Research

My first source of research will be a YouTube documentary called "dishwashers". It's related to my idea as it's also a kitchen documentary. It focuses on people's stories which is an element that I also want to use in my own documentary. The two parts that i'm going to take from this documentary is the start up to (6.20). And the end (16.37 onward) The middle part of this documentary leaves the restaurant and focuses on someones life. For my own it will remain in one location, the restaurant.

This documentary is mainly about stories and takes the form where you can't hear the interviewer as he is off screen and his audio is cut off. This documentary is an example of observational mode of documentary, the interviewer is off screen while the subject works and talks to the camera. It is a longer time frame than my own will be and most importantly it's about stories.

The documentary begins with a short montage of different shots of people working.
So much has been learned from this documentary. The different elements of cinematography are key, using different shots and cutaways are important in documentary. If it's one concurrent shot even if the person you are interviewing is actively doing something the shot needs to change or it gets boring. In this example the cutaways are constant and are different, you don't just keep returning to the same shot it uses a variation of shot types and camera angles. The pace of this documentary is very fast however and this is not exactly something I would like to replicate. In my own documentary when filming the likelihood is that it's going to be a dead time. This means the pace of my own is going to be slower and slightly more relaxed.

Analysing sound, you have background music alongside the montage with voice over included. The sound heard in the first interview are a combination of voice, background noise and the sounds of what he is doing. All the sounds used after the montage are all diegetic sounds. This communicated to the audience by giving it a realistic feel and let's us hear everything we see on screen not confusing the audience.

I have learnt much from this documentary including a clear way to structure my own documentary. Especially how to begin my piece. With different shots of the kitchen before focusing on the subject itself. In my own documentary this will be something that I want to replicate as it works well in this example.

This documentary has hugely influenced my own project with a blend of basic structure, different cinematography and interview techniques. Given the fact that it fits the same theme as my own I will look back at this research and compare my own documentary when it is finished.

Second Documentary analysis and comparison.

For the second documentary based on some feedback I chose
"Working 24 hours straight at chick-fil-a" from bon appetit.
The main themes from this documentary are story and progression. It is set up as a participatory documentary with the filmmaker participating in working at the restaurant for twenty four hours straight. Although not directly the same exact narrative or mode as my own idea, the location, cinematography and development of the characters are major items that I need in my own documentary. For comparison purposes when referring to the first documentary "dishwashers" I will refer to it as "documentary one"

Beginning with cinematography, it has a similar style to documentary one given the fact that there are many close ups, low angles mid shots and different shots that all relate perfectly to the interviewees answers. Here is a perfect example of this linking the interviewees answers to the cutaways. At (1:30) the employee begins listing different items on the menu at the restaurant and the camera cuts to them being prepared one by one every single time a new one is mentioned. It's under appreciated but gives you so much more information as a viewer and is quick flow fast editing matched with audio something that needs to be replicated in my own documentary. This is a style that is also used in documentary one with audio and on screen visuals linking up well.

This video is segregated into different parts, in this case they are divided by timezone. Every time it reaches a certain hour their is a piece of video that transitions the video naturally to the next stage, this is done by either the documentary directly talking to the camera or over footage however their is another transition which in this case is the time lapse. Every so often their will be a time lapse transition. This is something that I like the look of and could potentially use it in my own piece as an introduction establishing shot. This is displayed at (3.47) I prefer the night time scene and feel it would be much better set at night rather than day. At (5.06) we also have an inside time lapse of the drive through. Again something that I can take into my own piece and potentially have a camera set on the cut table on a busy night, this would be excellent footage for a cutaway.

There are also some on screen graphics that I like in this Bon Appetite documentary. These are nameplates, timestamps and subtitles. These can be key to introduce and help the audience understand what a new character is and why they are being interviewed/documented. Hopefully in my own documentary I won't have to use subtitles however with me being in the kitchen there is a  possibility that a loud noise like an oven could disrupt potentially clean audio. This then prompts the use of subtitles. This documentary on the other hand uses them to add descriptive elements instead of peoples speech in text form. There is an example of this at (1.05) instead of implementing a
voice over there is text on the screen to provide the information. It lets the documentary flow and is something that could be used if I wan't to implement facts or statistics like this example is doing here. This is quite a comparison to documentary one where the subtitles are primarily used for translation. In my own documentary this is something I won't need to worry about however it is useful to analyse as you could be interviewing anyone.

The clear difference between these two documentaries is of course there unique styles. One being observational and one being participatory. In documentary two there is much more involvement in the subject and it focuses on one primary person, the interviewer. You do have sub characters such as the restaurant staff and owner however it really is about the interviewer. This is completely different to documentary one where there are three separate main characters who all get equal focus and screen time.  I can take elements from both of these styles. From documentary one for example the story and development of the character is crucial to the directive taken and is something I would like to replicate in my own documentary. Again previously mentioned I do not wish to go to the level of doc 1's character breakdown and backstory. The style will be more of documentary 2 with more personal questions and backstory. The interviews are both heavily important factors of each and really help create the narrative, peoples stories make documentaries.

An interesting comparison between the two documentaries is the types of cinematography. Many close up shots are used in comparison to wides. Also the character development, both of these documentaries although different styles follow a character for a significant amount of time and have development. In doc 2 we have the impact of working twenty four hours on one person and we follow them throughout this journey learning about them as they talk about past experiences and what they're going through as of this moment. In doc one it's similar however over a long distance and delves more into the characters back story.

Both of these documentaries have similar aspects of cinematography in that a lot of close up shots are used. This seems a key feature especially because the idea of a food documentary involves this. As you want to be looking at the food, seeing what's happening. This is massively important to replicate in my own documentary. Unfortunately neither of these documentaries use much archival footage or voice over so it's impossible to gain knowledge or analyse them. Thankfully these are both things I don't aim to use in my own documentary.




Primary Research

First Primary Research-Focus Group

When deciding what to choose for my first bit of primary research I chose a focus group. This one was only conducted between four friends and was kept simple.  The topic of discussion was naturally food documentaries and if the group had watched any and what they enjoyed about them.

My focus group consisted of only seventeen year old's so unfortunately didn't contain a good range of people to cover my target audience however they were still in the age range. As they were slightly younger and at the bottom of the range they didn't have a wide knowledge of watching food documentaries, however they had watched certain YouTube videos linked to the subject. A prime example is Gordon Ramsey's Kitchen Nightmares. Each member of the group commented on the need for looking at the actual food when it's being prepared and served out of the kitchen because although the drama is fun the main subject of the video is the food.

Another key point was seeing every part of the kitchen from the oven to the prep table. They commented on trying to have a camera in as many places as possible to gain different types of shots like in the Kitchen Nightmares. Another point was seeing the finished article. From start to finish so in my case it would be the making of a pizza from just the dough to the actual cooked pizza.

A question I asked was. How important is it to you to see the restaurant front of house? The answers I received back were mixed. They all said if it focuses on the back of house it's not essential however it would be nice to get a glimpse of maybe even just a simple wide angle of the restaurant. This would be something I would like to implicate in my final piece.

Second Primary Research-Interview

Conducting an interview on someone familiar to my own subject. In this case it's another employee of a fast food restaurant. This is obviously similar to what my own interview will be however it will be informal where as this one is in a formal setting. I can take many things from this interview however. For example the questions, I began this interview with a simple question name and place of employment this worked well in this example interview as it relaxed my interviewee and will be something I replicate in my own filming. Although it might not be included in the final cut it's important for the interview to be more relaxed.

The first question I asked in this example aside from name and employment was a complete open question. Looking back at this it was a mistake. The reasoning for this is that it makes it harder for the interviewee as you don't want to rush them into an extended answer that they might not be prepared to give at such an early stage. In this case "Tom" my interviewee handles the question well and still gives an okay answer but as my actual interviewee in my final piece most likely won't have any experience it's important to begin with a closed question.

Another mistake made in this example is referencing the question in your answer. From the second question after receiving an answer I have to ask it to be repeated with the question in the answer. I don't want to agitate the interviewee so must try to explain prior to the interview what I want from it whether that be extended answers or closed.

Interview Research Feedback

You did well with coming up with questions that had something to do with your interviewee, meaning you were able to obtain in depth and articulate answers. Which you were able to come up with appropriate follow up questions

I would say that there were some issues with the sound, at times I was struggling to hear what was being said especially when it came to what was being said by the interviewer. I don’t know if that might be an issue with the headphones that I listened through or not, but that is something that might need to be looked into.

White balance for me looks good, I can’t see any issues there myself.

Interviewee is in focus and when it comes to framing, good use of rule of thirds I would say.

For the lighting a three-point lighting system really needed to be in place as the left side of his face is over exposed and really a second light was needed to balance out the right side of his face.

As this a formal interview, In the future a more appropriate background would be needed. I know this was just a practice but for this interview you don’t get a lot of information about who he is a person, which a plain and absurdly bright green background is unable to give.

You also have another person in the background that can be heard, which came across as a little distracting, and in future it would be recommended for either other people in the room to be told to leave or told to remain silent.  

You did very well at presenting yourself and asking your questions clearly for him to be able to understand what it is that you wanted from your interviewee. Overall for a first interview I would say that other than the technical elements that need to be looked into you did a great job. 😊



I have learned so much from this interview feedback. When conducting my own interview I will ensure to take all this feedback on to make my project much better. The main feedback I received was about the background and to eliminate background noise. Making my background relatable to my character is extremely important.

My target audience for this documentary is wide. Starting at fifteen and ending at 40 however realistically anyone can watch this. It's completely family friendly and works at every age. The themes in the video will be more targeted towards a wider audience. In terms of gender it will be gender neutral I have chosen this as both genders can be interested in my chosen subject and the ideas portrayed in my doc. 

Conventions of documentary.

Interviews- Interviews are a very important convention in a documentary. Interviews are normally used to either gain knowledge on a subject by asking someone who knows about it. Or to gain peoples opinion on a subject even if they're not an expert. The purpose is to entertain the audience. There are different question types an interviewer can use such as closed and open ended questions. Follow up questions are also important so as an interviewer you must pay attention to what the subject is quoting.

Voiceover- Voice over is used in documentaries to normally tell a story over clips of film. It's a running narration throughout the documentary and is off screen where you cannot see the actual narrator, this can be referred to as voice of god and is also a non diegetic use of sound.

Archival footage- This is footage used in documentaries that usually cannot be captured. An example would be a historical documentary where although the footage can be recreated it won't have the same standpoint and obviously won't be real. Archival footage gives the audience an insight into something they normally wouldn't be able to see so it works well to capture their attention.

Music-Sounds such as music can be used in a documentary as uplifting or saddening. An example of this would be over a rather depressing scene a sad melody is played.

Re-enactments-These are used to recreate something where no archival footage was captured. They come accompanied with a spoiler saying this isn't real and tend to be over dramatic. Crime documentaries use these a lot as typically footage won't be captured when a crime is committed only the events after.

Montage-A montage tends to be a quick paced editing sequence cut together.

Actuality-Can be footage of real events and is things you capture yourself that are real, like an interview.

Exposition- Introduces the audience to the documentary and gives information on the subject, attempting to help the audience understand what is going on. This can be either through a presenter speaking however is normally a voice over but can also occasionally be an interview.

Different types of interview questions.

When conducting an interview it is key to select someone who is knowledgeable on your chosen subject or question. You should always know what you're going to ask and have a question list with all the different types.

Open Question-An open question is used when you want to recieve an extended answer other than yes or no. These questions typically start with what, why how or describe. This type of questions will allow the interviewee to give out more information and allows the interviewer to have control of the interview it also gives you the chance to ask follow up questions on what the subject is discussing making the overall interview more like an honest conversation between both parties.

Closed Question-A closed question is simply used to get a yes or no answer. An example of this would be "Do you enjoy hot dogs?" It's more a straight to the point question and is only used to obtain an answer, you can start with one of these questions in your own interview to as it;s seen as an easy question to answer.

Single Question-Single questions focus on the topic at hand. For example if you are conducting an interview on a single topic you can base all your questions around that topic and recieve multiple different answers from one question.

Multiple Question-This is a two part question. There will be two answers that are required from a multiple question. This question allows you to gain much more information from the interviewee while eliminating yourself from asking to many questions, thus giving you more time to cover different topics.

Direct Question-Again like closed question it gets straight to the point, however in this case they are usually hard hitting. An example would be "Do you think Bush did 9/11" it attempts to make the interviewee react. This could be positively or negatively.

Leading Question-This question leads the interviewee into your chosen topic for the interview. It helps move the interview to another topic of your choice.

Modes of documentary. 

Expository

This type of documentary exposed a subject or person. It surveys a purpose to teach people about this subject or person. It also has a narrative structure and is usually bios with only one point of view on display. There are many facts and statistics included in this documentary, it tends to be easy for visual learners and is normally speaker over image more commonly known as narration. It focuses on one side of a story and this then leads to one conclusion again meaning it tends to be extremely bios however this does make it easy to watch as you don't have to decide for yourself at the end the documentary decided for you. An example of this type of documentary would be "This is our world" a documentary on climate change this and wildlife documentaries tend to be examples of expository with a voice of god like David Attenborough or in this case Finley Chadwick.

Poetic 

The best way to remember poetic documentaries for me is that it's like a mood board, creative mindset flowing with no boundaries or limitations. The representation of this documentary is subjective and abstract. This is displayed by the lack of narrative, crazy visuals and the fact that shots are linked by music. Advantages of this documentary would be that they are creative, experimental with emotion and are visually appealing. On the other hand the events are underdeveloped and there are unrelated shots to the subject it also leaves the viewer to decide for themselves this can be a good or a bad thing. There are no facts. An example of this documentary would be "a trail of happiness" this is an upbeat documentary edited to music in a beautiful Indian city.  It is presented through music, another thing to note about poetic is it completely escapes from the conventions of documentary. No interviews, voice overs and so on. 

Participatory

In this mode the filmmaker collaborates with the subject. There is a connection between the subject and the filmmaker and it creates artificial environments. The filmmaker becomes an integral part of the documentary getting involved and almost making him the centre of attention alongside the subject. An example documentary of this mode is Louis Theroux who follows people around and asks questions also sometimes involving himself in activities and situations that are occurring. The filmmaker tries not to affect the narrative and outcome of what you think. Attached is a clip from a Louis Theroux's most hated family in America, in this example Louis conducts an interview while the mother Shirley travels to a hate protest. Louis doesn't get involved but stands passively and watches, asking questions.

Performative  

A performative documentary is typically where the presenter is the main character and linked to the subject. Will typically include voice over and offer a unique experience however is bios. Sometimes this can include lying and reconstructing certain situations to suit the documentaries agenda. For example bowling for columbine by Michael Moore features a scene in which he receives a gun for opening a bank account, normally this would take up to thirty days with background checks, but in this case it's edited to seem like it happens instantly which is misleading for the viewer. Other examples of this documentary are when the presenters are closely linked to the subject so it could be a famous personality and their ancestry. The example shown here is "Super Size me" where the filmmaker in this case Morgan Spurlock takes on an active role by trying McDonald's every day for thirty days and showing you the results. It's personal.

Reflexive

In reflexive documentaries the presenter is on screen and acknowledges his or her presence. The film crew are sometimes even acknowledged on camera a typical reflexive style. It makes the audience  more aware of the problems the documenter faces while making the film. They also tend to have realism without editing or special effects but can still be manipulated with the removing of footage. Two example presenters of this documentary are again Louis Theroux and Nick Broomfield. The example shown here is Kurt and Courtney.

Observational

Observational documentaries have a presenter but instead they watch from afar letting events unfold and conducting fewer interviews. This gives the impression that they are unbios which is very true as they are not involved only watching. There will be multiple sides of the arguments presented. It's important the filmmaker is connected in someway to the subject also.  An example of this would be Big Brother which although is a TV show it is observational.

How can creative choices affect our perceptions?

Creative choices in media can affect how a person thinks, feels or reacts to something. It can come from moving image, print, sound and all other types of media.

Firstly in film. Different creative choices and narrative theories were first documented and explored by three narrative theorists. Todorov, Levi-Straus and Propp. Each of these theorists changed film as we know it. Creating different theories for an audience to react to. The theorist that links closely to this question is Tzvetan Todorov. His narrative theory gave audiences an equilibrium at the beginning followed by conflict which would then be restored back to an equilibrium. This specific creative choice gave films and most importantly audiences a structure having this happy ending after conflict makes certainly younger audiences only feel one way, happy.

There are many different aspects of film that can change our perceptions on something. Editing is one of these key microelements. This is explained almost perfectly by the kuleshov effect and a video by the late Alfred Hitchcock. He describes a piece of film of an older man looking into the camera and smiling. After this shot Hitchcock explains you could basically implement any other shot or piece of film you wanted. In this case the shot after is a baby and mother. The man smiling would then be perceived by an audience that this man must be a kind, warm hearted old man.  However replace the baby and mother with a girl in a bikini and the audience’s perceptions on the man instantly change. He simply must be a creepy old man if he is smiling at a young girl in a bikini like that. This is the power of editing. Different clips can be cut together to manipulate an audience and make them feel a certain way.  In fact every single one of the micro element can affect our perceptions, mise en scene with its different colours giving us different emotions some classic examples being red to show love. A film that uses this quintessentially is Pleasentville. The film is set in black and white giving a dull theme but many different colours are used to enhance it. There is a particular scene where the mother goes into the bathtub to masturbate. In doing so (bearing in mind the picture is still black and white) the colours start to appear in this case it's a bright green swan, pink flowers and a red bird eventually ending with the bright orange flame of a tree being set alight. This use of colour is one of the best I've ever seen in a film and really highlights how different creative choice in this case colour can affect our feelings and emotions towards a certain scene. 

Now discussing cinematography, certain films use different lighting and camera decisions to guide an audience. Although you may not realise when watching films these decisions can impact you emotionally and give you opinions on a character simply from the way they are presented through these different camera angles. One of these camera angles is named the Low Angle shot. In early more historic films this shot was used to depict something frighting or intimidating. A classic example of this would be Jason Voorhees or really most old school horror film villians. On YouTube there is a video detailing Jason's Top ten kills. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXcTGrm5Ass) In this example almost every single kill shows Jason towering above his victim this details the power and dominance of the lead villain and using the low angle to maximum capability.

Visual storytelling is hugely important for the audience. Using the rule of thirds correctly and giving the audience a visually pleasing image can greatly change the audiences feelings and perceptions on a certain scene or film in general. Composition techniques such as lines of perspective are used to draw audiences eyes a certain way and make them focus on a certain subject.

Music in films is drastically important to help understand a characters feeling and emotions. There are composers such as Hans Zimmer and John Williams who can create entire soundtracks just for one film. An example where this is used would be in the dark knight opening sequence. The music builds tension as the scene goes on beginning slowly and highlighting at key occasions for example when the first shot is fired and when the vault is first spotted. It ends with the revealing of the main villain the joker and spikes there. The revealing of a villain is normally pronounced well with visuals however in most cases the sound is key as it gives the audience a visual cue to a main character or scene. These sounds are normally non-diegetic meaning they are represented by an audio form that is not part of the film world. This example that I have just discussed is also an example of parallel sound as it goes hand on hand with what we are seeing on the screen. 

Lastly perceptions in documentaries are influenced by mainly the different modes. In all of the different documentary modes these being expository, reflexive, poetic, participatory, preformative and observational.  These different modes can almost certainly influence our perceptions. For example a participatory documentary is going to have a different impact on the viewer than an observational. When there is an elements of the filmmaker being involved in the subject you as a viewer also tend to feel involved making you feel a different way. To give an example you have someone like Louis Theroux who gives his own opinion in a documentary and gets involved in the topic influencing your opinion.

This leaks into journalism and propaganda print based media. Propaganda represents a huge creative choice that only shows one side of an argument. This type of media is an example where it's completely one sided. This clearly has an impact on the audience as it only allows them to think one way and have one idealistic viewpoint.

Overall different creative choices in media greatly affect our perceptions. The different micro and macro elements combined with theories greatly can change our opinion on something just through moving image or looking at print based media.  Combine this with the power of only having to show certain elements of what you want to show the audience, media is extremely powerful.