Please Critique my Video
- Thread starter SDub
- Start date
Michael Carter
Veteran
Not bad, doesn't seem "amateur" or tossed together - what stood out to me:
When he flubs the word "instructor" he's not on-camera - why keep that word? I shoot 2-camera interviews for the express purpose of being able to cut out an "umm" or a flub. You didn't even need a cut to hide it! Chop it out!
That side view angle is a little bizarre. Kind of like "we have a 2nd camera, let's just stick it here". He's facing off-screen with more wall behind than in front. Most people frame off-center so the direction the subject is looking is where the open space is. There should be a "visual reason" for the 2nd angle choice - that's hard to describe - many interviews you'll see are shot 4k or higher, and they just re-frame tighter for the more intense thoughts. If you have a 2nd operator, focusing on hand gestures and doing tight facial closeups from an angle close to the main angle works really well. There should be a reason to cut... and sometimes the "reason" is a little bit subconscious - but "because you can" isn't a great one...
Some of the holds on the gear are too long - there was a microphone that just hung there, all by itself. I'd look for more interesting angles on the gear - how would a really good still shooter frame something to create composition or even negative space shapes that are interesting? Make those kind of shots sort of little art-pieces. (Many of them are very cool).
People watch these to learn about 'worlds" they don't inhabit. "Drums... and wow, mics! And a computer?? What's that thing with the knobs??" You did a good job of getting that idea across, this is this dude's world... I'd try to make every shot as interesting and pretty as the best ones are. The good shots show you get that.
Some of the hard cuts could be dissolves - I'd experiment with it, some are very jarring. The "when to dissolve" is maybe more of a feel thing, but to me, there were definite cuts where a dissolve would work - we focus on something and get lost in it a little, the dissolve eases us back. I know, doesn't make sense - and super subjective.
The "Hear Everett" is just "WTF?? I can't hear a thing!" It just holds on him playing. Don't spend that time with the guy's experience and philosophy/etc and then we don't hear the thing he's spent all this time describing... kinda feels like a cheat!
Audio's good - lighting's fine, could have been a little more dramatic but that's more of a taste issue - only really gets visually odd when lots of blank amber wall is there.
You asked!!! Overall, well done!
When he flubs the word "instructor" he's not on-camera - why keep that word? I shoot 2-camera interviews for the express purpose of being able to cut out an "umm" or a flub. You didn't even need a cut to hide it! Chop it out!
That side view angle is a little bizarre. Kind of like "we have a 2nd camera, let's just stick it here". He's facing off-screen with more wall behind than in front. Most people frame off-center so the direction the subject is looking is where the open space is. There should be a "visual reason" for the 2nd angle choice - that's hard to describe - many interviews you'll see are shot 4k or higher, and they just re-frame tighter for the more intense thoughts. If you have a 2nd operator, focusing on hand gestures and doing tight facial closeups from an angle close to the main angle works really well. There should be a reason to cut... and sometimes the "reason" is a little bit subconscious - but "because you can" isn't a great one...
Some of the holds on the gear are too long - there was a microphone that just hung there, all by itself. I'd look for more interesting angles on the gear - how would a really good still shooter frame something to create composition or even negative space shapes that are interesting? Make those kind of shots sort of little art-pieces. (Many of them are very cool).
People watch these to learn about 'worlds" they don't inhabit. "Drums... and wow, mics! And a computer?? What's that thing with the knobs??" You did a good job of getting that idea across, this is this dude's world... I'd try to make every shot as interesting and pretty as the best ones are. The good shots show you get that.
Some of the hard cuts could be dissolves - I'd experiment with it, some are very jarring. The "when to dissolve" is maybe more of a feel thing, but to me, there were definite cuts where a dissolve would work - we focus on something and get lost in it a little, the dissolve eases us back. I know, doesn't make sense - and super subjective.
The "Hear Everett" is just "WTF?? I can't hear a thing!" It just holds on him playing. Don't spend that time with the guy's experience and philosophy/etc and then we don't hear the thing he's spent all this time describing... kinda feels like a cheat!
Audio's good - lighting's fine, could have been a little more dramatic but that's more of a taste issue - only really gets visually odd when lots of blank amber wall is there.
You asked!!! Overall, well done!
Oh my! That is EXACTLY what I needed to hear! Thank you so much for the information! That's the second comment I got about the mess up on "instructor." I kept it in there because I thought it gave a little bit more realistic character to the interview, gave it the aspect of impromptu and not planned. But, it's good to know it's not coming off as that.
The second camera angle, you completely called me out on it. I put it there and made cuts to it because I could and I didn't want to linger on one shot for too long.
Also, in regards to Hear Everett, it was a link to his channel. Just gotta click on the square to hear everett!
Thank you, really, for the feedback.
The second camera angle, you completely called me out on it. I put it there and made cuts to it because I could and I didn't want to linger on one shot for too long.
Also, in regards to Hear Everett, it was a link to his channel. Just gotta click on the square to hear everett!
Thank you, really, for the feedback.
Last edited:
Michael Carter
Veteran
Sure thing - just my opinion, but I'd give at least a few bars of him really playing at the end... is it a little "bait and switch"ey to say "you watched all this but now you have to go to another link"?
ectobuilder
Veteran
when the subject looks off camera it makes the subject look more opinionated and less authoritative.
your b-roll and cut sequences should be relevant to what he is saying, so when he talks about loving to record using his computer, then cut to that b-roll.
in terms of your b-roll in general, break it down more in terms of wide, medium and tight shots within the frame work of beginning, middle and end. For example when he is untying his shoes, don't just choose a single angle unless it is for a specific affect.
the same goes for camera movement. understand why you have chosen to utilize a slider and fixed shots.
all these elements contributes to the overall psychology of the film and should match the way you want your subject to be portayed, so things like slider shots help to distance the viewer psychologically from the subject.
your b-roll and cut sequences should be relevant to what he is saying, so when he talks about loving to record using his computer, then cut to that b-roll.
in terms of your b-roll in general, break it down more in terms of wide, medium and tight shots within the frame work of beginning, middle and end. For example when he is untying his shoes, don't just choose a single angle unless it is for a specific affect.
the same goes for camera movement. understand why you have chosen to utilize a slider and fixed shots.
all these elements contributes to the overall psychology of the film and should match the way you want your subject to be portayed, so things like slider shots help to distance the viewer psychologically from the subject.
Last edited:
That makes perfect sense. I'll consider that from now on!
@ectobuilder
I think when he mentions working on his PC and working collaborative groups, I do cut to the b-roll of him doing that. But, for the most part, it was random, so good call out there. I wanted all the shots to be locked of and smooth to denote precision, because my friend is very exacting and precise with his hobby. Did that not come across? If not, I shall fix it in my next shoot!
Michael Carter
Veteran
You gotta understand - so much of this is subjective. There are plenty of "rules" with good reasons, plenty of stuff that's been done for so long that it instantly speaks to a viewer, and of course all of those can be ignored by a talented filmmaker.
For instance, slider shots. I did a music video where every shot of the performer was "slid", and the "story" stuff was more static. To me, it was saying something about an "imagined" space that was floating and abstract vs. a "real" place. I didn't think that through, I just had an idea in mind and didn't even think too much - more sort of realized it after the fact. I just knew the song made me want to be sort of a slow-motion observer to it. So in a sense you're talking "subtext": a secondary message that may have nothing specific to do with the subject.
Sounds all highfalutin', but I believe in critical thinking and that being to express specifically why you like or dislike anything is a powerful tool. Might sound silly in terms of "I just landed a last-minute corporate interview"... but if your approach to a project at an intuitive level is informed by developing your critical faculties, it should show through, even subtly, in everything you do.
That said, I'll say a HUGE mega secret weapon is the book "The Visual Story" by Bruce Block. It's a simply massive amount of info on why shots, colors, depth, etc. affect a viewer. Something that should be kept on a nightstand (or toilet??) to constantly thumb through. Somewhat dense, but amazing.
For instance, slider shots. I did a music video where every shot of the performer was "slid", and the "story" stuff was more static. To me, it was saying something about an "imagined" space that was floating and abstract vs. a "real" place. I didn't think that through, I just had an idea in mind and didn't even think too much - more sort of realized it after the fact. I just knew the song made me want to be sort of a slow-motion observer to it. So in a sense you're talking "subtext": a secondary message that may have nothing specific to do with the subject.
Sounds all highfalutin', but I believe in critical thinking and that being to express specifically why you like or dislike anything is a powerful tool. Might sound silly in terms of "I just landed a last-minute corporate interview"... but if your approach to a project at an intuitive level is informed by developing your critical faculties, it should show through, even subtly, in everything you do.
That said, I'll say a HUGE mega secret weapon is the book "The Visual Story" by Bruce Block. It's a simply massive amount of info on why shots, colors, depth, etc. affect a viewer. Something that should be kept on a nightstand (or toilet??) to constantly thumb through. Somewhat dense, but amazing.