This year I have decided to take my presentations to the next level.
This year I have made a short 18:10 film with audio commentary and backing music. the reasoning being this is to further my skills and identify new ways to approach presentations of my material. The film consists of my project journey as a whole but also in a condensed version as is expected in a max 20 minute presentation.
It goes into research, conception, development, creation, implementation, testing and analyses. I left the theories of my conclusions out purposefully so the lecturers had something to ask me at the end - showing that if they are aware I did not cover it and also just to see if I peaked their interest.
What I did not cover in length was the outside project work and only mentioned a few in passing, these however were one of my greatest research chances of this year. I delved into different areas of audio design rather than just film sound effects which I chose because it is a weakness of mine and it is my last year here. This is when I get to do what ever I want.
Also one last thing I did not mention in the presentation is the future because im so unsure about it all. My experience kees growing but I still feel I need training in music thoery and composition - I have checked the musical universities and I do not quite reach the entry level yet, or worse Im too late to apply.
Planning for a future you are so uncenrtain about is hard, I have no doubt though it will be an interesting one.
Tuesday, 11 May 2010
Sunday, 9 May 2010
Reflective part 4
Heylo again
The tests continued on the 15th march and as such it was intended after that test the video would be altered to factor in the results of the blinking and emotional responses to create another Version, one which I knew the outcome would be before I tested it then by testing that I would get clear evidence If I had learned how to manipulate sound effects to change the viewers perception.
However the intial tests failed and so it had to be rebooked 2 weeks later in which only 2 films were tester and the video footage was unusable. The questionnaire results however were still of value and I did use them to change the next questionnaire again to improve it and also pulle dout some jusdgements about the test already which was that the hypereal testers were similarly opinionated to the realism testers but more diverse in there answers and mulitple choices, asnwering more than once per question usually.
The test was thought over again and it was decided to go to the backup plan which was whitespace mac testign which turned otu to be the best option in the end with clear video footage. I used the same headphones and mac in every test making sure i had as few variables as could be but missed an important one which was one tester was ill, the test results for that tester were very different - which proved in his state of illness he blinked more than the healthy subjects.
This test was analysed later on and data like blink times, mouth movements, eyebrow raises etc for later review as this part of the test is only about blinking. The results were graphed and put into visual form to easily understand.
This was then matched with the questionaire results which did not show the same cohesion at the hyperreal side of the scale but showed a different side. This result showed that th eminimalsit style had very definitive results on the views of the testers where as it became very undefinied between testers what their views where on it. Overall it seems that consciously more sound effects than less gave a wider scope of interpretation to that particular film where as with unconsciously it seems to be the case that the more sound effects you add the more in balance you become in terms of blinking.
I have made speculations on why this might have happened and one is in speculation is much like the sample rate of audio, the lower the sample rate the wider the gap between sample points and few sample points, this being similar to the minimalism film. This links to the answers being more defined but the blink rate was very wide apart and blink convergence few. Similarly with increasing the sample rate on audio the narrower the gap between sample points but there obviously being more of them, this being true again with the hyperrealism film where the view points of the testers were wide apart but the blink rate meeting a similar point in each subject with a much higher convergence of blink points. This means a very interesting development in understanding how the brain processes information and is not hard to believe as the way that the brain processes audio is not fully understood.
As for the relective writting this is at a close, while for the future who knows if we will have blink recognition phones and such.
The tests continued on the 15th march and as such it was intended after that test the video would be altered to factor in the results of the blinking and emotional responses to create another Version, one which I knew the outcome would be before I tested it then by testing that I would get clear evidence If I had learned how to manipulate sound effects to change the viewers perception.
However the intial tests failed and so it had to be rebooked 2 weeks later in which only 2 films were tester and the video footage was unusable. The questionnaire results however were still of value and I did use them to change the next questionnaire again to improve it and also pulle dout some jusdgements about the test already which was that the hypereal testers were similarly opinionated to the realism testers but more diverse in there answers and mulitple choices, asnwering more than once per question usually.
The test was thought over again and it was decided to go to the backup plan which was whitespace mac testign which turned otu to be the best option in the end with clear video footage. I used the same headphones and mac in every test making sure i had as few variables as could be but missed an important one which was one tester was ill, the test results for that tester were very different - which proved in his state of illness he blinked more than the healthy subjects.
This test was analysed later on and data like blink times, mouth movements, eyebrow raises etc for later review as this part of the test is only about blinking. The results were graphed and put into visual form to easily understand.
This was then matched with the questionaire results which did not show the same cohesion at the hyperreal side of the scale but showed a different side. This result showed that th eminimalsit style had very definitive results on the views of the testers where as it became very undefinied between testers what their views where on it. Overall it seems that consciously more sound effects than less gave a wider scope of interpretation to that particular film where as with unconsciously it seems to be the case that the more sound effects you add the more in balance you become in terms of blinking.
I have made speculations on why this might have happened and one is in speculation is much like the sample rate of audio, the lower the sample rate the wider the gap between sample points and few sample points, this being similar to the minimalism film. This links to the answers being more defined but the blink rate was very wide apart and blink convergence few. Similarly with increasing the sample rate on audio the narrower the gap between sample points but there obviously being more of them, this being true again with the hyperrealism film where the view points of the testers were wide apart but the blink rate meeting a similar point in each subject with a much higher convergence of blink points. This means a very interesting development in understanding how the brain processes information and is not hard to believe as the way that the brain processes audio is not fully understood.
As for the relective writting this is at a close, while for the future who knows if we will have blink recognition phones and such.
Tuesday, 4 May 2010
Reflective part 3
Heylo again
What I intended to do after completing the 3 variations of the Film was to contemplate a testing method, now in the development of the 3 film is did indeed research into the UK Film Associations and ask there advice on how they tested Films and also on Film and sound forums however it was a fruitless effort as a game of pass the parcel began which every time was passed on and got no nearer an answer.
Likewise in the forums I was shunned and only asked for directions to where to find answers - after all the Internet; the place to share information, obviously I was mistaken. The search led me onto more dynamic areas looking at other students work and projects involving Film testing which had more promising aspects in which I found out mostly screenings and questionnaires where used with mostly positive and useful information gathered.
Delving into the creation of my questionnaire I considered qualitative and quantitative questions and scoring systems, what originally came up with was a purely qualitative questionnaire for which was preparing to test itself once I had found another element to my testing. This next element was found accidentally ( again with accidents ) in a random assumption that blinking could maybe be affected by audio. Backed by my supervisor the research on this led to Walter murch's book 'In the blink of an eye' which was recently overlooked because I believed it was only about Film and not specified on audio.
To my surprise it was very enlightening albeit short on the subject of blinking and visual, but in one instance he mentions possibly not by intent of a sonically proven way blinking is affected by audio intake, not effects but vocals. He says
" Start a conversation with somebody and watch when they blink. I believe you will find that you listener will blink at the precise moment he or she 'gets' the idea of what your saying, not an instant earlier or later."
This lead me to believe that If I was too capture the viewers as they watched I could match up the blinking of each subject in each film and see if there was a connection.The initial test proceeded shortly after this.
The test was conducted at a friends apartment and captured using a hand held camera and shown on a laptop, the quality of the results from both tests where very useful in developing my testing methods. With the results of the questionnaire especially I re evaluated my test and submitted it to a lecturers approval and after such modified it again with both qualitative and quantitative questions and making sure multiple choice questions where used instead of open answers apart from a few questions which needed to be open.
The Video test was also useful in detecting blink points and notably other variables like eyebrow movements and rapid blink and any mouth movement like smiling. At last something had come together to use to test whether the sound effects had an effect on these. Hence the test was then approved by the supervisor and bookings were made at the university cinema and cameras were hired as well.
However this was not by any means the final chapter of the project. More next time
What I intended to do after completing the 3 variations of the Film was to contemplate a testing method, now in the development of the 3 film is did indeed research into the UK Film Associations and ask there advice on how they tested Films and also on Film and sound forums however it was a fruitless effort as a game of pass the parcel began which every time was passed on and got no nearer an answer.
Likewise in the forums I was shunned and only asked for directions to where to find answers - after all the Internet; the place to share information, obviously I was mistaken. The search led me onto more dynamic areas looking at other students work and projects involving Film testing which had more promising aspects in which I found out mostly screenings and questionnaires where used with mostly positive and useful information gathered.
Delving into the creation of my questionnaire I considered qualitative and quantitative questions and scoring systems, what originally came up with was a purely qualitative questionnaire for which was preparing to test itself once I had found another element to my testing. This next element was found accidentally ( again with accidents ) in a random assumption that blinking could maybe be affected by audio. Backed by my supervisor the research on this led to Walter murch's book 'In the blink of an eye' which was recently overlooked because I believed it was only about Film and not specified on audio.
To my surprise it was very enlightening albeit short on the subject of blinking and visual, but in one instance he mentions possibly not by intent of a sonically proven way blinking is affected by audio intake, not effects but vocals. He says
" Start a conversation with somebody and watch when they blink. I believe you will find that you listener will blink at the precise moment he or she 'gets' the idea of what your saying, not an instant earlier or later."
This lead me to believe that If I was too capture the viewers as they watched I could match up the blinking of each subject in each film and see if there was a connection.The initial test proceeded shortly after this.
The test was conducted at a friends apartment and captured using a hand held camera and shown on a laptop, the quality of the results from both tests where very useful in developing my testing methods. With the results of the questionnaire especially I re evaluated my test and submitted it to a lecturers approval and after such modified it again with both qualitative and quantitative questions and making sure multiple choice questions where used instead of open answers apart from a few questions which needed to be open.
The Video test was also useful in detecting blink points and notably other variables like eyebrow movements and rapid blink and any mouth movement like smiling. At last something had come together to use to test whether the sound effects had an effect on these. Hence the test was then approved by the supervisor and bookings were made at the university cinema and cameras were hired as well.
However this was not by any means the final chapter of the project. More next time
Sunday, 2 May 2010
Reflective part 2
Heylo again
Where I stopped in the first part was sound design history on film sound effects, where we go now is onto the second film design. As I stated many times in all my documents this project tries to identify what happens when we increment the sound effects so each previous film must have the elements of the one preceding it. So with that in mind I layered the first film track into the second mix and began to now establish the realism.
What was done was playing the movie over and over picking out what was thought needed a sound to establish a comfortable sonic environment where people would feel comfortable listening to and not question the amount in place. This stage's sound effects list was more dynamic than the first so new material had to be sourced which came from more worldly objects like sizzling pans, door slams, creaking windows, and much more etc. Not all of these were used of course and some effects where sought elsewhere like in Reason, Kontakt and edited in an experimental fashion in Audactiy and Soundforge.
What went on in terms of research was into Film shot styles and the sound effects they carried with them. This topic was seen as a doable task at first to create a chart showing all possibilities but that however proved to be a project in its own and would be an interesting one to do. However lots of films were researched to acquire a knowledge of what goes into each type of shot and some trends did arise like in ECU ( extreme close up) shots in situations like a gun shot added with a slow motion effect the results where nearly the same every time. The shot was the only or the main with exception to distorted Foley to establish the slow motion existed and was filtered with delay or reverb usually to add sustaining relevance, I assume but also if the shot was played at the same speed of the film the sound would be very bassy and what the engineers try to do is create a different representation for slow sound.
Gears began turning to find out how you could portray something within trying to keep it real but seeming hyper real and also what was the difference. I assume most people have never been shot at but it was found out that whizzes in films from bullets don't actually make that noise with modern rifles as the bullets are too fast. Now this made me think very hard on what I put in the realism film, everything I put in was in attempts to create that "its real" effect.
Completing the realism film was difficult, not too get too carried away with adding sounds and not to leave too much out, as with most realism films, not everything has a sonic signature attached to it, only the most important sounds to establish what i call, an object, setting and motive.
Implementing the sound effects into the hyper realism film felt easier with the creative scope unleashed - however I did not want to go too far from the theme I was building up from the first 2 films, then the testing would be against 3 films where one was was completely a different take altogether if I allowed myself to do so. Even though there were restraints it was still fun to play around with more sound effects experimenting and even coming up with accidents more often than not just like when I recorded accidentally from my pocket when I went shopping and came back and edited it and is now in the film :)
What my main focus was to emphasis the motif I had already in place and just layered on more effects to that effect, emphasising new areas not done in the previous films and even adding a slightly new take on some bit like the buildings appearing in the rain after the other city was destroyed.
that is all for today on this Honours Project reflection.
Where I stopped in the first part was sound design history on film sound effects, where we go now is onto the second film design. As I stated many times in all my documents this project tries to identify what happens when we increment the sound effects so each previous film must have the elements of the one preceding it. So with that in mind I layered the first film track into the second mix and began to now establish the realism.
What was done was playing the movie over and over picking out what was thought needed a sound to establish a comfortable sonic environment where people would feel comfortable listening to and not question the amount in place. This stage's sound effects list was more dynamic than the first so new material had to be sourced which came from more worldly objects like sizzling pans, door slams, creaking windows, and much more etc. Not all of these were used of course and some effects where sought elsewhere like in Reason, Kontakt and edited in an experimental fashion in Audactiy and Soundforge.
What went on in terms of research was into Film shot styles and the sound effects they carried with them. This topic was seen as a doable task at first to create a chart showing all possibilities but that however proved to be a project in its own and would be an interesting one to do. However lots of films were researched to acquire a knowledge of what goes into each type of shot and some trends did arise like in ECU ( extreme close up) shots in situations like a gun shot added with a slow motion effect the results where nearly the same every time. The shot was the only or the main with exception to distorted Foley to establish the slow motion existed and was filtered with delay or reverb usually to add sustaining relevance, I assume but also if the shot was played at the same speed of the film the sound would be very bassy and what the engineers try to do is create a different representation for slow sound.
Gears began turning to find out how you could portray something within trying to keep it real but seeming hyper real and also what was the difference. I assume most people have never been shot at but it was found out that whizzes in films from bullets don't actually make that noise with modern rifles as the bullets are too fast. Now this made me think very hard on what I put in the realism film, everything I put in was in attempts to create that "its real" effect.
Completing the realism film was difficult, not too get too carried away with adding sounds and not to leave too much out, as with most realism films, not everything has a sonic signature attached to it, only the most important sounds to establish what i call, an object, setting and motive.
Implementing the sound effects into the hyper realism film felt easier with the creative scope unleashed - however I did not want to go too far from the theme I was building up from the first 2 films, then the testing would be against 3 films where one was was completely a different take altogether if I allowed myself to do so. Even though there were restraints it was still fun to play around with more sound effects experimenting and even coming up with accidents more often than not just like when I recorded accidentally from my pocket when I went shopping and came back and edited it and is now in the film :)
What my main focus was to emphasis the motif I had already in place and just layered on more effects to that effect, emphasising new areas not done in the previous films and even adding a slightly new take on some bit like the buildings appearing in the rain after the other city was destroyed.
that is all for today on this Honours Project reflection.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
