Another victim volunteering for criticism

Chris, images OK but the Yak is better. A bit too much 'crossing the line' for me.

A less casual commentary (and using less of it) would have helped a lot. Too many ums and errs which you could have removed in editing. Not sure if you recorded the commentary 'on the hoof' or after the event. If the former, I strongly recommend the latter in future.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but it really could be so much better.

Commentary has a 'sitting in a small room' sound to it.

Cheers.

Thank you for your thoughts. There is always a danger when having asked for an opinion you then go on the defensive. Maybe I should have explained a little more.

The intention is to be casual/chatty, this blog is a distance from the official site.

It is supposed to have a hot off the press rather than produced feel.

Once the engine is running there are two places where I am allowed to be. (Tripods are also an issue!). If you look here, where we were recording the run up to check the temperature sensors it jumps left and right, and again the engineer, who doesn't know about crossing the line, flits in and out - but you need people in the clips.

http://friends-of-tfc.blogspot.com/2008/06/never-volunteer.html

This may meet more with your approval, beautiful aeroplane.

http://friends-of-tfc.blogspot.com/2008/06/dragonfly-shows-its-colours.html

Chatty and casual is fine but "ums and errs" always sound naff to my ear. In fact, it takes a really good pro to pull off chatty and casual.

I appreciate the limitations imposed by the subject and location but you can minimise the effects of adjacent shots that don't really cut by mixing or wiping or even fading to black. It'll even work, to a point, with crossing the line.

The DH Dragonfly is very pretty. I assume there are more Rapides in existence?

As a long time admirer of the lines of the Dragon Rapide, I enjoyed watching that clip.
Once had a die cast model of one. I wonder what became of it ???

Robert, me too! The die cast model that is. Unfortunately mine had seen better days by the time I inherited it and the wingtips were long gone. I still kept it for many years though.

Rob :- My one eventually ceased to be a toy and despite flaking paint etc. it was promoted to ornament status and sat on my bedroom mantelpiece until I joined the army. It then lived in my grandmother's display cabinet until her death in 1970. It was returned to me then but memories of it since then are a bit vague.
It could well be lurking about in a box in a dark cornet of the attic. :)

I've an idea my rather disabled version fell victim to one of the occasional female 'purges'. Not sure which one to blame so I'm keeping quiet. ;)

Hi
Because the Yak is flying... ;)

I've got to declare a vested interest - in the autumn of 2000 I spent a week videoing the WWII fighters at the Old Flying Machine Company at Duxford, for a CD-ROM project:

So I've been close-up and dirty with camera around these lovely planes - including air-to-air. I've still got loads of footage, which I'm searching for appropriate WWII archive footage to cut in with my footage to make a feature about what these planes did for real during the war - one day when I can get a round tuit!...

I found the problem with your Spitfire clip was that you talked about the pre-day planning that the ground crew have to do, but they were wandering around in and out of frame like they didn't know you were there filming.
Wouldn't they let you a bit closer (when the engine is off) and act-it-up a bit for the camera - tell you what they were doing?
Even if they won't 'perform' for you you could maybe get some factual info to revoice in your commentary.
Good luck...

Edit: I see you've done that in the P-39 clip you've later linked to. :)
But you could maybe sharpen it up by explaining in the V/O the significance of the activity going on.

Hi all, glad the subject matter is of interest.

1) The display for which the blog is a record of the preparations is where the flying will take place. Last year we just did a one off with lots happening but this year we are trying to show that it doesn't just happen. There is often a lot of criticism if an aircraft doesn't appear. One of the stars had a part removed on thursday, it will be in the states for tues (should've been w/e - Fed Ex lost it within an hour of collection!!!!!) then returned for the end of the week, display is 12 days away.

Last years

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClNaEiKpOmY

filmed in afternoon, 90 minute drive home, cut and rendered and uploaded htat night - looking back I see it still had a few glitches.

Be back with more discussion after TG, especially ofmc Paul!

OK

Trying to stay on topic, I suppose I am not saying rate my work but: How do I make a short 1min 30 sec diary insert hit hard.

The key shots in the original were, Alan and Pete talking, Pilot in a/c engine start, pilot interaction with ground crew, removal of gpu, chocks away lads (keen to get second engineer, Steve in), hence change of side filmed, also better for taxi off.

BTW the light as Paul may remember at DX facing airfield is a disaster.

Re: Interaction with the crew for staged shots. These guys are working long days, lots of days and are working against the clock. We have a good rappor but the stress involved these days if anything goes wrong is so much that I am greatful for unrestricted access I have got.

Incidently the reference to checks and preflight stuff, is what was done on the flightline. The commentary was added just to make it a bit different and to cover the fact that hte wind noise (before even the propwash kicked in) made the atmospherics a distraction.

So now I have ened up defending rather than learning.

while I am here this was 99 - I find this easier than the current remit!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEQIJt4CCr0&feature=user

(p2-350, pinnacle dc10+, jvc dv70, analogue out, no tripod (again).

Use the commentary to create drama and tension. Let us know the stress involved. The shots look like routine testing to an unenlightened observer. Set up what is going on, what is at stake if it fails and how difficult it is. At the end, give the audience a payoff. If the tests were successful, tell them. If not, tell them what that means. E.g. maybe the AC flys in the show, maybe it doesn't.

I hope this is more helpful.

Hi
To add to Rob's excellent comment, editing is about the cameraman shooting enough varied shots to allow story development and tension come through the cutting. CUs are needed to break up long wide shots where the action takes too long.

For a cameraman its about finding out what is going to happen (over what timescale) then taking a chance that you can get all the shots the editor is going to need before the action grinds to a halt.

That means taking chances ;)
Then knowing how to pick up relevant cutaways so the edit can be rescued - better still shooting some cutaways beforehand.

Also, a monopod can be better than a tripod where you need to move about fast yet get steady WAs.

Thanks Paul and Rob

Think Tuesday might be the next happening. You are right, and I think part of the issue is that we are being genuinely " as it happens" and instant. If we use library footage we end up with lighting/sky/solund issues. All challenges and where you realise that fly on wall has as much preparation as the stunning wedding productions we see in this section.

Oh and when editor, camera, other is the same person there is no one else to blame.

Thanks again.

BTW Dragonfly is here: http://www.avrosys.nu/aircraft/Transport/253Trp3.htm

I will probably get a chance to do a bit more on it. The current owner flew this particular one back from the states................

Best of luck with the next one. Nothing worthwhile is ever easy. You're right, good preparation is essential. Even top documentary makers often write the script then go out and film 'to fit'. (Otherwise they'd never be able get the commission to make the film). The good thing about being the camera and editor is that you can make decisions about things you know you can fix later. (Have a look at Robert Rodriguez' excellent 10 minute film making course.) For example, if you provide yourself with cut-aways you can crash zoom from wide to get close-ups and back out again as required, secure in the knowledge you can lose the zooms in the edit.

Thanks for the Dragonfly link.

Please let us know how you get on with the next one.

I'll postthe raw stuff later - that is pretty much what I started with.

A visitor to the museum posted this from the touchline. Previous day, but same principle. Really wanted to distance us from this type of thing.

http://www.airshowbuzz.com/videos/view.php?v=e94bf433

Thanks again. May get an opportunity to do some detail stuff on dragonfly if about at the right time.

Chris

I am probably going to be out of step with everyone here but apart from the actual ERRs, I found the commentary fine (could have used more ambient sound). I hate this false building of tension that documentary makers use now.

If you are interested in the subject then you want the facts and if you are not then you probably won't be watching.

Nowadays an hours documentary consists of about 5mins maximum of information and the rest replaying the whole thing again adding anothe 30 secs of information and then informing us what will be happening next. I often turn off programs that quite interest me because of all the phony tension building.

As soon as one commentator tries some new inflection of speech( speach? ;) ) they all jump on the bandwagon. When TV first started when a documentary was 30 mins then there was at least 25 mins of information in spite of the silly BBC accents.

BobA

Always a pleasure watching a Spitfire.
Never knew the benefits gained by clipping the wings but they lost that background whistle that they made. Didn't they ???

One of the proudest moments in my young life (about eight or nine I think) was when I waved to a low flying spitfire and the pilot waved back to me. :)

Just switched off a prime example of that. 'Mega Storm' on Sky3.

Are you thinking of the whistle over the gun ports on the P51D mustang.

Clipped wings make it more manouverable in the roll, might not look as nice though :)

No. Spitfires.

Look totally o/t but some of you have expressed an interest in old aircraft.

We are tracking B17 Liberty Belle live on its way to UK through this link:

Just thought you may be interested.

Change of plan on video uploads, nothing happening tomorrow and chief engineer has an abscess under one of his teeth so no piece to camera as planned (see how many er's he gets in!!) either. Real Life eh!