In the production of our documentary we used common conventions of documentaries in all aspects of it; editing, cinematography, use of sound and mice en scene. Establishing shots were important as they set the scene and create a more detailed atmostsphere for interviews to take place, whereas medium shots and close ups were used for the actual interviews to ensure the audience is focusing on what they're saying (shallow focus was also enforces this - whereas deep focus is better for establishing shots). Editing is vital for any sort of film/documentary , here are some examples of the way we followed the conventions of documentary editing.
- Fading into a colour: this marks the ends of a certain sequence of information, leading way for another sequence/piece of information.
- Dissolves were used to transition two shots together, often linking the two shots together.
- We used the censor effects to create a highlight effect to signal to the audience that certain sections on the screen were important.
- Wipes are used to show a quick change in topic, without changing the main topic.
SOUND
- We decided to break the convention of using Diegetic sounds and instead used mainly non diegetic sound; diegetic sound is normally used to send signals to the audience that the visuals are important to the topic. However we decided to use NON Diegetic
There is a good amount of informed commentary here, that shows you have developed a good appreciation of the codes and conventions of the documentary short film, however your comments are mainly assertions as you have not supported them with any evidence from your own research and provided real examples that demonstrate the points you are making are grounded in theoretical practice. You have to use real examples in support of your comments.
ReplyDeleteYou also refer to a 'poetic style' but there's no explanation of what constitutes a 'poetic style' or how you have achieved it.
ReplyDelete