amount to do but I feel like I did enough to earn my PASS grade. The actually show itself didn’t run as smoothly as we would have hoped due to our V Ts not projecting properly causing us to retake a few shots. The show was an overall success and everyone agreed that we did well considering our late change of heart to do a paranormal based show. Our director very deservedly revived a Distinction grade; she was calm and reserved but was also very clear to what she wanted.


Improv show: Think fast

For our second show we knew straight away that we needed to have an idea and stick to it. We threw around a couple of ideas to start with for example me and Seb had the idea of a movie quiz based show and a couple others. we eventually decided that we would like to do an Improv based show due to the interest Tim had in a show called 'Thank god your Here' which puts people into scenarios in which they have to make up a character on the spot and be as funny as they can be. we had a clear early vision which was a high and I decided to take up the mantle as director for Tim wanted the role as floor manager (he was first choice as director) we had a lot of meeting to discuss mainly the set design of our Improv show, we had the idea to have several sets within our show which would be sectioned off into three or four. We decided to have two sets with a walkway through the middle so that our host could come through the centre and then when it was time for the first scenario the cameras would track over to the left or right to capture the action. We knew what improvisers we wanted as seb who does acting at the local theatre suggested them and stressed that they would be a good choice. 

we had a bit of controversy when I made the decision to step down as director for I didn’t feel like I had a good grip on the concept of the show and didn’t have the drive to boss people about and overlook everything that's going on. This was entirely my decision and we quickly discussed it together and georgie took up the role of director and we had a good few days of intensive work done in which need catching up on. We then had another issue when I couldn't reach our actors and we had no other actors to play the scripted parts. Shortly after our designated painter dropped out meaning we had yet another thing to sort out. We had too many meetings and didn’t focus on what really needed doing. We had a lot of conflict between us and didn’t talk and some of us didn’t show up to college which messed up the show for most of us. We had a big heart to heart meeting to discuss what had gone wrong, this did temporarily cause even more falling out between us but we just gritted our teeth together and got on with it. The threat that our show would be pulled if we didn’t produce it in two days really got people to start working together again.

The show itself was so by the skin of our teeth that it can only be seen as a work of art. i had the tricky job of lighting and sound so I was busy and effectively didn’t stop for two days. i had a pretty solid lighting plan for our show which required a quite complex format because I had not only to light one set but three all at different points in the show. On top of this we had no time for a full rehearsal so the actual show itself was a big risk for me. Also on the sound side we had a problem with our lapel microphone (tie mic) for our host which were giving back too much feedback and eventually didn’t work. To accommodate this I had to set up a shot gun mic literally at the last minute to make sure we had some form of sound to compensate the lack of lapel microphones. We had a mic in the centre to capture the whole set which also meant we could hear what was going on in the gallery. The show was such a gamble and worked incredibly well it was just as good as we hoped it would be before we were put on the edge of being cancelled. I am very proud that we pulled off this very ambitious show and it is a huge bonus to hold the mantle as the lighting and sound operator on the best Multi camera show of the year.  

  

Razorlight Wire to Wire

i chose this video because it is a very symbolic one. it catches the serious undertones of the song with a clever execution.
.i filmed over a time period of 4 days with the addition of cgi in post production.

Press Pack evaluation

Press pack evaluation


For my press pack I did both a promotional poster and a behind the scenes magazine interview to help promote my thriller film. The reason I chose to do a poster is because it seemed like the best, traditional way to help promote a film. Also I had recently heard about minimalistic style posters which are simplistic designs with not much detail which is designed to tease the audience by showing an iconic image from the film. For example a poster for the popular ‘Lord Of The Rings’ films contained a yellow circle in the middle of a blank page which fans would immediately know as being the iconic ring from the films. I felt that the poster was the perfect style to what I imagined, a simple yet revealing poster that captures the imagination of the film within it. The font used was one I found from a website called ‘dafont’ which is a database of fonts of all shapes and sizes, it came in very useful when deciding what I want to use for my title especially. Ironically the font I used as the title was called distorted and of course the name of my thriller film is ‘Distortion’. The font was perfect aswell and captured the gritty look and mysterious feel that the film is all about.

I always had the intention to do a promotional poster for my thriller, On the other hand I didn’t always have the intention of doing a behind the scenes magazine interview though I was persuaded after analysing  couple of professional film magazines. As I discussed in task 1 of the assignment the magazine interview had to most of all look the part to be taken seriously. It had to have the correct layout in order to keep the reader interested and prevent them changing the page or becoming bored ect. The page needs to have the right amount of writing, in some cases it can be spaced out to make it look like less. My behind the scenes magazine interview contained a moderate sized amount of writing which ultimately took up a lot the page. It needed this to make the page more full and interesting. However it stood out a little bit too much on the page and possibly made it look too simplistic. Though the important part is the interview itself the layout and design are crucial to the success of the magazine.

The assignment on a whole was a useful way to promote my film, it helped me explore different ways in which you can promote a film and how they are done. I got to use the knowledge ive picked up from other films that have been promoted. Particularly when I discussed about how films use the internet and viral marketing campaigns to make little challenges for fans to promote a film. Viral marketing is a very interesting way of promoting a film because social networking sites and fan sites are so popular today its very to easy to keep interest alive. A good way of doing this is by doing the website for the press pack, though this is rather cliché when it comes to promoting a film. I didn’t do a website because it felt like all of the products would just be put into one department and it would act as a HQ for all the promotional attributes. It’s a better idea to use different types of promotional perks like a poster and a magazine interview because you can expand on just one area with all your perks in. the audio pod cast didn’t grab my interest either because were it is generally just a audio file you are limited to where you can put it and how your going to get people to listen to it, it seems like a long shot to put it on the internet because its unlikely to be found. The DVD cover design was possibly a good idea because it is similar to making a promotional poster, but with a little more detail, I decided to do a poster nonetheless because my new found fondness for minimalistic style posters. I did not do a video trailer because I like the whole secrecy surrounding the film which is reflected in both the magazine interview and most of all in my minimalistic style poster. All in all I am happy with the items I chose to do and I feel that they are a overall success