Clark's Approach to Making Audio-Visual Presentations

- for what it's worth!

Notes by Dr David F Clark OBE ARPS

This article is from the September 1998 issue of the Scottish Photographic Federation "Bulletin" newsletter, and I thank editor Iain lang for his kind permission to use it here.

First, it's important to point out that I am not wholly preoccupied with Making "competitive" AV sequences; much of my work consists of shows of up to 40 minutes. I feel that the duration of a show must be such that it fully reflects its subject and if the topic requires 22 or 35 minutes, then so be it. For example, I have made a record of the construction of the last large (68ft) wooden fishing boat in Scotland, from selection of the wood to the launch and fitting-out.

The techniques used and illustrated and the history of the design would be neither reasonably nor adequately covered in 12 minutes.

Similarly, an AV tutorial on watercolour techniques would be unduly rushed Were it to be crushed into a 10-minute format.

Second, the fact that two or more projectors are being used in an AV show lends itself to the exploitation of dissolves rates, half-returns and the use of the "third image". Since the last is a phenomenon which is only tenuously part of reality and is created only in this medium, I set great store by its effects and usage. Certainly there are some types of show which do not require this effect, but where it it appropriate then serious consideration must be given to what kind of image is to be created. It must retain meaning and context and it must maintain the continuity between the original images. Colin Balls has written very informatively in his book "The A-V of Slide-Tape" on the importance of guarding against a clash of horizon lines, areas of light and dark tone in various areas of the slides being dissolved, and so on.

Third, as a show is "Audio-Visual", then the visual and the auditory components must be a coherent unit and have some complementary features if the overall effect is to be enhanced. I recently saw a show in which very intriguing and colourful images were utterly ruined by the choice of music which was completely out of sympathy with the chosen pictures and, worse still, had been recorded at a level which filled the room with a hideously distorted cacophony. Similarly, the script should enhance the intention of the show, give information which is not already there in the pictures, and be pleasantly audible.

So, what comes first? In my own case, the idea for a show undergoes a gestation of varying length in which a review of the available slides (mainly, but not necessarily all, shot with the show in mind), the kind of commentary and its content being planned, and the possible musical/SFX components to be preferred, all whizz around in my mind. The general "shape" of the show then slowly begins to emerge.

The sequence of activities in which I have indulged over the past six or seven years has now become a pattern. I review the slides on a large, home-made lightbox which can accommodate 110 slides at once.

While a loose story line will have formed in my head before-hand, there is left in me enough of the photographer to ensure that the "visual flow" of images is easy on the eye and dissolves do not just juxtapose harshly irregular or tonally unsympathetic slides - unless there be a specific purpose in so doing.

I therefore try out lots of dissolves using three or four slides at a time in the projectors until I'm happy with what I've got. Incidentally, it is sometimes possible to get "happy accidents" in cases where one might not have thought of juxtaposing a certain pair of slides - just as in water-colour painting one can be richly rewarded by a flukey run of paint which, though unintentional, gives a marvellous unexpected effect. Clearly, all the slides comprising the full show must be in a sequences which retains meaning and logic, but if the changes disturb the eye then something is lost.

At this stage, I run through the whole show in the projectors a number of times until all the dissolves, half-returns and so on are well ingrained. I then record the sync track (on track 4) and lo and behold, I have a repeatable, accurately-timed set of slides from which to work out the timings of my background music, SFX and commentary. So I sit down with a sheet or two of lined foolscap and play through the sequence, writing down:

'00" Tape start 0'09" Music starts and first slide 0'14" Cloudy mountains ... (let's say) 0'22" Ship at anchor 0'28" Misty hillside ... (etc until, say.... ) 0'13" Sunset 0'17" Subtitle "End" 0'22" Music stops and last slide closes. Thus, every slide is briefly described with its timings, on- and off-screen. This allows me to fit appropriate music to the images and lets me know how to edit the sound, say, 8 bars from such-and-such a piece, followed by 32 bars of such-and-such a symphony, starting at, say, 05'43" and finishing at 07'19".

The same principle allows me to be aware of what time is available for any verse/commentary to accompany it. Because a story line will have suggested itself to me as I have so often reviewed the slides in their new sequence, this is the stage at which I write the commentary, write my own verse or quote the verse of others, etc, placing phrases and/or sentences appropriately in the sequences timings. In the past, I was often too lazy to write out the script.

The inevitable result was that stumbles and hesitations crept into the final dictation into the microphone, requiring multiple re-taping. Writing it all down allows one to time it exactly and I write it all down with the beginning of the line indicating the minute and second when speech starts. One is also much less likely to fluff one's lines or timing.

Perhaps one of the most enjoyable parts of creating a sequences is the listening to all kinds of music over the weeks and months beforehand until the "right stuff" comes up or can be cobbled together on to a suitable tape from a multiplicity of sources. I pre-edit the music from discs and tapes, even from old vinyls, on to a separate tape which should finally contain a straight run of music starting on the right second and ending on the right second. That can be then placed on tracks 1 and 2 of, say, a Fostex tape-deck, together with any sound effects on track 3, prior to mixing it all down on to the tape which already holds the synchronising pulses on track 4. All that is then required is a certain sleight of hand to switch on the "Play" on the Fostex simultaneously with the "Record" on the Imatronic or other tape-recorder.

Needless to say, one should ensure that the lead-in tapes on both cassettes are of the same length. You can check this by playing each one separately and starting your stop-watch as you press the button, then noting the seconds that elapse e before sound emerges in each case. It is then just a case of allowing the appropriate asynchrony when you press both recorders' buttons. You can then concentrate on editing the mix-down process by twiddling appropriately on the separate track volume knobs on the Fostex so that, for example, the music is appropriately muted during speech.

Finally, all that done, comes the moment of truth. You rewind the master tape you have just mixed down on to and, projectors on, you set the new sequence in motion. Oh, Happy Day! - it all works first time! - or not! You know you'll be re-making the sequence one day anyway. It reminds me of an episode when a good friend of mine who, like me, essays water-colour occasionally. He was labouring away on the foreshore of a quaint wee fishing village when a hoary local emerged to scrutinise his work for a lengthy period, finally turning away with, "Ach, weel, ye'll nae be carin' onywye!"