The official White House Instagram account put out a short video recently of President Trump announcing the push on his new tax reform plan. The video production team seemed to make some unusual choices in the filming and cutting of the video. YouTuber Josh Enobakhare for Olufemii Tutorials analyzes those decisions and whether they helped or hindered the President's message.
Enobakhare makes it clear at the outset that this is not a critique of the President (though he does seem to be speaking too loudly), but rather an analysis of the camera crew and the video production. The choices they made created an awkward presentation and took away from the message. Enobakhare analyzes the two camera angles the crew used and opines that they would have been better off sticking to one main camera. The video team cuts between both angles throughout the video but they're both medium to close-up shots, roughly the same distance from Trump. This is unusual as the more universal approach in these situations is to cut between a wide angle and closer up shot. Secondly, one of the angles is to the side which makes sense in an interview but doesn't work well in this case. Instead, the crew should have stuck to one camera with Trump talking directly to the audience.
What do you think? Did you find the cuts distracting? What changes would you recommend?
Or should be doing it.
I hope you realize, by including a pro-Trump message, you're inviting anti-Trump rebuttals. This shouldn't be a political advocacy site.
Knowing his micromanaging style I would assume Trumpski himself planned the look and feel of the entire production because he is, you know, an expert in media.
Trumpski .... hahaha lmao
I just found it creatively funny.
and were off………….
Terrible editing. It felt like some action movies where there's a talking scene but they're trying to make it more dynamic by cutting between various camera angles, erratically.
Thanks for the detailed and insightful comment! Very interesting and much appreciated
This has become a political rant site..seems on one hand the topics appear purposely selected to encourage same, and then people can't get beyond the politics and discuss the purported topics...getting a bit frustrating..
Trying to be objective, how do you judge the footage? Trump is a media person, so surely has a say, and then how might effectiveness be measured? Impact on supporters, opponents? At the end, it's all so much nonsense to analyze
I found the setup to be poorly miced as well. Too much ambient echo and not enough focus on the voice. Was a lav mic not an option, or did the crew just use built-in audio on the cameras (perhaps Nikon D750s, which their older firmware left in auto gain simply caused most clips to be overdriven)?
Nothing was mentioned of the composition of the side angle, either. The cropping has him talking to a virtual wall.
The whole feel would have been more genuine if he had walked in with a wide shot during the introduction, then either remain standing or take a seat which moves into a close-up shot. There might not have been time for that if the goal was to keep it at 30 seconds.