TV NEWS - Evaluation "Carology - The Cost of Motoring"

The Initial Idea and Production process
We started throwing ideas about over the summer as we knew it was a quick turnaround for this unit but when Andrew joined the group in September we where back to square one as we wanted a project and idea that we where all happy with. It always seems the way with such a brief at university that finding that initial idea is always the hardest bit. I came up with three of the four initial ideas but after looking into the others further it seems they would not be viable in some way. (For example...)

• Andrews idea about the Beatles could not go any further because after a good amount of time he had not had a response from any of his initial emails so early on we decided that we should scrap this idea. 
• My idea about motorsport was initially the strongest idea and I did have some contacts in this field so the group did feel this could be the way forward. However this idea was very dependant on getting permission to film at Brands Hatch but that permission didn't come through in adequate time. However I get a response to film in Germany for a DTM driver but as some of the group could not travel abroad we could not pursue that as a group but I am happy that i did follow up this lead personally! 
• The last idea was about transport delays which cailan did try to follow up but only got an email back about 3 weeks ago so we did not follow this up, but in a way we kept with the transport theme in our Carology project! 

Our main idea started by looking on BBC news and looking at the main page. It's annoying that I don't have the story to hand but i saw a story about electric cars and that grabbed my attention initially and we talked about how could develop this idea. We looked into what sold electric cars and how many models where on the market right now and we realised that electric cars are starting to take over and become very important in the future of motoring. The initial idea was to pitch an electric car against a petrol car and test which is better and what the costs are for each as well as the sustainability. 

After our meeting with Jo we did decide this would be the best subject to follow, she thought there where great possibilities for this topic. Jo told us to get on the phone and start contacting car dealerships and see what they could do for us. George and I got on the phone in Tesco Car Park to see if the local car dealerships would possibly let us borrow an electric car for our news piece. We did get mixed responses from our phone calls but we did get somewhere with SMART in Maidstone.  We ended up getting solid conformation from Smart that we could borrow an electric car for our shoot but as the weeks went on leaving us with a problem about what the package could be about. We had to change the angle of the piece accordingly, we changed from basically promoting electric cars and how good they are to putting a more negative slant on electric cars and showing how cheap it is to run a petrol car. We chose to use my car for this test because it is the newest and at the same team the group thought I would be the best presenter because of my knowledge in cars and motoring. I was obviously appreciative that they thought this but at the same time nervous as I had not done anything like this before!

We also had to decide on a "Live" segment for our project. We got a inkling early on that George's dad had a contact we could talk to, a guy who is obsessed with electric cars. After planning that interview and shooting it we had a meeting with Helen which changed that idea. It was not seen as live and we needed more of a reason to be on location. I came up with the idea of going to Brands hatch to speak to a driver about what his thoughts on the future of motorsport are. We did not have much time to plan so going there without a contact was risky but we met two great guys who gave us good interviews, and Jason's interview was the one we went with. it felt more natural and also had much more of a reason to be live. We happily followed Helen's advice and got the re shoot in good time to edit it.

We also had to decide who was going to present in the studio. I was torn because both Andrew and Cailan did really want to do the studio presenting. With no offense to Andrew I did feel Cailan was stronger and in the first take that was the case. But as we had to re film due to changing the live interview I thought as director it would be fair to give andrew another chance and he performed much better second time around. Of course there where still mess ups but as I know from presenting, that stuff happens!  

We had talked a little bit about roles before filming. It seemed the group wanted me to be the main presenter as I said which I was happy about after we had discussed what we where going to be doing. Andrew and Cailan ended up being the anchors and George was left to focus on editing. I was kind of appointed Director by the group (I assume through the way I had pitched the original idea as well as my expertise in the field we are filming in) which I was happy to take up but I could see George was not as happy with this group decision. After I explained to George what I had in mind for the project he was less worried about me being the director. George asked to be the editor which was fair because of the work he has done previously. Cailan was appointed as lead camera operator through the shoots thanks to my belief in his abilities through working with him in the documentary unit last year. As none of us had worked with Andrew since the first project we where unsure what his main strengths where but he suggested audio and music would be what he would focus on, which covered most areas.

All of the shoot days went well in their own ways. We got all the footage we needed from each day and when we did have to re shoot it was not too much of a hassle. I would like to point out I was present for every shooting day that was included in the final cut. I only missed one day due to following up a personal project through a contact I had found earlier on in this unit, however this shoot day had to be re filmed through suggestions made from Helen. I was happy about this because the original footage from the green screen day was out of focus and not great, when I had control of the video equipment like I had for the rest of the project, more time was spent on setting it up hence the better video quality. George and I did get a little worried on some of the shoot days because we where the main two on every day meaning we where worried about the commitment of the others but we made good of every day. The main struggle was re-shooting the live interview with two of us was very hard considering last time we had all four of us. I do wish on that day one of the others would have at least helped. I think I did a pretty good job as a director and I did get very positive feedback from all of the group. George had been worried that I had been controlling over the directing but I did say to him that I do have the most knowledge here, so it would make sense for me to lead it. However when other opinions where raised that differed to mine, I was always accommodating to them and if i thought it was a good idea i would go with it as i think criticism only helps us improve as a group.

Into the edit, George took the lead with this one. I wanted to take a back seat but at the same time I wanted to keep upto date with the project. I was present on all but one of the edit days and I did give George the space to work when he asked for it. I think early on He felt like I was peering over his shoulder monitoring what he was doing but in reality I was just trying to help the best I could with the experience I have had as an editor. I think George felt like I was trying to steal his thunder, but it was the other way round to this when filming, I always tried my best to listen to new ideas from all members of the team, if i liked them or not. George 's and my personalities do clash from time to time and George does struggle taking criticism meaning I found it hard to give my feedback without him being offended by it. I tried to explain it wasn't personal, I just think honesty is the best policy when it comes to group work.  However, this may seem like it was a shambles but in reality it was not. We did clash over certain decisions in the edit but we always did find a compromise. I was always there to help George and Cailan was there about half of the edit days as well.

What worked in this project?

• I felt like we got a lot of footage thanks to 5 cameras being used and also thanks to the work planning each shoot day which was mostly done by myself, cailan and george.
• Our script was split into four parts in an online document, meaning we had an equal contribution and we all wrote the parts in which we spoke, meaning it was more natural when it was being said.
• All of our footage bar one or two shots where perfectly in focus and colour corrected properly meaning when it came to the dit we did not have to spend much time adjusting the clips colours. 
• Our B ROLL Was interesting and informative as well as helping tell the story that we are trying to tell.
• I would say on the most part my directing was good and the team worked well on the shoot days that they attended. We always got a lot of work done on each day which is proven by the amount of footage that we have got
• I would say while my presenting was not perfect we did get there eventually and it seemed much more natural than I had expected when I originally said I would do the role which I am happy with!
• George did a great job with the edit. Even though altering opinions did sometimes mean we had some tension in the group, it was for the best because we kept pushing ourselves to make a better product. 
• George and I did a very good job updating the social media consistently, I focused on the Instagram and George focused on the Twitter, but there was some overlap when we where helping each other out. 

What did not work so well in this project?

• I think communication between Andrew and the rest of the group could have been much better in the project. We have a group chat in which we put all new ideas and thoughts in and mostly it is just myself, george and cailan. Andrew did not really communicate online or verbally in the way we would have wanted in the project. He ended up writing blog posts that we would have to read to know what he was thinking. It was a very inefficient way of doing things and we would have all appreciated if andrew would have been more upfront with his ideas. 
• Our whole project is too long, which is the main critique we have of it. The whole length is around 8 minutes which is excluding what the anchor says, at least 2 minutes over the time limit. Helen said this would lower our grade but it is something we have to mention because it does show our planning before, in the script could have been better. If we had timed out every mini segment we would have probably been much closer to the allotted time.We realise that this is an error and that is one of the main issues with the project.
• We did have issues with the lights casting a shadow in the green screen shoots but that was rectified after some time adjusting them. This did waste time when trying to film the final studio anchor pieces but we did get there in the end. But in hindsight we would have set it all up and tested before shooting.
• We had a few people drop out, mainly smart, meaning we did have to adjust the package segment in a little bit of a hurry
• Andrew did not have the commitment that the rest of us had in this project. Albeit sometime with genuine reasons not to come in, a lot of the time the reasons where farcical. He did not turn up to many edit days meaning mostly George had to edit the sound which he was suppose to do. I know he will go on to make excuses that he was never given a chance to do this, but he only turned up to one edit day before submission and did not give any input on this day. The whole group is very disappointed in the way Andrew had conducted himself, resorting to mean and sometimes personal attacks on his blog. He has done this from the start of the project which is very disappointing, he even bragged to us that he did a similar thing in the last unit to get a good grade. Unfortunately he has a way of always playing the victim in every situation which always makes him seem innocent. 

What could be developed if we where to do this project again?

• I would have loved to have done the original package comparing a petrol to an electric car, and with more time I do feel that it was achievable. However this was a challenge to try get everything planned, filmed and edited in around 6 weeks meaning that was probably never going to be an option. 
• I would love to have the chance to present again. It really brought be out of my shell and It did actually feel pretty natural by the end of it. If I felt that way at the start, possibly the package would have been stronger!
• I would have liked to have changed some parts in the edit (please don't kill me george) but as i know George spent so much time on it, it would have only made more tension to say these points very late on.
• I would also like to have developed as a director. I probably was controlling in some ways and that may have meant the others felt like they could not voice an opinion, which I do regret. But I am happy with what we have created and everyone can give themselves a pat of the back for all the effort they put in.

What did I learn whilst making this project?

• Being on the other side of the camera is very different. When george was directing me as a presenter, I was finding some things being said very patronising. While we sorted this out as a group it now gives me the other perspective for future shoots, in the way to treat your cast. As in some situations i did feel very uncomfortable. 
• How to place people in their best roles was key. i think we did a very good job at allocating roles to the person who suited them best Of course there was some overlap, but that only made us push ourselves and make a better show because of it. 
• I definitely learned who I can rely on, when it comes to turning up to shoot days and being active in the project. We did struggle on occasions when it was only 2/3 of us and it shows to me at least who I would want to work with again in the future.
• I also got more confident at picking up the phone and contacting people. I had always relied on emails before but now I realise getting on the phone can save you a lot of time. Most of the time all the nerves come before the call, not whilst you are in it. 
• Pushing each other (maybe sometimes too far) to get the best product was one of the biggest outcomes for me. Just because you think you know best, doesn't mean you are always right. In a way I liked being challenged because I like hearing different ways of doing things to improve as a creator!

Conclusion

I enjoyed this unit a lot. I got to work on a project that I am proud of and in a interesting subject for me personally. I got to work with new equipment and work with people that I like working with. I think due to the restrictions that we had we did a great job pulling it all together, and when something went wrong we where always super positive in making it good again. I am happy with what I contributed, George is a great editor, Cailan is just an all round legend and Andrew gives it his all when he is here. Through the stress and the disagreements, we did it! We created something that we can be proud of, it's not perfect but we had a great time making it and have learned a lot more about each other as well. Anyway, I guess that is it! Hope I can do more stuff like this in the future!