Final pieces and our Conclusions.
November 16, 2011 § Leave a comment
13/11/11
These are our final pieces, apologies for the late post; we were waiting on the youtube upload of the videos:
The 2D edit:
The anaglyph 3D edit:
Now that our project is over, I feel it is worth reflecting on how it went and what conclusions it helped us come too about the future of 3D cinema. Referencing our learning agreement, I will analyse our completed piece and what we learnt during the unit.
We set out initially to create ‘a 30-45 second passive stereoscopic 3D short film that employed seldom-used themes and techniques within the realm of 3D cinema’ because we wanted to find out why 3D cinematography hadn’t become widely used in independent and/or guerilla filmmaking, and to a certain extent I feel we succeeded in doing so. Our final pieces ended up actually being longer than we predicted, as in the beginning we assumed 3D filming and postproduction would be a much more complicated process. I feel if we were to have had access to stereoscopic editing software and had the resources to create the perfect DSLR rig, then we would have had a shorter piece due to the more difficult nature of the filming and editing. Due to the fact that we were unable to access these things though (working with a single camera and anaglyph 3D – stated as our backup plan in our learning agreement), we were able to lengthen our piece, which I personally believe benefits the narrative.
In our piece we attempted to utilize a multitude of ‘seldom-used (3D) techniques’ whilst still ensuring these techniques would work well with the medium. An example of this is the main P.O.V shot mid way through the film; a shot technique which is seemingly rarely used in 3D cinematography, yet was shot with the intentions for it to work effectively within it. Due to these intentions, the shot worked successfully; utilizing the many planes of focus down the side of the building and making for a shot enhanced by the 3D (be it anaglyph) nature of the video.
I feel we portrayed our theme of ‘L’appel Du Vide’ very effectively through the narrative, shooting and postproduction of the piece, and I also strongly feel this theme compliments 3D. The narrative portrays the character’s compulsion and the increasing sound and transitioning between shots created in the editing stage enhances this. That said transitioning created in After Effects, is possibly the contribution I am most proud of within the post-production stage, as I feel it portrays the character’s rushing compulsion whilst being an effective way to enter his point of view (which I also feel was shot very well by Dec, complimenting our theme).
As briefly mentioned before, we were unable to create a dual DSLR rig for the shooting of our piece, but as a group we saw this as a learning curve towards discovering more about the accessibility of 3D to low budget/independent filmmakers. As we discovered, 3D rigs are only effective if made into a ‘Z-bracket’, that of which is incredibly difficult to create without professional help or little money. Due to this we experimented with single camera 3D, which was much more effective than our created rig. Whether this is the case when compared to an effectively constructed ‘Z-bracket’, we are unsure, but maybe the expense of creating dual DSLR rigs deter prospective low-budget 3D filmmakers. Also, Working with a single camera has the downfall of taking longer in the editing stage, another possibly deterrent to this filmmaking niche.
Also as previously stated, we did not get access to 3D editing software or a polarized 3D television. Due to this, we could only show our piece in basic anaglyph, removing a lot of the desired aesthetic. If we were able to re-do the project with access to these things, the final piece would be a much more successful one. However, once again we saw this as another realization as to why 3D cinema may not have reached an independent film-making market. Passive editing software and plugins, as we found out, are incredibly expensive, especially to a film-maker running off little money. The same is also true with 3D televisions, often reaching around £1000 for a high grade one. We feel that until the technology becomes cheaper and more widely available it is unlikely that proper, passive 3D will enter this area of cinema, and see the current costly nature of that technology a reason why it is yet to do so.
As for my own role, I am quite pleased with my contribution to the group. I initially intended on taking a producer role, but Alex ended up dealing with a majority of the producing tasks. This was not a problem though as I, much like everyone I the group, still had many active roles due to the large workload of the piece. Like stated in the learning agreement, I did take on some camerawork and editing roles and feel that contribution was beneficial, that is not to discredit anybody else however, as everyone in the group put a huge amount of effort in getting this project to work. The group worked very efficiently and successfully together, helping us creating a final piece that, despite not being exactly as we wanted it due to technological restraints, we were very proud of. Our collective efforts throughout the piece can be found on our group blog: http://3dfuturecinema.wordpress.com/
Finally, I feel it is worth talking about some of the feedback our piece was given, the things I would change if we had more time on the piece and what I learned during the creation of it.
Overall we were given positive feedback for our video, people appreciated how due to technology restraints we were unable to create a polarized piece, but liked the aesthetic of the 2D film and the concept of the 3D. The transitions in and out of the P.O.V were praised for the effectiveness of them, which was something I was quite proud of, and how the music enhanced the general feel of the piece was another point that was mentioned. We weren’t given much negative feedback on the piece, but there are a few things I would have changed if I could:
Due to the time restrictions and complications in the project, the editing stage was left until fairly late, meaning we had to settle with a couple of things which we may not have normally. One of these was the levels of the ADR (Additional Dialogue Recording) and how I feel a bit more time spent tweaking them would benefit the piece. I feel at points they are a bit too clear, too loud or not muffled/distant enough. Another thing I would change, is that due to only having one tripod on the shoot, some of the cutaways were handheld and a little shaky. In an ideal world we would have re-shot them but due to time restrictions this just wasn’t possible. I still feel the piece is successful even with these small flaws, and see the project as a valuable learning experience.
During the unit, I’ve learned a huge amount about 3D cinema; I’ve leaned about the many different kinds of 3D, the anaglyph editing process, the difficulties of rig creation and shooting, how to utilize planes of focus to create a successful 3D illusion, the different 3D editing software and the popularity of 3D in independent film and why it potentially is that way. Whether I decide to progress with 3D however, I am unsure of. We had a lot of trials, tribulations and headaches along the way in this project, so because of this, and in an odd, cyclical way, I can only see myself working in 3D again if the technology becomes more accessible to me.
The Editing Stage – 2D and 3D.
November 15, 2011 § Leave a comment
9/11/11
When we began on the editing stage, between us we made the decision that Me, Tommy and Dec would each take specific roles to divide up the editing equally and for the benefit of the film’s quality. As stated in a previous post, I took on the role of the first edit and 2D After Effects compositioning (Stage 1) as I have had a fair amount of previous experience with it, Dec took on the roles of titles and 3D treating the whole piece (Stage 3) as he had been working 3D throughout the project, and finally Tommy took on the role of ADR and colour correction (Stage 2) as he was the actor and knew the lines he would have to re-record and also had access to good grading software. We knew stage 4 of the editing would now not happen so we saw this to our advantage to spend more time creating stage 2 and 3 edits we would be happier with.
Before I began on stage 1 of the editing, I felt I should get in touch with a recreational music producer I’ve known for a very long time called Elliot Hurst. A lot of his music leans heavily towards the down-tempo, experimental, ambient spectrum, which would work perfectly with our piece. As he is only makes music recreationally, there is no copyright involved as long as we get his permission to use the music. I sent him a message asking if we could use a song called ‘Madwoman in the Attic’, as this is the one I felt (after discussions with the group, especially Marcus) would work most effectively. It is an eerie, ambient/experimental piece; sounding far more like a film score than a melodic song, but this is the exact feel we were striving for. He was happy to let us use the song in our project, as long as we gave him full credit and linked his YouTube/Myspace in the description.
Once we had a song we felt we could create a rough linear narrative draft to then develop on. With guidance from Marcus I chose basic shot length and order, displaying the rough narrative we intended to portray, making sure each shot we used would work well for 3D conversion. Once we had completed the offline edit and knew the order we wanted the piece to take, I moved on to creating the After Effects transition compositions.
These were probably the most long-winded part of my stage in the editing process, as AE compositioning is a much more intricate and complicated process than basic linear editing. I began by creating the in-to and out-of P.O.V transitions. It was mainly a matter of making the shot into the back of Adams head match up with his P.O.V over the edge, so I had to find a way of making the shot look as if the camera goes through his head. I did this by firstly cutting the two shots to the point they needed to match at and then subtly zooming into the black of Adams hat. I then very quickly faded into the P.O.V shoot, keyframing some Gaussian blur to slowly dissipate, to match the previous shots background and create the illusion of eyes focusing. This whole process was over the space of about 20 frames so it was much easier on the eye when played real-time. It also worked easier than I expected, but the slightly more difficult part was yet to come.
Creating the transition back out was slightly more difficult. I had to reverse the P.O.V footage of Adam looking down in order to make it look as if our character was lifting his head back up and, reversing the previous process (over an even shorter space of frames), I cut it with an alternative zoom out of Adam from behind in order to vary the shots. To make the transition back through work successfully, I also had to add a two-frame, head-shape, black mask to create the illusion of the camera returning back through his head. The mask was barely noticeable, but without it the transition just didn’t work. To finish off the collection of shots, and after discussing with my group and technician Jason about how to make it work more successfully, it was agreed that the whole composition should be time remapped to speed up certain actions and camera motions, making it more effective and seem more legitimate. We also felt a vignette and slight warp should be added to the P.O.V to create a more effective illusion of both point-of-view and the feeling of the ‘call of the void’ As a group we felt this transition between shots worked well alone, but specifically for 3D as the focal ranges all the way through the 3 shots would contrast heavily due to their depth, something 3D plays a lot upon. These are some of the AE screengrabs:
Another transition that we felt would look effective in 3D was the mask between a pillar in the tracking shot, and the static cutaway of that same shot. I masked a basic version but due to the handheld camerawork it looked shoddy, as if the pillar were shaking around the screen. After talking to Jason about how this could be rectified, he suggested taking a still of the pillar from one of the frames and keyframing that still over the motion path of the original pillar; disguising the sporadic movement and making it smoothly mask over to the static shot. We used this technique and due to the foreground focal planes the pillar occupied being place over the top of all the other focal planes in the shot, we felt the shot and transition would look very effective in 3D.
Once these compositions were complete, I added them into the main premier timeline. I then went through the edit with Marcus, cleaning up any loose cuts and issues with the first edit. Once we were happy with it, I handed to editing role over to Tommy who began to work on the audio of the piece. We looked around for intrusive and uncomfortable sounds that could work well with the piece and when they were found Tommy organised them into the piece, arranging audio levels and working on multi-layer audio platforms to get the perfect sound. Once this was done Tommy got to work on the ADR, for more information about that, visit our Tommy’s or group blog: http://tommysawkins.wordpress.com/
Alex and Marcus wrote up a graph to represent the relationship and correspondence between sound and video. Tommy used this throughout the sound editing stage to get the best results:
Tommy then duplicated the project in order for Dec to begin stage 2 of the editing (the 3D side). Wearing anaglyph glasses, Dec went through the edit, bringing each part of the sequence into After Effects and adding the most effective anaglyph 3D he could. Like referenced previously on my blog, he would duplicate the layer, giving one a cyan tint and the other a tint of red, corresponding to the glasses. He did this throughout the whole edit, checking with Marcus throughout that the 3D was as best as it could be until, as a group, we felt the 3D edit was done. For a more in depth analysis of this process, visit Dec’s or the group blog: http://declanmurphyy.wordpress.com/
Finally, to complete stage 3 of the editing and our 2D edit, Tommy began work on the colour correction and vignetting. He added a subtle dark vignette to the footage and brought up the blacks and yellows using software called ‘Magic Bullet’. The full extent of this stage is written up on his blog (linked above).
Now that the editing stage was complete and we were all happy with both 2D and 3D edits, we felt it was time to upload them to both YouTube and Vimeo for our upcoming crit day…
Shooting:
November 15, 2011 § Leave a comment
7/11/11
We all met to shoot our piece at the B.I.C carpark at 10:00 as the production schedule stated and almost immediately proceeded to shooting the first tracking shot. We found that unfortunately neither the dolly nor skateboard would work with the rough ground of the carpark, so we would have to resort to our backup shot idea of a handheld follow shot/track. I took over the camerawork for this specific shot and once it was completed we moved on to the rest of the shots. Another slight problem was that, due to the windy conditions of the day, Dec’s Rode microphone wasn’t quite picking up the ideal sound we wanted. So then and there we decided it would be worth recording some ADR (additional dialogue recording) during the editing stage, as the dialogue would be muffled and toned down in the edit anyway. I returned to manning the cutaway camera and shot pick-ups throughout the piece. We finished before schedule with many extra shots to experiment with in the edit.
Overall the shoot went very successfully, everyone managed their roles efficiently and we got the footage we set out to get. We made sure to pay due attention to the way we shot everything throughout; making sure that it would work well in 3D by ensuring multiple focal planes and well thought out depth of field.
Ashley documented a lot of the shoot, and that footage can be viewed in the last section of his behind the scenes documentary. This is just a short draft version of the footage that he put together:
And here is a collection of photographs Ashley took during the shoot:
Marcus did a blog post referencing everybody’s hard work on his and the group blog. This is a paragraph from that post:
‘All in all, everyone did really well, Tommy and Adam did an admirable job as actors, with Tommy still having the initiative to bring up possible shots and methods of shooting throughout the day, providing invaluable foresight and not getting bogged down in the extra work he had taken on. As I mentioned earlier Alex was a great help in sorting out the Camera crew and directing the camera team when they shot from the other side of the road. Al managed to get some beautiful cutaways throughout the day, which will prove very useful when it comes to the edit. Dec did really well as the main Cameraman; his technical insight was very useful in deciding how best to setup the cameras for the shots. Ashley’s work documenting the shoot will be a great help when it comes to bringing across the amount of work we all put in on the shoot day and throughout the project.’
To see the rest of what he wrote about the shot, visit his blog:
Pre-Shoot production meeting:
November 15, 2011 § Leave a comment
4/11/11
By the Friday we first planned to shoot on, we still had no actors, so we decided to go with our plan B of using Adam and Tommy and shooting the following Monday. Marcus decided to call a production meeting with the group to make sure we were all organised and so everything could run smoothly on the day.
In this production meeting we discussed exactly how we could achieve the shots we intended to shoot and how we should have someone manning a second camera in order to capture cutaways and pickups. We also discussed everyone’s exact roles throughout the day and what that would entail so that it would be cemented prior to the shoot, avoiding any time wasting on the day. These are the decisions we made:
Marcus: Directing.
Alex: D.O.P and camera assistant.
Me: Secondary camera operator and camera assistant.
Dec: Primary camera operator.
Tommy: Acting
Ashley: Shoot documentation
We felt we should also create a production schedule in which we could map down what order we planned to shoot every shot. Marcus went through all the shots on his storyboard, giving each a specific number and I was given the job of creating a production schedule that corresponded with these shot numbers. We discussed what order we planned to shoot the shots in and once at home I made this production schedule and posted it to the group facebook page:
Production Schedule (Monday 7/11/11)
Shooting Time: 10.00 A.M – Meet at B.I.C Carpark
Weather: Grey Cloud | Sun sets: 16:32
10:05 A.M – Track shot (Shot 1) – 45mins – 1Hour
11:05 A.M – Low angle in carpark (Shot 2.1) – 15mins
11:20 A.M – P.O.V and back of head (Shot 4 and 3.4) – 30mins
11:50 A.M – Get back in car/final shot (Shot 6) – 30mins
12:20 P.M – From road quick zoom – (Shot 2.3 and 3.1) – 15mins
12:35 P.M – Across road (Shot 2.2 and 3.2) – 30mins
13:05 P.M – Across road (Shot 5) – 30mins
Still from Facebook:
A final important topic of this production meeting was the news that we would not be able to access both the passive 3D software and a 3D television, stopping us being able to edit polarised 3D and meaning to demonstrate 3D we would have to use anaglyph. We were all disappointed by this news, but saw it as a realisation as to why passive 3D may not be used in low-budget pieces, as the software and means of showing it are very expensive, hence why we could not acquire it. As a group we felt comfortable showing our piece as both an anaglyph edit and a 2D, colour corrected edit as hopefully this would both demonstrate the 3D aesthetic we are trying to portray along with the style aesthetic we would ideally want to go with.
Some post-production Facebook discussion:
November 15, 2011 § Leave a comment
4/11/11
During the project we have been communicating and discussing a lot using our group facebook page. Here are some of the things we discussed:
Plans for the editing stage.
November 15, 2011 § Leave a comment
3/11/11
We felt it would be a good idea to have some set plans for the editing stage in advance of shooting so we could progress directly to it afterwards. We decided that there would be 3/4 stages of editing that we would follow:
1. Create a linear edit with the correct timing, titles, effects, shot order, shot length, sound and After Effects work in order to portray the narrative, style and aesthetic of the piece. This will take a majority of the time in the editing stage and must take guidance from our director Marcus throughout, but once this is completed and ready for 3D progress to stage 2. Additionally, Tommy intends to take an active role on the sound side of the editing.
2. Create a duplicate Adobe Premier file in order to create a 2D online edit of the piece complete with colour correction and vignetting. Tommy intends to take the primary role during this stage.
3. Taking the other Premier project (completed stage 1 version) and applying anaglyph 3D to it in After Effects. Dec intends to take the primary role in this stage as he had a fair amount of experience working anaglyph in AE during our test shoots. This will primarily be an edit to portray our 3D intentions, as it is guaranteed that we can portray the 3D illusion using this method. However, it will not have the ideal aesthetic that we want to give our piece as the anaglyph effect will remove it, but we can portray this aesthetic through the stage 2 edit. The two edits together will become a representation of what we are trying to achieve if we cannot achieve stage 4.
4. Stage four depends entirely on whether we get access to ‘Neo3D’ or any other passive 3D editing software. We have decided as a group that if we cannot get access to this software by the day of shooting, this stage will be scrapped. This is due to the fact we will simply not have time to get to grips with the software to create an edit before the unit deadline. Nevertheless, if we reach stage 4 it will entail taking the completed stage 2 edit, editing it into passive polarised 3D and burning it to Blu-Ray 3D DVD. Tommy, Dec and I will most likely take a joint role in this stage, as we are all equally experienced with the software.
Finding Actors.
November 15, 2011 § Leave a comment
2/11/11
Marcus felt that before we found actors, we should discuss whether one or both our male characters are interchangeable with females. We had a feeling actors would be difficult to get hold of due to their busy schedules and so the question had to be asked; if one or no male actors are available, can we use female actors despite the storyboard portraying two male characters?
We came to the conclusion that if our actors were separate genders, the undertone of a relationship between them would be assumed by the audience, and that wasn’t something we felt would benefit the script at all. If anything, we felt it would detract from the themes we were trying to portray. As for two female actors, we felt the background small talk (banter) during the long track shot just wouldn’t quite work in the same way without two male actors. We intended to take this all into due consideration when looking for actors we could use.
Alex took on the primary role of primary casting director in our shoot as he has some connections with the 2nd year acting course. After looking into it he found that the whole acting course were incredibly busy, but there was a slim possibility that some of them would be free on Friday the 4th of November. So we decided to plan to shoot this day, depending if any of the actors got back to us about being able to act in our piece on that date.
If we couldn’t find actors, we felt having a backup plan would work to our advantage. Tommy from our group volunteered to act if no actors were available, and as he knew the themes we were trying to portray from and insider perspective we felt this could work quite successfully. For our main character however, we asked some people in our class to see if they would be available. Adam Mew said he wouldn’t mind helping if we couldn’t find someone to play our protagonist. However he said he would only be available on Monday the 7th, so we decided as a group that if we didn’t have guaranteed actors by Thursday the 3rd, we would postpone shooting until the Friday and use Adam and Tommy. We felt this wasn’t necessarily a bad thing however, as Adam has had previous acting experience on a non dialogue piece:
Marcus’s amended storyboard and accompanying shot list map.
November 15, 2011 § Leave a comment
31/10/11
After viewing the location again Marcus decided create a visual shot list map as well as the final amended storyboards we would use as reference during the actual shoot. The storyboards have the additional shots that we found the piece needed during our previous test shoot added in, and the shot list map has corresponding camera position and character movement diagrams:
Fifth (third single-camera) test shoot.
November 15, 2011 § Leave a comment
27/10/11
Now that we had the location arranged, we felt it important that we arrange a test shoot. We planned to test how well the full narrative worked and how the piece would work in the new chosen location; finding a test shoot spot we could relate to it. Also we felt it would be a good idea to test our dolly that we were considering using for our long tracking shot.
We decided to shoot at uni, finding the highest point we could that could be related to our chosen location. This is the 3D render of our fifth test shoot:
The test was overall very successful; it pointed out a few final issues we would need to address before we continued on to our actual shoot. One of these was the fact that the dolly would have to be on very smooth ground to create a flawless, smooth tracking shot. Dec felt to combat the issue we could mount a sandbag on the dolly to weight it down and remove some of the shakes. But our main conclusion for this issue was that if the floor at our location just wouldn’t work with the dolly (with or without sandbag) we would do a handheld track instead. Our director Marcus felt comfortable with this idea as he felt a handheld track could remove a ‘clinical’ nature the piece could pick up from a still track, adding variety to the style of the shooting.
Another thing it made us, specifically our storyboarder and director Marcus, realise is that there were possibly shots that needed adding to the narrative/storyboard, as he felt without them the nature of the story was difficult to comprehend as an audience. Marcus felt adding in reaction shots, establishing shots, cutaways and additional shots from across the road would make the piece much more understandable. He planned to take a re-visit to the location and also arranged a future production meeting with the group, in which he intended to have an amended storyboard and shot list location sheet.
Location Scouting.
November 15, 2011 § Leave a comment
25/10/11
Before shooting, we needed a location that would work perfectly with our storyboard and theme. Ashley took on the main role of location scouting and went out to find spots that would work successfully. Since we had done test shoots corresponding to the storyboard, we knew that we needed a high drop for the P.O.V shot and a vantage point to shoot from across the road to portray our character experiencing ‘L’appel du vide’. After discussing with our Director Marcus and D.O.P Alex, this was the location we settled with (photographs taken by Ashley):
It is located on the second from top floor of the B.I.C carpark and had everything we needed for shooting. Also, a lot of the architecture would work well for 3D shooting as it contains many different planes of focus. For example, pillars run along the length of the carpark where we intend to shoot our tracking shot and we can utilize this for 3D.
For the other locations, visit Ashley’s blog:
Al Hodgson AUCB BA DMP 