Editing Blog: Finding New Software

     My trial period of the editing software I was using, Movavi, has ended. This isn't such a big problem because my re-edits have already been done. However, if I need to edit something after my re-shoots, I won't be able to. Additionally, because of the coronavirus pandemic, my school has been closed until April 15th. Therefore, I don't have access to the school's editing program, Pinnacle Studios. I am left without access to any editing programs that I am familiar with. I decided that I have to look online for a new one. I looked up "free editing program no watermark" and went through multiple editing programs. While all of them were free, most of them had limits, such as not being able to export, that I wouldn't be able to work around. Eventually, I found VSDC.

   VSDC's UI, at first glance, is very cluttered and overwhelming. There are a lot of different tools and icons without labels. Additionally, the preview screen is in the middle of the work space instead of in the top right corner. However, VSDC has a lot of features that weren't in Pinnacle or Movavi. For example, on the right there is a list of sliders that allow me to adjust not only the brightness and contrast, but the temperature, blurriness, and saturation of the shot. There's also a rotate tool, which I don't remember being in Movavi. There are some other features I won't need, such as a tool that creates shapes, but are interesting to have nonetheless.

   The text feature is very hard to use. Because of how many things are on the screen at once, it's difficult to figure out how to edit the font, size, and color of the text, let alone how to add animations to it. Eventually, after closing multiple unnecessary windows, I found the text editor was at the top of the screen. I added text to the intro that would help give a little more context and mystery to my film. Overall, VSDC has a steep learning curve because of the sheer amount of features it has, but once I figured out how to access what I needed, it's a very helpful program.

Re-Edit Blog: Fixing the Story

     Now that I have reflected on my peer review, I have to re-shoot and re-edit my final task before I send it to be graded. I have decided to re-edit before I re-shoot my final task. If I edit what I have first, I will be able to see what I can fix through editing and what I have to re-shoot completely. For example,  I thought the shot of the boots was a little too dark. I am going to look through Movavi's (the editing program I am using) features to see if there is a way for me to adjust the brightness without making the shot look bad. If there is one, I will not have to re-shoot that shot. If there isn't a brightness option or I don't like how it turns out, I will have to re-shoot it. I believe that this will be the most efficient way to ensure that my film is completed before the April 9th deadline.

    While editing, I kept the biggest problem I am facing in mind: the story isn't clear. I realized that I can't really fix the story problems through re-shooting without going in a wildly different direction from what I storyboarded. I have to be able to tell the story solely by making smart edits. I had the idea to make text appear during the establishing shot that helps explain the plot a little more. The opening shot now makes it explicitly clear that the setting is an abandoned area in a redacted location. I think this will not only help serve the story, but will also add a more ominous mood to my film. Because I am adding more text to the film, I had to edit the pre-existing credits to appear at different times. I don't want to have too much text on screen at a time. The credits in the beginning, such as the production studio, now disappear faster.

   I made many minor changes in addition to the more major and obvious ones. For example, the audio is louder overall. I changed the script slightly to explain the story more, which meant I had to replace the old voice over with the new one. I had to cut up the voice over to be in sync with the robotic voice. I brightened up shots that I thought were hard to see, such as the aforementioned boots scene.

volume before editing

volume after editing

Reflecting on My Peer Review

    I was not able to film this week because I had volunteer work on Saturday and I was busy on Sunday. Therefore, I decided to reflect on the review that my peers had given me. Two members of the group that reviewed me were absent, so I only received two reviews. Both reviews said that my final task was the correct length. The transitions were clean and my titles were in the correct order. The only shots I missed were a pan, a tilt, and an action match. What surprised me the most was that both reviewers thought my lighting was ok. While editing, I personally thought it was too dark and was nervous that most of my film wouldn't be able to be seen. However, both reviewers noted that they liked the mood the lighting set. I think I will try to brighten my footage slightly through editing or by filming before the sun sets. If the darker footage looks better or the mood is shifted too much, I will not replace it.

   Another comment I got that I didn't expect was that the sound was low. One of the reviewers mentioned that they couldn't hear the voice over. When I was listening to my film, it sounded fine. Only one of the two people who reviewed it mentioned that it was quiet, though, so it may have been just them. Regardless, I am going to increase the volume of everything when I do my re-edits. The biggest suggestion the reviewing group gave me was to make the story clearer. I did expect this suggestion and I'm not sure how I am going to fix it. In retrospect, the pitch is the source of this problem. I picked a time that was hard to film at and a concept even harder to successfully convey in just 2 minutes. I'm not sure how different from my pitch I'm allowed to make my final task. I am going to be putting most of my effort into figuring out how to fix the story, as everything else I do relies on the story.

One of the peer reviews I received

Peer Review Blog

    On Monday, I peer reviewed group 8's final task. Technically, it was really good. The sound was clear and consistent. I didn't have to turn up my volume to understand anything and there were no jarring, sudden noises. The lighting was, for the most part, not too intense. I could easily see what was going on in the video. However, in one scene, the back lighting was a little too strong and made the focus of the shot dark and hard to see. The transitions were clean and varied. They also had a variety of different shots which made the film visually interesting. The "directed by" credit wasn't at the very end, though. It came up a while before the film actually ended.

   What I liked most about the film was the acting. I thought the actors did a good job giving the characters personalities. I understood the relationship between the characters and how it lead to the conflict of the film. I thought about the suggestion I wrote on the paper and decided that the ending wasn't actually a problem. Not understanding the ending could just be a personal problem. Plus, it did leave me wanting to see more, so it's not entirely a bad thing. Instead, I would suggest changing the scene where the younger sister is hit by a car. The sped-up footage looks out of place compared to the footage immediately before and after it. I think this could be changed by making the shot shorter or having the actor run faster. 

Front side of peer review sheet

Back side of peer review sheet