Feedback On My Rough Cut

Although the original feedback for our video had been corrected in my most recent cut, I requested feedback from my peers and found a few areas which could still use some brushing up.

• People liked the shots of the dogs. To be honest I'm not sure where they went, I do not remember taking them out, but I will gladly invite them back in for my final cut.
• There was a close up, low angle shot of Josh lip syncing for the lyrics at 2:35 which was left out of this cut, but apparently it was good and should be used in the final cut.
• The blur effect at 1:09 did not go down as well as expected. It was supposed to portray that Josh was tipsy from the alcohol but it ended up looking like a poorly focused shot in actual fact.
• Josh appears to poorly lip sync during the booth shots at 2:39 and 2:42 and at the start of the 2:47 shot, so I plan to cut out the first two, and only keep the end of the 2:47 shot.

I plan to act upon this feedback before my final cut, and possibly make other changes which I feel are appropriate along the way.

Rough Cut - My Own Edit

Although my group and I have already finished a rough cut of our video, I have taken that cut and edited some of the footage on my own now. I have changed or edited around 25% of the footage from the original rough cut. Some differences are noticable whereas others are less obvious, such as minor effects being added or some shots coming in slightly earlier or later.

Qualitative Feedback

I asked some peers and classmates for feedback on our second rought cut of our video so that we could ammend anything that people felt did not go well or looked un-professional or out of place. This also allowed us to find out what aspects of our video people enjoyed the most so that we could exploit these shots or editing methods even more in our final cuts. Although we came out with much more praise than criticism we understand that this may be because people don't want to be rude, and we are not under any impression that all the work is done because people already like the video.

The Good

• People liked the extreme close-up of Josh's eyes at 0:05 as it looked professional.
• The high-angle shot at 0:18-0:20 followed by the low-angle shot from 0:20-0:23 praised as it showed a variety of shots.
• The very quick longshot of Josh at 0:24 was also singled out as it was cut to the beat nicely.
• Josh was also praised for his performance in this cut. We anticipated that there was a lack of enthusiasm or creativity in the performance in our first cut so we were glad that this improvement was picked up on in the second cut, for example with Josh's dancing at 0:54
• The shot of Josh in the music booth at 1:03 and 1:14 also went down well as people liked the way the camera was shaking and the performance was becoming more energetic as the song also became more intense at this stage.
• Josh drinking at 1:09 produced a few laughs, as intended.
• We were also told that the longshot of the dogs at 1:31 went well with the beat.
• The very short shot of Josh jumping a fence at 1:38 was also singled out as a good shot.

The Not So Good

• Concerns were raised about the lip syncing during the close-up of Josh at 0:36 to 0:38.
• The shot from 2:07 to 2:14 was criticised for being possibly too long, and would look better with another quick shot in the middle at around 2:10.
• People said that as the outro plays from around 2:50 to 3:10 people wouldn't mind seeing Josh dancing again.
• Obviously concerns were also raised about the general missing spaces in footage but we fully intend to fill all the gaps!

Rough Cut 2

This is an updated edit of our video. In this cut we start to get an idea of what the video may look like, although still about a third of the footage is yet to be either filmed or inserted, and we have not added effects or advanced editing techniques yet. We re-shot some footage as we felt Iceburg needed to perform with more energy, but we feel that he is coming along well now. Also, I feel that my longshot of the dogs really adds a new dimension to it. You know it makes sense!

Clarification

Although it may seem odd that we have a track called 'Rizz' on our tracklisting, and our track features the words 'It's Rizz!' while we claim our artist's name is Iceburg, we have a good cover story for this. Many rappers have alternative names, for example UK rapper Giggs is also known as 'Hollowman', and Eminem of course is also known as 'Slim Shady', we are simply promoting the fact that Iceburg is also known as 'Rizz'.

Research On Record Label

The record label I have researched is the one we chose for our artist; Atlantic Records. We chose Atlantic Records as similar artists to ours are signed to them such as Ed Sheeran and Plan B. It was a toss up between Atlantic Records and Island Records (Rizzle Kicks' real label) but we chose the former as they seemed to have less big artists, which means they would concentrate more on the ones they do have.

Atlantic Records' parent company is Warner Music Group, whom are widely seen as the second biggest record label in the world and are constantly in contention with the other 2/3 major labels; Sony Music Entertainment, Universal Music Group, and EMI who prior to late 2011 would be regarded as one of the major labels, but maybe not now, as the latest yet to be approved list just contains Sony, Warner and Universal respectively.

Atlantic Records is an American label founded in 1947 by Ahmet Ertegun and Herb Abramson. It was in 1967 that Warner became their parent company. The label are most famous for being host to many major rock acts over the years such as Led Zeppelin and The Rolling Stones, and also helping the evolution of African-American music, as they held such talents as Ben E. King (best known for 'Stand By Me') and Ray Charles (best known for 'Hit The Road, Jack') in the prime of their careers. Currently their most popular artists are of the urban genre, as their website mainly promotes rappers; Wiz Khalifa (similar style to our artist) and T.I as well as RnB star Trey Songz.

Just To Let Y'all Know

There seem to be rumours flying around that I don't do any work in media. Okay then. I've done 43 legitimate posts, some containing up to 3 post-worths work. Other people I have spoken to estimate to have done under 30 posts. So why does my name keep cropping up? Also, just to clear it up, I completed every task seen on my blog. There is one analysis task of 4 album covers which I completed with Josh, each of us doing 50% of the work. There are two presentations on here which are credited to other people (Manan and Josh respectively). Their names are on it because it was done on their account. In actual fact Josh and I worked on that presentation together. He did 50% of it and I did 50%. The one credited to Manan was a task which we all actively participated in. Josh came up with and planned the image change, I took the and uploaded the pictures, Manan wrote it up on his account. So don't be thinking that I stole these pieces of work, I fully participated in all tasks. Cool, safe.

"Problem? I didn't say there was a problem." - Jme, 2011.