Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Hillsborough Disaster documentary

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Surrey, England
    Posts
    267

    Default Hillsborough Disaster documentary

    Hi all,

    Haven't been on here for ages! Busy life at the moment, and the documentary I am making presently is taking a lot of my free time.

    I have been filming a fair few interviews for the documentary, and I wondered if anybody could give me any hints, tips or constructive criticism? There is a short clip from a longer interview here:

    http://thehillsboroughdisasterdocumentary.com/2011/11/27/hillsborough-richie-greaves-a-survivors-story/

    One problem I found in this particular interview, although it doesn't show in this clip, is filming in changeable lighting. This was shot in Richie's front room, with one wall pretty much dominated by patio doors. At first this appeared to be perfect conditions, as there was a beautiful bright, natural light in the room. However, what I noticed after filming was that the sun was coming out from behind the clouds and then going back behind them, and that made the picture brighter and then dimmer. I had the Iris set to manual on my Panasonic HMC41E camcorder.

    Short of shutting the curtains and artificially lighting the room, does anybody have any advice on how I could have avoided this?

    I have started a blog about the making of my doco, with some of my video clips at The Hillsborough Disaster Documentary if anybody is interested.

    Thanks in advance for your comments.

    Cheers,

    Mike

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Smalltown, Queensland
    Posts
    604

    Default

    I think you may have been looking at it for too long lol. I noticed vague light changes, but mainly because you warned me. I think if it is one-take it becomes natural for the eye. If you were doing continual edits, then it may look wrong.

    I'm just a viewer, not a film maker (yet). However is it not logical to use a light that emulates the sun, from the same position as the sun, so that it will compensate if the sun goes behind a cloud?

    Then again, you never actualy show the patio window, the scene is a bit claustrophobic, which is intentional for the subject matter I presume. But if you are not filming direct natural light, why not close the curtains and fake it?
    Last edited by Stripe; 12-07-2011 at 02:23 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Surrey, England
    Posts
    267

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    I think you may have been looking at it for too long lol. I noticed vague light changes, but mainly because you warned me. I think if it is one-take it becomes natural for the eye. If you were doing continual edits, then it may look wrong.

    I'm just a viewer, not a film maker (yet). However is it not logical to use a light that emulates the sun, from the same position as the sun, so that it will compensate if the sun goes behind a cloud?

    Then again, you never actualy show the patio window, the scene is a bit claustrophobic, which is intentional for the subject matter I presume. But if you are not filming direct natural light, why not close the curtains and fake it?
    Thanks for taking the time to comment!

    The light changes mostly happen in other parts of the interview which are not shown - I hadn't noticed too much in this clip, but I'll be looking now!

    I should have closed the curtains and set up a light I suppose. The three main factors that stopped me doing that were:

    a) I love the warmth of natural light
    b) I am asking these people to give their time freely, so I feel a little rushed when I am setting up
    c) I am not yet confident that I know what I am doing with my lighting rig, so I tend to avoid it where possible

    Thanks again for the comments!

  4. #4

    Default

    I didn't this there was a problem with the lighting from the clip you showed. The framing was a bit off, Rule of 3rds. He has to much head room. Apart from that it was fine the sound was ok as well.

    Well done.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Surrey, England
    Posts
    267

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Midnight Blue View Post
    I didn't this there was a problem with the lighting from the clip you showed. The framing was a bit off, Rule of 3rds. He has to much head room. Apart from that it was fine the sound was ok as well.

    Well done.
    Thanks Midnight. I need to master that rule of thirds malarkey as well!

    No, there was no light issue on this clip that I noticed - but on other parts of the interview (not shown) the sun would come out and then go in, causing the picture to lighten and darken. While in real life the sun coming out felt good, the result on camera is not so good!

    Thanks for your comments.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    10,849
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Nice to hear from you again, Mike.
    I think there's little you can do about natural light. This is why TV crews always bring their own lights and drain your electricity meter when they film at your home!
    Rule of thirds - covered.
    This clip looked giood and sharp - but everything in it did. Try to get your subject as far away from the background as possible, zoom in and try to throw the background out of focus as much as possible to create separation. A bit of backlight helps here as well.
    There is a lot of background hiss on this track. Fortunately it seems to be very even white noise and can be vastly reduced in post. I've had a play and can send you what I've done if you like. Once you notice the hiss, you really notice it!
    Tim

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Surrey, England
    Posts
    267

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TimStannard View Post
    Nice to hear from you again, Mike.
    I think there's little you can do about natural light. This is why TV crews always bring their own lights and drain your electricity meter when they film at your home!
    Rule of thirds - covered.
    This clip looked giood and sharp - but everything in it did. Try to get your subject as far away from the background as possible, zoom in and try to throw the background out of focus as much as possible to create separation. A bit of backlight helps here as well.
    There is a lot of background hiss on this track. Fortunately it seems to be very even white noise and can be vastly reduced in post. I've had a play and can send you what I've done if you like. Once you notice the hiss, you really notice it!
    Hi Tim, thanks, its good to be back!

    I do seem to get a certain amount of hiss with all of my recordings, and I haven't been able to work out why as yet.

    I think I paid about 400 for my EW 100 (G) Lavier mic, but I wondered if it was that, or maybe interference from other wireless devices. Any ideas?

    Anyway, I'd love to hear what you've done, thanks for taking the time to do it! Can you reduce hiss in Sony Vegas do you know, or do you need other software?

    Cheers,

    Mike

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    10,849
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Here's a link, Mike. There's a few secods untreated, then a few seconds treated, then untreated, then untreated so you can get a direct comparison. This is followed by the whole snippet treated so you can listen for artifacts.

    This is not really a good sample as I downloaded it from YouTube into RealPlayer, converted it to wmv for import into Vegas, exported to GoldWave as a wav then back into vegas (as the treated wav) then converted to mpeg2 for YouTube which will have converted it to flv!

    I used the Noise Reduction facility in GoldWave, which is fairlty basic, but worked OK here In prnciple you take a very small sample from the clip which has the noise only, then "subtract" that from the whole of te clip.
    If your sample is too big, you get a lot of artifacts from the sound of running water (like we used to get on mobile phones) through to full Dalek like voices. The trick is often to take an extremely small sample and apply that, then repeat. I did that three times with this and left it there with a bit of his as it was on the verge of leaving artifacts (if you listen carefully you can probably hear some).

    Anyway if you want me to play with a higher quality version, if you can find some way of getting me a wav file I can send one back.



    The most noticable part of the artifacts is when he breaths in.
    Last edited by TimStannard; 12-07-2011 at 10:30 PM. Reason: update
    Tim

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Surrey, England
    Posts
    267

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TimStannard View Post
    Here's a link, Mike. There's a few secods untreated, then a few seconds treated, then untreated, then untreated so you can get a direct comparison. This is followed by the whole snippet treated so you can listen for artifacts.

    This is not really a good sample as I downloaded it from YouTube into RealPlayer, converted it to wmv for import into Vegas, exported to GoldWave as a wav then back into vegas (as the treated wav) then converted to mpeg2 for YouTube which will have converted it to flv!

    I used the Noise Reduction facility in GoldWave, which is fairlty basic, but worked OK here In prnciple you take a very small sample from the clip which has the noise only, then "subtract" that from the whole of te clip.
    If your sample is too big, you get a lot of artifacts from the sound of running water (like we used to get on mobile phones) through to full Dalek like voices. The trick is often to take an extremely small sample and apply that, then repeat. I did that three times with this and left it there with a bit of his as it was on the verge of leaving artifacts (if you listen carefully you can probably hear some).

    Anyway if you want me to play with a higher quality version, if you can find some way of getting me a wav file I can send one back.



    The most noticable part of the artifacts is when he breaths in.

    Thanks for doing that, I appreciate it!

    The real trick I guess is to work out why I am getting that background hiss in the first place, so I can eradicate it while filming!

    I'll put it on my list of things to do!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Surrey, England
    Posts
    267

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeTV View Post
    Thanks for doing that, I appreciate it!

    The real trick I guess is to work out why I am getting that background hiss in the first place, so I can eradicate it while filming!

    I'll put it on my list of things to do!
    You're right as well. When I turn it up, the treated areas of the video are hiss free, but, they are replaced with the sound of alien communications from the planet Zog!

    When/if you film with a wireless lavier, would you expect to get that much hiss?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. MXF disaster and H.264 issues
    By theend in forum Sony Vegas video editing apps
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-02-2009, 01:59 AM
  2. Wedding Disaster!
    By JJThet in forum Wedding and Event Videography
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-08-2009, 04:34 PM
  3. Two camera widescreen disaster!
    By markandmag in forum General video editing software help and advice
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-25-2009, 09:58 PM
  4. Help with wedding video disaster
    By Auspom in forum General video editing software help and advice
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-18-2008, 11:36 PM
  5. DISASTER has occured to my XM2
    By camera_james in forum Hardware Problems
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-06-2005, 02:57 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •