The third blog post should reflect on the game show project. Were your expectations met (both on a technical level and in terms of content)? What worked well and what were some challenges faced? How might you approach these challenges differently in future (what did you learn?) Collaboration and communication are an integral aspect of multi-camera production – what have you learned about collaboration through this assignment, and what learnings can you apply to future production work?

While reflecting on FAKE OUT! I found that while some of my expectations were met, especially in terms of teamwork, there were also several challenges I hadn’t fully anticipated. As the director, I was responsible for queuing the graphics and vision switching. I expected that the intro would be too fast for our graphics so I asked Shani to slow down so the graphics could be properly displayed, and while she did adjust during the contestant name announcements, the rest of the intro was quite fast. Because of this the graphics and the camera switch were delayed, which was my fault, I should’ve been more specific when talking to Shani. In the future if possible I would do a practice run of the intro to have a smother take. A major issue I had was I didn’t account for the fast-pasted back and forth between Shani and the contestants, this led to my camera switching being behind most of segment one. I found my rhythm more in segment two, but this highlighted the importance of adapting in real-time. I was especially impressed by my team. Georgia, on audio, was quick with buzzer sounds, and Samantha executed the graphics well, even with minimal direction.

I felt that Pre-production was a strong point for our team. We worked on multiple planning documents to define our show and work out details. I also met individually with each crew member, provided tailored run sheets, and highlighted their key responsibilities. Despite this, some miscommunications still occurred, such as confusion over guest seating, Shani going off-script in the final segment, and inconsistent scorekeeping. These issues may have stemmed from nerves, a language barrier, or simply gaps in planning. The key thing I learned from this experience is the importance of rehearsal, even for formats that benefit from spontaneity. In future, I’d suggest running through the show with stand-in contestants to block camera shots and test timing, followed by a second rehearsal of just the introduction with the actual host and crew. Even with detailed planning, unpredictability is a natural part of media production, it’s also what makes it exciting. As Holmes (2008) notes, “the promise of liveness and authenticity is central to the genre’s appeal,”(p.26). Games shows are tricky as you want a polished final product but not too polished. That’s why I think my idea of a rehearsal with sit-in contestants would be the best of both worlds, allowing the technical side to be polished but allowing the human side to be spontaneous.

 Overall I have conflicted feelings about our final product. I’m proud of my team and our collaborative work but I also recognize that I have a lot more to learn. I’m committed to growing from this experience so that next time I’m in the director’s seat, I can feel confident and truly proud of the outcome.

References

Holmes, S. (2008). Quiz Show. Edinburgh University Press.