Digital News - Editing Development
I am in charge of the editing of the whole episode. I have recently put together a rough cut of two packages and a live which after feedback from Helen found needed a lot of work doing to it.
I needed to cut down approx. 6 minutes of footage from both packages in total down to one package of 2 minutes 30 seconds. This was a big challenge for me as I found it difficult to be ruthless with the interviews. In order to help me I have done some research into news by watching ITV Meridian's packages and also BBC's packages to see how they could have sifted the information to make it relevant to what the viewer needs to know.
For our project, the viewer needs to understand what the Tesco Bags of Help scheme is, who the organisation Groundwork is and their involvement and also what Demelza are going to do with the finds that they receive from the scheme. I worked out that it is better for the viewer to hear the solid, factual information such as what the scheme is and why they have it through the people who run it(Tesco) and then go to a more light hearted "how it will benefit" with Demelza. This is because as a group, we feel that the audience would prefer to know what they are doing with the money and why they have applied for funding as opposed to who they got the funding from and how they went about getting it. This can all be learnt from the Tesco interview which will be more important for the viewer's understanding and general interest.
During the edit for Demelza's sequence in the package, we noticed a rather distracting hum that flows through the piece. I tried really hard to remove the hum using Adobe Audition using the tools "Noise reduction" and then "Normalise" to create the right volume levels. This worked for removing the hum however it made the interviewee incredibly quiet. If I then turned up her volume using the normalise tool, it created a horrible feedback that peaked and make any "s" sounding vocabulary high pitched and gave a static background. We decided after consultation with the group that the information being given was to valuable to the story to be lost and we would just have to work around the sound and learn from it next time. In order to do this, we would need to make sure that we listen out for not only good sound from the interviewee but also for any background interference.
Our live was not too difficult to edit together as it was a "live" section so is not supposed to have a lot of sequencing to it like a package is. After the rough cut with Helen, she suggested getting some single shots of the interviewee to make it more interesting for the viewer to watch as well as allowing them to engage with their information further as the attention is solely on them. We only filmed a standard two shot so in the edit, I have changed the positioning of the clip and zoomed in to create a single shot of the interviewee as a close up. I have covered the edit with an appropriate GV so that the piece with still flow together nicely. I think this has worked well because it has allowed us to make adaptations to what we originally thought would work and improve it by quite a lot. In future, I think it will be important not to be frightened of moving the camera to a single during a live shoot, so long as it is at an appropriate moment. I think this comes down to how well researched you are on the subject of your questions as it will allow the director to tell the camera operator when to move to a single based on the questions being asked. This is definitely something I hope to achieve next time.
I needed to cut down approx. 6 minutes of footage from both packages in total down to one package of 2 minutes 30 seconds. This was a big challenge for me as I found it difficult to be ruthless with the interviews. In order to help me I have done some research into news by watching ITV Meridian's packages and also BBC's packages to see how they could have sifted the information to make it relevant to what the viewer needs to know.
For our project, the viewer needs to understand what the Tesco Bags of Help scheme is, who the organisation Groundwork is and their involvement and also what Demelza are going to do with the finds that they receive from the scheme. I worked out that it is better for the viewer to hear the solid, factual information such as what the scheme is and why they have it through the people who run it(Tesco) and then go to a more light hearted "how it will benefit" with Demelza. This is because as a group, we feel that the audience would prefer to know what they are doing with the money and why they have applied for funding as opposed to who they got the funding from and how they went about getting it. This can all be learnt from the Tesco interview which will be more important for the viewer's understanding and general interest.
During the edit for Demelza's sequence in the package, we noticed a rather distracting hum that flows through the piece. I tried really hard to remove the hum using Adobe Audition using the tools "Noise reduction" and then "Normalise" to create the right volume levels. This worked for removing the hum however it made the interviewee incredibly quiet. If I then turned up her volume using the normalise tool, it created a horrible feedback that peaked and make any "s" sounding vocabulary high pitched and gave a static background. We decided after consultation with the group that the information being given was to valuable to the story to be lost and we would just have to work around the sound and learn from it next time. In order to do this, we would need to make sure that we listen out for not only good sound from the interviewee but also for any background interference.
Our live was not too difficult to edit together as it was a "live" section so is not supposed to have a lot of sequencing to it like a package is. After the rough cut with Helen, she suggested getting some single shots of the interviewee to make it more interesting for the viewer to watch as well as allowing them to engage with their information further as the attention is solely on them. We only filmed a standard two shot so in the edit, I have changed the positioning of the clip and zoomed in to create a single shot of the interviewee as a close up. I have covered the edit with an appropriate GV so that the piece with still flow together nicely. I think this has worked well because it has allowed us to make adaptations to what we originally thought would work and improve it by quite a lot. In future, I think it will be important not to be frightened of moving the camera to a single during a live shoot, so long as it is at an appropriate moment. I think this comes down to how well researched you are on the subject of your questions as it will allow the director to tell the camera operator when to move to a single based on the questions being asked. This is definitely something I hope to achieve next time.
Comments
Post a Comment