Month: March 2018

Post 1: Pre Production

Ready Camera One: Week 4 Pre Production

Post 2: Week 3 Reading

Ready Camera One: Week 3 Reading

Post 3: Reflection

Ready Camera One: Week 4 Reflection

For the Assessment 2 production I had the job of the Director. My main tasks were calling what shots to cut to, blocking out the scene, communicating to the floor manager instructions as well as the camera crew if any camera’s had too much headroom or  and also information the actors of how they should move in the scene. Something I realised when directing is how important it is to be a good communicator and to remember to inform everyone about how you would like the scene to happen. Also to be open to different ideas and ways of shooting something. Due to the fact that we had a lot of time before our group was due to start myself, my vision switcher, floor manager and one of the camera operators all sat together and talked about the scene and how we could film it.

I found this experience really fun and helpful in collaborating as I had some ideas about how we could film Rosehaven but I also really wanted to see what everyone else thought and if they had any ideas as well. Because we were a small group and it was only the one scene, the process of all of us sitting together brainstorming is much different to other media productions I have crewed on. Usually writers and the director/ maybe producers collaborate on what the plan is then tell the other crew members what to do without their immediate input. However for us, it was a better way of coming up with a concept as everyone could give their opinion and it also helped their role as they understood from the very beginning how the scene was going to be filmed. e.g The floor manager knew where to tell the actors to stand and reset themselves after each take.

As an audience member it was interesting to see how the effect of having an audience increased the feeling of being live. In our case we were watching from behind the camera’s but as it was mentioned in the Marriot reading it was like we still existed in the space that she talks about where the watching of the event and the occurring or the event are all transpiring at the same time. This experience also made me realise the differences in liveness for a studio audience and those watching at home. As is talked about in the Gadassik reading there is the idea that television rests or a “continuum of liveness” and that another way to determine the truest version of liveness is when something unplanned breaks through the continuum, be it a pause, a gasp laugh etc. It’s a ongoing discussion, but I feel as though being an audience member on the “set” it was more live than what the audience at home would see, as you would be there for the cuts or break through of the live continuum of television.

In terms of the main difference of single vs multi camera the thing I would say immediately is shot options. You can have more than one shot at the one time and cut back and forth which provides good variety for the viewer. Something that this prevents however is a boundary in terms of where you film. Most multi camera shows will only have one set that you use and this can be very efficient for the crew as there is no time wasted transporting production somewhere else, but it can also be limiting as you have to get creative in order to avoid using the same formulaic ways in which to film a show/scene. Multi camera shows also tend to have a studio audience, whereas single camera shows don’t as they tend to sometimes be more inclined to visually represent the story than to satisfy the audiences want to see as much as they can of the show. There is also the point that if you had a studio audience watching a single camera follow each actor around, it would get frustrating being there and so that is avoided in a multi camera set up.

Overall it was a really fun experience that taught me how important it is to treat a production like you are apart of a team and that each job informs the next one. Looking forward to the next production 🙂

For our assessment my group were given the script for “Rosehaven” a show on ABC. The excerpt was a scene where Barbara and Daniel are walking into Daniels old school where he is going to give a speech. As a group we made sure to work with what we had in a short timeframe. We wanted to see how other groups went about interpreting their script for the shoot and so we elected to go fourth in the order or recording.

When given some time to plan, we sat in a circle and read through our script, figuring out how we were going to block our two actors, also watching the scene on youtube to see how they did it. As the scene features them walking into the school, we elected to keep things simple and not have any props or furniture around as we didn’t need them. From here we found that our main goal was to find a different way to represent the characters walking into the primary school. Originally we thought we could get them to pretend to be walking and talking (walking on the spot..) but then realised it might look a bit lame and that instead we should try to incorporate some interesting camera work. We settled on the idea for the actors to start offstage with camera one on them and then as they walk to their mark (they start the dialogue) camera one will follow them (pan to the left) and then the vision switcher would switch to camera two ( a mid shot of both actors) so that camera one could readjust itself allowing the people in the control to cut from cameras one, two and three pretty smoothly.

We made sure to scribble little notes on the scripts for our actors letting them know to start their dialogue as they walk so that during rehearsals we could make sure the camera operators felt comfortable learning the sequence. Having the pre production stage helped us practise what would need to be thought about before a show; briefing the crew on how the scene will be directed, any major shots we need and creatively planning out what we thought we look good e.g making the actors walk to their mark and having their mark be in the centre of the stage. Personally I felt like this prepared us pretty well during the shooting of the scene.

In this weeks class we discussed the concept of the laugh track and other things we observed from the reading. It was great to learn about an aspect of live (and sometimes prerecorded) television that you often don’t think about and just assume as apart of the show. Hearing from the class, the comparisons between having and not having a laugh track showed both positives and negatives.

Laugh tracks have more potential to engage emotionally with the audience as they demand an emotional reaction to what is shown, yet at the same time for some people they can be irritating with a canned laughter effect. There is also an inclusivity and familiarity with laugh tracks as the majority of families grow up watching sitcoms aimed towards a general audience. Due to the development in writing shows for unique stories as opposed to mass audiences, it is more appropriate and now more common that tv does not have an audience or a laugh track to accompany them. It seems like there is an unspoken rule of thumb that when a show has a laugh track its content, scripts, and characters are generally likeable and can appeal to most viewers. Some characters even fall into crowd favourite stereotypes that the audience can quickly connect to. Whilst this isn’t a bad thing, in the last 10 years there has been a real push for more realistic stories to be told and the natural progression for that is to make the way in which they are watched by the viewer more realistic too.

During the second half of the studio we went on a tour of the new studios in building ten. And I for one was not disappointed. There were several different sized studio’s each with their own special equipment and uses. One of the studio’s featured a green screen for shows with computer generated backdrops, control rooms that were really well equipped for large scale productions that need things like graphics and live streaming and a large main studio that we will be using later on. Overall, it left me feeling really excited about what we’ll be doing in the next few weeks!

This weeks reading was dedicated to the topic of the laugh track within television. This has been something that is used to hint at liveness (“a live studio audience”) but in recent years has often been prerecorded and used by tv shows to pretend that they have an audience at all.

Giotta discusses how the laugh track has subsequently been used less and less in television shows, yet the attention to the viewer and logic of the track is still very much embedded in television shows that do not feature one. This is achieved through other ways including the trick of breaking the fourth wall. I remember watching some of the examples that Giotta mentions including episodes of shows such as Scrubs where J.D looks at the camera or when Amy Poehler as Leslie Knope carrying out the Mockumentary style. As the writer talks about, there is still the sense that you are being told when to laugh due to the character pausing, or making eye contact with you. It does overall feel more intelligent in the relationship to the audience and I probably prefer shows without a laugh track because it seems like the creators/actors work harder to try and make the people at home laugh.

That being said a laugh track for shows such as Friends and the Big Bang theory are very important and affect how the show is written and performed. I feel like the pace of Friends is very planned and very expected. The punchlines hit on a beat, there are pauses for laughter etc. This doesn’t make them any less entertaining to watch, but just a clear indication that there are noticeable differences. When comparing this to parks and recreation, there is an almost awkward silence and each character delivers funny jokes at a different speed/ style. There is also the fact that shows like this will tend to move on quicker than shows that have a laugh track, which also contributes to the theories about it being more intelligent as it doesn’t have to wait for the audience to catch up on what was said.

Its hard to tell where the laugh track will go in the future. It is definitely crucial for live television to help gage the excitement of the filmed event or the popularity of the event, however in terms of prerecorded television, just as the reading touched on I think it may continue to disappear. But, who knows? It might make a miraculous comeback.

After discussing the reading (Marriot) we were given the task of exploring the use of livesteam apps Periscope and Twitch. A relatively new idea, live-streaming apps are a big example of how audiences are now able to become their own producers in media through their phones instead of getting live content from television or radio stations.

My group downloaded Periscope (apparently twitch is slightly more video game oriented in live streaming) and after practising a little bit with its format we elected to go down to Bourke street Mall as we felt that it was such a busy place, we had a good chance of finding something interesting to capture “live”.

However as we left the campus, walking down to the tram stop, we found that there was a lot happening at the State Library. We noticed that two men were playing giant chess and felt that this was something we could work with. Similarly to a live football game, there’s a sense of exclusivity as even though the chess set will be there tomorrow, the game that was played in that moment won’t be, as a viewer your waiting to see who wins and who loses, by how much etc. So this was a good start for our live-steaming adventure. We then decided to go into the state Library and film a birds eye livestream of the main study area. I thought this was a cool idea as you could follow more than one person when watching or focus on a section in the library and wait for something live to happen there. A slight disadvantage of the setting was that as it was a library, there wasn’t heaps of memorable “live moments” to have really captured, begging the question does something have to be specifically interesting to be deemed live?

After the library, we eventually filmed some content down at the Bourke Street Mall, which included our getting lost on the tram on the way back to uni. This event was probably the most entertaining as it was completely unplanned and unexpected to happen by the three of us. Looking back to when I have watched livestreams and something has gone wrong or the vloggers plans have changed, I felt much more engaged as the overall experience of watching it felt more in the moment. Its a big part of life for things to go wrong, be an inconvenience and change, so to see that on the screen you are watching makes you connect much more to the people making the live show. This is definitely where the power of live television comes from.

The reading for this week (Live Television: Time, Space and the Broadcast Event) by S. Marriot talked about the ideas of live moments, the ways in which we are made aware that we are watching a live programme and how liveness is still successful against the influx of pre recorded content that air around it.

Something that can’t be denied is the desire for big international events to be aired live i.e weddings like Kate and William, funerals such as Princess Diana, election nights and sporting matches. Marriot mentions the example of the 2004 Euro Football championship between England and Portugal generating over 20 million viewers, tuning in live. Even though I don’t particularly follow soccer I agree with the desire to watch the match as it is happening. Apart from the lack of spoilers that can happen, people also want the feeling of being united over something they are really passionate there’s something pretty amazing about going through it at the same time as somebody over the other side of the world.

A point that really stuck with me in the reading was the little ways in which live tv makes sure we know it is live and reinforces the exclusivity of it so that we keep tuning in. Just by using phrases like “You are watching this Live”, “We’re still live” doesn’t so much as remind us in case we’ve forgotten, but rather makes us almost feel like we can’t look away as it will never be exciting or as watchable than it was live. By using the present tense and directly referring to the audience as “You” and “We” brings them into a moment where the event, the speaking of the event and the reception of the event are all transpiring. Even from experience watching live events, I find that I tend to focus more and engage then when the show is pre recorded. I think subconsciously when you are having a conversation with someone you know to pay complete attention to them and live television has that same effect. Looking forward to learning more about it.

The first class of week one was a really good introduction to what we are going to be looking at this semester in the world of Live Television.

We met our teachers for the semester Ruth and Ed and discussed the idea “Liveness” and what it really means to be live, forming into groups to do so.  After talking through some guiding questions, the class highlighted certain characteristics that one associates with live television including: A studio audience, breaking the fourth wall, potential mistakes being made, the liveness being for a special event (e.g sport) etc. Something I found interesting was how the definition of live television varies depending on who you ask.

When answering the question of what it is, some main points included: A programme with no edits, one take, something that is happening as you see it. Yet at the same time, it was discussed how shows like the today show which are done live, also have a tendency to be heavily scripted in creating its liveness, possibly missing making it closer to a prerecorded programme as there isn’t as much spontaneity in the show. Regardless it is still a very popular and well loved show to watch and one could argue that it combines the best elements of live and prerecorded television; being able to broadcast a show with interesting content that is appropriate for its audience (no major issues of censorship), whilst having the novelty of being recorded live and leaving a little bit (if some) room for the occasional stuff up/ endearing reminder that “we are live” and “anything can happen”.

At the moment, I’m not sure whether I prefer live television more off script, or forget to appreciate the work that goes into live tv in a more scripted format. Hopefully the course will show all different types of “live” and I’ll see which one I like the best.

My Blog Post on a chosen television show:

Studio Week 2 Part 1 of Assignment 1

My Blog Post on Livestream with Periscope:

https://www.mediafactory.org.au/alexandra-russell/2018/03/09/studio-week-2-part-2-of-assignment-1/ 

Over this week, my lovely group and I explored the livestream app “Periscope”. Our task in capturing a moment of liveness was an interesting one. We started by getting some practise filming in the State Library and around RMIT but one of my group members pointed out the fact that it was great footage, but was it interesting enough to be considered live even if it was shot in realtime? Like the example of shows such as the today show where yes, you are seeing it live but there are several times when you are bored and there isn’t much happening.

This was an idea that I think really stuck with us as we tried to find some other things to capture live. Our decided shot was of the tram ride we took back to RMIT from Bourke Street Mall. I really liked the livestream as I felt in represented liveness really well. It was unplanned liveness due to the fact that we didn’t know when the tram was going to start moving, or if it jolted making us wobble, whether people would be waiting at the traffic lights on Swanston street or if they would be crossing the Road etc.

I think that in relation to other shows I’ve seen that are live such as Saturday Night Live, there is a lot more planning and “scheduled liveness” that is probably more likely to be interesting and entertaining on a consistent basis, as opposed to very little planning for our livestream apart from the location and how long it was going to be for. Overall it was really fun to learn how the app worked and to have random people watching the livestream as it happened, making you remember how this type of viewing revolves around the audience and their wants.