GW: EVALUATING THE COMPLETED INSTALLATION

The installation is now complete and both the physical artefacts and the found footage reel are pretty close to where I wanted them to be. I was seeking to find a new and more interesting way of creating debate around the global warming issue and straight documentaries, onlinevirals, animations etc were having a limited effect. I wanted to find a novel engaging way to communicate the issue to audiences from leftfield and in particular as the piece progressed to a gallery audience.I wanted to do a final overview of the piece and see how close it came to my original intentions of doing the following.

• Educate and inform on the key facts and issues of global warming. Create discussion on the issue.
• Entertain by creating an engaging narrative to immerse hook audience into the piece and as a bi-product the issue.
• Puzzle audience leaving a collection of clues to see if they can unpick the reality of the piece.
• Question the notion of what installations are and can be by combining video found footage and found objects.
• Challenge issues of representation in documentary and creating an ecstatic truth where the facts are real but the characters and narrative are a faction.
• Question the notion of fake news that is ever present in todays media.

THE FOUND FOOTAGE REEL
I have finally completed editing all of the individual parts of the reel for all of the "found footage" films that make the complete video reel for the exhibition. They are all ordered as I had been planning and nave a linear narrative flow. I wanted to make them look like separate pieces on the reel so added 2 seconds between each piece of content. They have also been edited down since version 1 which ran to over 19 minutes. Now with spaces and titles at the start and end of the reel it runs to 16:22 minutes.

The video reel comprises of all of the following elements.

1: Title card saying what the content is on the reel
2: Local TV news piece. 4 mins
3: Online manifesto 1. Introduction and back. 49 secs
4: Online manifesto 2: 2:15 mins
5: Documentary/Interview 9:25mins
6: Online manifesto 3. Call for action. 1:38 mins
7: Title card saying that Ben Wright has gone missing again.
TOTAL: 16:22 mins.



GW EXHIBITION FINAL 2 from Jon Saward on Vimeo.

I am very happy with the narrative flow of the piece and feel it makes sense. Dropping the second manifesto piece that was in earlier versions does streamline the piece and still fulfil my original intentions. In terms of the arguments on Global Warming they are all still there but counterbalanced by lots of drama, conflict and attachment to the characters and narrative.

In terms of style I feel that the collection of pieces of video do all have their own look and feel and are believable. This was important as I want them to look like random pieces of "found" content from different media platforms and not all created by one person. I think I have managed to achieve this.

One area for concern is the length which at 16:22 oversteps my aim of keeping it under 15 minutes. The length is an issue but I racked my brains and there was not really anything I could leave out. All of the video pieces work as a suite of elements and build to create a whole narrative as I intended. leaving out some of the elements would either disrupt the narrative flow or leave out key facts on global warming. Communicating both of these was of paramount importance to me

A second area for concern is the exhibition of the piece to an audience. Ideally I want the audience to consume the piece in the order I intended and as laid out on the film reel as this will aid their understanding. I feel that is does still work even if not watched from the start but obviously not as well. My hope is that they will be engaged with the narrative, puzzle and drama of the piece and watch a full cycle even if they come in half way through. As humans do not like a puzzle unanswered and I feel this will make them watch the video piece in its entirety at whatever point they enter it to get the full story.

A third area for concern is that the video will not be watched fully or simply by-passed. My hope is that the intrigue and some of the more catchy aspects will get their attention as well as the narrative and wanting to follow the enigmatic story of Ben EWright. . The raised voices in the doco, the use of music in the manifestos and the punchiness of the TV News piece all do this in my opinion. It helps that I am the only sound piece in the gallery space that I am exhibiting in.


THE ARTEFACTS AND EPHEMERA EXHIBITION
These are all now in place in the glass topped display table which although large is a great way to exhibit them all. I wanted them to be displayed as in a museum or gallery as I saw from visiting the Tates Soul of a Nation: Art In the age of Black Power exhibition. I also wanted some distance between the audience and the artefacts so they could not be too closely inspected for potential flaws and the glass also helped remove the audience a little from them. Th case also gave the objects value and kudos through this organised and polished display they looked valuable. and rare. I wanted them all in one display case to link them all together as they work as a collection adding to, complementing the video and the story and adding hard physical evidence that the story is real. I got a few of my peers to look at the pieces and all of them (including a graphic designer) were impressed with the authentic design and ageing of the pieces.

The pieces included in the display are.

• 4 photos: Ben in his graduation photo with friends, Ben in protest march press still, personal snap of Ben and placard and Ben and 5 friends out on the town.
• Newspaper front page of Bens disappearance.
• 35mm motion film canister of Cambridge 1968 with Ben on it.
• MI5 letter revealing Joe was under surveillance.
• A4 poster for Global Warmning society launch at cambridge Uni.
• A5 Flyer/handbill for early Global Warmning meeting in Cambridge.
• Global Warmning badge.
• A3 poster for a big Global Warmning protest in London.
• A2 Daily Mirror newspaper A frame advert.

When arranging these I did attempt to put them in a chronological order in the display table but this did not quite work with all of the different sizes. I also though that they did not need to be in chronological order. So I arranged them by first putting the photos at the back of the case furthest from the audience. This was as they did not stand as much close scrutiny as they were the hardest objects to create and are a little uncanny valley in places.

The rest of the objects I inserted randomly but after having looked at some research so one piece did not get all of the attention I made sure that I had equal spacing around the objects. One that I did make sure was pretty close to the front was the MI5 letter as this needed to be read to get the full impact of it. I did consider having cards explaining what all of the artefacts were but felt they were pretty self explanatory and less detail about them would make audience actually look more at them. Finally I created two cards saying who had "loaned" the photos and artefacts. This served two purposes firstly adding to the authenticity and secondly as a to credit Simon and Tim who helped me create the artefacts and photos respectively.


THE TWO ELEMENTS WORKING TOGETHER

Getting the audience interested and engaged is the main issue. I do not want them to simply wander past but want to immerse them in the fictional world I have created. By the use of music and sound in my piece I feel it will to draw them, especially as it is only a small show and in the room I am in no-one else is using sound.

Whilst I feel the length of the video may be an issue at 16 minutes I have sat through much longer John Akomfrah's Unfinished Conversation piece I saw at the Tate was 45 minutes and this had a narrative thread. Also if you want to take it to the extremes Douglas Gordon's 24 hour Psycho was just that as Christian Marclay's The Clock. To aid the viewing I did provide chairs for 3 people and the chairs also allow a rest from the exhibition and may attract people that way.

The positioning of the projection and the artefacts display case works really well as they complement each other. they also allow for both to be seen together when entering the exhibition space and look like they belong together. they also allow both to be seen at once. In a second screen way of life often two tasks are done at once and the geography of the installation allows the artefacts and the videos to be looked at almost simultaneously.

The piece does play out by hopefully getting an audiences attention by first bemusing them as to what the pace of the rest package. I feel the fact that there are two elements also works in its favour there are also the artefacts to look at whilst you cab still listen to the video playing. The links between the two are also of interest with artefacts creeping up within the films thus cross referencing each other.

EVALUATING THE PIECE AS A WHOLE AGAINST OBJECTIVES
One of the key issues is that the piece will not work as intended for many of the audience. In order for the full immersion to work they cannot know of the pieces intentions or any of the actors playing the roles or the illusion of the piece is shattered. So this will exclude a few of the audience but hopefully there will still be a pleasure in seeing how the piece was executed as a whole.

It would have been good to have been able to test the piece in its entirety in front of an audience but time and resources would not allow this. So what follows are my own personal thoughts as to how well I achieved my aims and objectives.

Educate and inform on the key facts and issues of global warmning. Create discussion on the issue.
In terms of the complete installation achieving my objectives I feel that it does inform and educate the public. There is not as much global warming evidence, data, statistics and information as I would have liked but this would have been to the detriment of the drama. By keeping it down to the key facts it makes the piece more engaging to the audience. Even though the piece is a fake narrative the facts are not and I hope that the piece creates discussion after they have left it. The piece is meant to provoke, question, inform educate and entertain and hopefully stays with an audience in terms of bizarreness, narrative or the issue. All of these hopefully make people remember it and the knock on of this is that they will be talking about it and therefore the global warming issue.

Entertain by creating an engaging narrative to immerse hook audience into the piece and as a bi-product the issue.
I feel the piece is entertaining. This is helped by the variety of video and the ephemera in the installation. I think there is some fun through the music in the manifestos and real drama and conflict in the documentary interview piece. there is conflict, there are engaging characters, puzzles, enigmas and a narrative thread as the glue holding it all together.

Puzzle audience leaving a collection of clues to se if they can unpick the reality of the piece.
There are clues as to the fake nature if the piece. Aside from knowing the talent the piece is interlaced with tells as to the fake nature if you look close enough to help you unravel that the piece and world is a pure construct. The use of the names of illusionists and hoaxers as surnames throughout, the uncanny valley photographs. Even the shots of me unshaven and shaven in the doco interview if you look closely. Lastly the use of the Cottingley fairies image in the doco shoot.

Question the notion of what installations are and can be by combining video found footage and found objects.
I have not been to lots of video installations but from the limited experience I have I have not seem much of this combination of video projection footage and physical objects and fake ones at that. I have seen lots of installations but I think my combination and the two working in tandem is certainly unusual. The context of the piece in a gallery does raise lots of questions about what installations are and can be. This is two-fold firstly if you do not get the fact that the installation is all fake it makes you question the idea of objet trouvé "found" art in installations and is it OK to show objects and call it art even if they are collected be they physical or audio visual. Secondly if you realise that the objects are all fake it opens up lots of debate surrounding culture jamming, documentary in galleries, truth and fiction and ideololgy.

Challenge issues of representation in documentary and creating an ecstatic truth where the facts are real but the characters and narrative are a faction.
I think I have certainly achieved this if the audience managed to unpick the fake nature of the work they cannot fail but to notice that it is representation. Ben is a composite of all of the global warming academic, political, sociological and humanist research and reading I did. He is me as I am the filter or conduit and he is projecting my ideology on the topic as I see it. So it is my ecstatic truth. The fiction is not real but grounded in reality but the facts, figures arguments and statistics are real so the arguments are real and justified. I do feel ethically that I have provided the right facts but do feel and issue may be if the audience feel it is a fake and construct that this may make them feel that these arguments are too.

Question the notion of fake news that is ever present in todays media.
The aim was for the piece to feel 99% right and to try and engage the audience as to why it does not feel quite right but overwhelmingly the evidence provided in the installation supports the fact that is is real. If you can unpick this it shows how fake news can work, by shouting longest and hardest the "cultivation theory" happens to audiences and they believe the messages being communicated. If they do not spot it is a fake then fake news works, if they do spot it they can see how it works. I feel the piece works both ways. It does make you question the messages the media is communicating to us.

GW: PREPARING EXHIBITION SPACE

This represented issues as due to the nature of a space where a lot of artists are exhibiting things can keep on changing. It also did not help that my full time job had just started and time for me to spend on site preparing was at a premium, or that technical support was a little erratic to help install my work. I had been considering the space for  a while and knew roughly the area I would be working in would be a rectangular space, and be able to be made pretty light tight so projections will work and approximately 3.25 meters by 5 meters rectangle. See below for my initial idea for the installation in this space.

In the end my gallery installation space was made up of two main elements but 6 parts to this.

1: Found/Collated Footage Film-reel on Global Warmning.
A projection of the collection of "found footage" films that I was the curator of. In reality these were all created by me but were not being sold to the audience this way. This compromised of a showreel with four elements on it. TV News piece, Manifesto by Ben Wright, Documentary Interview with Ben Wright, a last Manifest from Ben Wright  and finally a title board saying Ben Wright had disappeared again. The story is told chronologically through these elements and they are all film based although the manifestos are mocked up to look like they are captured from online. This is just under 16 minutes long and has sound throughout and will play on  a loop.


GW EXHIBITION FINAL 2 from Jon Saward on Vimeo.


2: Display case full of Global Warmning Artefacts and Ephemera
This was a collection of artefacts that I designed and were made primarily by a collaborator of found or collected items from the Global Warmning movement. The intention is that the real looking physicality of these items solidified the story as they provide tangible evidence that it did actually exist. It is a variety of artefacts from posters and hand-bills to newspaper headlines and through to a badge and photos. These were to be displayed in a large display case 225cm by 120cm with a glass top.


The aim and intentions for the installation
before I continue here are the intentions for the installation and how I envisage exhibiting the piece for the audience to disseminate, interact with it and be immersed in it.

• I want the audience experience to be the questioning of the nature of installations, the media of film and TV, as well as the museum/gallery feel of the artefacts. It is really a film with added extras but I want all of these elements to complement and be intrinsic to one another to build a whole. I also want them to get involved the idea is that by offering a range of elements there will be something for everyone but also a puzzle. and for them to question what are the elements? How do they fit together? What is the story they tell? What is the ideology? The aim is to make them consider the topic of global warming in a different way and perhaps to be left with some of the ideas or for it to generate discussion and hopefully response long after they leave.

• I want the public to move around the space and interact with the elements in the installation. Due to the nature of the video work the and the lack of pre-eminance of the visuals to tell the story a lot of it works on audio alone. This allows an audience to watch it but ALSO to be able to listen only and still pick up the story. This can be done while viewing the artefacts in the display case. As some of the artefacts being created may not stand up to ultra close scrutiny a way for the audience to look at and read them if necessary BUT to keep them a little at arms length too. I do want movement to be free BUT feel some type of seating for the video work would work. It provides a sit down from the rest of the exhibition and will allow slightly longer video work to be delivered in comfort.

• There may also be the added element of some of the participants attending the private view are happy to play their character if approached. This will have the added interest of seeing characters who are in the video piece milling about the exhibition as a whole and see how the public react to them. They will be low key and just another audience member and it will be interesting to see if they notice them at all.

The Projection Installation Issues and Compromises
The reality was that the width of my gallery space was reduced to 240cm when I had planned for it to be at least 325cm. Also the nature of the erection of the board display system was such that it meant I ended up with a cross brace piece of it at the back of my installation on the wall I was intending to project onto. This meant that due to the with of my space I could not project onto the back wall of my area as it encroached on the space and the throw of the . I did feel a little aggrieved as if I had been consulted on the decision on the width of  my area I could have flagged this up and changes could possibly have been made to those around me without too much interference with their work. As it was it seemed too late when I realised the issue to change it! I also feel that my area was compromised more than most. I played around with other ways I could utilise the space and came up with the compromises below.

The best compromise to solve the problem was to screen the work across the rectangular installation space rather than the length of it. This was a huge compromise as it greatly reduced the scale that my video work could be screened at and therefore its impact. As I had only 240cm to project across I decided to mount the projector as high as possible to increase the throw of the image. I had a standard HD projector booked out but due to the space for the throw did also try a short throw projector which gave a bigger image. However the compromise here was that the projector was old and the input was phono not HD. In the end I decided to sacrifice scale in favour of quality and go with the smaller but better quality image. This set up is outlined below with the cross brace highlighted in pink to the right of the chairs.

In terms of getting the projector up high I made one with Danielle the technician that could be mounted on the boards high up. It was built with a hinge so the angle of the projector could be changed. Once it was installed by the technicians It was a fiddly job adjusting with the keystone to get the image square and also to adjust picture and sound to make sure they were just right. One issue will be the projector does not have a remote so the only way to turn it on will be by climbing a ladder and switching it on. Technical support during the build was at a premium so it will be an issue to solve later.

In the installation did initially have speaker stands to either side of the projection BUT this seemed to make too much of  a feature. So I eventually ended up tucking them away discretely under the chairs which did not really affect the sound and kept the installation cleaner. Initially I was going to put a roof on my exhibition space to cut out some of the light but after consulting with another student who was going to do the same and my tutors I abandoned this idea. It would make the space feel too enclosed and with the decent projector found that light spill from the rest of the exhibition was not too much of an issue. Sound levels will be an issue as there will be some noise pollution to the rest of the exhibition from my installation. I will have to just get it as loud as I can and make sure the audience will be able to hear it but not offend the rest of the artists.

The Display Case and Artefacts
From the above diagram you can see where the display case of artefacts ended up which was parallel to the projection. Originally it was going to be against the left hand side wall as you look at the diagram above. However after consultation with my tutors it made more sense to put it on the back wall. This made the space seem bigger and also allowed for the audience to look at the artefacts AND the projection simultaneously.

Final thoughts
The complete installation of my work flows well in terms of layout and I am pretty happy with the results. The only caveat and it is a large one is the size of the projection.

• Make sure at all discussions in changes to layout of the show.
• Plan when I need the technicians and book them in.
• Consider ALL elements that I will need. The projector shelf was a late addition and I should have planned this.
• Rigorously test projectors and their throw.
• Fight a bit harder for what I need and do not compromise quite so much. The projection is the crux of my piece and feel it is underserved by the space I had to work with.

GW: COMPLETING THE DOCO POST-PRODUCTION

The documentary/interview piece needed a couple of versions to get it to where I was happy with it. I had all of the areas below to consider from my own point of view and from the feedback I got from those that I screened the work to. I took all of this into consideration and ended up with the piece below which I am pretty happy with.

COMPLETED DOCO FINAL 2 from Jon Saward on Vimeo.

Titles for the start and credits for the end.
I wanted to keep the piece clean and simple and short to keep the length down. The title seemed obvious Global Warming, Global Warning. I used Adobe After effects to play around with the titles. I wanted the titles to have a clean simple news feel with a little bit of character and tried a variety of fonts before settling on Courier New. This is a very typewriter looking font so brings those semiotics to the piece. I played around with the colour but white worked best. I also wanted a little movement in the titles so through animating the text managed to have one word appear on screen and then the other. then I had the brainwave of then combining the two words into one Global Warmning the name of the movement. I animated these so they moved to the middle and then converged to make the word Global Warmning. I then thought it would be good to warm them up by turning them red. the titles are very simple but work well in my opinion.

A way to open the piece and set the scene
I decided against adding a scene of the crew all being taken to the secret location and did not like the me introducing the film I shot so decided to go with on-screen titles. These were added but the wording was tricky but they were needed to contextualise the piece. I wanted to try to add some drama and an edge as well as exposition at the start. I added in the put in an van and taken to a secret location for the drama and intrigue. Also I added the fact that he thought the interview was just a platform for his cause but I was really after the dirt and scandal on HIS story which i had been told was off limits this created a set up and let the viewer in on this. I also added the interview was given almost reluctantly and on his terms.
For continuity I used the font Courier New font here too in white and kept it simple and the word count down as much as possible. I played around with the order of the titles and whilst they needed to be on screen long enough to read them (standard thinking is 3 times quickly) I did not want them on for too long.

Solution for the opening of the piece.
This was a hard problem to solve. Generally in an interview you ask a person to introduce themselves first but this seemed too contrived and too long. I looked through all of the rushes and found a good wide shot of the whole scene and me asking if everyone was ready before the interview starts. I liked the idea of this as it established the scene of the interview and cabin in a wide and the crew lights etc. It also gave the piece a sense of urgency and the warts and all behind the scenes liveness I wanted to convey.

More/longer awkward pauses in exchanges when I am challenging him.
When I am challenging Ben about disappearing, the incriminating evidence the awkwardness needed more from the rough cuts. I added a long awkward pauses at the junctions and cross cut exchanges of looks and held stares. pauses almost too long and uncomfortable to watch as I try to put him on the spot and am rebuffed by him or cut dead with a lazer guided stare. I feel these work well and create some real quiet controlled drama and conflicts in these exchanges.

More pacey editing at the end of the piece. More cutty and disjointed to capture action.
I applied this to the ending. I had to stop short of jump cuts as the action was supposed to be continuous but upped the shot count in the final scene to give a feel of jump cuts. hard edits from WS to ECU to MS to BCU all work well to capture the moment that ben explodes. More CU too to see the two men lock horns at the end and to capture the emotion and feeling.

More use of close ups of both faces to build confrontation, conflict and action.
As mentioned above at the ending but also more throughout especially in the awkward exchanges in the game of mind chess the men are acting out.

The interview felt too long at 11 minutes. The drama and interaction between the characters was good and needs to stay but less preachy global warming as there is too much.
From the initial cut I managed to lose 3 minutes of facts to streamline the piece. I did not want to lose too much as there need to be a pace and ebb and flow. me trying to put him on the spot being reprimanded by him. Building his confidence and indulging him with questions he ants to answer before chancing my arm again with the personal questions. The balance feels much better and the piece now runs to 9:30 and that includes the titles, captions and credits so it is a much slicker watch.

Possibly more abstract GV's as I loved their awkwardness.
I added more in and I do like these they are a real fly on the wall and in themselves feel awkward replicating the feel of some of this piece.

Music.
I tried a variety of pieces of music for the intro and even as a bed underneath but they all detracted from the reality of the action playing out on screen I am still not 100% sure about no music on the opening. I may try some other music possibly but i really do like the starkness of no music and you have to fill in the emotion yourself and it makes the viewer concentrate on the dialogue and performances.

Consider grading.
I did a few grading tests but this seemed to make the piece feel too polished which I was not after. I feel lost the grittyness and contrasts in the shots works well. It actually feels like a polished rough cut and I quite like this.

GW: FEEDBACK ON VERSION 1

I screened the work to a few friends and family to get some feedback. All this feedback is great and gives me real suggestions for pushing the piece forward. However I have to remember that it was not a true viewing. The videos were watched in sequence from my computer not in the installation environment with all of the artefacts and they were not 100% finished. Also everyone that I screened it to were aware of the intentions of the piece and/or knew people in it so they never saw it unimpeded by all of this baggage. However there were some really good suggestions. As always I was aware of most of these but a sounding board is always really helpful and a few areas were flagged up that I had not considered.

The pieces that I screened to them were these in the order I am planning on.

1: Local TV news piece. 4 mins
2: Online manifesto 1. Introduction and back. 45 secs
3: Online manifesto 2: 2:15 mins
4: Documentary/Interview 11 mins
5: Online manifesto 3. Call for action. 1:45 mins TOTAL: 19:45mins

Below are the issues and questions raised and how I can possibly move the piece forward.

1: The whole entirety of the piece is too long. The current running time is about 20 minutes and everyone felt that this was too long. I am very inclined to agree. It is not good delivering a message that no one will sit though. I think I can trim the news piece a little, look to lose a big chunk of or completely the second manifesto, be more ruthless with the doco and also trim the last manifesto. I think a maximum is 15 minutes is the absolute target.

2: The audience all loved the drama and human aspect of the piece. This they found really interesting and the area that played the strongest. When developing the next version I must make sure that I keep most of is in. It may be interesting to see how I could develop this even further right through to the end possibly after the last manifesto piece too.

3: The TV news piece worked pretty well. All of the audience felt it was an excellent way to give all the background and back story as well as creating a sense of mystery and enigma. I feel that this is working better now that it plays much struggler and the archive footage gives the piece a greater sense of authenticity too, especially the protesting footage and less head shots of Ben. It may be good to update some of the VO though as I now have created the manifesto pieces and add some footage of this with or without sound. I may see if it can be trimmed a little too so it is really low fat.

4: The documentary piece was great in the more dramatic elements but possibly too many facts and data and it was overlong. I agree with the length as it is a clocking in at 12 minutes currently. It also needs an intro at the start to contextualise it which it does not have at the moment. I described this for them but I do not feel it needs the live action into which would make it longer but that this could be done with titles setting the circumstances of the interview out. In terms of content I think that a lot of the global warming facts and figures need to go as these seem to turn audience off. It is a balancing act of having a realist interview that fools audiences but giving them enough info on global warming to sell some of the message. The interview is a bit like a game of chess both men having an agenda and how that plays out. Ben wanting a platform for his cause but myself wanting the scandal, intrigue and corruption and expose storyline. I have to indulge Ben to get to the story and this is done through allowing him to promote his cause. However it is he drama that was interesting the audience so further development needed with more of that and less of the facts and figures. I could also try some archive images over the top to see if that works and gives more interest to the piece. I do like the clarity of it being a one on one interview though and this may detract from that.

3: Possible issues some of the dialogue. The phrases "get mean" , "by any men's necessary" and the call for direct action a d tone of the final manifestos piece a couple felt were too strong. I will have a look at this but the character of Ben is annoyed, feels boxed into a corner and that he needs to resort to more incendiary language.

4: There was confusion over what the piece was actually all about. Question fake news, narrative piece, what is and can an installation in a gallery be, promoting the global warming issue, what is the truth and it being a puzzle. Some felt that these we a little conflicted and there was possibly too much going on in the piece which left them not really knowing what my intentions were. Really my intentions were all of those but I need to work on more clarity as to the hierarchy of these ideologies and messages. However that all said it made them think about a few of these topics especially global warming which is the central theme.

5: The manifesto elements were too preaching and long. They were a little too preachy and the tone did not endear the character or his message to some of the audience. There are currently three and perhaps is is one too many. I did such extensive research that I want to add in all of the information I found and keep what was stripped from the script and just repurpose it for the manifestos. However the audience were switching off a little during these. I feel the first one is necessary as it introduces the character. The last one also offers a call to arms and suggests potential solutions so I feel this needs to stay too. I will see if these can be trimmed though and possibly experiment with adding images and footage over them to give them more visual punch and to illustrate Bens points. On watching it again with an audience I feel the second one is surplus to requirements though and will first try cutting and reducing but it is possibly not earning it's keep currently.

6: The ending needs more punch. The end manifesto was OK but the piece needs a stronger ending. Possibly end on Ben walking out of the doco interview? I like the call to arms of the last manifesto but they have a point. I will experiment with these ideas. Also perhaps there is more of an enigma at the end. Perhaps Ben goes missing again and the screen informs us of this at the end.

7: Sort of working and stays with you if puzzling. The audience all agreed that although they were unsure about some parts and what exactly it was all about that some of it was entertaining and all felt that they had been educated and informed which was the intention. Hypothetically if they saw it in a gallery they would not be sue what it is and would also question the surroundings, is it art, is it real too. Most encouragingly they all said that it stayed with them and would encourage more discussion on all the questions it raised. If they are discussing the piece then they cannot fail to talk about the issue too!

GW: CREATING FAKE PHOTOS

For the artefacts/ephemera part of the installation I wanted to add some photos alongside the other items being created. The photographs I had manipulated in Photoshop worked for use as props in the TV News film shoot and as on-screen images for the Documentary piece and as they are not on screen for two long and therefore do not need to stand up to really close scrutiny. The other reason for doing this was that having a physical copy would pull all of the elements together. Some of the same photos I wanted to make physically were used in the TV News and Doco film pieces.

As mentioned earlier I want the work to be over 99% believe able but I also want the audience to feel it is not quite right and sow the seeds of doubt but only just. I do not want to stray too far down the path of the " uncanny valley" but to certainly take a glance into it.

The other issue with the photoshopped images was a technical one and that they were taken from online so were designed to be for web/screen and are generally 72dpi whereas print is 300dpi. Some of them were also small and this meant that if they were blown up to print they would pixelate and lose that look of authenticity. Technically this route could be tried but then the images would also be printed on contemporary photo inkjet printer paper and lose that feel of late 1960's photographs.

So the best option was to go the traditional wet photography route and try to develop pictures in a darkroom. To do this I was intending to print out the images digitally onto paper then photograph these on physical film and process them and then develop them in the darkroom. However after some research and also after speaking to photographer friends they suggested a better alternative. They felt that as good if not better results by blowing the images up and projecting them onto a wall, photographing them on film, then processing and developing them. One of the photographers at college even said they had some old photography paper that these negatives could be used to create photos onto.

The photos that I wanted to create hard physical copies for were.
1: Four college graduates. Wright and Griffiths included.
2: Ben with placard and girl.
3: Ben with banner in a crowd of protestors.
4: Ben and 4 friends on a night out.

The route I took was to seek the advice of a colleague and to have a refresher on exposing and shooting on film and then on processing and eventually developing. Shooting the digital manipulated version of the photos on a wall seemed to work well and I managed to get out of the processing stage on the film as my colleague did it for me.

Then using the enlargers to expose the photographs was a real joy as I had not been in a darkroom for far too long. After a quick refresher and sorting out the chemicals I soon picked it up again. The paper was quite hard to work with as it was old and this was great for authenticity of the photos but it made it trickier. However after contact and tester strip I soon managed to get a variety of prints, in differing exposures.

Lastly and once dry the photos needed pressing flat and then distressing a little to make the images look old. One thing that was interesting was speaking to photographers and discussing the size of the images and how they would have been back in the late 60's early 70's and also their purpose would dictate their size, finished and the life they would have had up until now. So the following decisions were made.

1: Four college graduates. Wright and Griffiths included.
This would be a professional print at the event so a bigger size, not too much distressing and decent paper with a large white border.

2: Ben with placard and girl.
This would be an amateur snap and would have to be a more distressed and also of a smaller size on a lesser quality of paper.

3: Ben with banner in a crowd of protestors.
This would have been a press shot but I wanted to make it feel like a rough or test version. So the image size was a decent size but the print would be left rough as it was a working test print.

4: Ben and 4 friends on a night out.
This would again have been an amateur snap, so the size not as big. It is the sort of image that would possibly have been pinned onto a wall and be a little tatty. Pin marks, bends and smudges added to the authenticity.

The whole process worked really well and I was really pleased with the end results. They look really authentic but as I mentioned earlier may not stand up to super close scrutiny so placed at the back of the display case furthest away from the audience may be the best way to go.

GW: DOCUMENTARY/INTERVIEW EDITS & PICK-UPS

Initial Assembly Edit 
The initial assembly edit was fairly quick to do as I was able to synch up all of the different cameras and let the action play. One that was harder to do was the camera on Brian as it had no sound. I had to use the sound from the camera that was on me even though the shot was substandard and then synch the footage of Brian with no sound to this soundtrack. This was really tricky and time consuming to do although I did clapperboard with my hands and when this was in vision it was much easier to do. Once this was done it was a matter of choosing the best takes of each of the shots. I kept the cameras rolling throughout all of the attempts and this made synching the footage easier BUT it did mean that there was a lot of footage in the timeline. So I put al the takes in the timeline synched them all up, chose the best one then discarded the rest.

There was also issues with footage from the hand-held camera where it was just a lot of short shots and not coverage of the whole scene from start to finish and all of the lines. Some of this was fine as it was just GV's but the shots that had talking heads had to be labelled and then the right place in the edit found. This was done last when I had all the best takes in place.

One other issue was at the ending where the wide shot did not cover all of the takes. This was a little bit of a hassle as it meant that until I got my pick-ups I only had two decent shots to choose from. Luckily the end of the interview is a little more frenetic so the shots can be more cutty to build tension and this was possible.

The interview flowed pretty wellI left the interview a little baggy though as I knew that I would have the pick-ups to put in to replace the substandard shots of me. The pace was good but in the final edit I may want to try and build the tension more and be more frenetic in the cutting when ben explodes at the end of the interview. There is plenty to work with though.

Re-shoots
Before I completed the editing I had to get the re-shoots done to correct the mistakes on the footage first time around. This was done as pick ups of just my lines. Fortunately the other actor was around to read me his lines and also to give me an eye line. I needed a little coaching to hit the lines and to make sure I did not act as the fluidity of the earlier shoot recording on all 4 cameras was gone and this footage needed to be cut into edit that I had already.I think i did well and Brian an actor coached me but I had to be careful not to "act" but to just be myself as this worked well in the first shoot and had the right feel and tone.

As well as all of this sound was checked and so were the images and lighting so no errors were made this tim. I also managed to get a cameraman friend to shoot this for me so the quality was good.

One minor issue was the fact that I had not shaved and in the intervening 6 days between shot one and this one I had not shaved. I remembered the shots and took these on my phone as reference, lighting, props and my costume but overlooked this. This was not a problem in the Wide shot as you cannot see but in the roving hand held and new MCU and MS of me it does show. Tiny shots from the hand-held will work though as it is hard to see. In a way this accident adds another dimension to the piece as the sell is that it was all shot in one 10 minute session continuously. As I am trying to make it 99% right the highly observant may notice this and question it and therefore it's authenticity which i do not mind.

Adding the re-shoots to the edit
Once the re-shoots were added the piece looked a hundred times better as a complete interview package. There may be issues over grading as the footage from all of the cameras looks slightly different. However I like the rough a and ready feel of this it makes it look less polished and gritty and may keep it. I will also try grading though to see what it looks like more polished.

Overall the sound is good but it may need a polish in Adobe Audition to clean it up a little.

The piece did have a nice flow to it and did play out like it was all filmed continuously in 10 minutes as this was the premise. Another area that will need solving is the into. I did not film the set up of the crew that was being taken to the location due to the fact that it would have taken too much time and I am not sure I could make it work without it being over-dramatic and cheesy. So I think I will either have to shoot a short intro to the piece with me OR find a way to do it with titles. The conflict can possibly come across better in the titles so I will try that first.

Areas to work on before the final cut.

• Consider grading.
• Titles for the start and credits for the end.
• Solution for the opening of the piece.
• More/longer awkward pauses in exchanges when I am challenging him.
• More pacey editing at the end of the piece. More cutty and disjointed to capture action.
• More use of close ups of both faces to build confrontation, conflict and action.
• Possibly more abstract GV's as I loved their awkwardness.

GW: MANIFESTO EDITS

The manifestos are basically clips that would be seen online of Ben Wright promoting his cause. The aim was to make Ben seem mysterious and still keep the audience guessing as to if it was him or not and careful lighting would do this. Thinking of a backstory for these they need to feel as though they feature and are written by Ben Wright (in his early 70's) but that due to the funding coming in to the organisation he had a creative young team of technical people working on them to create them.

The web would be an excellent resource for Wright and he is appealing to a wide audience. However the target audience are younger the next generation who will inherit the problem and are likely to be more pro-active about the subject so they will need to appeal to this age group predominantly.

I have selected three in what I imagine were a landslide of Vlogs online as this would be a great platform for Wright to promote his cause. The three manifestos need to build in intensity and ferocity as they evolve and Wright resorts to stronger language and calls to action when he realised that passive action is not working. The first will be a simple introduction to the fact that he is back. The second will outline all of the issues that need to be acted upon and fingers will be pointed. The third will be a frustrated call to arms urging people to rise up and act on the issue. Also it will threaten to expose his incriminating information on the governments and the fossil fuel companies.

They currently fit into the running order of the video installation like this.

1: Local TV news piece. Set up the issue and backstory.
2: Online manifesto 1. Introduction and back.
3: Online manifesto 2: Selling key points as to how the public have been hoodwinked etc.
4: Documentary/Interview. Confrontation interview with Ben wanting to promote his cause whilst his interviewer is really after the dirt and scandal of the story.
5: Online manifesto 3. Call for action.

All three of these manifestos were shot in a similar style two cameras and recorded twice to offer a variety of shots to cut together to play with pace and add interest to them. They were all shot in a black studio and the first two are lit only by a key light and back light to keep Wright looking mysterious and hidden and hopefully keep the question of is it really him still alive. The only difference being the third where he has now come out of hiding and dose not need this tactic. I have outlined the editing styles below.

Online manifesto 1. Introduction and back.
Short at only 45 seconds and a slowish pace but some cuts between different shot sizes. Once I had edited the actual manifesto video I put it within the Blog that wright had been using to promote his cause. I had built this earlier and I simply put the video in a layer over the top. This was to not just show the video but to give the impression it lived online to add to to the authenticity.

MANIFESTO 1 FINAL from Jon Saward on Vimeo.

Online manifesto 2: Selling key points as to how the public have been hoodwinked etc.
Over 2 minutes long and a little more cutty as Ben is more passionate and trying to sell his message. Cuts between cameras more than manifesto 1. I have not included that here for now as I am unconvinced that it is need in the final piece.

Online manifesto 3. Call for action.
1 min 30 secs minutes long and a much more cutty. Ben is angry, forceful and on a roll aggrieved that the movement is still making no traction. many more cuts and harsher cuts to give it edge. Once I had edited the actual manifesto video, as with manifesto 1 I wanted to not just show the video but to give the impression it lived online to add to to the authenticity. In this instance I built a fake youtube page which took a while but the watched count and branding worked well in my opinion to create a real authenticity. To finish I simply put the video in a layer over the top.

MANIFESTO 3 FINAL from Jon Saward on Vimeo.


The finished edited pieces worked quite well but did seem overlong. I think in trying to keep what I took out of the script to make that work I simply decided to add it in here as I liked it and due to the work put into writing it. The real issue seems to be with manifesto 2 which is very long. 1 is much shorter and 3 pacey so it is not so noticeable. 2 may be surplus to requirements.

Shortening and adding GV's.
To try and enliven the manifestos I did try and shorten them. This was tricky for 1 & 3 as they rely on everything that was in them. But I did manage to shorten 2 but I still feel it may not be necessary. I also tried adding in GV's and archive footage. this did make them more interesting but did detract from Wrights please and message and it was hard to find GV's for all areas. I personally prefer him on screen rather than the same old Global warming images we have seen a hundred times.

The Global Warmning logo
I added this to the start of all of the clips. I was considering doing something a bit more clever and animated but that take time to do and more importantly would also extend the length of the manifesto pieces themselves. In order to keep it clean and the length down i went for a very simple logo. I did try it at the beginning and the end but with Wrights last line send off felt that they were not needed at the end and this kept the length down too.

Adding Music
One issue that I feel the whole piece needs (perhaps excluding the TV News piece) is more light and shade. Wright is coming across a little staid and I feel that this could turn the audience off as he bangs on about global warming. I tried experimenting with a music bed under the manifestos but this detracted from what he was saying. Thinking back that the technical team behind the production of these in their fictional universe are young and the target audience are young I thought some fun could be injected through the music.

So I researched lots of songs that had the lyrics hot in them that people may be familiar with. Yes this is a little tacky and not like Wright but I love the irony of using them and it does inject a sense of energy. The music is pop in genre and bouncy so works contrapuntally and in contrast to the video and the message. I feel it does not detract from the seriousness of the message as it highlights the light and shade of the fun music and very serious message.

Another plus of the music will be in the gallery when my work is screened it will inject some energy and hopefully interest in my work and get people interested.

GW: MANIFESTO STUDIO SHOOT

The manifestos are basically clips that would be seen online of Ben Wright promoting his cause. The content for these was originally written as dialogue for the documentary piece in the installation. However it was simply too wordy and a huge amount was tripped out during the final draft. My idea was to repurpose this though into the manifestos so Ben could still make these points. In order to make this easier I decided to film them in the TV studio using an autocue for the actor to read. It would also give me huge control over the lighting and sound. The aim was to make Ben seem mysterious and still keep the audience guessing as to if it was him or not and carful lighting would do this. The manifestos currently fit into the running order of the video installation like this.

1: Local TV news piece. Set up the issue and backstory.
2: Online manifesto A. Introduction and back.
3: Online manifesto B: Selling key points as to how the public have been hoodwinked etc.
4: Documentary/Interview. Confrontation interview with Ben wanting to promote his cause whilst his interviewer is really after the dirt and scandal of the story.
5: Online manifesto C. Call for action.

The shoot went really well and the auto cue made remember the lines and technical information easier for the actor. I checked the sound regularly after the issues with the last shoot and shot one of the cameras myself using a student for the other one. The aim was to make the piece catty and punchy so I got a straight MS and MCU on my camera and the other camera got CU and BCU from interesting angles. This I feel will enable me to cut it together interestingly in the edit.

The mise-en-scene was kept pretty simple and a clean black background to draw all focus and attention to the character of Ben. The clothes were of a kind that I had discussed with and chosen from the actor (Brian's) own wardrobe and in keeping with his character. As far as lighting goes this was different for the shoots. The first and second manifesto I want to keep the audience guessing as to if it really is him or not. To achieve this I used very, very low key lighting on Ben and a harsh backlight to give him a halo effect and make it hard to make him out, to keep this mystery. For the final manifesto it comes after the doco interview and he is now putting himself front and centre of the movement and out in the open so I lit him to be visible to the audience. The sound was set up out of shot and recorded through a TASCAM Mixer AND into the camera and regularly checked.

What I have learnt and will take forward.

1: Make sure eyes of talent stay still when reading the autocue. If not they fair to address the viewer directly as eyes move left to fight. This looks unnerving but weirdly it works in my opinion as it makes Ben look a little shifty in the properly lit manifesto. At the same time is does distract from the direct address to the audience that I was after and that feeling of it coming from the heart and being unscripted. So I am a little conflicted over this area currently. Compromises were made to make the shot achievable for the actor to communicate all of the facts and figures so it was a necessity. Also I feel it is believable that he is starting to gain momentum and the TV show, studio and autocue are resources he may have access to from funding and supporters.

2: Make sure the script is nailed before going into the TV studio. More read throughs and checks as to how it will play when said out loud. Corrections were needed in the TV studio and whilst these are easy to do on the autocue it would be more professional to have carried out a read through and edited the script with the actor before the shoot.

3: I love the control that I have in the TV studio and is is where I am happiest and have been for most of my pieces from Siblings, through to Amen Break and also this element. My understanding of and control of the studio space and resources is a real asset and the USP of my practice. The control of space, kit, lighting and environment I really enjoy.

4: The shoot went well but I feel the script and direction could have been stronger. Looking back at the rushes as I write this Brian played the character according to direction and script but I should have made him more likeable. There needs to be more light and shade and for him to charm us more and endear himself to us. It is a little preachy in places whereas charm and a little sugar would lighten the tone and make us empathise with Ben more too.

GW: DOCO SHOOT ISSUES

I transferred my rushes from the doco shoot yesterday and finally viewed them today. It was A bit of a nightmare and real disappointment from the doco shoot with Brian yesterday as there are in my opinion some real issues with them. The problems stemmed from being under-crewed due to availability of collaborators and crew and also using some of my students and possibly expecting too much from them. Some of the footage is great and the shots of Brian are great, the wide shot is solid and some of the hand-held camera footage is good too. Brian's performance is good throughout and although and sells the issues well. It is more due to my direction than anything else but it would have been good to make him more likeable and charming as this would have endeared the audience to him more. However he plays the role well staying on the realistic side of acting and plays off well against me.

The issues stem from being under-crewed, the crew (students) being relatively inexperienced and myself doing too many roles and taking my eye off the ball. I was the writer, director, producer, actor, art director as well as being camera and sound supervisor and it was simply too much and too many balls to keep in the air at once. Looking back I needed a sound-person, third cameraman and ideally a production assistant. Budget for this and the fact that I was shooting in a small space at a friends house led to me not being able to do this. Also due the the lengthy set up of the shoot I was too eager to get shooting and should have run more thorough checks but due to the restlessness of cast and crew I did not do this!

The main issues are two fold. 1: There are sound issues. The main camera that was recording the sound did not record ANY sound. My student who was using that camera was listening to the sound coming into the mixer BUT the feed from the mixer to the camera did not work. This is a schoolboy error but the blame lays firmly with me not my student who was relatively inexperienced with the kit. The issue stems from the fact that the TASCAM sound mixer was not used to record the sound just balance it and then feed this mix to the camera. So even though there was sound going into it where it was monitored there was no sound outputting from it to the camera. I should have checked the sound back from the camera and also checked the leads were set up right. I should have monitored the sound more frequently myself too. The sound was recorded on all of the other 3 cameras though but only on their in-built microphones so there IS SOME sound. It is usable but unfortunately not as good as it could or should have been. However I may well be able to polish it a little in post-production and call in the help of some sound designer/recordist friends.

2: I am really unhappy with the shot of me which is poorly framed with not enough looking room, not as well lit as Brian's shot and the focus is not 100% sharp. The main issue was that this camera was unmanned due to only having two crew and myself but I was busy doing too many roles as mentioned earlier. It was obviously hard to check this shot as I was in it but I should have got the crew to shoot some footage and then viewed it back. It really needed a cameraman on the camera too as then the shot could also have been varied between MS and MCU. below is an example and contrasted with a shot of Brians.

Putting it right.
1: Time and availability of myself, crew and actors mean that a complete re-shoot is going to be tricky so it will gave to be pick ups. To keep the time down I will only shoot pick-ups of the footage of myself. The plus side is that the footage will be better and that I will be able to get the MCU and MS that I am after and address the framing and lighting. The issues will be continuity, making sure I deliver the lines right so it all cuts together. In order to try and make sure this goes right my actor Brian will be there for eye lines and to do his lines to make sue my phrasing and performance fits. I will also take the rushes from the last shoot to match the lighting with Brian's footage. Sound wise I am going to speak to friends who work in sound and decide if it is best to record the best sound I can or to recording using the camera in-built microphone again so the sound will be the same.

2: In terms of the sound I will need to enlist the help and advice of the sound guys I know. The sound is not awful and the dialogue is still fine to listen too but there is some background noise that I want to try and reduce. If all this fails I may decide to put a disclaimer on the titles at the start of the piece. The premise was that we were given the interview shot at short notice and then taken to an undisclosed location for the security of Ben Wright. I could put in the titles setting this scenario up at the start that there were sound issues to not only allow for the error but to give a sense of realism to the shoot. Under the premise obviously a re-shoot would have been impossible.

On a positive note there is some really good footage in there and it has real potential to get the feel that I am after...

GW: DOCO SHOOT

A hugely busy and very stressful day BUT with the help of my actor and crew we got the 10 minute documentary shot. IN ONE DAY! The experience was aid though by two of my brightest and best students who acted as cameramen in both senses of the word as they were in it too. Brian our main actor was a joy to work with. As we shot around his house in his cabin in the garden he was hugely accommodating and even threw in lunch, snacks and drinks all day!

Things to use when moving forward.

• There Do not try and be actor, director, producer, camera supervisor, sound recordist and art director. Too much and it works to the detriment of the piece however needs must in this case.
• Location important and a great location to choose but not to the detriment of lighting issues which due to the exterior quality of the shoot was changable and led to issues of continuity. Also space was at a premium.
• Set dressing was important. Whilst the location worked really well as a non-descript earthy building/log cabin that could be anywhere a few photos and books personalised the space. Also all of the items from the actors really helped create a character for it too.
• Costumes too were really important. The choice from Brian's wardrobe (after much deliberation) worked well and was sciency enough and relaxed but avoided new age hippy. I wanted to look smart casual so a shirt, jeans and shoes achieved this and went for media type and professional but not too smart. After many thoughts I asked the cameramen to dress in their usual clothes which worked well too. I did get them to bring 2 tops though just in case any of theirs were inappropriate.
• Work with experienced actors as they are so much more professional.
• Make sure the actor is happy the environment was not the 100% for shooting in but the actor was very comfortable and at home and this really aided the shoot. A good personal relationship worked well with the actor as well in this case.
• Story-boards were a necessity as they gave me a shorthand with the cameramen.
• Get a production assistant to log and make notes of the footage as this was a job too far for me alongside everything else. Shooting with 4 cameras there is going to be a lot of footage and management of this could have been stronger.
• Pay more attention to the cameramen as I put  a lot of trust in them but looking at some of the rushes even more direction would have helped.
• Working with students was fine in terms of expense but more experience and not as much teaching from me would have taken a lot of pressure from my shoulders.
• Make sure a clapper is used at the start of EVERY setting off of the cameras.
• The lines were an issue for both of us but especially for me. Make sure the script is ready earlier and more time is made available to learn it.
• Leave lots of time for setting up. the set up took 2 hours. This was due to me being a little rusty, 4 cameras being used, lighting changes demanding re-sets and also sound issues.
• The shoot worked well in terms of planning. The idea of doing it as a documentary and filming with 4 cameras meant that there was only one set up not multiple and it allowed for the easy shooting of the script in chunks. This also aided the fact that the script was not 100% known by either of the actors.
• Breaks for the crew are invaluable. They also allow time for reflection and build unity. After a stressful and long set up and a shoot of the first third a break was invaluable to settle everyone down and discuss ideas and the way forward.
• Be open to ideas from the crew. Collaboration is good. My two cameramen both suggested a couple of interesting ideas shot wise and even in one of the scenes for an extra take that hopefully will add to the project.

GW: THE ADDITION OF VLOGS TO THE INSTALLATION

Working through the drafts of the script for the documentary interview element of the installation I have realised that it is too long. There is simply too much in there and it is to the detriment of the drama and confrontation (chess game if you like) that I am trying to establish between myself the interviewer and Ben Wright. I did a lot of research and found a lot of the facts, stories, politics and science about global warming really interesting and think the audience will too, so I do want to keep the best of it in the piece. However within the documentary interview script hey end up being too fact, preachy, statistics at times and boring and I feel they will lack some of the drama they are designed to have and possible lose the audience.

Deciding to pursue the idea of stripping out some of the facts, exposition science and arguments as they do not sit well in the piece though is one thing but what to lose and how to re-purpose this into another way to the audience is a different story. It MUST fit in with the narrative of the story and installation. They MUST also be personal, short, visually interesting, communicate the message effectivelyI considered many options and also want this content to feel different from the other elements I will be using. I have outlined what I was considering and my feelings on all of these below.

1: Animated Virals.
I have tried some of these and they are time consuming.they can work though but also unless using real characters can not have the emotional connection with the audience. they are immediate and often funny but lack a little in depth and emotion..

2: Kinetic Typography
This works with some of the more basic messages but as well as being hugely time consuming lack a little of the emotional appeal of a real figure telling the audience the facts.

3: Vlogs.
Really interesting way of doing it and can be simply filmed and break the fourths wall having that direct to audience feel. Great for listing ideas and thoughts quickly.

4: Keep them in the documentary interview still.
Not really an option this as it would make the documentary far too long and too hard to shoot. the idea is to strip them out and even after thinking about possible ways to include it feel this is the wrong option.

So weighing up all of these and doing a little development on how they could work I have decided to do short Vlogs (Video Blogs). These will be used as new additions to the installation and work with the other video elements. These will be sold as Ben putting them  up on his Blog and also online youtube etc to get his message out to his audience and hope that they go viral. It will basically be him selling his cause and possibly the organisations manifesto directly to the audience breaking the fourth wall. Stylistically these can be pretty interestingly filmed. As there will be a few very short vlogs I think I can be playful within the context of the story narrative too as early on I want to create a sense of enigma. I aim to keep the audience guessing as to if the returned figure claiming to be Ben Wright is actually him or not. So the first couple I think can be shot hiding much of Ben away to keep them guessing. Back lit, low key lighting, focus pulls

As a refresher of what the documentary shoot has to do and the role it performs in the whole piece and how the Vlogs and manifesto and issues that Ben will be campaigning on through them will slot together. This needs a to have a good narrative structure so I have really plotted this out and researched around academics and experts in the field and applied their ideas and theories.

ACT ONE
1: TV News Piece (3-4 mins)
The role this fake TV local news section will serve is a good set up for the video content that I am assembling. In about 3 minutes it does a really good catch up of the story so far, gets out of the way lots of exposition and back story and also has the sense of enigma I am after. I may also use a little bit of Vlog within the news piece to establish it and to illustrate the fact that Ben MAY be back!

This all happens in the first act of a screenplay generally the first quarter. Within the structure of the whole piece this is what narrative academics Todorov calls the equilibrium and Labov orientation. Screenwriting guru Syd Field calls them the set-up. They are pretty much all the same thing though. Field also talks of a plot point which spins the action off in another direction and this also occurs in this as it is the fact that Ben MAY be back!

ACT TWO
In the pieces that follow we now need to try and create some drama for the audience. The character whose journey we follow is Ben Wright and even though he is not playing out all of the drama in these his story and character arc is what takes the audience through the installation. Drama comes from conflict and for Ben this is in the form of not being acknowledged, conflict with governments and the fossil fuel companies, his past having faked his own death and run away. There are also the larger less personal and overriding conflict against the climate change issue he is fighting and creating awareness and change.

The elements 2-3 below will incorporate all of these in them and generally it is regarded as act 2 in the three act structure. Field called this middle section of a screenplay the confrontations, Todorov problems/enigmas and Labov complications and once again they are really saying the same thing. We need conflict to generate interest and hurdles to jump over and hoops for our hero to jump through to create drama.

2: VLOG (1-2 mins)
This will be the introduction into some of the issues that Ben wants to raise. We will have set up the Vlog in the TV news piece and what it is so we can get straight to business here. Ben will protest against apathy, fossil fuel spin, governments being bought and use this as a real call to arms. As of yet the enigma will still be there as to if it is actually ben or not.

3: Documentary Interview (9-10 mins)
This will be the audience finally getting to see ben in the flesh. The piece will be a sit down interview with a film-maker (myself) which he has been led to believe will act as a platform for his cause. However the film-maker whilst interested in the issue is really after the big expose and stories behind Joes murder, Bens faked suicide, and all of the conspiracy theories and dirt that surround this story. A game of cat and mouse ensues as I try to get him onto this topic and he dodges the issue before finally exploding at the end. The end of this piece of content will be what Syd Field calls the second plot and Labov the climax. This is where something happens that moves us towards act three and a conclusion.

ACT THREE
4: VLOG (1-2 mins)
This will be the final act and what Field and Labov both call the resolution and Todorov the new equilibrium. It is not really a happy ending and itself has a sense of enigma as it is basically Ben's war cry for action "by any means necessary" to fight global warming. He will set out his manifesto for change and motivate the public behind the cause. He will also make threat to the fossil fuel companies and governments making them very aware that he is about to go public with the incriminating evidence he has on them.

This takes us to a climactic ending. In the bigger picture if this was a 120 minute screenplay all of the above would be the first act.

GW: SCRIPT READ THROUGH & ALTERATIONS

I met with my actor today with the 4th version of the script for a read through and to tweak it. The script was down to 18 pages due to some trimming I recently did but was still too long. The aim for the piece was to be about 10 minutes tops and the video content in it's entirety to be no more than 15 mins which is a length I feel people will find OK to disseminate in the gallery space I will be installing it in.

The aim for working with the actor was to also use him as a script editor. I have worked alongside Brian Ralph (the actor) in my job and through discussions and email exchanges on this project he has developed a good feel for the character and the fake documentary if not 100% the installation piece as a whole. So I have been closely working on using him as a sounding board. Due to the lateness of the day in getting the script ready due to holidays etc it has only given me a week to go through it with him. I had got someone else to read it and they pointed out some issues but I really needed a collaborator and someone who understood scripts and acting to collaborate with. I am far too close to the subject and although I feel I know what needs to be cut I need someone to help me see the wood from the trees. It will also be good to get a fresh perspective on the harnessing of all of my research and writing and see what they feel the hot topics, interesting information and hooks are and what is surplus to requirements, repeats itself, does not drive the story forward or inform, educate and entertain the audience.

I have also decided to pursue the idea of stripping out some of the facts, exposition science and arguments as they do not sit well in the piece. They end up being too fact, preachy, statistics at times and boring and will lack some of the drama they are designed to have and possible lose the audience. So they will be used as new additions to the installation and work with the other video elements. These will be a mini Vlogs (Video Blogs) as mentioned in a previous post that Ben would have put up on his Blog and also online youtube etc to get his message out to his audience. It will basically be him selling his cause and possibly the organisations manifesto directly to the audience breaking the fourth wall.

I have however whilst earmarking some of the areas I think could go from the doco script and instead be used as Vlog posts left a lot of them in. I want a second opinion as to which could be used as Vlog posts and which could stay within the script as some stats, data etc will be needs to tell the story and establish bens arguments and credentials as a climatologist.

As a refresher of what the documentary shoot has to do and the role it performs in the whole piece and how the Vlogs and manifesto and issues that Ben will be campaigning on through them will slot together. In order.

1: TV News Piece (3-4 mins)
The role this will serve is a good set up for the video content.
2: VLOG (1-2 mins)
3: VLOG (Addressing issues)
4: Documentary Interview (9-10 mins)
5: VLOG (1-2 mins)

The issues we discussed are all listed here and I was aware of most of them but as I mentioned needed fresh eyes to help me to solve. and we needed to work to solve. Underneath are all areas to work on and develop for the future.

• The script was far too overlong. Currently by nearly 50%!
• The script was far too wordy and in places was not written in normal speak but film speak. As
• Lots of shoe horned in exposition.
• Far too much in the way of data, statistics. Will lose the audience and very hard for an actor to deliver.
• It is a little bloated in terms of story-telling. What exactly is does the piece need to do individually and in the context of all of the other elements of the installation?
• A little too much elaborate and flowery dialogue. Keep a few zingers
• Needs more scene descriptions.
• Need to see what I can not SAY but get Brian to ACT!
• Try to add more light and shade, serious and FUN if possible. make sure character of Ben is likeable AND passionate not just tub-thumping.
• In future develop the script much earlier and give the actor more time to learn.

The meeting lasted all day (7 hours) and was hugely productive.

CONCEPTUAL ART

I was reading around as I am still trying to place my practice and current piece of work even at this late stage in the day. Yes it has strong narrative and character sensibilities and the structure does fit within the Trans-Media genre. It has a strong ideology and messages and values and a social conscience and is a campaigning documentary sensibility but that still does not properly define it.

For years I have not liked my work to have nice aesthetics and look good but this is not what I am all about. The idea behind the work is more important always to me and certainly the concept are paramount. I want to communicate an idea through the concept. The penny then dropped am i really interested in and creating conceptual art?

Heading to the excellent Tate website for a definition here is what they said.

"Conceptual art is art for which the idea (or concept) behind the work is more important than the finished art object. It emerged as an art movement in the 1960s and the term usually refers to art made from the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s. As a definable movement conceptual art is associated with these decades but its origins reach beyond these two decades. Marcel Duchamp is often seen as an important forefather of conceptual art, and his readymade Fountain of 1917 cited as the first conceptual artwork."

I really relate to LeWitts statement in his essay Paragraphs on Conceptual Art, "In conceptual art the idea or concept is the most important aspect of the work. When an artist uses a conceptual form of art, it means that all of the planning and decisions are made beforehand and the execution is a perfunctory affair."

Conceptual art can be apparently almost anything. This is because, unlike a painter or sculptor who will think about how best they can express their idea using materials and techniques, a conceptual artist uses whatever materials and whatever form is most appropriate to putting their idea across – this could be anything from a performance to a written description. Although there is no one style or form used by conceptual artists, from the late 1960s certain trends emerged.

Researching further I discovered that many artists whose work I admire are considered conceptual artists or have created conceptual works. Richard Longs land art, Bruce McCleams body art, Gilbert and George, Sol LeWitts diagrams on how to make  drawing as well as lots of "found footage" artworks.

Is my piece conceptual art? I think it is the idea(s) behind the work are more important to me that the finished object although I want it to be good as it can be. The decisions and planning are carried out beforehand in my pre-production and the execution can be perfunctionary I would quite happily develop the idea and then let someone else execute it form if given the chance. Even though I primarily use video I am now straying into create props and artefacts too. This is an area i will definintly look into more moving forward.

GLOBAL WARMNING: DEVELOPING THE DOCO SCRIPT V4

I had left the script for a few days to ponder it and now opened it again. Version 3 was still way over length and clocking in at 21 pages. However with a fresh set of eyes and perspective I realised that I could easily cut some sections that repeated themselves somewhat and also streamline a lot of the dialogue. Doing this I managed to get it down to 20 pages still nearly double the length I was aiming for.

It was definitely playing too long and laboriously though from a test read through I did with a friend. The characters were working well and the combatorial moments were really getting there BUT the data and details on the global warming issue were still too long and I was having trouble letting go of them because even though I knew this I really liked some of the writing and was having trouble letting go of it.

It was becoming hard to see the wood for the trees.What I really needed was afresh set of eyes and a script editor. Not knowing nay who would work for free I decided to call my actor and to see if he would be happy to work on the script with me. I explained the issues ands as he has written scripts himself and was very interested I the project he agreed to help. He also provided some excellent advice that I knew but had not been adhering to "Show, do not say". he reminded me that he was an actor and a look or gesture could speak a thousand words. He was more than happy to help put this element into the script and as I knew he had a good grasp of the character I was more than happy to take him up on the offer.

Following his advice I did manage to strip out another page or so of dialogue replacing it with scene direction and action. I also took the time to go through and be super ruthless marking the areas on the script that I felt MUST stay and those that could possibly go. I did not take them out immediately as I wanted to use Brian my actor as a sounding board and second opinion> BUT this did make me prepared for the script edit as I had decided which battles I would fight for if it came to it and which I was happy to concede.

GW: USING THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CINEMATOGRAPHY & FILM LANGUAGE

I wanted to develop this idea concerning the use of cinematography in the Global Warmning project before my shoots. I want to keep the feeling of realism in the documentary style pieces however I want to manipulate the audience a little using cinematography within the framework that the documentary style allows.

TV News Piece
For the TV news piece I am going to have play it pretty straight in order for it to look real and right. It will follow the formulaic conventions of TV news. The reporter will need to be at eye level and address the camera breaking the fourth wall for his pieces to camera in a MS (mid-shot) perhaps at the start and MCU (medium close up) possibly at the end for the outro.

The shots of the interviewees will be the traditional MCU to MS and the GV's of them for cutaways looking at things, doing etc in their environments will be a mix of shots. I want the climatologist in a sciency looking office and the woman an old friend of Wright in a  home environment

Manifesto Pieces
These are designed to be campaigning pieces that will go online so again break the fourth wall with Ben Wright addressing the audience directly. Shot sizes of the main camera angle will be very traditional MS and MCU. These will be mixed with BCU (big close ups) and CU (close ups) shot from very different angles. This will add real creativity and mystery as the audience will not be used to seeing these sort of shots. they will allow probing of Wright and putting him under the spotlight of the audience as they try hard to see more of him. The very CU work will again not fully reveal all of his though but parts of him. The camera height here will be a little under eye level so Wright looks more powerful and looms a tiny bit over the audience making him look strong.

What is also very important here will be the mise-en-scene as I want Ben Wright to be obscured slightly so it is hard to see him. Masks etc could be used to hide but these would be too OTT and possibly intimidating mystery I want intimidating I do not. The easiest solution would be lighting. These will be shot in a TV studio so I have lots of control over this and a mix of strong backlight to create a halo effect and a low key light to put a little light on his features will work well.

Documentary Interview Piece
This piece allows for more creativity BUT it must still feel like an interview but with a youthful crew creating it it can work a little outside obvious convention. the premise of this piece is that it is a one shot chance at interviewing Wright. therefore if I was in charge of shooting it for real I would make sure I got as much coverage as I could. It would be shot as an interview due to time and also will avoid the  need for the interviewee to put the question from the interviewer (who would be cut out at a later date) in the answer. This will also allow for drama to play out as they both play a game of strategy one trying to dig deep and the other rebuffing him. For this reason I will cover the shoot with four cameras.

Camera 1: A WS (wide shot) covering the whole scene with lights, crew cameras and setting in it as well as myself interviewing and Ben Wright. This will cover all of the action and provide a go to safe shot if one is needed. It will also cover all of the action in the scene if any happens and be great for setting up the interview showing the process of the shoot to the audience. It will provide a warts and all look for them at the interview. the camera will be at eye level and reveal the location only not the surroundings to keep it a mystery and the log cabin could be anywhere. This shot will remain the same throughout and will be shot on a wide angle lens and this will give it a deep depth of field that will make sure the whole scene is in focus.

Cameras 2 & 3: A Shot of the interviewer AND reverse shot of the interviewee in MS & MCU. The MS will be used for more general questions and for the more heated and tense and emotionally charged questions and responses the camera will move in for a MCU. The only exception to the shot size will be on the interviewee where a CU will be used for very emotionally charged moments. The closer shots CU & MCU allow for more emotion to be conveyed in the frame by the actors to the audience.The camera will be at eye level and the interviewer and interviewee MUST both have looking room. These cameras will be shot on a standard 18-55mm lens.

Camera 4: This will be the probing and creative camera. It will be given license to get lots of CU details of the shoot to add some texture and feel that the participants are under its scrutiny. It will be hand-held and this will also give a real fly on the wall feel that the more static cameras will not be able to get. This will also give the footage from this camera a restless energy and kinetic feel.

Shots will include ECU of the faces of the participants, feet, hands, fingers wringing pans from one participant to the other and also pans in from objects in the set to the characters. It will also pick up the details of an interview shoot such as the other cameras, lights, microphones and question cards to create a real behind the scenes authenticity to the shoot. It will also gets lots of GV's (general views) of the location and elements in it, books, photos, artefacts to add texture. This camera will use a prime 1.8 50mm lens. This will give it a really shallow depth of field and allow focus for the audience on details and minutiae of the scene. Extra close ups for emotion to drag the audience into the scene will also be beneficial.

The mise-en scene will be a log cabin which is very atmospheric and no other details about the location will be shown so it could be anywhere. It will be set dressed with objects, books and photos that are in keeping with Bens character and plenty of books on the global warming topic. The costumes will be Ben looking smart in shirt tie and cardigan looking like an older man but neat and tidy. I will be wearing smart jeans, shoes and a shirt but looking more contemporary but smart all the same. the crew will all be dressed don in comfortable clothing.