Sometimes I wish I my mind would switch off when we discuss project ideas or here are calls for a film script to suit a competition theme at our club meetings; it always ends with many sleepless nights and unnecessary stress – for me at least. Yet, rather annoyingly when the end product comes together so well and I realise something pretty good grew from a brief image flashing in my neurologically aberrant brain, perhaps I should cut my fertile imagination some slack.
For the uninitiated or those with short memories, way back in April, our club treasurer David “Offshore Account” Laker was hosting the club meeting and mentioned former OVFM Chairman Chris Coulson has acquired a live(ish) dinosaur which he named Dexter and had kindly offered to allow the club to film his new pet one club evening.
“If it wasn’t for me, he never would have even heard of Oscar Schindler!”
The annual North vs. South competition was also a point of discussion and we needed scripts to fulfil the theme of “Out Of The Blue”. David quipped that if we could combine the two ideas it would save a lot of time. So of course my brain defied all orders to sit quietly and let someone else respond to David’s call to arms, and immediately produced an image of Dexter leaning over two shocked and scared looking people.
My deviant grey matter also decided these people should be parents of a young woman introducing her new boyfriend to them, Dexter being the boyfriend. By the time I got home that night a half-formed scenario occupied my head, and eventually I was forced into submission. A few days later I sat before my PC, opened up Celtx and began to transfer the mini-film playing in my head into script form and within a matter of hours I had the first draft completed.
At the club meeting on June 7th I bravely submitted my script – now entitled MEET DEXTER – to the club for consideration. I’m the world’s worst public orator so heaven knows how my pitch sounded to my fellow club members but I wasn’t confident I had conveyed my idea successfully, yet somehow I was persuaded to keep working on it and begin the storyboarding and blocking.
With MEET DEXTER apparently going ahead after all, we needed to begin securing the vital assets of the production, such as location, crew and cast. Simon “Snapper” Earwicker, our chairman and reigning Hide & Seek champion, suggested we contact Olive Allen, widow of OVFM stalwart Derek, to see if we could use her garden which I was told was “quite big”.
Quite big? Try @!%*$?# HUGE!! It ran on for miles and would divert off into another spacious hideaway which in turn would reveal a verdant labyrinth, shaded by a canopy of towering trees and divided by thick hedges. I actually discovered a tribe of pygmies settled in the undergrowth behind the garden shed, who thought they were in the Amazon, blaming their Sat Nav for not suggesting they turn left at Albuquerque.
Dexter defies all biological reason and precedent by giving birth
But it was the centrepiece of the garden, a stone paved square with surrounding low walls that sold me on this wonderful expanse of land being perfect for the shoot and Olive was gracious enough to confirm her permission for us to use it. So August 16th was marked in the diary, the day OVFM, the actors, Chris and 7 ft dinosaur would descend upon Chez Allen.
At this point it seemed that only I was aware that this was a club film and not a personal project so I was getting a little worried no-one had volunteered to help as per the request on the website. Thankfully David put the word out at the annual garden party and without the use of incriminating photos, managed to secure our crew.
Next was the casting. I had asked a few people that I had worked with on prior films if they would be interested but they were either on holiday on that filming date or were still traumatised from working with me before. I put out casting calls on social media with sadly little response, aside from two women I had to pass on for logistical reasons.
Luckily Anna Littler came to the rescue by referring me to Blitz And Bananas alumna Sue Gray to play Sandra and Hannah Whitehead, a budding actress and model to play Tilly. Rather fortuitously, Hannah has an older sister Beth, also an actress, so that was an extra role fulfilled too. The final piece of the puzzle was our male lead, the call answered by David Wrighton to play Ron after I e-mailed a number of local theatre groups for actors.
This is what happens when you let OVFM into your garden!
How would the shoot go? Find out in part two coming soon!
Apologies in advance for the vagueness of this preview but while the theme of the next club meeting is a Workshop evening, where one of our knowledgeable members shares their expertise in a certain area of film making or post-production, I have little else to add to that.
I can tell you that our archivist and head projectionist Andy “Elementary My Dear” Watson will be demonstrating editing with Serif Movie Maker but I cannot share any specific details with you as Andy has sloped off on holiday and won’t be back until just before the meeting! I can only assume that Andy will take us through the basic set-up, explore a few features of the editor and share a few tricks with us he has learned but other than that, the content of his presentation is a mystery.
By the same token that makes the evening a little more enticing and gives it a sense of danger since we don’t know exactly what to expect!
That’s right folks, the time has come for our club members who accepted this special challenge – first announced back in March – to show us the fruits of their labours in editing the supplied raw footage provided by our vice-chairman Sam “Choo Choo” Brown.
For the rest of us, the contents of that footage will remain a mystery, making the outcome even more exciting. With so many creative individuals in the club we are assured a number of unique interpretations and stories, making for another entertaining night.
As ever if you are bringing a film PLEASE let us know by replying to this post in the comments section below, listing the format, run time and picture ratio. This is crucial in helping us to plan the evening time wise and to ensure we have sufficient material for the whole session, so your co-operation is very much appreciated.
And if you haven’t done so already, be sure to speak to Pat Palmer about getting involved in the History Of Orpington club film project.
We have another project for you all but this time it comes with a twist it is an editing exercise only!
Usually a theme is chosen and club members are expected to conceive and create a film in any style or genre to accommodate that theme but the difference here is that half the work has been already been done for you. Our Vice-Chairman Sam “Choo-Choo” Brown has been out and about shooting some random footage which will now be passed on to everyone to then edit and create their own film using this “stock footage” if you will.
There are a few rules that need to be adhered to.
You CAN:
create your own titles
add your own music
use sound effects
use any visual effects
alter the speed of the film
use an audio commentary
You CANNOT:
add any extra footage
The deadline for this project is the club meeting on Tuesday May 10thand you can request a DVD copy of the footage from Ian Menagewho will be distributing the first batch of discs at the next club meeting this coming Tuesday (March 29th).
We hope that as many club members as possible will participate in this project and that the end results will provide an interesting an varied response on the evening, in terms of how the different creative minds in the club will interpret and utilise the footage. The key objective is that we expect a different film each time but wouldn’t it be curious if two people had the same idea?
Only one way to find out and that is to join us on May 10th. Until then good luck to everyone who takes up this fascinating challenge!
This week’s club meeting is a two part coaching evening to help improve the filmmaking skills and knowledge of club members and familiarise them with the club equipment.
First there will be a demonstration of how to use the various supplementary bits of kit we have at our disposal (full list is HERE), including the dolly track, wireless mic, steadycam and more.
The second part of the evening will be a Q and A session in which your questions will be answered by our ever knowledgeable panel of experts. So if something is nagging you about lighting, sound, editing, focusing, or you have trouble understanding terms like “aperture” or “backlight” then this is the perfect opportunity to ask someone who knows to explain it to you.
Remember there is no such thing as a silly question as we all had to start somewhere, so don’t be shy in asking for help if you need it.
We are a filmmaking club and we are just as effective working as a group unit as we are as individuals, so please make use of this session to help improve your understanding and knowledge of making films, or to share your knowledge with those who need it.
Those members who turned up at our film making in one evening recently will have had the opportunity to turn the footage into their own version for a short film. We have already seen an examples from each “team”.
It is expected that there will be an opportunity to show all of them together at our meeting on 9th June after the first Top Ten films are seen. Don’t forget, any member can have a copy of the footage from Andy or myself if they only ask for it.
Why not have a go and join in? After all, it WAS a club event and deserves an effort to be made. Otherwise, there may not be another one. The future programme is in your hands!
As you know, I have tried to arrange something different each year, to test your reactions of interest, which is why these evenings have changed from around Christmas to now..
On 25th March at the first evening of this session Simon showed us the different basic aspects of lighting and how to use reflectors to improve shadows etc. Sam was a willing model and also a presenter. This could have run and run, but we then had Lee’s presentation of the Celtx free programme for screenplays etc. There was a good discussion on the pros and cons of it. Thanks to those who contributed and spent time on their presentations, very useful and entertaining. You can see Simon’s notes HERE an I urge you to at least glance through it.
The members who attended appreciated the evening, the rest of you missed it!
The next on April 8th will see Mike Shaw on an evening of Music – in films, moods and sources for us to use. Should be entertaining and I might even film it for posterity, or whatever we choose to call our Archives.
Then, on April 22nd we’ll try what we haven’t before and have four members demonstrating their editing and other programmes in the four corners of the hall, to only 3 or 4 members each, with questions and answers, as follows:
David Laker will be using Pinnacle Studio for those who want to see a basic demo in action;
John Epton will show multi cam editing on Serif MoviePlus, plus the very useful (and cheap) noise reduction software Music & Speech Cleaner. Why not bring along a troublesome audio on a USB stick and he could try to fix it? May also include Animations on Serif Draw Plus, if time allows
Andy Watson will also be using Serif;
I’ll show Edius and the stabilisation software Mercalli – bring some shaky clips!
Naturally, numbers are limited for this event (as they say for all the best raves), so let me know if you wish to come.
The Power of Editing proved to be a strange session in that it was so far the most accurate in regards to keeping exactly on time, while at the same time providing so much information that I used a huge number of pages in my note-book – hence the longer time taken to write a coherent article.
Unfortunately, the session was also very ‘must see’ – watching film and editing techniques within Final Cut Pro 7. This article may therefore be the most wordy and have the least imagery of the Technical Certificate sequence.
Editing
It has been said that Editing is the equivalent of brainwashing – indeed, the three key aspects of ‘brainwashing’ are all present in the intense sessions that are required of the professional editor. To give one example only, Gabriella Enis, our tutor of the evening recently finished a ten minute ‘makeover’ documentary for the BBC. To this professional standard, she completed this ‘rush job’ in 3 days.
What this means is that she spent three days going over the same footage over and over again, hearing and watching the same events to come up with a single piece of work only 10 minutes in length. And this was a ‘normal’ piece, without such things are colour grading or any effects.
How the editor performs their task is down to the tools and the training, In regards to what the purpose of an editor actually is, this can be summarised in a commonly used analogy: there are three story tellers in the production of a film – the screen writer, the director and the editor. At each stage of production, the entire feel, emotion and focus of the story can change entirely.
Depending upon the nature of the production (drama and documentaries can be very different for example), the screenwriter, director and editor can work very closely together in an extremely intimate relationship for extremely long periods of time in order to piece together the final production.
There are essentially two different types of editor:
Offline Editor
The offline editor is the job which Gabriella principally performs, and in most ways is similar to the work which any of us would do on our own films at independent levels. We all have an editing suite in our homes (some of us essentially in the form of editing software, while others like Gabriella with far more complete editing rooms). The offline editor typically works with lower resolution data in order to make the editing process workable (as in speed of CPU processing etc.) and will probably perform the majority of the structure and story editing.
Online Editor
The online editor usually works in an in-house editing suit and will receive the work from the offline editor in order to ‘conform’ it. This process usually involves swapping out the normal resolution sequences for their broadcast / projection level equivalents.
In many ways, the difference between the two can also (though this is not a strict distinction) also involve the difference between using an NLE (non-linear editor) and a linear editor. While the latter is not really used so much any more, the conforming process can essentially be a start-to-finish process (i.e. linear). This is almost never the real case however, as it is usually the in-house online editor who will also add titles, credits, some effects etc.
It should be noted that in this case, the term ‘online editor’ is not connected with a program, or real-time editor of a television show – sometimes these are also referred to as ‘online editors’.
This division also took place in the older days of purely film-based editing – in the case of the confirmation process, this resulted in the work being re-done using a clean original negative rather than the lower quality prints delivered to the offline editor.
Today, there are really only three applications available on the open retail market which are looked at seriously from the point of view of film editing (i.e. for feature presentations): Avid, Adobe Premier and Final Cut Pro. Naturally there are many, many more but they are not used at this level of professional work.
It should be noted that with the advent of version 10 (FCPX), Final Cut Pro may also soon be dropping out of this elite list due to a wide range of professional functionality being removed from the product. It was certainly the view of Gabriella, most of the tutors whom I have had in this particular course and (from rumour) Walter Murch (the definitive editing legend, editor on Apocalypse Now, and the man credited with introducing digital editors, in the form of Final Cut Pro, into the film industry) that Final Cut Pro has now fallen into the realm of the Prosumer market-place and no longer has a place in the film industry.
Gabriella did all of her demonstrations using Final Cut Pro 7, mainly because of changes to the FCPX visual interface meaning it is actually more beneficial to see things happening in FCP7 in this case, not specifically the reduction in functionality.
Whether Avid, Final Cut, Premier or (for comparison), the outsider Blender NLE, all work on very similar principles of operation.
Workflow
The editing workflow (from a generic perspective, see later for two specific examples) takes place in four phases.
Ingestion
This phase has had its name changed frequently over the years. Up until recently, it was also known as ‘digitisation’ due to film being transferred to a digital medium but is now no longer a common process. The generic ‘Ingestion’ term is therefore used to represent the addition of all of the tapes, files etc. into a project in the software of choice. This process also involves the correct naming of all tapes and files being included, the addition of descriptions etc, to librarian standards, in order to find clips at a later stage. If available, ingested sequences are usually named after the clapper-board / slate information provided by the AD (assistant director), or at the very least the time-code of the tapes.
Assembly
The assembly phase is the creation of a raw, ‘un-edited’ sequence using a ‘best-option’ take from each of the ingested shots (see below for the different ways that this is done in different circumstances). A very rough gauge from Gabriella was that an assembly might be three times the length of the intended final production (e.g. 3hrs long for a final 1hr production). In many ways, the assembly is also pretty ‘dead’ if watched as a film as no effort has actually been made to construct the structure or story of the final piece.
Rough Cut
The rough cut phase is where the editor works on the structure of the production – making editing decisions from the assembly in order to create a structure and tell a story in a rough form. The rough cut may take a 3hr assembly down to 1.5 / 2hrs in length, but still far longer than the intended final production. It is this stage in which an actual target date is in use and may be of high pressure – it is the rough cut which is usually used, and on a pre-planned date, for demonstration to the commissioner / budget provider of the production. It is therefore vital that while not completed, the rough cut tells the story correctly and is essentially in its final, if not quality form.
Final Cut
In this phase, the editor no longer needs to work on structure and instead concentrates on tightening the story, selecting better shots (e.g. from multiple takes) to improve the quality. It is at this stage where the editor and director may spend hours deciding whether to cut a scene on frame 24 or 25 (it can be that specific).
The rough and final cut processes may often merge together. It is also in these phases where colour grading may take place (grading can be done for regularisation between shots, but also to modify the emotion of a particular shot).
It is in these final two phases where a demonstration of editing was actually performed in class, but for which it would be impossible to demonstrate adequately in this article. From here on, I’ll try to cover some of the important points in a heavily summarised form in four specific subject areas.
Editors (or Marked) Script
An editor involved in the production of drama will typically be involved in the production right from the very start, and will therefore have access to the original script (see more, below). Of far more importance in the traditional editing experience however, is the ‘marked script’ which takes the form of the original script with amendments made in a specific notation by the AD (assistant director) or other appropriate crew member such as continuity.
These notations are intended to assist the editor in indicating where, when and how certain types of filming have been performed by the director / DoP, along with information regarding how shots have been marked and how many available takes there are (there may have been many more takes, but the specified number indicates the number of good takes that were ‘printed’ for use).
Note that shots should always be filmed ‘overlapping’ – in other words, the entire sequence of actions by the actors is captured by different cameras in a repeat of the entire scene so that there is a plethora of material to work with in the editing suite. An unnamed film worked on by Gabriella as an assistant (the first feature film to come out of Zimbabwe) is a good example of a bad, non-overlapped film – the director would call cut in the middle of scene, move the cameras and lights while the actors are frozen, then restart the action from the new filming locations! If nothing else, this means that there is only ever one take available during editing.
A script marked by the AD, showing various shots and takes.
The code written into the ellipse refers to the shooting script scene number (e.g. 133), the camera setup (e.g. multi-camera or multi-setup shoots – camera A, B, C etc.) followed by the number of available takes after the slash.
The line and stop mark at the base indicates the portion of the script which is covered by the shot. Shot 134A/1 in the illustration only covers one short portion of spoken dialog and is probably therefore a closeup. In the case of 135A/3 however, this indicates a shot covering the entire scene and includes all of the dialog – it is probably therefore, indicative of the ‘master shot’ (see later, in the section on a classic dialog edit for an explanation).
The wavy line through shot 137A/4 indicates that while this scene covers all three sequences of spoken dialog, the first sequence of dialog is off camera.
Editing Documentaries
Documentary editing usually involves masses of film, but where very little is actually used in the final production. An example from Gabriella’s 10min school make-over documentary for the BBC involved a worker being filmed in the room – she had hundreds of these shots, and this particular one was about an hour long. In the end, she used about 2.5 seconds of this sequence.
A common approach to documentary production is to create a raw ingestion production (see last section) and burn the time-code into the image (if available). This raw work is then handed to the transcriber and possibly to the director (who may not actually be involved with much of the editing in this case, especially if they are a series director, as in the case of the 10min documentaries described above).
The transcriber will return a typed transcript of all activity, scene descriptions (in the case of non-interview related shots), potentially in a marked form with interesting or notable time-code ranges which should be included in the story. This transcription, created after the ingestion but before a true assembly of the raw shots effectively becomes a script from which the editor can work, and is used as a guide in telling the story that the transcriber / director wants to tell.
The story is built initially by assembling the dialogues, interviews etc. according to the story that the director wants to tell.
The ‘B roll’ is now assembled – the non-interview shots, and not just the best shots as some bad sequences may include ‘gems’ which highlight a particular point (Gabriella stated that shots of shy, inexperienced children particular fall into this category, as a single statement can make the entire shot).
The B Roll is used as source material to feed into the bland dialogue / interview assembly to illustrate what the speaker is saying.
At the point where an assembly is completed and the editor is moving onto the Rough Cut / Final Cut phases, it is always good to edit to a music track – by this time, the editor / director should have been able to select an appropriate sound track for the documentary. The music because a percussion sequence which aids greatly in established what sequences should be put / edited together.
It is very common to assemble images and sounds from different sequences – especially in interviews, where an interviewee may not be particularly cinematic. In this case (and actually the norm), keep sound and cut the images from illustrative sequences.
Conversely, in documentary editing it is often a case that reshoots are impossible and the editor must work with what they have – if there are no illustrative shots available, use the interviewee.
It should be the case the director can provide a ‘paper cut’ which the editor can use as a guide in the rough and fine cut phases. In the modern world, this is usually impossible and the director may not even have time to watch the cuts with the editor – a common process today is to hand over a transcript, then return after the first rough-cut is available, with little other creative input to the sequence assembly.
If the documentary does not totally make sense, this is usually not the fault of the editor – in documentary editing, all of the filming has already taken place and if there is not enough, there is not enough. In these situations, the documentary can often be saved with VO (voice over).
Editing Drama
In drama editing, the editor is usually involved in the production process from the beginning and may have lengthy discussions with the director regarding what and how some things should be filmed in order to give the editor enough material to work with. The editor is usually working during the production process as well, with daily rushes being delivered to the editor for ingestion / assembly – the director may also be involved over-night when filming is not taking place.
The decisions of the editor / director in these situations may result in additional material being filmed to plug holes in what has been made available or otherwise to enable the same story to be told in a slightly different manner – this is in total contrast to what is delivered in a documentary environment.
The editor may need to be a diplomat and act as a buffer between the director and producer in the editing environment, suggesting solutions to problems. At the end of the day however, it is the directors film and the editor may need to accept the [sometimes incorrect / bad] cut that the director finally chose to use.
The editor should also expect however, for the director to return to the editor to have the sequence recut as the editor originally suggested after other people have seen it – this is usually a mark of a good director who is willing to accept when they are wrong. Bad / arrogant directors who stay with the bad cut regardless, usually see their film failing or getting bad reviews.
A common description of the long periods of time that the editor and director spend in getting the film right is that they are ‘dreaming together’.
If the final edit does not 100% match the script, don’t be too concerned. The editor can only work with what they are given, but even very slight differences (i.e. cutting on frames only a couple of frames apart, or a slight difference in colour grading) can change the feeling and emotion of the film.
A typical scene should include a master shot of all of the action, characters, dialog being spoken, dirty and close ups of characters.
Initially, straight cut all scenes based on dialogue to ensure that the correct story is being told – don’t be too concerned about the images in these sequences.
Finally, change straight cuts to L / split cuts with overlapping sound / images / ambience from different tracks in order to create the emotions and feelings – the main contributor to any single emotion may be best achieved with sounds from one track, but images from another, along with totally manufactured additional information (foley and effects).
Classic Drama Dialog Scene
A classic dialog scene will include three different types of shot. The master shot is taken from a distance capable of taking in the entire scene, all principle actors and can capture all of the dialog. There will also be both ‘dirty’ and ‘clean’ close-ups of each character. There may also of course, be additional types of shot at the discretion of the director, but these are the classic components.
The distinction between ‘dirty’ and ‘clean’ closeup comes in the form of other characters or objects in the scene. The ‘dirty’ closeup describes the traditional over-the-shoulder shot in which a second, non-speaking character is used as context and shows where the speaking actor is addressing (obeying all of the ‘don’t cross the line’ rules). The ‘clean’ closeup however, removes the second character – the shot only shows the speaking character and nothing more.
Combinations of these different shots are assembled with the following considerations:
On the first cut (even if not the rough cut), use straight cuts (sound and images cut at exact same place) and concentrate on editing based upon the dialogue, not the images, so as to tell the story.
It is very easy to have a character enter frame from one shot, and complete the motion from the opposite side of the frame in the next shot (e.g. switching from master to closeup). While not quite caused by the ‘crossing the line’ error, it does make the observers eye jump and should therefore be avoided – if avoidable in the filming location, it is usually regarded as a mistake on the directors part (this is sometimes referred to as a Jump Cut).
Use the master shot not only to set the scene, but also as filler to join together two cut shots which might cause the above mistake (e.g. A rear shot shows a character slipping into a booth towards the right, but the closeup from the other character’s perspective shows the action completed while entering in from the left – instead, cut the two shots shorter and show the entire act of sitting from the master shot’s perspective, re-entering the closeup with the character already sitting in place).
In isolation, each of the shots will nearly always have a lot of space between events. The edited sequence will normally be shortened drastically (except for story telling pauses) by tight cutting between shots, removing dead space (contracting time).
Edits are far more noticeable if the cut takes place when characters are not doing anything – always cut (if possible) with the character in motion (however slight).
Once the scene is being refined, use L or split cuts (where the sound and image are cut in different places, with sound / images from different shots overlapping) to show the spoken word of one character and the reaction of the other (e.g. aggression from one character is usually best reflected in the face / eyes reaction of another character rather than the one speaking). This is particularly important if a character has their eyes hidden (e.g. they are wearing a hat, with shadow) – the eyes show the emotion.
Use the clean closeups after the pay-off of the scene has taken place, the dirty closeups before. The clean closeups allow the observer to concentrate fully on the character speaking and now needs no additional contextual setting.
Conclusions from the evening
This session was a little like a driving lesson – so many youngsters pass their driving test and think that they know how to drive, when in actual fact all it proves is that they have a basic knowledge of how to control a car: driving is something else entirely.
Nearly everyone at club level has used an editor at some point, and may know their program of choice intimately. This session however, demonstrated clearly that knowing why certain cuts are made in certain ways is far more complex and ultimately rewarding in a final quality production than simply knowing how to use the tools in the software.
Next session
The next session will be by far the longest, and yet may be the most problematic to both note and write a coherent article – The Power of Special Effects, a very practical session delivered by a S/VFX specialist from films such as Batman Begins, Sunshine and the Human Centipede films.
A Personal Review of The Green Screen Practical Evening.
Mike’s in the Spotlight Again.
When it was suggested that another session with the club’s green screen was due Chris quickly volunteered to organize the requisite practical evening. Never one to shy away from a challenge he decided to put on a demonstration of the use of green screen AND show how to use the effect in an editing programme. But that’s not all! The ever ambitious Chris wanted to project the demonstration on our screen in real time AND use an editing programme that was unfamiliar to him. PHEW! Was he mad or what? This promised to be quite a night!
Many Hands make Light Work
Practical evenings at the club are always popular and Tuesday 30th August was no exception. Our little hall was soon heaving with OVFMers eager to look, learn, share and experience as chairs and tables were put out, refreshments prepared and all the behind the scenes work of club night was done.
Moral Support doesn’t Count!
Chris arrived with mountains of gear and with the help of Pete, Bob, John, Sam and others set up the four lights (important so that the background and subject are both properly lit), the green cloth back drop, the camera, the projector, the PA system and the laptop…GULP! All this was achieved surprisingly quickly, very efficiently and with commendably little swearing
Once the hardware was up and running the challenge of putting on an entertaining and informative green screen demonstration in the space of just two hours was on. Would the evening be a success and make Chris a hero? Or would it crash and burn and demote Chris to zero status? Only time would tell.
Hands up if You’re Happy
The evening got off to a great start with a fascinating compilation of video clips showing how green screen is used in television in some very unexpected situations. The compilation brought to mind the fabulous visit we’d had from Andrew Bishop of Darkside Animation back in March. If you were fortunate enough to have attended Andrew Bishop’s night you wont have forgotten the passion and craft he and his team bring to film and television as they use the latest computer software to create special effects that are breath taking in their complexity. The Darkside Animation team worked on the recent BBC Sci-Fi drama Outcasts and it was amazing to see how locations could be replicated in the studio using sophisiticated green screen techniques. Naturally after such inspiration many of us were fired up at the thought of all the possibilities at our own fingertips.
Bonnie and Clyde are at it AgainI want you, you and you in my team
With the intro over it was time for the practical part of the demo to begin. Chris called for his first victim, I mean volunteer! With Jane on camera Mike stepped up to be shot against the green screen and although painfully shy he did manage to put on a performance for us worthy of the West End stage while lighting and exposure were adjusted for optimum effect.
Go On do something Funny
Chris explained the principles and fielded questions while victim number two Sam donned Jane’s purpose made green suit. Looking very much like a character from The Incredibles and acting the part too Sam made a perfect subject for stage two of the filming. Working like a real double act Mike and Sam improvised some very amusing scenes. All this was projected and recorded ready for stage three of the demonstration.
The Green Streak Glides to the front
While the rest of us partook of Peggy and Jo’s teas, coffees and biscuits Chris and his tech team of Mike, David and Bob worked on the editing. It’s no mean feat to capture, edit and apply effects in limited time and on unfamiliar software but as Chris always says ‘He who dares wins!’. Pinnacle was chosen as the video editing software de jour because it’s relatively inexpensive, already has a number of followers amongst the ranks of OVFMers (see their user group elsewhere on this site) and is capable of working with green screen effects. Other software is available and the principles are the same whether you work on an £80 programme or £800 one. Of course the end results may differ though.
After the break Chris was able to show us the fruits of their labour, but not before we watched a couple of hilarious films by Jim, Jane and Barbara, the contingent from the sticks. We cheered, we clapped, we laughed….and we gasped as we watched not just Jane in her green suit but Jim as well as he cavorted with abandon in his figure hugging costume. It’s an image seared onto my memory but I’m hopeful counselling will help! Jim and Jane you are great sports.
It’s a bit parky in here
The evening ended with Sam frolicking amongst the baa lambs and Mike being thrown on the mercy of the audience all thanks to the magic of green screen, Pinnacle and little bit of expertise. Naturally with so much going on there was bound to be the odd hiccup in the evening but several of the most attentive club members were quick to call out advice, offer suggestions and generally do their utmost to help. In response to these unsolicited but really useful contributions I’m sure I heard Chris mumble several words of thanks…at least I think it was thanks!
Surely There’s a law against This!
So after two eventful hours what did I learn? That getting the lighting right is vital, green screen can be a lot of fun, what some club members get up to in their spare time, and that ‘tolerance’ is an adjustment tool in Pinnacle as well as the ability to rise above trial and tribulation. Chris your fortitude was an example to us all, well done for producing a great evening!
Chris Goes back to Basics
So Hero or Zero? Well Chris will always be MY hero! But what’s your verdict?
Bob Gives his Opinion
Here Comes The Science
Why green screen? Basically green screen is a method of filming and isolating your subject from the background so that a substitute background can be added. Most video editing software allow the layering of film and the facility to select a particular colour in your clip and make it transparent (sometimes called chroma key). By using this facility in conjunction with a clip shot against a green screen background it is possible to put your subject anywhere from the moon to the bottom of the sea… just as long as you have the necessary replacement footage!
Mike and Friends against the green screen
But why ‘green’ you ask? Well a colour is needed that is as different from skin tone as possible while being suitable for the colour sensitivity of the camera. Video cameras are particularly sensitive to green while the film used in movie cameras is more sensitive to blue.
Away goes the green screen
I’ve posted a few Photoshopped images to show the principle of green screen. Using Photoshop on a still image is easier than applying an effect to a video clip but even so the exercise keenly highlighted the difficulties with green screen. Colour spill from the back drop and show through of the back drop in areas of hair etc both cause problems, as does the colour variation across the back drop as a result of uneven lighting. If you attempt green screen give yourself the best chance of success with plenty of time to set up and perhaps try some dry runs first too. Why not join the club members who’ve already used green screen in their films with great success. Good luck!
