Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Part two of my Hillsborough documentary

  1. #1

    Default Part two of my Hillsborough documentary

    Hi all,

    Here is part two of my three part documentary on the Hillsborough disaster. Thanks to all who gave me feedback on part one; hopefully you kind souls will take the time to watch and comment on part two as well. Part two is 21 minutes though, so I'll understand if you don't.

  2. #2


    You've cut off Damian Kavanaugh at around 5:48 before he finished his sentence. There is a green flash at 16:14 I don't know if it's a bad frame.

    Apart from those little points I think you've made an excellent documentary.

    Well done Mike.

  3. #3


    Thanks, Midnight. I'm not seeing the green frame at all ... Weird. You're right about the Damian Kavanagh clip. He went on for a while after that and didn't really take a breath, so it was difficult to find a suitable space to cut.

    Thanks for the comments & kind words, I appreciate it!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Surrey, UK
    Blog Entries


    I think you've done a great jo to get all these interviews in the first place and then to string the excerpts together in such a cohesive manner.
    If i can be picky, I'd suggest you need to look at where your interviewee is addressing their comments. It is generally considered that the nearer to the camera that the interviewee looks the more empathy the viewer will feel with them. You don't want them talking to camera though (unless you're specifically after instructional/preaching). So it's generally best to plong yourself (or the interviewer) right next to the camera, or, if close up, just behind and jst to the left or right.
    The wider your interviewee directs their answers, the less personal it feels - at least towards the viewer. There comes a point where it's usefl to show the interviewer as wel. Then it becomes intimate again, but this time the intimacu is between interviewer and interviewee rather than interviewee and viewer - and we, the viewers, are evesdropping the conversation. Either and both are good, but something where the interviewee is looking wide of the camera and we do not see an interviewer is not so personal.
    So, shots like 14:47 are not as good as 3:25.

    Actually 3:25 is quite an interesting shot. With the subject screen right, I would have said he should really be looking towards the left side of the camera (from teh operator's point of view) but here you have him looking towards the other side but it still works. I don't know enough about this stuff, but I imagine this works because the direction of his gaze is still within the frame. I like the composition of this shot. It's a busy background with light and shade falling on the foliage, a soft blue sky and brickwork. Most of the brickwork in the image is an expance of ratehr plain wall, over which you place the Prof's head. I would have expected the busy background to be distracting, but far from it, it acts as a really great frame. The only thing that might improve it (and I may be wrong as it would not have occurred to me to set up a shot like this) would have been a reflector to soften some of the shadows and brighten up his face.

    (PS I'm seeing the green flash too)

  5. #5


    I think you've made a very interesting observation Tim, the framing of the professors interview does "technically" seem wrong but because he looks directly into the camera a lot, the angle of his body position and the fact that he is "the expert" it does work well. The may be other things going on like the golden ratio spiral thing but like you say it does work well.

  6. #6


    I was happy to watch though it Mike, it kept interest because you took the time to edit the comments very well. Having 3 or 4 eye witnesses reflecting on the same issue is very powerful when it comes to believing in the accounts. This must have taken a lot of effort from you.

    The Eileen Clayton parts annoyed me a bit, she closed her eyes a lot, which although natural for her, comes across weird on camera, plus the bright blue stark background, plus the audio was very 'tinny' for her parts, and was a noticeable drop in quality, especially for her first part.

    The 3.25 shot was a favourite for me too, I think it stood out because the character was very assertive amongst a group of otherwise passive interviewees.

  7. #7


    Even though I'm not familiar with the events being discussed, I found it very powerful.

  8. #8


    Stripe, thank you for your comments.

    I can't notice any significant change in audio quality on the Eileen clips - could it be that she doesn't have a bassy voice like the men before & after her?

    Hilary, thank you for your kind words also!

  9. #9


    Her part at 4m50s is very thin and tinny compared to the audio from the beginning. It was a noticeable drop in quality to me because I deal with sound a lot. But I am sure average viewer ears are forgiving when they are watching various interviews in various locations, but I would have boosted this a bit because it would have bothered me personally.

    Her second part doesn't seem so bad.

    It makes me aware of yet another thing to consider when interviewing in this way, seems the tech problems just mount up from behind the cam lol.

    The old adage that the viewer should never notice the work involved - it's a cruel one.

Similar Threads

  1. Hillsborough - Heading for Disaster
    By MikeTV in forum User Videos
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 03-19-2017, 09:01 PM
  2. Hillsborough Disaster documentary
    By MikeTV in forum User Videos
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-07-2011, 10:44 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-01-2011, 10:38 PM
  4. HDC-SD9 Documentary Help
    By PinkFloydEffect in forum Technology advice and tips
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 01-25-2011, 04:51 AM
  5. Part of audio track renders, a part not.
    By dreqonline in forum Sony Vegas video editing apps
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-04-2008, 08:53 AM

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

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