I'm delighted to say that our final production went really well. Every single one of the team played their part spectacularly on the day and all our hard work paid off. But now it's time to reflect on the process as a whole that got us to where we are now.
Issues We Faced
One of the more memorable problems was finding out that we couldn't use the sofas and chairs that we wanted from the foyer. We were thankfully able to source alternative furniture, which still matched the aesthetic we were looking for, and while it wasn't what we initially had in mind it still worked.
An issue was faced on the day was mostly my fault. At the rehearsal on 20th April, I misheard what the set team said – I thought they just wanted to use bird and human footprints on the boards, when actually they wanted to combine them with some bird images. That meant that I didn't carry out this action, because I didn't know it was an action. On Sunday, Calum printed out some A4 images to use, but they got a bit lost within the set decoration. We made a quick decision that we would get 6 A3 images printed through reprographics. I sat with the printer while Calum made use of the time and ran some technical rehearsals. If I did this again I would definitely have a quick debriefing with the set team just to clarify what was needed ahead of the final production date.
The main problem that we had all the way through was the lack of personnel. Where most groups had 9-11 people available we only had 8. To solve this, the Gallery Team doubled up on roles to ensure everything was covered. This has had both positive and negatives. It meant that we had to think creatively throughout the process, especially in production tasks, about who we would get to be in front of the camera – meaning we brought in some really talented Acting students to work for us. This set-up presented different challenges in terms of operation and it made it very hard for Calum and I to watch and review things in our Director and Producer roles. Calum got around this by having technical rehearsals where he just watched which allowed him to hone his creative vision.
Justify Decisions
Journalistic
Choice of theme – this was something that we were all interested in, therefore we knew that we would be able to create a good quality magazine show, as the theme lay in our sphere of interest. We knew that we would be able to get good guests with relative ease
Choice of topics – we chose issues in the birding world that we felt our target audience would be interested in hearing about. Insert topics were also chosen based on places we thought our target audience may have already heard of
Choice of guests and talent: Mike has previous falconry experience and is actually in our target age range, meaning that our target audience would hopefully be able to relate well to his experiences and point of view. Cain was also a great choice as he is extremely knowledgeable about a variety of ornithological topics and has a really clear way of speaking which comes across well on camera. Lequane was a fantastic presenter! He was clear, confident and conscientious throughout the process and really carried it off on the day. He was the perfect face for a show that appealed to a young audience but retained its credibility about promoting serious issues to a wider audience.
Technical
Our set looked amazing! We were looking for something that would appeal to young people, but still had connotations of birding, which we did through our choice of furniture and the props, utilising some vintage cameras and lenses which are currently quite trendy. Even Cain gave it his 'class' stamp of approval. The false wall was particularly effective and despite its ambitious nature the decision to include it really paid off.
Lighting – we didn't do a great deal with the lighting as we were looking for a relaxed, non-dramatic set up that would be relaxed, comfortable and help the guests feel at ease. The addition of Emily's criss-cross set up of the birdie lights were an excellent addition to that backdrop that enhanced the overall effect of the set.
Sound – we didn't want to make our sound-set up too complex so close miccing of our contributors proved sufficient, and mirrored what we had seen on The One Show and Springwatch. This worked well and allowed us to get clear sound for the speaking segments.
Titles – we created a title sequence that began to challenge the usual conventions of a nature show, demonstrating to new viewers that this isn't going to be like a BBC production. Here's a version of the titles that we could have used had we decided to push those conventions to their very limits – it's a shame we didn't get to pursue this avenue, but I think if given an opportunity it's something I would quite like to do.
Personal Contribution
As Producer I've contributed a lot from an organisational and administrative perspective. I was responsible for all of the paperwork and ensured these were circulated in good time – something which is critical to the smooth running of a production. I also ensured that all actions were followed up and seen through to completion but perhaps I took this a bit too far because I was asked by one of the team if they could actually do their job towards the end of the process. On the day my advanced organisation really paid off when one of the team received some extremely distressing news and for a period of time we weren't totally sure if she would stay for the final production. Thankfully she was able to stay, but having the contingencies prepared in advance meant that we didn't need to panic; we were just able to implement the pre-prepared plan with ease. On reflection, therefore, I believe I carried out this role very successfully. I can only think of one real action that I dropped, so next time I just need to make sure that I double-check things I'm not sure on.
As Production Assistant I have really grown throughout this process. In the initial productions I was terrible at calling out the shots. Thankfully the Dancing Queen task gave me a real confidence boost about this role, which I developed over the subsequent weeks. I think it's safe to say that I peaked at the right time and by the end of the production day I bossed it. I was clear in my communication and was getting the information about the shots out in good time, allowing the camera operators to do their job. I think it would be helpful to the sound crew next time if I was a bit calmer and gave my instructions at a quieter volume.
Final Production
I personally think our Final Production was very successful. Our target audience was young people aged 16-25, in the north of England with a previous interest in wildlife, and I believe our show would have appealed to this demographic. Our set was vibrant and stylish, and took advantage of the popularity of vintage equipment such as cameras and binoculars. We also had appropriate guests and tackled interesting topics – although in another version it would be nice to have longer inserts as 40 seconds is not long enough to cover any topic in detail. The title sequence was particularly effective at attracting our target audience, using effects and music to signal to the audience that this isn’t your average nature show within the first minute. The title sequence also served to challenge conventions of nature shows. There was probably more that could be done within the show itself to push boundaries, but I'm delighted with our production and I think that it worked really well and looked extremely good.
Commentaires