Although having a simple structure for the overall film the editing process for the film was at times problematic as a portion of the shots were unsuitable for the overall production . This was demonstrated when at first the only section involving the choir was filmed during a rehearsal session of the performance and the wrong song at first was being played although I had used it in the time line this was a problem as the majority of shots from that session were used in the sequence to aid the original interview with the Jamie Holman . This was later changed to use the final rehearsal session footage of the performance as this only focused on the actual performance song, due to this change the sequence had to be changed to fit this in to the time frame of the documentary as well as reapply the transitional effects to both the audio to slowly fade in the song as the scene changes and the visual to ensure it was a smooth scene change. The advantage of changing the footage used was that in the older version the members of the choir were in normal clothes where as in the more recent recording session the members were in uniform colours of black and red allowing the viewer to better recognize them as a single group as well as having better sound quality reducing the need for alteration to the audio at this stage.
The use of the choir’s singing as a piece of music through the video was a inventive decision because of this I did not need to use a secondary sourced music piece that may of clashed with the content as well as having lots of instances of the same music piece already to be used in the video. The disadvantage of this is having the same piece of audio used several time in the video could become repetitive for a audience. On the other hand the use of live recorded music adds a more natural feel to the video and is easier to control its audio via slowly altering the audio levels to the correct level needed.
The main interview with Jamie Holman was a challenging edit as his answers to the questions provided included tangents that although related to the subject did not fit with the overall flow of the video, these were cut although due to small amount of time between these and the actual content careful care had to be taken so when cutting these so that the end of words not related to the content were not left in that would produce a stodgy production. Although a advantage of this was that the content delivered was precise and to the point .On the other hand cutting these tangents left a significant amount of time to be covered by cut away footage of the office space constructed behind him during the interview that although well shot almost broke the momentum of the edit when compared to the interview.
In contrast when using the footage from the filming session at the prism gallery the use of its footage created sense of momentum in the edit an example of this the sequence where clips of Jamie working at the prism space to set it up have were sharply cut together in a short montage set along with the diegetic sound footage as well as the non diagetic audio of the choir audio coming to a crescendo as the short sequence closes with him leading the effort to set the gallery up in time cutting to a panning shot of the next piece to be talked about. This is engaging for the viewer as it shows a sense of progress and keeps the from slowing down.
When dealing with the footage where he is talking directly to the camera due to using a different microphone than the interview issues were faced with the audio being a lower quality as a low hum could be heard as he spoke, the use of a de-hummer tool was attempted though failed to solve the issue. The next attempt used the de-noiser tool although it worked in the short term the effects as the sound quality became unpredictable differing each time it was played due to the de-noiser proving lackluster, a third attempt at the problem was using Adobe audition to identify the source of the hum and remove it on the other hand doing this removed Jamie’s voice from the clip as well.In conclusion when dealing with the audio of the sequence the audio levels were lowered to hide the presence of the hum despite not being effective and producing a possibly stodgy sequence.The solution to this if done again would be to use the same clip on microphone to prevent this problem happening and ensure consistence level of audio quality.
The overall editing process of the film although encountering problems went well as a professional looking production was the end product. This is as through the video the overall quality is maintained throughout the film though it could be debated that the short sequence where the audio is slightly lower quality than the rest of the film negates this.Furthermore the process was a success as it furthered my experience as a editor by finding solutions to problems that occur during the process as well gain a better understanding the importance of structuring a edit to play with the aspect of pacing a film. On the other hand the editing process should that at times my working can be predictable as few experimental ideas were used to set the film apart from my other work although using the live choir music as backing track for the film could be considered as experimental as I did not know how it would turn out over all.In conclusion the process was a success as the film was made and I gained experience as a editor though if I were to do this again I would better plan out how much time the editing will take up.