rate my rookie effort

[matt king]

here's a video I shot and helped edit yesterday. Please critique.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgVPhOSeliA

[Will Sommer]

I don't have experience with online video or video at all (hence why I'm in this group). Still, here are my thoughts:

-The speaker you had at the end was great.

-Good video editing and mix of singers, speakers, and different groups.

-I wish there had been some narration to set things up.

[Mike Deal]

I have just a couple of comments to make here besides the fact that I think you did a good job of gathering decent sound with a variety of people and also a good job of shooting the people on the stage as well as the crowd.

First, you need to get your hands on a tripod. The video would have been way better shot the way it was, but with a tripod. Huge difference.

Second, try not to zoom very much... I know its hard, but it will keep the viewer from thinking about the production of the video and focused on the story that you are showing them. If you have to zoom do it really slowly... crawl up to the tight shot or from it.

Experience will make you a better video journalist... the two tips I just gave you came to mind right away because I broke both of them today while shooting a house fire. While driving home tonight I just had to keep telling myself that the important thing was that I could look back and see the mistakes I made, I just have to remember them for the next time.

[Carlos Virgen]

Tripod, as Mike Deal suggested. Especially if you are zoomed in every movement is amplified and it interferes with the story telling. Also if you need to zoom in, physically move in. In other words don't use the zoom controls on your camera it is too distracting. I think it would have been great, if possible to get some comments from some of the people attending the service.

[Zac Echola]

A few things to note about tripods and zooming:

Think of each frame as an image. The bigger the difference between one frame to the next, the larger your file size.

The harder you compress your video, the more these differences between frames really matter, because they'll result in poorer quality and lots of pixelization.

Stabilize the frame and let the action happen within it rather than creating movement with the frame. You'll save your self tons of headache when editing too.

[matt king]

Thanks,

The effort was hurt by my failure to get more generic crowd reaction that I could have used to interrupt the zooming, I think. In other words, medium range shot of preacher, overlay his audio on crowd shot, back to close up.

Does something like that work?

As for the tripod, is it simply a stability issue or is there some other aspect to it? And how do you shoot an action scene (like a fire) with a tripod?

[Zac Echola]

Every situation is different (so don't take this too literally) but find a point in the center of the action at the fire.

Point the camera at some action in front of you, like the fire. Shoot wide, medium and tight shots for at least 10 seconds each. Turn the camera on action to your left or right and shoot wide, medium and tight shots of people standing around or the trucks. Then do the same behind you.

Then go get your sound bites.

Try not to shoot too much, especially in situations where the video is most valuable immediately. More video means more hassle in editing.

Four angles times 3 shots each gives you 12 different edits to work with. You can start out with a head of someone talking about the fire, cover the sound with multiple shots of the fire, then end with a second person talking about it.

That doesn't mean shouldn't take your camera off your sticks at some point. Just make sure that you hold it steady (if it's a small camera hold it close to your chest. If it's large, get it on your shoulders).

[Jeffrey A. Haines]

Although a lot of videographers support the "elbows hands" tripod method for getting steady hand-held shots, if the subject is particularily dynamic, and I am using a small camera with a viewscreen, I will often open the screen, and hold the camera underhand out away from my body. I find that the weight of most small cameras (a couple pounds) combined with the sweeping motion and extended length of my arm, tends to minimize shaking.

For any kind of interview though, if I have to be handheld, I would definitely use the close to chest method that Mr. Echola described.

[Jeffrey A. Haines]

I thought you did a good job of identifying the important moments from the event, and I felt like I got a good idea of what "Martin Luther King Jr. Day in Warwick" was really like.

I was also pleased that although some of your shots were shaky, you managed to get a lot of closeups. I feel that with low resolution video, it is VERY important to frame people in shots as closely as possible, in order to make their facial features and expressions visible in a small display format. This does, however, make it difficult to continuously frame someone if, as in the case with one of the speakers, they have a very dynamic style and tend to move around a lot.

A lot of "presentation" videos end up with a feeling like this one. Because the content is just the "audience PointOfView" of a stage presentation, it can be very difficult to capture viewer interest. It is crucial that the "talking head" shots be kept short and pertinent. I think that your video would have been more engaging if you had taken a few of the crowd members aside and captured quick sound bytes setting up "what is going on here today?" "How do you think Dr. King's work has influenced us here in Warwick?" et cetera. A quick byte setting up the purpose behind the ceremony, overlayed on the establishing shot would have helped draw me into the video.

With online video, it is crucial that you capture your viewer's attention in the first five seconds, unless something about the video is inherently "viral." In the case of most events like this, a lot of the material is not necessarily fresh or unique, even though the message may be important. (most people are aware that events like this honoring MLK happen each year, but what sets THIS event apart?)

Also, although there is definitely a natural fondness for material you have shot or you started out with, it is important to be brutal when you are editing video for the web, especially for a video covering an event like this. I felt that some of the shots dragged on too long, and I felt that the video as a whole was a bit long. Even though you may really like a shot, or it may contain a clip you particularly liked, you have to make sure it is crucial to the video as a whole before you elect to keep it. I was also looking for some kind of story arc, which could have been provided by audience interview sound bytes.

It takes a while to develop a sense for what clips are important, and how to effectively structure a video like this, but any kind of experience definitely helps. I'm sure your next one will be leaps and bounds better. As long as you think of a video story in the same way as structuring a print narrative, you can't really go wrong.

[matt king]

Thanks for that thoughtful analysis (and to all the others as well).

The reason I chose to shoot video is I couldn't think of any reason to write a story, quoting people talking about what MLK means to them, because that story's been written about 47 million times. I was to cover the day, though, and I was relying on the video to make this story different - the music , the fiery preacher, etc.

I'm not sure what someone could have said about MLK in an interview that woulda been compelling. Do you think a slicker video would have obviated that?

I get what you're saying about lingering shots

[Jeffrey A. Haines]

I think a slicker production would have helped make the video more compelling, but I also think a couple powerful quotes would have gone a long way.

I think the difference between getting a short succinct statement from a bystander and trying to pull a good quote out of a stage speech is that by nature, a good stage speech follows an arc, and in order to get the full effect, sometimes you really have to witness the entire thing, something that is just not interesting in video format. MLK day honors ideas that people are incredibly passionate about. I think you could have gotten a great succinct statement that would have pulled the whole thing together.