Evaluation of ‘Live’ Show
On Wednesday 9th December of the year 2009, we began recording the actual live show we had been preparing for 6 weeks prior. The project itself went well, everyone at first was a bit awkward on how we were to do things, but with a little bit of teaching, we managed to pull ourselves together and create something really good.
During the making of the project my responsibility and job was Post Production Producer for the Internet round, but that soon spread out, into being in charge of the VT insert material for all rounds and the final edit for the show after it was recorded. The job I had to do was finding the material we were to use in our round, then convert it onto Final Cut Pro, and finally edit it so it can be used for the show, being burnt to DVD. I found the clips we were going to use in relatively short time, and using a program on Kate’s computer we managed to convert them to the right file.
After sorting that out, I then had to send all my work to one file, which would contain all the tracks used for the show. At this point I took control of the shows editing, and spent most of my time on the computer, using programs like Final Cut Pro, and DVD Pro, which I had gotten used and was able to work on with efficiency. At times I would help with the creating of the set, gluing some pictures on, and lifting a few things, but nothing serious as I had a back problem that prevented me from doing extraneous work.
In terms of how good my contribution to the project, I feel that is important, and I had done very well. Sure had I not done the editing work someone else would have done it, but I feel that I learn things quickly, and because of this I can reach a high standard of work at a fast speed. Without my efforts, in the editing suite, we would not have had a DVD with our insert material sorted, nor would we have had the Final edit completed and finished. My good work elements, was that if I was given a deadline, say of 3 hours, I would work as hard as I could to get it done in 2 hours, but seeing as I am not fully used to the programs, and there are something I will not learn until later on in the year, I end finishing at the last minute. Things which I could improve on, is my punctuality, and being more assertive in getting people to the computer so they can tell me how exactly they wanted thing done. As most of the time I was so engrossed in the work I assumed things and did it to how I would expect them to be done.
From this project I learnt many things, how to work the Vision and Audio Mixer’s, sound level optimal for speech, camera angles and ‘searching for shots’. Most of these practical skills I didn’t find much difficulty in grasping, given a short and quick tutorial about how to work the equipment, given time I picked it all up fast. However no one was really given a good long length of time on one particular job or usage of equipment that means those who are slower, and take more time to get used to something, never had a real chance to get their heads around it. The things I learnt in terms of Theory are mainly based around how lighting should be conducted, how the system actually works, and the terminology of the Studio. This helped because as the weeks progressed Peter began using it more and more, to get us into the feeling of being in an actual studio, thus efficiency was increased as everyone knew what he was talking about.
The overall technical quality of the show was brilliant in my opinion; everything was of near professional standard and worked smoothly. The VT inserts, and image of the panel on screen came out clearly, and people could understand them if they saw it. However one slight hiccup, in terms of 2 clips from the Directors fault, which were based on the pixelated questions. On both of those questions the contestants did not get to see the pixelated faces as they were cut too soon, thus meaning the contestants had no clue about who was missing. However both the groups being very famous, they were able to tell who was missing. The sound quality was good, however it was recorded at too low a level, meaning it topped out at a low -24dB this meant that everything was too quite, and had to be boosted up much louder. This isn’t just the sound operator’s mistake, but also the talent and host as I was in the same room as the operators for the first half, and heard them distinctly tell the panel to speak louder. The host however took this a bit too literately, and most likely to nerves, his voice jumped from really loud to really quiet in small gaps of time. This was rectified when I began editing the final version, and had to boost the sound up 12 dB, just to be able to hear the talents speech, and then had to suddenly drop the sound by 8dB when the host suddenly shouted. Overall though, it was a good production, plus it was everyone’s first time doing something like this, so mistakes are expected to be seen.
Our use of Cinematography was well done, having 4 cameras, 2 as ‘pole’ which had the ability to move around more feely, and get right up to the talent, and 2 ‘fixed’ cameras, which one was used as safety and the other included shots of the audience and host, thus giving the set depth. The shots that came out were really nicely done, with plenty of breathing space in some, but others were a bit tight. Our set and the Mise-en-Scene used in the show fitted it perfectly, as we are based on media, having the flats covered in media related articles, such as internet, newspapers, a TV, which we put and actual one in the gap so the audience can see the inserts, even the desk had a picture of the ‘Hulk’ a comic book character which has spread upon multiple media platforms. The show was also meant to be relaxed and amusing, and with the talent and host wearing semi-formal outfits I feel they achieved this feeling.
In the final piece, I think everyone’s ideas really did come through, I did think about the TV showing through the flats, and was happy that others shared the same thought. Things we could improve upon, is maybe more ‘outside of the box’ thinking, because when we did try it, some really good ideas came out, however we never used them. We seemed to have played it safe and stuck to the rigid formula without trying to expand it anymore.
The audience seemed to have enjoyed the show, sitting as one of the members in the second half; I thought it went rather well. Even when I talked to them about the mistakes, they said they hardly ever noticed them at all. They were talking truthfully as I asked them to, and didn’t care if they hated it, since the more they hate it, the more I can write for my blog and evaluation, thus giving me a better grade. Alas this was not the case and they seemed like it was perfect. As I have said many times before, only the fact that the sound level was recorded to quietly and the 2 muck ups in terms of VT insert material went wrong. Other then that, everything else went fine, and it was mainly all due to lack of experience and nerves. So the remedy for improving is simple enough, just get more practice done on it. In comparison to real Live TV shows, I feel we have stuck tightly to their cores, and didn’t really try to flesh it out and give it, a true individual nature. Research materials for all were things like Never Mind the Buzzcocks, or Have I Got News For You? Mainly comedy panel shows, which we made sure we didn’t try and copy. In the sense that thinking we can be hilarious, may suit us, but not others thus making it a horrible experience. Allowing a couple of laughs through is fine, but not to expect stand up talent.
My conclusion on this is that it went well overall; we had some problems and had some great moments, all natural. If I had the chance to re do this project, I would give people roles earlier on in the process so they get more practice at their job.
Tuesday 15 December 2009
Monday 14 December 2009
Creation of VT DVD and the final edit for the Show.
When all the clips had been made, it I took the job of creating the VT insert DVD for the show, that we would be using. So what i had to do was compile all the Inserts onto one track, then using the programme Final Cut Pro i edited them down to make sure they ran in order and so that the sound is to loud, nor the picture to bad quailiy. However the first time round failed slightly becasue the black title sequnces before the actual clip, were in the wrong order, thus throwing the chapter squence made on DVD Pro useless. So within a time scale of 2 hours, I had to re do these black sequences, then re do the chapters on Final Cut Pro and DVD Pro.
What was invloved was re typing the titles, making sure they are in the right order, aswell as making a couple of clips a bit longer , as some of them were only reaching 2 seconds in length. After editing these, I then had to place markers, in which DVD Pro would read ,and place the chapters accordingly. However this did nto go to plan, and so i had to manually place markers again in DVD Pro on the track. After doing that i then had to pull up the chapter scren, and procced to connnect each marker with a chapter 'button' then titling them appropriatly. In doing this, when using the dvd player and remote, the correct clip would show corisponding with the correct button.
Then this was used in the actual production, and after some small difficulties in understanding how things were played out, it worked well.
The next day I then began editing the actual feed we had recording, making sure the sound levels were working at the correct levels, and making sure the picture quailty was good. In terms of quality the clip was really well, apart from a few hic ups, liek the showing of a VT's title, or the delayed time before it was shown. I worked on these first, but soon realised that I could not just fit the whole clip, as that would clash with what the host and talent were saying, thus it wouldnt make any sense at all. So some of the mistakes were left in, but edited so it was clean, and looked as professional as I could make it.
After sorting out those kinks, the next thing on the agenda was the sound levels, the actual show was recorded at an abismal low level, something the sound operators must not have picked up on. Because of this, the speaking and VT inserts maxed out at a measily -24dB. To rectify this i had to boost the entire thing on average by 12dB. But it wasn't as simple as that because afterwards I had to attend to the fact that the Host's voice throughout the show was unpredictable, and would become ridicoulsly quiet at one point, then screaming loud at the next. So using the sound editing on Final Cut Pro, i managed to fade his voice and the others at the right times, looking at the sound levels, it looks like a crazy roller-coaster, full up massive dips and high rises, all to compensate for the unpredictablity of the peoples voices. However in the second half, everyone seemed to calm down and the sound levels didn't have to go through such a workout.
What was invloved was re typing the titles, making sure they are in the right order, aswell as making a couple of clips a bit longer , as some of them were only reaching 2 seconds in length. After editing these, I then had to place markers, in which DVD Pro would read ,and place the chapters accordingly. However this did nto go to plan, and so i had to manually place markers again in DVD Pro on the track. After doing that i then had to pull up the chapter scren, and procced to connnect each marker with a chapter 'button' then titling them appropriatly. In doing this, when using the dvd player and remote, the correct clip would show corisponding with the correct button.
Then this was used in the actual production, and after some small difficulties in understanding how things were played out, it worked well.
The next day I then began editing the actual feed we had recording, making sure the sound levels were working at the correct levels, and making sure the picture quailty was good. In terms of quality the clip was really well, apart from a few hic ups, liek the showing of a VT's title, or the delayed time before it was shown. I worked on these first, but soon realised that I could not just fit the whole clip, as that would clash with what the host and talent were saying, thus it wouldnt make any sense at all. So some of the mistakes were left in, but edited so it was clean, and looked as professional as I could make it.
After sorting out those kinks, the next thing on the agenda was the sound levels, the actual show was recorded at an abismal low level, something the sound operators must not have picked up on. Because of this, the speaking and VT inserts maxed out at a measily -24dB. To rectify this i had to boost the entire thing on average by 12dB. But it wasn't as simple as that because afterwards I had to attend to the fact that the Host's voice throughout the show was unpredictable, and would become ridicoulsly quiet at one point, then screaming loud at the next. So using the sound editing on Final Cut Pro, i managed to fade his voice and the others at the right times, looking at the sound levels, it looks like a crazy roller-coaster, full up massive dips and high rises, all to compensate for the unpredictablity of the peoples voices. However in the second half, everyone seemed to calm down and the sound levels didn't have to go through such a workout.
Roles played in Production
In the first half I controlled the DVD player, and so was in main charge of getting the VT inserts ready , for the director and vision mixer to use when needed. it was quite a simple job really, just sit around and press play and pause, then at the odd time, tell the director through the coms link that the VT's were ready. Most of the first half went fine, however on several of the inserts, the vision mixer cut out way to early, in doing so, the clip and question didn't really fit.
These were in the Music round, and were specifically the JLS and Girls Aloud, which were the pixelated vts. They were cut way to early, so the contestants werent able to see them. Apart from that the first half everything Being in this position, one needs to be alert at all times, so nothing goes wrong.
In the second half I played a member of the auidence
These were in the Music round, and were specifically the JLS and Girls Aloud, which were the pixelated vts. They were cut way to early, so the contestants werent able to see them. Apart from that the first half everything Being in this position, one needs to be alert at all times, so nothing goes wrong.
In the second half I played a member of the auidence
Anaylisis and Report on Live T.V Production
Analyse and Report on Live TV Shows-By Kamal Shaddad
The 2 shows I have chosen for this essay, is Stephen Fry’s Q.I and Dave’s Argumental. Q.I is a quiz panel show that has been around for over 10 years, and is hosted by Stephen Fry, the man who is hardly ever speechless. It focuses on testing its talents knowledge of the wide world, but I think its underlying theme is the search for knowledge. The TV Channel Dave, created a truly unique debating show, which is now going to be used on BBC 2. It focuses on arguing your point through any means necessary, even if it means getting naked in front of the audience. Both shows are regular, and usually book comedy talent, though one show looks for those less crude then the other.
Q.I is a quiz show based on General Knowledge, but usually its questions go far deeper. Its rounds aren’t very set in stone, but about 2 is the norm. The first one will last the actual duration of the show, only leaving maybe 5 minutes for the second round. This round focuses on the episodes theme, which can range from science, to animals starting with the letter G. The talent then usually guess, and have a laugh over the facts given out by the host, in order to come to some sort of answer. The second round is known as the round of ‘General Ignorance’ and is the shows form of a Quick fire round, however they usually only manage to get 2 questions in at the end of the show. Most of the show is ’ad lib’, which means that it does not stick to a rigid format, instead questions will be handed out, and then it’s up to the host and his comedy talent to fill in the gaps with their jokes. The role of Stephen Fry in series is a sort of bank of knowledge, who may or may not choose to give out small hints on certain questions, however he is not strict and his tone is always warm and open.
The opening sequence is very short, maybe about 30 seconds long, however in that time; the producer has managed to get across the feel, theme, and idea behind the show. The music used is upbeat, but calm, nothing to fast paced, thus giving a nice relaxed and comical feeling to the show. Accompanying the music is a very heavy graphic sequence; it is full of mathematic equations, literature from the past. However it also contains pictures of things on earth, ranging from the earth itself, to animals, babies, even people who affected the way we live our lives today. Whenever a picture is used, words are usually placed over it, and it works in time with the music, giving it rhythm and pace. All of this would have been done to show the many topics the show can cover, and how vast it questions can range. The final piece in the opening titles is a magnifying glass, which searches through all this information, as if trying to find something in particular, this is what I mean by showing its underlying theme for a search of knowledge, most the things asked and said, people will not know, and they watch the show partly to find out things.
The format used for Q.I is just like most panel quiz shows, 1 host, and several talents, ranging from 4 to 6. Behind them are large screens, used for VT insert material, whether it be video or audio. The shows logo will always take place, if the screens are not being used. In terms of tension building, there is no real noticeable build of it; instead they have opted for the amusing way of making a large fuss if someone has said the wrong answer. However it isn’t just any wrong answer, usually it’s when it is based off an old wives tale, for example if the question was “Who goose-stepped across Europe during the 1940’s?” The answer most people would think is the Nazi’s which is wrong as they stopped doing it after 1939. Because the answer seems so easy and full of common sense, it traps the talent, making it a rather amusing scene. This shows a very light hearted prank, the host can use to trap his talent in, but also it tells people watching, that is the wrong answer, and usually the correct term is followed. The Audience that this show is aimed for would most likely a much older audience, 45-55, but those above and far below that age range can find it equally amusing and fascinating. The reason being for this age range is because the show is broadcasted in the evening, usually during tea time, so about 6 p.m. Also the light and humour mixed with the education factor would appeal more to those who have reached a high point in their lives, and are actually interested in learning about the world.
The size of the studio seems very large, to my guessing I would say it would be 50mx50m, the size of a medium town hall. Since the set itself is rather large, and the fact the audience are never seen in any shots, and the amount of noise they make makes one think it is quite a large studio audience. The set itself is a mix of being complicated and rather simple, in terms of simplicity, the 2 large screens used for VT inserts stand tall behind the talent, but behind the host is a large circular dial, which is decorated with literature, maths and the shows logo. The desk which the all rest on is quite grand, once again it is styled in the shows logo of a Q with a small I in side of it, the host and talent sit on the upper part of the Q, whilst the rest of it stretched towards the audience, with the I raised in the centre and covered in an orange glow. It gives a very professional, but old feel to the set, thus boosting an idea of a modern library steeped in knowledge. Seating wise, you can’t actually see the audience as said before, but most likely they are all on raised platforms, angling down to the set, and the Host and his talent sitting in comfortable chairs behind the desk. The way it is built, means the sound is semi funnelled to the audience from the desk, but don’t in a casual and gentle way, so the sound surrounds the audience rather than blast them from head on.
The set seems like it should be permanent, as with all the screens and desk to move, it would probably take a lot of time to set it up, and then strike it all down for another program. But because of the gap between the audience and the set, it allows the camera crew much more breathing space, in terms of looking for shots, they can move around much more freely, and not have to truly worry about getting in someone’s way. I counted about 7 cameras in total for the production. 1 Camera would be on a crane, which is movable to a certain extent, a safety camera focused on giving a wide shot of the host and talent, 2 cameras on the talent to the hosts right and left, one focusing on giving shots of the team together and each individual whilst the other 2 can go in closer for angled shots and over the shoulder shots. One final one that focuses on giving shots of the host, and a wide shot of him and 2 other contestants.
The microphones would have been maybe several hanging down above the audience to pick up the laughter and applause, whilst each person on the desk had their own individual microphone attached to their clothes. The likely size of the lighting grid is big, not huge but big. The lights are mainly focusing on the action on the set, and trying to light the talent and host as naturally as possible, without being too dark. The screens themselves give off light so they have no real need to be brightened, however the set itself, that is including things like the desk, the ‘I’ in the centre of it, the large circular piece behind Stephen Fry’s head, would all need lighting. Most of it is probably done from behind or inside the actual pieces, thus the overhead grid can focus on the talent.
The likely size of the crew would have been about 21 people needed to get the show running. The Mise-En-Scene used in the show as made to look modern, but warm and welcoming. But it doesn’t forget about the logo, and thus it keeps instilling the idea of searching for information and knowledge. The clothes the talent wear are semi formal, nothing to smart, but nothing to casual, giving an educated feeling. The health and safety issues one is to address on a set like this, is mainly the lighting, as some of it is just at the feet of the host and talent, as well as hanging directly above them, it is possible that they could fall or set something alight. Other things, is the large screens and surrounding set being held firmly in place, so it doesn’t fall on anyone. The shots that would be focused for a show like this are Mid Shots, Close Ups, 2 Shots, 3 Shots, Wide Shots, Medium Close Ups, and Over the Shoulder Shots. These are the basic and most used shots in Quiz Panel shows, as that is mainly what you can get, as they are sitting behind a desk.
Argumental, is a very unique debating show, shown on Dave and soon to be BBC2, it consists of 1 Host, 2 team captains, and 2 comedy talent, and each side has a colour, red and blue. A topic, chosen by the host is said, and both teams are to argue 1 side of the topic in question, to the audience and then it is up to them who win, by a show of cards. In terms of rounds there are about 3, the first is just a simple argument between the team captains, and the talent are allowed to have a small say in the matter. The second round, is based on a topic, however the person arguing a side, must link a set of pictures they haven’t seen before, to the topic. This is usually done between one member of the talent and a team captain of opposing sides. The final round focuses usually on something weird, and that is when the ‘winning by any means necessary’ comes into play. However it all depends on the topic set, this could range from naturism, to the general public, to the elderly. Just like Q.I the show is mainly focused on ‘ad lib’, as the reasons behind arguments tend to straw from the topic, and end up lashing out at either the opposition or the audience. This is all seen in loud applause and laughter, as the comedians amuse their audience in a bid to win their votes.
The opening title sequence is not very long, and contains many graphics in order to prove its point, as well as set the tone for the rest of the show. The music is not very fast paced, nor slow, but one thing is for certain is that it is not upbeat, instead it makes one think that there is friction between two people, which is usually what you get during an argument or a debate. During the music, the pictures of the team captains in black and white pop up, in body positions and with facial features one would expect from somebody trying to prove their point. Tagged along with them, are their teams colours of red and blue, but also captions you would hear in a debate, in large white letters. These tend to slink into each other and meld together using special effects. This put together gives off the feeling of a show about debating facts and topics, which is obviously what the Producer was intending to have done.
The format for Argumental stage is very different and in my opinion very unique for a debating show. The audience are placed in a triangle formation around the ‘debating stage’. One area sits at the very front, in between the 2 teams, looking like the neutral side. Then 2 other areas are focused behind the 2 teams, as if they have already chosen aside from the very beginning. A large stage, with lights in the floor which give off the red and blue colour in a ladder fashion, shine. Then around both sets of these lights, is a red area and a blue one, and at the edges sit the teams in comfortable white chairs. Above the stage and the 2 audience groups which sit behind the teams, are 3 very large screens, which show the name of the topics, a special graphic which is shown in the colour of the team that wins an argument, and any VT inserts. The host himself doesn’t sit anywhere near the talent, instead part of the stage branches off into a corner where he sits at a table, both colours surrounding him to show no bias.
Also the format of the show itself is very different to most debating shows, as they usually focus on serious aspects that affect our lives, however Argumental goes for those small things, which really don’t but one can have a good laugh about it. Also usually in debating shows, it’s the host who decides who wins, but this show gives that choice to the audience, but the way to win their hearts is to make them laugh, and manage to get some real form of truth into your argument. The role of the host in this show isn’t very strong, since it’s all up to the talent when it comes to actually entertaining the audience, the host only moves things on when something has gone on for long enough and calls out who wins by seeing the number of cards. In this show, tension doesn’t really play a huge part as well, there is no massive build up to when the audience vote, it’s just a simple, raise your cards, and we see who wins. Any form of tension, is really built when the 2 opposing teams argue with each other but even then it’s hilarious and never truly serious. The target audience, is probably aimed at 25-35, however those of a younger age can still enjoy it, well only to the age of 16 probably, and not may who are older will enjoy the very crude comedy used. Since the arguments seems like something you would think of at the pub, or after a long day, and is perfect to sit and watch with a beer.
In this case as well, the set seems like it is to be permanent, as there would be a lot to move and set up, and striking it would be even more of an effort. The studio is probably the same size as a medium town hall, however in this case, the lighting grid is very complex, as well as the fact that the lighting changes throughout the show at regular intervals. As the stage lights continue to flash, the overhead ones focussing on lighting the talent, and audience, there are many bars of neon light placed behind the teams, where the audience sit as well, and the screens themselves have lights above them. So for the Lighting master, he most likely has 2 other people working on other areas, instead of one person controlling the whole set. I saw about 6 cameras, most of them would have been in a fixed position apart from 2, which would get those over the shoulder shots. The crew would have numbered in my mind, as the set is much larger than the Q.I one about 25 people. The microphones are mainly fixed, above the audiences, on the shirts of the talent, and one stand for the host on his desk. The set and its props are designed to show to opposing sides coming into conflict, thus boosting the idea of argument, and picking sides. The cards represent those who would ‘follow’ you cause and your answer to a topic if it was serious. The places the audience sit seem to give off a mini- army sort of aura for some and then those sitting in the middle, seem to be undecided and it’s up to the talent to reel them in. The risks for this set are massive, going from the multitude of lights, to the massive screens placed high above the audience’s un-expecting heads, fuses can blow causing a fire, screens could fall hurting people or maybe killing them, lights could fall, the stage wouldn’t hold up, causing damage to property. To prevent this, loads of safety checks should be done, to make sure everything is being held tightly enough so nothing like this happens.
Shots that are to be used in this type of show are going to be far different than in Q.I since people are able to stand up, move around, the audience is always in clear view, and anything can happen really. So the selection of shots that would be used is, Mid Shots, Close Ups, 2 Shots, Wide Shots, Medium Close Ups, and Over the Shoulder Shots, Long shots, Medium Wide and Long Shots. All these will insure that the TV viewing audience will get all the action as sometimes on the show, people move around a lot, and the camera’s need to be quick and able to catch everything done.
This is my analyse if 2 live TV Shows, one of them being Q.I a studio based Quiz Panel show, that is all about General knowledge and the search for more. The second being Argumental, a comedy show focused on debating pointless topics in a manner of strange fashions.
The 2 shows I have chosen for this essay, is Stephen Fry’s Q.I and Dave’s Argumental. Q.I is a quiz panel show that has been around for over 10 years, and is hosted by Stephen Fry, the man who is hardly ever speechless. It focuses on testing its talents knowledge of the wide world, but I think its underlying theme is the search for knowledge. The TV Channel Dave, created a truly unique debating show, which is now going to be used on BBC 2. It focuses on arguing your point through any means necessary, even if it means getting naked in front of the audience. Both shows are regular, and usually book comedy talent, though one show looks for those less crude then the other.
Q.I is a quiz show based on General Knowledge, but usually its questions go far deeper. Its rounds aren’t very set in stone, but about 2 is the norm. The first one will last the actual duration of the show, only leaving maybe 5 minutes for the second round. This round focuses on the episodes theme, which can range from science, to animals starting with the letter G. The talent then usually guess, and have a laugh over the facts given out by the host, in order to come to some sort of answer. The second round is known as the round of ‘General Ignorance’ and is the shows form of a Quick fire round, however they usually only manage to get 2 questions in at the end of the show. Most of the show is ’ad lib’, which means that it does not stick to a rigid format, instead questions will be handed out, and then it’s up to the host and his comedy talent to fill in the gaps with their jokes. The role of Stephen Fry in series is a sort of bank of knowledge, who may or may not choose to give out small hints on certain questions, however he is not strict and his tone is always warm and open.
The opening sequence is very short, maybe about 30 seconds long, however in that time; the producer has managed to get across the feel, theme, and idea behind the show. The music used is upbeat, but calm, nothing to fast paced, thus giving a nice relaxed and comical feeling to the show. Accompanying the music is a very heavy graphic sequence; it is full of mathematic equations, literature from the past. However it also contains pictures of things on earth, ranging from the earth itself, to animals, babies, even people who affected the way we live our lives today. Whenever a picture is used, words are usually placed over it, and it works in time with the music, giving it rhythm and pace. All of this would have been done to show the many topics the show can cover, and how vast it questions can range. The final piece in the opening titles is a magnifying glass, which searches through all this information, as if trying to find something in particular, this is what I mean by showing its underlying theme for a search of knowledge, most the things asked and said, people will not know, and they watch the show partly to find out things.
The format used for Q.I is just like most panel quiz shows, 1 host, and several talents, ranging from 4 to 6. Behind them are large screens, used for VT insert material, whether it be video or audio. The shows logo will always take place, if the screens are not being used. In terms of tension building, there is no real noticeable build of it; instead they have opted for the amusing way of making a large fuss if someone has said the wrong answer. However it isn’t just any wrong answer, usually it’s when it is based off an old wives tale, for example if the question was “Who goose-stepped across Europe during the 1940’s?” The answer most people would think is the Nazi’s which is wrong as they stopped doing it after 1939. Because the answer seems so easy and full of common sense, it traps the talent, making it a rather amusing scene. This shows a very light hearted prank, the host can use to trap his talent in, but also it tells people watching, that is the wrong answer, and usually the correct term is followed. The Audience that this show is aimed for would most likely a much older audience, 45-55, but those above and far below that age range can find it equally amusing and fascinating. The reason being for this age range is because the show is broadcasted in the evening, usually during tea time, so about 6 p.m. Also the light and humour mixed with the education factor would appeal more to those who have reached a high point in their lives, and are actually interested in learning about the world.
The size of the studio seems very large, to my guessing I would say it would be 50mx50m, the size of a medium town hall. Since the set itself is rather large, and the fact the audience are never seen in any shots, and the amount of noise they make makes one think it is quite a large studio audience. The set itself is a mix of being complicated and rather simple, in terms of simplicity, the 2 large screens used for VT inserts stand tall behind the talent, but behind the host is a large circular dial, which is decorated with literature, maths and the shows logo. The desk which the all rest on is quite grand, once again it is styled in the shows logo of a Q with a small I in side of it, the host and talent sit on the upper part of the Q, whilst the rest of it stretched towards the audience, with the I raised in the centre and covered in an orange glow. It gives a very professional, but old feel to the set, thus boosting an idea of a modern library steeped in knowledge. Seating wise, you can’t actually see the audience as said before, but most likely they are all on raised platforms, angling down to the set, and the Host and his talent sitting in comfortable chairs behind the desk. The way it is built, means the sound is semi funnelled to the audience from the desk, but don’t in a casual and gentle way, so the sound surrounds the audience rather than blast them from head on.
The set seems like it should be permanent, as with all the screens and desk to move, it would probably take a lot of time to set it up, and then strike it all down for another program. But because of the gap between the audience and the set, it allows the camera crew much more breathing space, in terms of looking for shots, they can move around much more freely, and not have to truly worry about getting in someone’s way. I counted about 7 cameras in total for the production. 1 Camera would be on a crane, which is movable to a certain extent, a safety camera focused on giving a wide shot of the host and talent, 2 cameras on the talent to the hosts right and left, one focusing on giving shots of the team together and each individual whilst the other 2 can go in closer for angled shots and over the shoulder shots. One final one that focuses on giving shots of the host, and a wide shot of him and 2 other contestants.
The microphones would have been maybe several hanging down above the audience to pick up the laughter and applause, whilst each person on the desk had their own individual microphone attached to their clothes. The likely size of the lighting grid is big, not huge but big. The lights are mainly focusing on the action on the set, and trying to light the talent and host as naturally as possible, without being too dark. The screens themselves give off light so they have no real need to be brightened, however the set itself, that is including things like the desk, the ‘I’ in the centre of it, the large circular piece behind Stephen Fry’s head, would all need lighting. Most of it is probably done from behind or inside the actual pieces, thus the overhead grid can focus on the talent.
The likely size of the crew would have been about 21 people needed to get the show running. The Mise-En-Scene used in the show as made to look modern, but warm and welcoming. But it doesn’t forget about the logo, and thus it keeps instilling the idea of searching for information and knowledge. The clothes the talent wear are semi formal, nothing to smart, but nothing to casual, giving an educated feeling. The health and safety issues one is to address on a set like this, is mainly the lighting, as some of it is just at the feet of the host and talent, as well as hanging directly above them, it is possible that they could fall or set something alight. Other things, is the large screens and surrounding set being held firmly in place, so it doesn’t fall on anyone. The shots that would be focused for a show like this are Mid Shots, Close Ups, 2 Shots, 3 Shots, Wide Shots, Medium Close Ups, and Over the Shoulder Shots. These are the basic and most used shots in Quiz Panel shows, as that is mainly what you can get, as they are sitting behind a desk.
Argumental, is a very unique debating show, shown on Dave and soon to be BBC2, it consists of 1 Host, 2 team captains, and 2 comedy talent, and each side has a colour, red and blue. A topic, chosen by the host is said, and both teams are to argue 1 side of the topic in question, to the audience and then it is up to them who win, by a show of cards. In terms of rounds there are about 3, the first is just a simple argument between the team captains, and the talent are allowed to have a small say in the matter. The second round, is based on a topic, however the person arguing a side, must link a set of pictures they haven’t seen before, to the topic. This is usually done between one member of the talent and a team captain of opposing sides. The final round focuses usually on something weird, and that is when the ‘winning by any means necessary’ comes into play. However it all depends on the topic set, this could range from naturism, to the general public, to the elderly. Just like Q.I the show is mainly focused on ‘ad lib’, as the reasons behind arguments tend to straw from the topic, and end up lashing out at either the opposition or the audience. This is all seen in loud applause and laughter, as the comedians amuse their audience in a bid to win their votes.
The opening title sequence is not very long, and contains many graphics in order to prove its point, as well as set the tone for the rest of the show. The music is not very fast paced, nor slow, but one thing is for certain is that it is not upbeat, instead it makes one think that there is friction between two people, which is usually what you get during an argument or a debate. During the music, the pictures of the team captains in black and white pop up, in body positions and with facial features one would expect from somebody trying to prove their point. Tagged along with them, are their teams colours of red and blue, but also captions you would hear in a debate, in large white letters. These tend to slink into each other and meld together using special effects. This put together gives off the feeling of a show about debating facts and topics, which is obviously what the Producer was intending to have done.
The format for Argumental stage is very different and in my opinion very unique for a debating show. The audience are placed in a triangle formation around the ‘debating stage’. One area sits at the very front, in between the 2 teams, looking like the neutral side. Then 2 other areas are focused behind the 2 teams, as if they have already chosen aside from the very beginning. A large stage, with lights in the floor which give off the red and blue colour in a ladder fashion, shine. Then around both sets of these lights, is a red area and a blue one, and at the edges sit the teams in comfortable white chairs. Above the stage and the 2 audience groups which sit behind the teams, are 3 very large screens, which show the name of the topics, a special graphic which is shown in the colour of the team that wins an argument, and any VT inserts. The host himself doesn’t sit anywhere near the talent, instead part of the stage branches off into a corner where he sits at a table, both colours surrounding him to show no bias.
Also the format of the show itself is very different to most debating shows, as they usually focus on serious aspects that affect our lives, however Argumental goes for those small things, which really don’t but one can have a good laugh about it. Also usually in debating shows, it’s the host who decides who wins, but this show gives that choice to the audience, but the way to win their hearts is to make them laugh, and manage to get some real form of truth into your argument. The role of the host in this show isn’t very strong, since it’s all up to the talent when it comes to actually entertaining the audience, the host only moves things on when something has gone on for long enough and calls out who wins by seeing the number of cards. In this show, tension doesn’t really play a huge part as well, there is no massive build up to when the audience vote, it’s just a simple, raise your cards, and we see who wins. Any form of tension, is really built when the 2 opposing teams argue with each other but even then it’s hilarious and never truly serious. The target audience, is probably aimed at 25-35, however those of a younger age can still enjoy it, well only to the age of 16 probably, and not may who are older will enjoy the very crude comedy used. Since the arguments seems like something you would think of at the pub, or after a long day, and is perfect to sit and watch with a beer.
In this case as well, the set seems like it is to be permanent, as there would be a lot to move and set up, and striking it would be even more of an effort. The studio is probably the same size as a medium town hall, however in this case, the lighting grid is very complex, as well as the fact that the lighting changes throughout the show at regular intervals. As the stage lights continue to flash, the overhead ones focussing on lighting the talent, and audience, there are many bars of neon light placed behind the teams, where the audience sit as well, and the screens themselves have lights above them. So for the Lighting master, he most likely has 2 other people working on other areas, instead of one person controlling the whole set. I saw about 6 cameras, most of them would have been in a fixed position apart from 2, which would get those over the shoulder shots. The crew would have numbered in my mind, as the set is much larger than the Q.I one about 25 people. The microphones are mainly fixed, above the audiences, on the shirts of the talent, and one stand for the host on his desk. The set and its props are designed to show to opposing sides coming into conflict, thus boosting the idea of argument, and picking sides. The cards represent those who would ‘follow’ you cause and your answer to a topic if it was serious. The places the audience sit seem to give off a mini- army sort of aura for some and then those sitting in the middle, seem to be undecided and it’s up to the talent to reel them in. The risks for this set are massive, going from the multitude of lights, to the massive screens placed high above the audience’s un-expecting heads, fuses can blow causing a fire, screens could fall hurting people or maybe killing them, lights could fall, the stage wouldn’t hold up, causing damage to property. To prevent this, loads of safety checks should be done, to make sure everything is being held tightly enough so nothing like this happens.
Shots that are to be used in this type of show are going to be far different than in Q.I since people are able to stand up, move around, the audience is always in clear view, and anything can happen really. So the selection of shots that would be used is, Mid Shots, Close Ups, 2 Shots, Wide Shots, Medium Close Ups, and Over the Shoulder Shots, Long shots, Medium Wide and Long Shots. All these will insure that the TV viewing audience will get all the action as sometimes on the show, people move around a lot, and the camera’s need to be quick and able to catch everything done.
This is my analyse if 2 live TV Shows, one of them being Q.I a studio based Quiz Panel show, that is all about General knowledge and the search for more. The second being Argumental, a comedy show focused on debating pointless topics in a manner of strange fashions.
Monday 7 December 2009
VT Insert work
During the multiple sessions we were having in our groups to order our rounds. I was busy making sure the Internet rounds VT inserts were done, and then helped some friends out in thinking about opening title sequences, audio music and stings. The title through a class vote became Media Meltdown, and with the name, we thought the show was to be upbeat. So using programs such as Garage Band and Logic Pro, me and another PPP (Post Production Producer) created a theme tune, however in truth it sounded like a construction site and wasn't particualry nice. I tried to change it however it still failed, but 2 others had managed to go onto youtube and watch a guide on using photoshop, and several other programs, to create the opening sequence, with stings and title.
It took them 2 days, and for the time they made it and a week off due to hospital reasons, i find that a lot of my work has been done for me. Which I am gratefull, but at the same time, was hoping to get something done. So at the first chance i leapt to gain some ground of respect and took the job of compiling all rounds vt inserts onto 1 DVD, complete with chapters. Needless to say I found it difficult to work with, and even now 2 days before the actual show there are still some bugs that need sorting out.
What I had to do was get every single audio, video, and picture track into Final Cut Pro, and edit it all together into one peice. Then export that onto DVD Pro, and give it some chapters, i had to redo the peice several times, due to missing titles out, or not knowing the order that some were to go in. On top of that the script writer needed a Cue sheet of the inserts to do the scripts. So once i had worked everything together, i then had to go through each insert, and record its start time, end time, duration, and finally what actually happens in the clip.
Most of it was fine, however 2 of the clips i made for the internet round was horribly short, about 2 seconds, and that is my fault for not noticing it sooner. Also i thought that i had done the chapter marking correctly, however when returning to college the next day, I had missed the chance to do it as i was at a doctors appointment, and even with the help of my fellow PPP's the chapters had not synced right.
It took them 2 days, and for the time they made it and a week off due to hospital reasons, i find that a lot of my work has been done for me. Which I am gratefull, but at the same time, was hoping to get something done. So at the first chance i leapt to gain some ground of respect and took the job of compiling all rounds vt inserts onto 1 DVD, complete with chapters. Needless to say I found it difficult to work with, and even now 2 days before the actual show there are still some bugs that need sorting out.
What I had to do was get every single audio, video, and picture track into Final Cut Pro, and edit it all together into one peice. Then export that onto DVD Pro, and give it some chapters, i had to redo the peice several times, due to missing titles out, or not knowing the order that some were to go in. On top of that the script writer needed a Cue sheet of the inserts to do the scripts. So once i had worked everything together, i then had to go through each insert, and record its start time, end time, duration, and finally what actually happens in the clip.
Most of it was fine, however 2 of the clips i made for the internet round was horribly short, about 2 seconds, and that is my fault for not noticing it sooner. Also i thought that i had done the chapter marking correctly, however when returning to college the next day, I had missed the chance to do it as i was at a doctors appointment, and even with the help of my fellow PPP's the chapters had not synced right.
What do we want and expect from people in certain roles?
We had a moment to think about what and how we would want, lets say camera operators to act, and go about their job, aswell as the talent, and even the Director. This was to get those people doing those jobs get into the right frame of mind, that we would remember and help us for the actual shoot.
Talent- We would expect and hope fro mthe talent that they would be helpfull, and listen to the floor manager, and director when asked about something or told to do something, such as Mic checks, or how to act. We would also want them to be mature, and focused, not to the point where they become ridculously dull, but so they take it seriously as well as having some fun. Also if something in the script goes wrong, to be able to think on their feet, so they can continue the pace of the show, even is something goes wrong.
Camera Operators- One major thing we would ask of Camera Ops is a good understanding of shots, I mean if they don't know what a Mid shot is, then is pointless having them work the camera as that is one of the most used shots for this type of production! A good attention span aswell, so that they can stay focused on listenign to what the director is saying aswell as following the action on set. Also to have good awareness of his surroundings, so he doesnt tread on the cabels, or bump itno something, but aswell to be able to use the space given to find good shots.
Sound Operators- They should always make sure that no other sounds or 'Interferance' can be heard, from the studio. If done properly, then the only sounds heard are those that are mean't to be their, whilst if not done properly, one might end up hearing the sound of ventaltion, or people talking from outside. Also they are to have a good attention span, and concentrate on following the script aswell as the conversation struck up by the Host and his talent. Make sure the levels aren't to high and to make sure they have mastered the fader.
Vision Mixers- Always listen to the Director, and be quick with the fingers, so each cut is smooth and swift. Allowing the show to look natural and follow the talent without problems, in turn causing a good viewing experience for those watching it on TV. Focus is also needed, if you were to forget which monitor represented which camera, then it woudl ruin the show completely.
Floor Managers- Always be alert on anythign that is happening on set, and then see to it that it works perfectly fine, if it is too take time to fix, then the FM is to alert the Director about it, so he can manuvere around the problem.
Directors- They are to have a clear voice, so that people can understand when being talked to , and what they are being asked off. To be alert of the situation, and always watch the monitors, so he can plan the next shots he wants, and which cameras to do them.
Talent- We would expect and hope fro mthe talent that they would be helpfull, and listen to the floor manager, and director when asked about something or told to do something, such as Mic checks, or how to act. We would also want them to be mature, and focused, not to the point where they become ridculously dull, but so they take it seriously as well as having some fun. Also if something in the script goes wrong, to be able to think on their feet, so they can continue the pace of the show, even is something goes wrong.
Camera Operators- One major thing we would ask of Camera Ops is a good understanding of shots, I mean if they don't know what a Mid shot is, then is pointless having them work the camera as that is one of the most used shots for this type of production! A good attention span aswell, so that they can stay focused on listenign to what the director is saying aswell as following the action on set. Also to have good awareness of his surroundings, so he doesnt tread on the cabels, or bump itno something, but aswell to be able to use the space given to find good shots.
Sound Operators- They should always make sure that no other sounds or 'Interferance' can be heard, from the studio. If done properly, then the only sounds heard are those that are mean't to be their, whilst if not done properly, one might end up hearing the sound of ventaltion, or people talking from outside. Also they are to have a good attention span, and concentrate on following the script aswell as the conversation struck up by the Host and his talent. Make sure the levels aren't to high and to make sure they have mastered the fader.
Vision Mixers- Always listen to the Director, and be quick with the fingers, so each cut is smooth and swift. Allowing the show to look natural and follow the talent without problems, in turn causing a good viewing experience for those watching it on TV. Focus is also needed, if you were to forget which monitor represented which camera, then it woudl ruin the show completely.
Floor Managers- Always be alert on anythign that is happening on set, and then see to it that it works perfectly fine, if it is too take time to fix, then the FM is to alert the Director about it, so he can manuvere around the problem.
Directors- They are to have a clear voice, so that people can understand when being talked to , and what they are being asked off. To be alert of the situation, and always watch the monitors, so he can plan the next shots he wants, and which cameras to do them.
10 Questions for First rehearsal
1Q: What is the dB range for speech?
A: -18 to -6 dB
2Q:What does the Vision Mixer's single output go to?
A: The HDDR (Hard Disk Drive Recorer)
3Q: What signal does the Audio Mixer receive?
A: Analogue
4Q: What are the stands the Camera's actually rest on called?
A: Pedastels
5Q:When is the Director in full control of the studio?
A: When he says, " Everybody on Cans please"
6Q: On the Cool lights what is their terminology for their shutters?
A: Barn Doors
7Q: What are the bars above called?
A: Lighting Grid
8Q: On digital what dB level must the sound not pass?
A: 0 dB
9Q: What is a tracking shot?
A: Physically moving the camera forwards or backwards
10Q: What does the Producer focus on?
A: Content of the program
A: -18 to -6 dB
2Q:What does the Vision Mixer's single output go to?
A: The HDDR (Hard Disk Drive Recorer)
3Q: What signal does the Audio Mixer receive?
A: Analogue
4Q: What are the stands the Camera's actually rest on called?
A: Pedastels
5Q:When is the Director in full control of the studio?
A: When he says, " Everybody on Cans please"
6Q: On the Cool lights what is their terminology for their shutters?
A: Barn Doors
7Q: What are the bars above called?
A: Lighting Grid
8Q: On digital what dB level must the sound not pass?
A: 0 dB
9Q: What is a tracking shot?
A: Physically moving the camera forwards or backwards
10Q: What does the Producer focus on?
A: Content of the program
Production Designer Lesson
We learnt more about the role of the Produciton Designer aswell as the Artistic Director which are both the same really only for this project, in the real world, the PD is the Head Honcho.
Nothing infront og the camera is accidental!!
In making a set, everythign is to be their on purpose, and these are the terms and thought patterns one should thinkg about when making a set.
1)Broad Storkes
-Tonal Palette, what colours do you wish to appear on the screen?
-Visual Motifs, a way of identifying something
2)Concept Art
-All design adds to theme
-It cannot distract the audience's attention
3)Lockdown
-Scene Breakdown, how the location looks like
-Prop Breakdown; Action-Anything that is used
Dressing- Anything that is only for set
4)The Team
-Production Designer-Head Honcho
-Art Director
-Props Manager
-Construction Manager
-Lighting Master
5)The Product
-How much romm do you have?
-Specific needs?
-Textures, Finishes?
-Build it/Decorate it
-Erect it/Light it
These are the things the Production Designer, and our 5 Artistic Directors must think about when designing the set
Nothing infront og the camera is accidental!!
In making a set, everythign is to be their on purpose, and these are the terms and thought patterns one should thinkg about when making a set.
1)Broad Storkes
-Tonal Palette, what colours do you wish to appear on the screen?
-Visual Motifs, a way of identifying something
2)Concept Art
-All design adds to theme
-It cannot distract the audience's attention
3)Lockdown
-Scene Breakdown, how the location looks like
-Prop Breakdown; Action-Anything that is used
Dressing- Anything that is only for set
4)The Team
-Production Designer-Head Honcho
-Art Director
-Props Manager
-Construction Manager
-Lighting Master
5)The Product
-How much romm do you have?
-Specific needs?
-Textures, Finishes?
-Build it/Decorate it
-Erect it/Light it
These are the things the Production Designer, and our 5 Artistic Directors must think about when designing the set
First Group Meeting
We had our first meeting, I am with Jasmine, Ryan and George. We were then told that each group was to be in charge of their own individual round, and that the show would have 5, 2 first, then a break followed by the final 3. We were read out several roles which one person would be in charge of per group, they were;
-Technical Producer
-Artistic Director
-Post Production Producer
-Content Producer
The Technical Producer was given to Ryan, as he is good with cameras and such. The role of the TP is to listen to what everyone else is doing, then taking it to Peter, and seeing if it can actually be physically done on set. So if the art director had an idea of having a TV placed inside a board and then plays the VT insterts, behind the host. Ryan is the one who sees if it can be done, and if not trys to find ways in which it could.
Artistic Director was given to Jasmine, since she showed us all her previous art work from GCSE, and it was much better then what we could do! Her role is to work with the other Art Directors in creating the set, and also creating it. We were obviously to help the group of Art Directors, in the makign of the set as this was a class thing.
Post Production Producer was given to myself, as I was good in using Final Cut Pro* among other programs on the iMacs. The job of the PPP is usually to add in the final edits to a show, but as this will be filmed 'As Live' we are in charge of creatign Title Sequnces, importing the Audio tracks, and any Video tracks used for VT Insert material. After mangaing all of these things for my round, I would combine it with the other PPP's stuff to make a compelte order of inserts.
Content Producer was given to George, who at the time wasn't around, but we knew he wanted to be director for the show, so this was his stepping stone. The role of the CP is to watch over the rest of the group to see if all is running smoothly for the round, aswell as create the questions and write them up.
We then had to come up with ideas about the round sthat could be used in our Quiz Show. In the end they became (in order)
-Music
-Internet
-Movies
-TV
-Quickfire
We were hoping to get the Quickfire round, however we were out voted and became in charge of the internet round. So our questions were to invlove maybe famous clips from the net, and facts about it. So we went over to the library and began searching the net and found several clips fomr youtube, they formed 4 of our questions to our round. The questions were;
Q1: What theme song are these boys singing?
(VT of muted boys singing)
A: Pokemon Theme
(VT of boys singing chorus)
Q2: Who is this man complaining about?
(VT of Chris Crocker without persons name)
A: Britney Spears
(VT of Chris Crocker saying her name)
Q3: What happens next?
(VT of man in bat suit scaring someone)
A: Falls over
(VT of man falling over)
Q4: What happens nect?
(VT of drunk woman getting onto bench to dance)
A: Falls off
(VT of woman falling off)
These are the questions we made for the VT inserts for our round.
-Technical Producer
-Artistic Director
-Post Production Producer
-Content Producer
The Technical Producer was given to Ryan, as he is good with cameras and such. The role of the TP is to listen to what everyone else is doing, then taking it to Peter, and seeing if it can actually be physically done on set. So if the art director had an idea of having a TV placed inside a board and then plays the VT insterts, behind the host. Ryan is the one who sees if it can be done, and if not trys to find ways in which it could.
Artistic Director was given to Jasmine, since she showed us all her previous art work from GCSE, and it was much better then what we could do! Her role is to work with the other Art Directors in creating the set, and also creating it. We were obviously to help the group of Art Directors, in the makign of the set as this was a class thing.
Post Production Producer was given to myself, as I was good in using Final Cut Pro* among other programs on the iMacs. The job of the PPP is usually to add in the final edits to a show, but as this will be filmed 'As Live' we are in charge of creatign Title Sequnces, importing the Audio tracks, and any Video tracks used for VT Insert material. After mangaing all of these things for my round, I would combine it with the other PPP's stuff to make a compelte order of inserts.
Content Producer was given to George, who at the time wasn't around, but we knew he wanted to be director for the show, so this was his stepping stone. The role of the CP is to watch over the rest of the group to see if all is running smoothly for the round, aswell as create the questions and write them up.
We then had to come up with ideas about the round sthat could be used in our Quiz Show. In the end they became (in order)
-Music
-Internet
-Movies
-TV
-Quickfire
We were hoping to get the Quickfire round, however we were out voted and became in charge of the internet round. So our questions were to invlove maybe famous clips from the net, and facts about it. So we went over to the library and began searching the net and found several clips fomr youtube, they formed 4 of our questions to our round. The questions were;
Q1: What theme song are these boys singing?
(VT of muted boys singing)
A: Pokemon Theme
(VT of boys singing chorus)
Q2: Who is this man complaining about?
(VT of Chris Crocker without persons name)
A: Britney Spears
(VT of Chris Crocker saying her name)
Q3: What happens next?
(VT of man in bat suit scaring someone)
A: Falls over
(VT of man falling over)
Q4: What happens nect?
(VT of drunk woman getting onto bench to dance)
A: Falls off
(VT of woman falling off)
These are the questions we made for the VT inserts for our round.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)