Group video interview: reality check!

A different type of interview that had to be attempted before the actual conference was the multi-person interview. Three fellow CSIR colleagues, one a conference delegate and two others attending as well as serving on the SAOUG committee, were willing to assist me with this venture. This impromptu interview, although quite informative in the way that it reflects the different expectations and topics of interest even to librarians/information specialists working in the same company, revealed a few technical problem areas that I hope to improve upon come conference time: 

• Angle of camera: the camera was placed too low and should have been headheight instead. This error resulted in the shoes and legs being the closest visible part of the people being interviewed. 
• Field of view: in my opinion, too much of the subjects interviewed can be seen. With face plus upper torso being the preferred displayed sections, zooming or even moving the camera closer to the subjects would have cut out the lower half of the subjects.
• Sound quality could have been better. Not only was there background noise coming from the adjacent kitchen area, but the camera should be placed closer to the subjects. This observation will probably prove to be an invaluable item of knowledge when conducting an interview during breaks at the conference: there WILL be background noise: isolate your subject or move closer to him. In stark contrast to this, the interviewer was too close to the camera. Comfortable listening to the video clip would then entail constantly adjusting the volume setting to a satisfactory level.
• Another aspect, not necessarily an error, was the final length of the video clip. Although only two questions were asked, using three subjects meant that the clip ended up being longer than 3 minutes. I now know that one can to estimate the expected length of a typical interview to be approximately 30 seconds per response per subject.  

In retrospect I would say that I definitely prefer conducting a one-on-one interview. Interviews are shorter, and retakes would take less time. Doing a one-person interview would also mean that less time of the subject is being used. Furthermore: I find it easier to approach a single person than trying to get a group together. On the technical side of things it is easier to frame the shot, gauge the best distance for volume, as well as correct angle, when conducting an interview with a single subject only.

5 days to go : Interviewing practice

To further hone my interviewing skills I had decided on interviewing a few CSIR employees who would either be presenters or delegates at the conference next week. This was easier said than done: a few of the people asked refused to be interviewed, and then one of my delegate interviewees had to attend to a sudden medical emergency on the day of our scheduled interview!

I am quite pleased with the interview done with Natalie Bowers, the youngest presenter at the conference next week. Her paper/presentation deals with the Virtual Research Environment and we were both happy with our third take: I was planning on following Natalie's road to the conference, also on attending her dry run presentation at the CSIR, but will be unable to attend due to conference attendance. I was also interested in interviewing her after the conference presentation; hoping this will still realize as it would be interesting showing a young presenter's conference preparation, actual conference presentation as well as immediate on-the-spot interview after her talk.

The camera was not handheld during the interview, but balanced on a stack of books. A definite improvement in the stability of the picture when compared to the video interview on training day can be noticed. The shakes at the end of the interview will be eliminated by using a tripod, as is planned for the longer conference interviews.

Reflections on training: the video interview

An activity enjoyed by many social reporters but quite difficult to capture in presentable format, is the short video interview. During training day, I decided to do a short interview (2 minutes, 5 questions maximum) interview with our convenor, Elmi.
This turned out to be much harder than anticipated. Finding a quiet corner with minimal noise/visual distractions was easy enough......and this might not be the case at the conference. Our first take was nearly three minutes long, so we decided to do a shorter second take using only three questions instead of five. The second take was ruined by the interviewer when an %$#*&!! was uttered during an unexpected break. The third take was presentable, but needed tweaking. The fourth take was just right: lengthwise, contentwise and also visually up to standard. The use of a tripod-held camera instead on being handheld by the interviewer, would have resulted in an even better clip. Further difficulties experienced resulted in the following hints:
*Have questions ready in large print easily readable by interviewer
*If possible, do a practice run
*Try to mount camera on tripod or gorrila pod, or have a third party operate it
*Interview is much easier if interviewer's hands are camera free
*Interviewer to be ready with next question at all times! An answer might be much shorter than anticipated