After All This Time...

Well, well, well.... I guess it is time for you guys to see the final product!

    Despite all of the hardships and stress (especially with so many other things going on in my life simultaneously), creating this documentary was definitely a learning experience. I had made another documentary prior to this, but the process was very different - the majority of things were figured out on the spot, my group got extremely lucky in specific situations and there were more people in the group, making filming a much easier process (especially considering our very minimal set-up). 

    However, this documentary took so much more effort. The topic was extremely complex (we could not come up with a name for a really long time), the B-roll was a lot more stylized and required much more work, and the filming situations were not as smooth as expected. Regardless, I really do think that this project pushed me out of my comfort zone and allowed me to try something new, taking a step toward the type of content I would like to keep creating going forward. Without further ado, you can check out the documentary excerpt here, the magazine article below, and our social media page here. Hope you enjoy, and thank you for sticking through this with me! It's been a pleasure.

Creative Reflection

It has been a wild ride. Now, it's time to reflect.

The episodic docu-series The Overlooked focuses on diving deep into topics that are often left in the dark, whether that ignorance is conscious or unconscious. Its second episode (Butterflies in a Glass Cage), as well as the magazine article and social media page, work jointly in order to educate and start the conversation regarding misrepresentation and how this affects not just society’s perception of women, but women’s perception of themselves.

The documentary was created with the main purpose of educating the uneducated and deepening the overall understanding of how small, seemingly insignificant choices in the media creation process can enforce and uphold certain systems of oppression, which in this case was the misrepresentation of women in media. My partner, Kimberly Blum, and I decided to break up our target audience into two main groups: the primary audience (women, particularly introspective teens who are growing into adulthood and are curious about the influence of media) and the secondary audience (uneducated teen-age males as well as older women who may have been oblivious to the male gaze their entire lives). By mostly focusing on younger audiences, especially the likely most affected part of the group (women), we are reaching those who may be the most susceptible to the negative effects of the male gaze and giving them the necessary knowledge to realize the effects in their personal lives (as well as ways to potentially combat them). Because this target audience tends to practice heavy social media usage (particularly on sites like Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, etc.)  and tend to prefer the video medium, we decided to distribute the film on both Instagram and YouTube in order to be able to gain exposure and share it easily with others. Instagram will be its main distribution platform due to the overwhelming popularity of the app within younger viewers, and YouTube is an easily accessible platform in which users do not need a user or password to view the posted content (this link will be easy to send around and put in our Instagram “bio.” Both sites allow for the posting of long-form content, which works in our favor as well.

In terms of genre, we decided on an expository documentary in specific, since this documentary “mode” sets up a specific perspective on a subject and uses sound, cinematography, and other aspects of the production in order to support this specific view. On top of the supporting visuals and sound, this type of documentary often features a “voice of God” style voice-over and utilizes interviews in order to move the piece along. Kimberly and I chose to adhere to these tropes except for the voice-over for many reasons. We realized that we wanted each interviewee to be able to tell their story in the most authentic way possible without any interruptions from a third-party. Because of this, we mainly used music and the interview audio throughout the entirety of the documentary, allowing for interrupted reflection from Tess Segal, Maya Elizabeth and Sabrina Ares, all of which was manipulated as little as possible in order to maintain the interviews' “realness.” We also chose to shoot very stylized B-roll on a staged set in order to not just visually represent the topic through the use of props, but also engage viewers further. This is especially necessary with our target audience, since they consume video content constantly, excessively and often almost mindlessly; therefore, we needed to ensure that this documentary was eye-catching in order to keep them attentive, especially with their shorter attention spans. Stills from this production were also used in the magazine article and social media, carrying over that captivating aspect onto the different components of the project.

Speaking of the distinct components, we made sure to develop consistent branding throughout, using solid, relatively neutral colors and simplistic fonts in order to create a modern “look” that also had a slight performative edge, mainly because of the documentary props and the topic as a whole. We kept the graphics in the documentary very minimal, the magazine used stills as well as the shared color palette, and the Instagram page consisted of stills, canva graphics, behind-the-scenes visuals, excerpts, and “lessons” learned from either the first episode (Counter Conformity) or the second (Butterflies in a Glass Cage). The Instagram page, which we saw successful docu-series like The Art of Design also use, consisted of a mix of story and normal posts, the story posts acting as a casual gateway for followers to interact with our page (we saw that posting stories casually, particularly stills from the documentary, got people more excited about the final product and consequently increased our social media presence). We also chose to do a Q&A-style magazine article in which the creators get to describe their experience and let “fans” know any future plans. This format allowed the information to be more direct and comprehensible due to the organized question-by-question nature, making it more likely for audiences to engage. We also made sure to add plenty of visuals, especially stills, in order to appeal to our target audience (since they seem to be drawn to more visually-oriented media).

However, I really do think that we could have done a better job at only using specific fonts or specific shades of a color. Originally, all of the more vibrant colors in our color palette came from the wardrobe that the interviewees wore to the shoot (we incorporated it into the branding since it became such a big part of the piece), but we could have done a better job at only using one specific shade of that color rather than not being specific. This also applies to fonts, especially because there is a drastic difference between the fonts used in the lower thirds of the documentary and the social media postings.  Also, despite our efforts, we were not able to get the television screens from the documentary to look as real as possible, which also may have brought down the production value of the piece (which in turn could result in the loss of credibility from viewers). These were definitely areas that needed improvement.

Regardless, I believe one of our strengths was the representation of women through all three components. After all, the project itself dealt with how this improper portrayal could be detrimental to this social group, so we did our best to represent women and their experiences as authentically as possible, while simultaneously showcasing the hurtful representation (only in necessary moments, though). For example, when Sabrina Ares discusses the superficial way in which women are shown in film, certain shots (particularly some that focused more on the her body) were shown, purposefully making the viewer aware of how a seemingly insignificant production choice affects how women are viewed and consequently treated in society. This selective incorporation of male gaze-y shots and angles helps visually prove what the interviewees are discussing, helping solidify the message. Additionally, because there is no voice-over and there was little manipulation to the interview audio (the only alterations done were cutting out pauses, stutters, or filler words), the women interviewed are able to represent themselves verbally in the way that they choose, allowing them to properly address the issue as someone that has experienced the consequences of this rather undiscussed phenomenon. We also used the episode’s name, Butterflies in a Glass Cage, to symbolize both the celebration and oppression of women’s “desirable” characteristics in media. The phrase “in a glass cage” is a metaphor for many things; however, in this context, it is a reference to how women (which are represented by a butterfly) are constantly on display - keeping women in a constant state of feeling celebrated while simultaneously trapped within the confines of this painfully narrow representation of what “woman” means. 

All in all, this project was a huge learning experience, especially when it came to the production of the documentary. Those it was incredibly difficult during certain periods of the process, I think it made Kimberly and I much stronger creators, especially when it came to on-the-spot troubleshooting and collaborating with others outside the project. Despite feeling like we could have taken things further if we had a longer period to plan and complete all three components, I am grateful for this experience and everything it has taught me about myself, my creations, and the world.

Grading and Sound: Bringing the Piece Together

The End is Near.

    After putting all the B-roll on the timeline (which took way longer than expected, probably because I had tons of footage to choose from), I had to do the masking. I had quite the scare once I realized that the method I was counting on (the Ultra Key method I mentioned in a previous post) did not work for every clip, leaving me to come up with strange shortcuts to get a similar effect (even though it was much more time-consuming than my original plan). This consisted of using a green solid to mask out the screens, copying that mask onto the movie footage that was supposed to be playing on the TVs, switching the blending mode and then messing with settings until it didn't look awful. The only issue was that without the Ultra Key effect, most of the TVs texture was covered up by the movie excerpt layers, making it seem even less realistic than before. There I was, hours before the deadline, trying to figure out what in the WORLD I was going to do. Saying that I was stressed was comically nothing but an understatement. This is how I felt staring deeply into my computer for hours at a time:

    Halfway through, though, I realized that my initial approach was applicable to almost every clip, I just had to adjust two different settings within the effect in order to get it to be clearer (transparency and highlights on the Ultra Key effect). My computer crashed probably a total of 30 times (that's what I get for shooting in 4K) but overall it was relatively easy to handle and I was still able to get everything done. Check out the silly little blue screen I was greeted with multiple times throughout the night!

    I was eventually able to figure it out regardless, however with the little time I had left to finish and my computer being on its last straw, there were some parts of the TV that were not fully covered by the mask. These edges made it look less realistic and in turn took away from the B-roll. Despite being somewhat disappointed with the result, I pushed myself to finish audio, last-minute color tweaking, and music.

    The audio was overall very clear (especially Tess's, it was amazing) so I only had to do some minor tweaking, and color grading was relatively minimal since all I really felt was necessary was basic correction, which I did. Overall I think it looks clean and consistent, which is what I wanted for the documentary (our branding overall is very simplistic and modern, so this went very well with it). I found some futuristic yet relaxing background music that was royalty free and luckily, it fit perfectly. I really do think that this song adds to the project and helps create the atmosphere I wanted from the beginning. 

    I finished very late at night - but honestly, it was worth the lack of sleep. Despite the project being due, I think I am going to continue tweaking things and eventually finish the remainder of the 28-minute documentary, especially after going this far to get props, interviewees, a filming location (still can't believe I basically tore my house down for that), and great gear. Thank you Jimmy G, may ShortCuts (the program he runs to showcase student work at BECON-TV) reign forever and ever, Amen.

    Adding music at the end made everything come together and got me excited about the project, even after hours and hours of working on it. I will be posting it soon, so stay tuned! It's just really is crazy that this is my last big project before high school ends... Part of me does not believe it's real... I'm just glad that I was able to be a part of such an amazing class (both AS and A). They completely changed the way I view the world and approach my own projects, and that in itself is priceless. I have always been grateful for the opportunity to get such a great education, but man, this class is just something else. I'll forever carry everything I learned (and am still learning) with me, and I can't wait to see where I end up in the future. Can't wait for you guys to see the doc, and if you haven't already, you guys should watch Counter Conformity here :D

We are Out Here B-Rolling

    I tend to have a weird process for B-roll. Sometimes I use this method, sometimes I don't, but for this documentary? It SAVED me. Let me explain.

    As someone that likes to compete in a multitude of intense, time-sensitive competitions, I have learned some tricks to save time and save myself some of my sanity. Because I am usually the camera person or editor in my teams, I have adopted this method where I put all of the B-roll in the timeline and then quickly chop it up until only the usable footage is left on there. That way, once we are done with the interviews and it is time to input B-roll into the sequence, I can simply scrub through and pick out what correlates with what is being said, or easily find replacements for repeated clips. It may seem counterintuitive to go through everything first, but it makes it easier in the end (especially because you are much more familiarized with the footage). Obviously this method is not the most practical for other forms of video creation, but doing this for the documentary made my life so much easier for multiple reasons:

    1. There was a LOT of B-roll, all in different files. Putting everything in one place made me feel more secure about not missing anything, and I definitely felt a lot more organized.

    2. Because of the extensive amounts of footage (there were multiple hours peer interviewee per camera), familiarizing myself with each shot as I cut it up made choosing and finding shots much easier (and quicker).

    3. Due to my plan to mask the TVs and play footage on the screens, I needed B-roll that was completely stable. No pans, tilts, or even small shakes. Because of this, I needed to only be looking at the stable footage I got, meaning I was able to easily find still, usable clips by simply scrubbing through the sequence. This saved me the stress of not having steady enough clips at my immediate access, which was really nice in the moment. Below is a picture of me editing Sabrina's close-up footage (from my camera - Wade and Sammy filmed mostly wide shots and Kim did BTS stuff with her camcorder):

    Also, for some reason, people kept getting in the shot during filming which was a PAIN to deal with in editing. Check out my dog unapologetically walking in front of all the cameras during Sabrina's shoot:

    Also, I think Wade or Sammy left the wide camera running as we set up because I found a long clip of us getting everything ready for Maya. We moved the TVs, set up lights and even explained to Maya what the vision for the B-roll was, despite us already communicating this through the chat (and through the Pinterest board we shared with all of the interviewees). I really enjoyed having so many people on set, it definitely felt great to get things done quickly and efficiently since everyone was committed to getting the best shots possible. Check it out below, I thought it was cool:

    On top of working on B-roll though, I also did a lot of masking work for the interviews. For instance, we failed to realize that there was an Expo marker in Sabrina's shot, so I covered that up, which was a quick fix. However, due to our limited interview filming locations inside my house, the framing/composition of Tess's main camera shot was a little questionable, which led me to mess with some things in post. I brightened the right side of the shot since it was super difficult to get rid of shadows,  which took about three masks (the plant, the wall, and the area where the plant was sitting). Then, because the right side looked huge compared to Tess, I zoomed in the bottom layer so that Tess looked bigger in the frame (and also to cover up her socks and some cables that were fully in the frame). I swear I should have taken out the aperture/ISO/shutter speed numbers at the bottom of the camera's monitor so I could have seen how obviously in the shot it was. Regardless, I think I made it look less unprofessional through some tweaking, although I really wish I could go back and do things differently. We did our best working with the space (turning the camera to the right or left would reveal parts of the house we didn't want to show, so it was difficult). Here are the before and after pictures:

    I also did some color correction for the interviews. I had mentioned this issue when I posted about the filming process, but man, lighting was a PAIN. There were so many clouds in the sky and so much sun that even with the blinds down and lights pointed at the interviewees, the lighting would change drastically. This was especially an issue for Maya, since the periods of light and shadow lasted less time and would consequently fluctuate horribly. For example, there was one answer that Maya gave in which the lighting changed five times. 

I was in pain.

    Thankfully, I was able to even things out with some key framing, which I genuinely thought could only do so much. Thank you Premiere, I worship you <3

    Last but not least, I got Kim to look for some TV show/movie excerpts for the TV screens as I edited, which honestly saved a lot of editing time. The only issue is that we had to screen record the videos since Macs do not have a built-in microphone for screen recording (instead it records the audio as it plays from the speakers, which makes it sound really muddy and gross), which for some reason made the footage super glitchy when I imported it. Thankfully it didn't cause any issues, but I was super scared that it was going to corrupt the sequence. I made a copy of the sequence I was editing and added them onto that just in case, but luckily we did not have any problems. 

    Anyway, things are moving and it's going well! I'm a little worried about time especially with so much of the masking to do once I am done choosing B-roll, but we shall persevere. The deadline is approaching soon, so I'll post updates periodically. Wish us luck!

Line-Edit: Done. Now Onto Some Cool Stuff

Hello everyone. I am EXHAUSTED.

    Let's just say that the so-called "easy" line-edit ended up being a much more challenging task than I had initially made it out to be. I went into these editing sessions with my experience with my first documentary, Counter Conformity, fully knowing I transcribed, organized, and completed the entire line edit in just a few hours. As you can probably tell, it was not this easy this time around.

    First of all, the interviews were WAY longer than in Counter Conformity. Even when chopped up and ready to be edited (I made sure to delete parts of Kim asking questions or long pauses), the interviews were either an hour or even up to an hour and a half! It was a lot to work with, especially with such a hefty topic (and of course, really well-spoken interviewees whose answers were all too beautiful to scrap). Speaking of the topic, I realized that we needed to be careful as to how we introduced and explained the male gaze, since many people do not fully understand the concept the first time it is introduced. Because of this, I managed to edit the parts about implicit bias, unconscious and conscious choices in production as well as the lack of minorities leading the film industry - the only issue was that it took a WHILE to even mention the male gaze. It took some time for me to cut it down and even longer for Kim and I to decide how to cut it down even further. Thankfully, we were able to shave off a good amount of the beginning, only leaving the crucial points in there. In the end, the line-edit ended up totaling up to around 28 minutes, which considering the original 4 hours of interview footage, was pretty manageable. I'm really excited to make a longer documentary, especially for a topic as complex as this one.

    Also, since Kim was already over, she worked on the magazine article and finalized the social media, allowing me to test out the masking process for the TVs. I tried it on a few clips and it is looking like the Ultra Key effect on Premiere Pro (especially with the masking option on the effect itself) will work well. 

*Note: The Ultra Key effect is what is used to "key out" a certain color from a video. You basically apply it onto a clip, select the color you want to remove, and boom! The sections of the frame that contain that specific shade become transparent. For those that were wondering, yes - this is the effect used on green screens, since you would simply key out the green, leaving you with the transparent background and allowing you to put your subject wherever you please. When doing this with the TVs, I was basically masking out the shade of the screen that way the linear and static textures would remain, but I would be able to place the movie excerpts below in their own layer. Hopefully that made sense...

Anyway, now that I've sort of explained what this effect is, here is a picture of me trying it out (I used a B-roll clip to see what footage would look like on the TVs, and notice how the TV-like texture appears to be on top of the B-roll clip, making it look realistic):

    As for the magazine article, Kim found out that a lot of docu-series tend to do simple Q&A articles in which the director or crew of a specific project get to give some behind-the-scenes information about the inception of the project idea, the creation process, and even future plans for the series. She interviewed me and began working on it. Here are some of the templates she was looking at:

    Anyway, now with a clear plan and solid foundation, it is time to get some B-roll on the timeline and get this footage rolling! I am genuinely proud of the structure and cannot wait to see how it looks like with the staged B-roll on top. It's going to be awesome.

Talk to you guys soon! 

Target Audience and Genre Research

    After such a long time of working on this documentary, I just realized I had never showed you guys what Kim and I have been basing our entire production off of. Before the project is due on Sunday, I really wanted to take the time to go over all the crucial components that not only make this documentary what it is, but also help Kim and I base our decisions off of. 

    First, let's talk about genre. As we all know, this project is a documentary; however, when speaking of genre, common tropes and important production decisions, we have to be more specific.

    There are six "documentary modes": expository, observational, participatory, performative, mockumentary, and poetic. Overall, the type of documentary we have been making has been mostly expository - but we have definitely decided to switch some things up a bit.

    You see, expository documentaries discuss a specific topic and often pose a specific argument, using cinematography and other aspects of the creation process in order to strengthen and support that point of view. Like some other types of documentaries, expository documentaries utilize indirect and maybe even direct interviews, a "voice of God" style voice-over and wide varieties of footage, whether that be stock footage, archival footage, or video captured during the creation of the doc. These documentaries can often be historical, such as The Dust Bowl (2012).

    We decided to adhere to some of these tropes (the use of interviews and supporting footage, for instance) since this would allow us to showcase others' views and experiences (especially with a topic like the male gaze) while also being selective about what was visually backing up the interviewees points. We decided to stick strictly to indirect interviews and even stray away from a voice-over, which is not super common with these types of documentaries. This is because Kim and I wanted each interviewee to be able to speak for themselves, telling their story as authentically as possible. This makes the documentary more personal, since it feels as if the interviewees are having a direct conversation with the audience.

    We also decided to capture very obviously staged B-roll in a relatively empty room with nothing but TVs, cameras, and often chairs/tables, creating a set that one would likely never encounter if not on some sort of filming set. This was done on purpose, since we can experiment even further with what we are showing (since the TVs allow us to include even more footage) and make an unnatural setting seem natural. This was done in order to accentuate the constant gaze even coming from our cameras, showing that in a world where media is continuously and excessively being created and distributed, the male gaze can be felt constantly. This incorporation of staged and stylized B-roll can be seen in other documentaries such as The Future is Fluid by Gucci, but is still relatively uncommon within the genre. Being able to challenge these tropes not only differentiates our documentary from others, but also allows Kim and I to drive the point home throughout different areas of the project.

    Up next is target audience. Knowing who your media is being directed to and basic information about these consumers can be extremely helpful in creating an effective production, distribution, and marketing plan. For this documentary, Kim and I agreed that we could like to break up our target audience into two sections: a primary and secondary target audience. Our primary target audience would be women, particularly introspective young adults (14-25) who are growing into adulthood and are curious about the effects of media on certain societal groups. Our secondary audience, however, is an extended version of this and includes two main groups: older women and younger men. Because the male gaze is something that has recently become an Internet conversation, many older women probably are not aware of this social issue nor its detrimental effects. Therefore, being able to watch and process all of this information could be extremely beneficial and eye-opening for them, even if they are not the primary audience.

    The second group is mostly made up of younger men, since they are similar in age to our primary audience (and therefore consume media similarly) and are currently growing up internalizing all of this problematic media. By watching this documentary, they could sympathize with women and be much more aware about the heavy consequences of the male gaze, hopefully pushing them to educate themselves and their peers. Both younger men and younger women heavily use digital mediums to not just communicate and consume but also to make sense of the world, which is why Kim and I will be posting on Instagram throughout the project's completion. This is one of the most widely-used social media platforms by our target audience and due to its variety of content, we can keep our followers engaged while also advocating for a larger cause.

    There are many reasons we chose these groups. Not only would it be much easier for Kim and I to create content directed toward others our age (especially since we have personal experience that could assist us in creating a better documentary), but as I mentioned earlier, the male gaze has recently become a "hot topic" online, especially the TikTok community. However, because many people have decided to use the term to describe things that do not necessarily align with the definition of the male gaze,  many newcomers to the conversation are confused, not knowing what the male gaze actually is. Therefore, this documentary could hopefully help clear some of that up, simultaneously providing some sense of comfort for those who have been greatly impacted by this issue. We hope to spread awareness not just through the documentary, but through the social media page and magazine article as well. 

    Speaking of social media, we will also be using YouTube in addition to Instagram, however only as an extra means for distribution. This is because the likelihood of someone finding our video on YouTube without any incentive is slim to none. However, it is still helpful since we can send the link around and still have non-Instagram users watch our project. Instagram, on the other hand, is our main source of communication. Here, we (mainly Kim) have been posting behind the scenes posts, information about the documentary's release, as well as some "mini lessons" from different episodes of our documentary-series, The Overlooked. This reflects a lot of the social media posts I had seen on other docu-series' social media pages, particularly the one for The Art of Design (Netflix Original). 

    Overall, we have been keeping our branding modern and simplistic, only using neutral colors (and some  accents here and there, often from the interviewees' clothing) to represent our docu-series. This has allowed us to keep our branding consistent even throughout two different episodes (the first one being Counter Conformity). Here are some screen shots for our social media page:

    Honestly, it's been great to have a partner for all of this, since we have been able to divide and conquer. Kim was Vice President for our TV production club last year so she is well acquainted with how to properly run social media accounts, plus she wants to go into journalism, so having her make the magazine article and maintain our social media presence while I mainly worry about the documentary has been great, since we're each playing to our strengths. I've been working on the doc, so I'll post some updates soon! Talk to you guys later.

Doc Spine Time

Okay guys, here's a really quick update:

    Chopping up and transcribing the remaining two interviews took a WHILE. No matter how much I tried to maximize my time, it was still really time-consuming. For those that were curious, this was my set-up:

    On one computer (my beautiful and beloved Monster), I chopped up Tess's and Maya's interview while tweaking and finalizing the transcriptions on the other. So, for instance, if Tess's answer was long (I wanted to listen to everything so I could familiarize myself with their answers), I would be fixing the format of the transcript. While an interview was exporting (since I had to transfer it onto my computer to transcribe it), I would listen to the interviews on my Mac and fix minor errors in the transcripts. Despite working 24/7, all of this took me about three or four hours. This was especially due to my Mac's incredibly slow speeds (unlike Monster, it didn't handle a large quantity of 4K footage very well).

    Regardless, I was still really happy how things turned out. I now have everything I need to begin the line-edit, which I organized neatly into folders on the hard drive. I made a "transcriptions" folder where I will be keeping each person's exported interview, transcription, and Premiere file (for the transcription). This is obviously just in case something happens, because moving forward all I will really need are the transcriptions, which I have already put into a Google document (all on the Google Drive folder Kim created for the project. Check it out!

    I also started making a list of all of the media I could get for the TVs, since I wanted to make sure I got things that correlated with what the interviewees mentioned while discussing the topic. This is what I have written down so far. I will start looking for this tomorrow and will also ask Kim for some help, that way I can start finalizing the line-edit. The things on this list are just suggestions and I will definitely be adding more to the list as I keep looking:

    I'm exhausted at the moment, but tomorrow I will begin the highlighting, re-structuring, and line-edit process - which genuinely, I am quite excited to start! I have my free hour tomorrow during 8th period, so I will definitely get some work done then. I hope to have the entire line-edit done by Tuesday, Wednesday the absolute latest! I really do not want to push things any further since I have to work on the B-roll, sound, and grading. However, I consider the line-edit the most important part of editing (and the most time-consuming one) because without a line-edit, you don't have a story, and without a story you don't have a documentary. Let's hope for the best! Hopefully I'll also get some more time in class to work on editing. Wish me luck!

Thank God for Monster

     This is probably the heftiest part of the project, or at least the one that feels like it. Ladies and gentlemen (and non-binary friends), editing has officially started.

    I will admit, I went into this fully knowing Monster #2's capabilities but MAN was I impressed when I actually saw it in action for the first time since February. Even with 4K footage, this legend was playing it back with no issues, even letting me speed things up to 2x or even 4x speed when re-listening to the interviews. There was NO LAG. I swear it was probably one of the sexiest things I have ever seen. By the end of this project, I will surely be converted to a Windows user.

    During my free hour, I proceeded to line up all the interview clips together (we couldn't edit the interviews in one take since my A/C kept turning on), syncing the audio, chopping them up so that we only had the parts of the interviewees talking, and then getting them ready for transcriptions. I decided to not begin transcribing yet since chopping up the clips was taking longer than I thought, but I did decide to do a very small yet important thing: rename clips. This was for two main reasons:

    1. Staying organized and being able to identify what a clip is from the name alone

    2. Preventing any linking issues: For Counter Conformity, we often had clips that had the same name (for example two files named "C0001") because we were using two different cameras that both started at C0001 and continued to add on as more clips were recorded. When I was trying to export the final version, my computer unlinked everything and accidentally re-linked every edit to the incorrect clip. It was such a painful experience - definitely one I would not like to experience again.

    I decided to follow a simple formula, mainly for the interview clips. Before the clip number, I would add three letters:

    - S, M, or T for Sabrina, Maya, or Tess

    - I for interview clip

    - A or B for A cam (main camera, wider shot) and B cam (second camera, tighter side shot)

    This definitely helped me stay organized as well as gave me a lot of peace of mind. Not to toot my own horn, but it looks pretty awesome now:

    After getting Sabrina's interview ready, I began looking for the transcription tool on Premiere that I have been using for both of the documentaries I've made so far, especially since it's so useful. To my horror, I realized that Monster did not have the version of Premiere 2021 that had it, leaving me to resort to my own computer for transcriptions. I exported the chopped up interview (about an hour of footage), imported it to my computer, opened up a Premiere 2022 project and began transcriptions. I thought that it was going to take a very long time (especially due to the length and quality of the footage), but surprisingly, it was relatively quick (about 25 minutes). Here is a screenshot of Premiere while it was working its magic earlier today:

    After this, I had to correct some minor transcription errors (words that were slightly off, grouping sentences into each answer so it was more organized, etc.) which took about 45 minutes, but overall it was really smooth. Having interviewees that speak clearly was definitely an advantage. After this, I exported the transcription as a .txt file and saved it to my computer. This is what it looks like (notice the time stamps and everything for each answer):

Man. Isn't it beautiful?

    Anyway, I am now working on Maya and Tess's interviews. I hope to get these transcriptions done and carry out my usual line-edit workflow, which includes the following:

    - Pasting all of the transcriptions onto a Google document 

    - Going through and highlighting the best answers, often creating a more revised version of the structure and color coding each part of the structure in order to know where to put each answer, or part of an answer

    - Put each part with similar colors together 

    - Re-order each answer within each section of the documentary in order for things to flow well

    - Grab this skeleton of the documentary and start putting those clips onto the timeline (this is where the timestamps at the top of each answer get really handy!)

    - Edit out parts and overall work on the flow of the line-edit until each interview leads into the other, creating a cohesive narrative that follows a logical and easily-comprehensible structure

    - Finalize the line-edit (I usually get someone else's opinion on it since they have a fresh mind when watching it) and begin adding B-roll

    I hope to get the line-edit done as soon as possible! I definitely have a lot of work ahead of me but honestly, I'm willing to put in the work. Kim and I had a talk the other day and decided that because we only have one computer and our schedules don't really line up too much (especially because she has been working a lot), that I would handle editing and she would handle the social media and magazine article. Obviously we will help each other when we both have the chance, but honestly this was such a relief because I know she knows her stuff when it comes to social media (she was Vice President of our TV production club last year and had to run the "socials" for it) and I already have a relatively fast-paced, established workflow for documentary editing. I just hope that we are still able to collaborate as much as possible especially with a lot of the important final decisions coming up soon (ex: documentary/docu-series name, minor graphics, etc.). I'm sure we will be okay especially since we work really well together, but we just have to make sure we stay on track and do whatever we can to make this documentary the best it can be. I'll post updates as soon as I can.