The document discusses issues with past expert interviews and plans for future interviews. It summarizes: 1) The first interview with Kevin had some problems, including him facing the wrong way and unfavorable objects in the background. 2) The second interview with Julie was difficult to schedule but eventually worked out well, though the presenter was missing. 3) The third interview with Sonia went smoothly with good lighting, sound and information, though one comment couldn't be used. 4) Company interviews are still being pursued but the documentaries requirements will be met with the past two interviews.

1. UPDATE AND REFLECTION ON
THE EXPERT INTERVIEWS WE
ARE CHOOSING OR HAVE
CHOSEN
14/12/16

2. It has already been briefly talked about in the previous blog post but when reviewing the footage that we got from our
interview with Kevin we realised there was quite a few issues.
One major issue there was with the interview was that we placed Kevin in an unconventional position where he was facing
the wrong way towards the camera. He was looking towards the right (where our presenter was placed) of the camera, this
wasn’t conventional and looked very odd.
If we were to do this again we would either change the venue of the interview as the room we chose wasn’t in the best
condition for an interview and we would take our time in organising the interview as we had to rush Kevin’s interview for a
second time due to situations that happened within our college that was taken out of our hands.
Another issue that was wrong with this particular interview was that there was some bad mise-en-scen in the background of
the shot that was wrong and highly unprofessional.
Next time we would make sure that there was no objects that would distract the viewer. We will make sure we have a clear
check of the area surrounding the camera in order to avoid these mistakes in the future.
EXPERT INTERVIEW 1- KEVIN DOHERTY
Unconventionally
looking to the
right of the
camera leaving
too much space
on the left.
Poor mise-en-
scen with other
camera in the
background.
The separate messages rearranging the interview

3. EXPERT INTERVIEW 2- JULIE MAITLAND
This interview took quite a while arranging with it being quite difficult to find the correct time in our timetables as well as
Julie’s. There was two planned Friday meetings in which Julie for whatever reason, couldn’t make but there were also times
where we couldn't agree to arrangements we initially made which made things quite difficult. However, we did eventually
arrange a time which suited both parties and the results of the interview were quite successful.
During the interview, we did have to manage the lighting with the window being directly behind her which we handled
quite well by closing the blind.
There were no real problems that occurred whilst filming this interview. The only thing that was different was that our
presenter, Josh couldn’t make the re-arranged interview which means that when our interview is shown on our
documentary we will just have to show Julie talking which wouldn’t be a problem as this is conventionally seen in other
documentaries. The presenter doesn’t always have to be on screen.
These are messages that were exchanged between our group and Julie that highlight the struggles we had arranging this
interview
As can be seen, there were no real problems with this interview

4. EXPERT INTERVIEW 3- SONIA WOOD
There was no real problems with the arrangements of this interview, it was straightforward and it was arranged quickly and
efficiently which was a positive due to the problems we had arranging other expert interviews.
Again, for this interview there wasn’t any major mistakes made. The lighting and sound quality was fine and Sonia provided
us with some excellent information.
The mise-en-scen was particularly strong in this interview with the mug (prop) stating something about equality which is
something that certainly coincides with our documentary about LGBT where we are trying to convince people that equality is
lacking throughout Media.
During the interview, Sonia made a lot of interesting points and even included examples of where she sees LGBT
representation improving in her everyday life. She did however say something in the interview that she told us we couldn’t
used for our finalised documentary. This was disappointing as it was a very good piece of detailed information however it is
the right decision made as it could have possibly affected certain people within our college.
This prop has the
word ‘Equali-tea’
which links in well
with our
documentary
The one message sent and received highlights the efficiency in which our interview
was arranged with.

5. EXPERT COMPANY INTERVIEWS
We haven’t yet received anything in regards to footage from any professional companies despite some suggesting that they
will help us however, there are still ongoing discussions in which we hope will result in some decent recordings for us to
edit. If this doesn’t work out though, with the Julie and Sonia interviews being successful, we have met the requirements of
at least 2 expert interviews in our finalised documentary. We have further since, sent more emails to these people (as well
as the ones shown above) in order to try and get a definitive answer however we have failed to receive a reply which is
disappointing but we can still have a successful documentary without them.