As you will have seen from my previous post I promised a piece of footage from the press conference.
I filmed in HD so it is with great regret that I show this to you via YouTube, it looks so much better in it’s true shooting quality but at least you get to see it.
Let me set the scene a little, by the time the section you are about to see is taken each speaker has said their piece and is now fielding questions from the audience. Most of the questions asked by the audience regarded the publicity and the potential benefits of the Tribunal but this question really starts to rile the audience and the panel. I shot using a monopod which wasn’t ideal for some of the conference but was ideal for this section as I could flick between speakers. At one point I roll the camera round to capture the questioner but unfortunately the lighting wasn’t anywhere near good enough, it does help to show a little of the cut and thrust however.
I love the way both of the panellists deal with this question but particularly Ewa, her passion combined with deep understanding of the situation makes her a tough match for the questioner. The clip doesn’t show this but after Ewa’s answer he storms out of the conference, it was exciting to watch the Panel deal with such difficult questioning in the way that they did.
Reflections on Seminar feedback to this piece
Today I screened this to a few fellow students and some tutors. I was pleased with the feedback I received, here is a little reflection on the feedback session I had.
The group that saw my piece also showed each of their work and there was some very interesting pieces, I was particularly pleased that my was well received because it was considerably longer than any of the other works. The pieces other than mine that I saw I think benefited from their shorter length and as an impactful piece maybe mine could be improved with a harsher edit. The reason I left the whole exchange in is because whilst it is simply an answer to a question there is a clear narrative and the unhurried nature of the edit helps to tell this story.
Words that came back in response to my piece were ‘natural’, ‘well shot’ and ‘voicing an opinion’. Whilst these comments are somewhat superficial on a critical basis it is nice to hear these phrases being used. I think the word natural came up because of its distinct lack of effects or edit points, I showed what really happened and the emotions that really were there in the room.
I am pleased I received the comment ‘well shot’. The piece was shot on a monopod and because of this I ran the risk of it looking jerky and unwatchable but actually the cut and thrust of the exchange is captured in its essence by shooting in this style.
Finally I am delighted it came across that I was trying to strongly voice an opinion and take a side, the piece is supposed to ridicule the questioner and take the side of the panel.