Property of Peter Waiting....all rights reserved?
..................
.................why not?
Thursday, 2 February 2012
Research Portfolio
Full performance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81UXpyIPaRM
Song specific video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcdZtAHEpJw
The recording of live music has constantly changed since the first ever performance was filmed and immortalised onto tape, but the aims of performance recorders has always been to make the act they are recording look and sound as good as they possibly can. Obviously the genre began with 1 static wide angle camera positioned looking at a stage filled with performers, but this has changed greatly as the genre has evolved along with technology. We have seen the development of better quality camera’s for music performances, high dynamic range lighting, various ways in which the cameras can be moved and repositioned for better angles, and even technology designed to aid the broadcast of the acts live to the whole world in an instant, but nonetheless, that static wide angle shot is still very much a staple of the genre.
In my opinion, musically, Glastonbury is one of the most influential annual events in the music calendar. It has been running since 1970 and Michael Evis, the festival organiser, has put a great deal of effort into acquiring the hottest acts of the moment to perform on the world renown “Pyramid Stage”, as well as scouting new talent to showcase to the world. This high standard of performers (including BB King, Elvis Costello, Al Green and David Bowie), has attracted the worlds media, and more importantly for the UK, the BBC (British Broadcasting Company). As the event grew and started to dominate the British festival season, the annual mud fest, previously known as a “hippy fest”, changed from having cult status to becoming a household name. This change in public opinion gave the BBC an opportunity to broadcast the event, which was until then thought to be associated with rebellion (which as we know is not usually in the interests of any BBC producer).
As I mentioned above, there is often only one aim of a director when broadcasting an artist live: To make the performer look as good as they possibly can. With reference to camera positioning and angles on the performers at a stage like Glastonbury, there is only a limited number of things you can do with the camera and often, due to the nature of the content, you can only record an artist through an invisible wall as their performance is the most important thing to the viewers and they cannot appear to be interfered with by the camera crew. Despite the camera being limited to “3rd person audience view”, directors have adapted the way they shoot and cut music performances to keep the audience interested.
It is thought that while we progress further with technology, younger audiences are getting used to faster paced programming and more obscure/interesting shots. The genre has had to adapt in order to attract the (apparently) uninterested youth audiences.
As we can see in this example, we have more recently seen the inclusion of dollys in a genre that previously used static cameras. This small change in equipment creates a large difference in filming an event like this, as the director and crew are able to not only get the variations available on a standard tripod, but could now change the X and Y axis of the camera (even at the same time with the better quality dollys). This creates a much more immersive environment for the viewers at home, helping to attract wider audiences and boost the ratings for the show. The dolly can be used in many different ways for great effect in music productions, and can give the viewer at home a “unique” view of the performance, one that a festival goer would not be able to experience e.g. hovering above the crowd. Despite it currently being a constant in the genre, there is only a few examples of this in the chosen video, but still gives a view that cannot be achieved by a person at the event.
An example of this is at 00:20. Here BB King (the king of blues and arguably the greatest blues artist of all time), addresses the crowd by saying “Good evening ladies and gentlemen”, in which the crowd respond with a half-hearted cheer. He then uses a classic performing trick by asking the crowd the same question again, usually accompanied by a louder and longer cheer. This is a technique known to musicians as “pantomiming the crowd”. It is not uncommon for a musician to attempt to build up atmosphere in this way, so from a director’s standpoint, this pantomime skit can also give a director an opportunity to showcase his talent by changing the shot to match what the television audience can hear and what BB is saying.
At 00:20, when Mr King grabs the microphone, the director has chosen a low angle mid shot of the BB, with band member slightly out of focus in the background. This shot is used to let the television audience know that he is the star of this performance and the lower angle gives him superior status to the audience at the festival and back home.
As he picks up the microphone, he says “Good evening ladies and gentlemen”. The director should see this as an attempt for BB to interact with the crowd and the director should accordingly respond to what is happening on stage. After a quick cut to a tracking mid of BB from the other side, the director arranges to have the camera follow the narrative. As the crowd begin cheering in response to BB, the camera shows us a shot of the festival audience as it zooms in from an extreme long of the pyramid stage, heightening the atmosphere. As the crowd finishes the initial response, BB repeats the question to create more audience participation and feedback. As he does this, the director lines up another “reaction shot” from the audience and uses one of the front side stage dollys. The camera starts high above the crowd and lowers vertically towards the floor, while simultaneously moving horizontally towards the crowd and slowly zooming out. This camera movement, although fairly complex, is simply used to help engage the audience at home with the artist and the festival-going audience. This type of shot is useful to give a variety of height/angles of the cameras.
Another reason why this shot is so common in festivals is due to the advances made in technology. The development of large jumbo-screens made the broadcasting of festivals a totally different experience. The cameras were not only there to broadcast to their audience on their sofas, but also made it possible to broadcast the event live at the event; (In Glastonbury’s case, these screens are called “I-mag”). This changes the dynamic of the production as the directors responsibility is not only to their broadcaster, but to all members of the festival watching the 3 giant screens surrounding the Pyramid Stage. I know from personal experience that a dynamic director, constantly looking for interesting narrative, can change the atmosphere of crowd - and that a poorly directed performance can leave some members of the audience feeling low. The bad quality of the production can often retract from the artist’s performance, and subsequently the introduction of jumbo screens put much more pressure on the director than before.
Glastonbury’s Pyramid Stage Analysis
After repeatedly watching my chosen broadcast, I used the evidence I gathered from the video and drew from my own knowledge of live concerts to create an accompanying floor plan to help fully understand my research. Not only was I looking for camera positioning, I also spent extra time analysing the height of the camera’s, the distances of the cameras and even the type of movements the cameras made.
Below is a mock up of the Pyramid Arena. Here i have highlighted the positions of the cameras outside of the pyramid itself – (i made a different floor plan for the fenced off stage area)
Starting with the two camera’s on the “front of house mix tower” – it is obvious looking from the broadcast that there are at least two different cameras in the mix tower, as the height of the shots changed slightly, despite coming from the same angle. For the director, it is important to have 2 cameras on the mix tower. The reason for this being that during a live concert, it is important to keep a camera constantly on a wide angle, as cutting between CU shots and wides can help give emphasis on certain aspects of the performance (e.g a guitar solo). They most likely had the cameras on different levels to give a variation of shots from the wide. As is evident, one of the cameras is eyelevel with the musicians, and one slightly higher. The two camera system means that one static camera can hold the wide while the other looks for interesting and new shots using a tripod.
The camera positioned looking at the stage from the right hand side is also sitting on a tripod. This camera can be used to get shots of the performance whilst also having a different angle on the crowd, making a panoramic pan of the entire arena possible. The side-on angle is crucial to give some depth to the performance and helps the audience at home to get a better impression of the layout of the performance, giving more information about crowd size/reaction.
There are two extreme long shots set up by the BBC camera crew. One camera is situated on a nearby blimp/aircraft. This camera is likely to spend most of the time getting panoramic views of the whole festival, but focusing on the main stage will be important for this camera as that will be where the most exciting events are occurring and the largest crowds will be at Glastonbury Festival. The other camera is situated behind the stage on Pennard Hill, a nearby landmark. This camera will be used similarly to the ariel camera. These cameras can be used to great effect because of their panoramic views. “Zoom and pan” shots will dominate these cameras to enhance their positioning.
As is evident by my floor plan, there are 3 jumbo screens at the Pyramid Stage. These are located to either side of the stage, and behind the Mix Tower. The positioning of these allows for maximum viewing by festival attendees, helping smaller audience members and children to still see a piece of the action if their height does not allow a clear view. Despite it’s odd positioning, the screen is placed behind the Mix Tower to allow any members of the public stuck behind it to see the stage; despite the large scaffolding structure in the way.
Here is my detailed floor plan of the Pyramid Stage and Stage Front Pit:
Here we can see that there is only two camera that can break the performers invisible wall, the one behind the stage. All other cameras used in this production are from an audience perspective, but these two on stage break the barrier between artist and public member, giving these 2 cameras a unique angle on the musicians, as well as the crowd.
Two static cameras are placed on either side of the stage in the stage pit, below the performers. These cameras will be used for basic camera functions, as well as keeping the television audience on the same level as the festival audience. This gives the impression whilst on televsiion that the viewer is actually at the event by elevating the musicians to the same lever that the crowd view them from – often, viewing a gig from a height can make one feel disconnected from the artist as elevated musicians are a staple in the industry for practical reasons, as well as power balance.
The two cameras on dolly cranes are used for a wide variety of reasons, the main being the wide variety of shot that they can produce. Their manouverability means that the director has many more options than he would have if the cameras were static. The other dollycam in the stage pit is on a track. Unique shots that this camera can offer are those of power. This angle gives the audience at home the oppertunity to get closer to the act than the festival crowd can, helping to immerse the audience in the performance. The one key shot i think this camera can get is one of power. A slow pan, from left to right, low angle, zooming out shows B B King on the stage, guitar in hand, revelling in the love and passion from the crowd, feeding off the power and staring into the sky. This camera shot only adds more quality to the performance, and despite this scenario already oozing with power and confidence, the sweeping shot makes this scene look absolutely film-esque....as intended by the director....
Blog for Practical Assessment
In the process of planning our assessment shoot at Lever Street Music Campus, the present members of the class sat down and discussed our production roles. As the shoot is not just for our benefit, but part of an assessment, we collectively felt that it was only fair if the roles were divided up evenly, giving each member a chance to perform in all areas of production. I decided to aid my classmates early in the process.
During a rather unruly and heated class discussion about the allocation of roles, I decided to make my voice heard, and subsequently took charge of the role assigning. This was simply an attempt to prevent a situation that had begun spiralling, so, using an authoritative voice, I publicly asked each of my classmates whether they we’re happy with the roles that they had been assigned in an attempt to sort out the argument. Everyone responded confidently that they were happy with their assigned roles and any potential disputes over roles were quashed. Despite this action not technically being cast as a “role”, I definitely think these types of situations can affect the outcome of a production. In terms of how I benefitted the team, I cannot specifically describe how exactly this would have helped my course mates, but am confident that a positive attitude and a friendly approach to every circumstance will help the success of the production, be it an evaluated college assignment or a professional broadcast. I value this instance to show leadership qualities, but am in no way suggesting that I was the ‘leader’.
In these circumstances I felt the class discussion needed some ‘direction’, were it not for the fact that our tutor had taken this opportunity to test the class’s skills at discussion and co-operation, in which we had almost miserably failed.
These are the roles that I undertook during our production:
CAMERA 2 OPERATOR
CAMERA 1 OPERATOR
DIRECTOR
CAMERA 2 ASSISTANT
RUNNNER
Starting with the most ‘basic’ of my roles, the job of a runner has always been looked down upon by the industry as being the ‘base role’ of most jobs in the media. Despite this stigma attached to running, I find this role to be one of the most crucial in the system and have learnt that every job has to be valued and thought of as ‘important’. It is common knowledge that the job of a runner typically involves picking up the slack from the professionals, travelling to/from studio or set and making hundreds of cups of hot beverages. To confirm, during our assessment at “The Centre for Music”, whilst performing my duties as a runner, I was not making cups of tea. My evaluation of my running job at Lever Street campus shows that my involvement in each performance was not selfish. The job of a runner is to offer your services as a person, helping those around you to fulfil their job requirements fully and lending a hand with anything that needs sorting. To assess my performance, I would say that my main role as a runner was to aid the floor managers; the lack of talkback between the cameras can create a void between the studio and gallery, so running down the artists for their post performance interview was crucial in helping the production run effortlessly, and carrying information can be just as important as carrying pieces of equipment from place to place.
I enjoyed my work with the cameras because of the nature of the role. I enjoy looking through the lenses of any camera; seeing it as a means of capturing a moment. My production assignment was no different. I felt confident operating the cameras in the studio and am happy to provide interesting shot types for my director to use. Camera operating is obviously, due to the nature of the industry, intrinsically linked to almost all other roles in the business; to the extent that the performers wouldn’t bother performing if there were no camera operators.
Starting with my work on camera 1, the tripod is neatly tucked away in the corner of stage left. This camera is positioned behind a large monitor speaker in the corner in order to block it from entering camera 2 + 3’s shots. It is the closest camera to the artists, meaning that successfully operating it will enable the audience to get closer to the performance, giving the audience a more personal view of the performance as if they were actually witnessing the event. I had no issues operating this camera, as camera familiarity is not one of my weak points. Issues I faced whilst operating this camera were with regard to the talkback system. Unfortunately, the two way talk back systems had failed, leading to communication difficulties from the studio back to the gallery. Able to hear the director, I could follow instruction from him/her and also offer shots to the director when he was not addressing me or when I was not live. I felt that the difficulties in communication made the whole process harder for every person involved in the production, despite this; I still performed on camera 1 to the best of my abilities.
My experiences with camera 2 were of more enjoyment. This camera, whilst I was controlling it, was positioned in the middle of the studio, between either cameras on a track. The track was running diagonally from left to right, back studio to front studio respectively (SOUTH WEST – NORTH EAST). I was involved in laying of the track earlier that day, and had discussed with director Mikael about laying the track in that position to increase manoeuvrability and shot angle. Previously the track was laid north south, but after discussions with fellow rigger Nyasha, we came to the conclusion that a diagonal track would provide more varied shots. We put our case forward to director Mikael and he was persuaded enough for us to de-rig the track and re-rig it in the newly discussed position. I enjoy using the track, liking it for the low resistance travelling and the high accuracy needed to control it. With regards to a tracking camera in comparison to a static, it is painstakingly more obvious to see (as a viewer) when a moving camera has made a slight mistake in their actions. Feeling confident with the camera, during broadcast I tried 2 difficult shots. I simultaneously was tracking, panning and zooming at the same time. Apart from vertical movement, there were no other ways of me manipulating that camera for a better shot and these 3 motions in one movement is often known as one of the hardest camera shots to perform. I use the word ‘perform’ because I associate the movement of a camera as being the same as playing an instrument – artistic if done right; but can look poor if a small mistake is made.
I felt that I was confident in my choice of shots, followed direction well and kept a steady hand whilst moving the camera. To critique myself during my short time on camera 2, I was disappointed with one of my tracking motions – despite playback showing that it didn’t appear that bad. I found it difficult to organise motions with the director because of the lack of talkback. I was eager to showcase my skills, but with only one line of contact to the director from the studio (via floor manager), organising the timing for the tracking shots was difficult and took a bit extra organisation.
My camera assistant at the time, Ezra, was very confident in assisting me. He moved fluidly with the camera, helping me to feel confident in my motion. I take part responsibility in the success of camera 2 throughout the day due to wiring expertise showcased from myself at the start of the day. As soon as camera 2 was set up, I quickly realised the lost potential of the movement was due to a simple wiring mistake.
The rigger of camera 2 had left the two external cables loose on the floor behind the track, potentially blocking the track run, but also the operator. I instantly saw this as a hindrance as well as a health and safety risk. I put extra time into re-wiring the cameras, ensuring that there wires were correctly measured and attached to the length of the tripod. I then preceded to gaffer the two cables together, making for an easy carry for the assistant, whoever it may be. This small change not only effected the movement of camera 2, but I was also told that it boosted the operators confidence, knowing that they could move freely without hesitation and worry that they, the camera or the assistant may fall over and potentially ruin a take. I feel that this simple change had great effect, and confirmed this whilst I was working as a camera assistant. Frustratingly, when a problem is quelled so quickly, there is no way of knowing wether it would have been a disaster and subsequently the cleverest and most crucial changes are ones that go un-noticed...
Despite only being cast as the camera assistant once, I spent at least 3 takes helping the operator out by carrying the wire spools. This is a job I have no shame in doing as I understand the importance of camera confidence and am prepared to stand static, holding two wire spools in order to help the flow of my production, as I hope all my classmates would do.
Following the example set by some members of the class, I did my upmost to contribute to the day, providing help when my course mates were under pressure by roles – after all, no one-man can do all the assigned roles, no matter how good he is. I helped rig and de—rig, carrying equipment from the van, to the set, and back whilst helping the driver to load the vehicle at the end of the day when everyone was tired and eager to leave. I used initiative to overcome problems and prevented a possibly catastrophic wiring issue.
It is crucial for every member of the crew to share the workload, not only from an evaluative standpoint, but from a professional perspective as well. The loss of one member in the production can cause delays, mistakes and potential over-working from certain members.
I would have enjoyed floor managing on this production, as I feel that a strong, authoritative voice can ease the flow of a production, if not just instilling confidence to the members of your team and surrounding crew members (e.g. Lever Street sound engineers). I felt the sound engineers were not appreciated enough, and without a talkback system, they were left out the loop (literally). This is just an example of how a floor manager can ease the situation by relaying instructions, controlling the room and keeping everyone informed, both in the gallery and the studio.
My stint as director saw me attempt to overcome the problem that had faced my successors throughout the day. The failure in the talkback system had led to a scenario drastically different to one than we had all imagined. The loss in talkback had created a block in communications between the studio and the gallery. This rift in comms meant that the director and camera operators were no longer in the same book, let alone on the same page. I know this from the time I spent on the cameras earlier that day. Arguably I was in the best position to organise the situation, having operated 2 different cameras that day, fully understanding the issues faced when talkback breaks down. I have always understood that communication between the director and camera is crucial, potentially the most important part of television production.
My approach to the problem was simple and effective. Understanding now that it was going to be a big task for my crew to work with no communication, I took the reins and decided to do something that no director had done before me and performed my camera briefing from the studio floor. As my take was fast approaching, pressure rising; I left my post in the gallery to address my entire crew ‘face to face’. As the responsibility had fallen to me, in a position of power I was forced to use a loud, authoritative voice when addressing the studio. I used initiative by approaching my 3 camera operators whilst at their posts, looking through their viewfinder and describing to them exactly how I wanted my take to look. After talking to each of them individually about camera specific shots, I talked to them about how I planned to direct them without the talkback system. I made extra time to talk to camera 2 operators, Mikael, to organise a few simple camera tracking motions, ensuring he was slow and steady with the camera (which he was anyway).
My confidence in this situation was a strong positive force on how my role as director intrinsically helped the team. My final instructions to the operators were simple:
1. Whilst not live/under instruction, use your inspiration to offer me an interesting shot.
2. Whilst under direct instruction from myself, follow my directions to the word.
Seemingly simple enough, it was the confidence of me as director that helped the confidence of my team, resulting in a well timed and executed performance from every member of my crew. I believed that if my team felt that I was in control of my role, they would feel more confident about their roles and subsequently perform better. The rapport I built with my team led to a very successful broadcast and led to a personal congratulating handshake from myself to all my crew as soon as the broadcast was completed. Despite the pressure, my team were successful with everything they did. If I were given the opportunity to re-shoot this performance under my own conditions, I would have:
· Organised and fixed the talkback system
· Spent time listening to the track I was to record, understanding the speeds of the song and the crescendos of the music – in order to create a more immersive editing experience
· Written a shot-by-shot run through for each of my cameras to follow
· Set up a monitor in the studio, to hear my artist perform and edit along with the music
· Repositioned the cameras closer to the stage to achieve a more personal production for the slow, heartfelt song the artist was singing
· Organised a runner between the gallery and the rehearsal rooms to co-ordinate camera 4. There was often lack of communication, potentially from the lack of a talkback system for camera 4 operator
· Changed the mis-en-scene by using softer lights, finding the studio lighting rather harsh on the performers face
· Removed all from the studio that were not intrinsic to the success of my performance in order to reduce background noise and increase focus of the crew
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)