Jumping off to the next stage of this assessment, one of the requirements that were pointed out in-class was the interactivity feature our assessment #3 project has to present. This feature required was introduced in the context of a new software introduced to the Thinking in Fragments studio called, Korsakow.

In short, Korsakow is a software created by Florian Thalhofer that helps filmmakers to produce interactive online documentaries or projects through authoring database narratives. The only difference is that the software is created to show and tell a story through the interactivity of modular fragments that are based on a particular theme. However, unlike any films – Kosakow encourages filmmakers to explore storytelling in various perspectives and has an option to produce projects or films that do not have a particular begin, middle and end.

As Anna Wiehl (2016) puts it, “Korsakow documentaries are based on evolving modular storytelling and intimate, personal narratives…”.  

She describes the software as having “multiple destinations”. Thus, produce “documentary arguments (that) do not develop in a pluri-linear way”. Instead, “they form associational networks, ‘potentially enormous sets which in turn express a milieu, mood or even constellation of views upon an idea, topic or event'” (Wiehl, 2016).

Although, Wiehl (2016) perception of Korsakow was difficult for me to understand as it was almost impossible reading the concept of the software whilst, imagining what it actually looks like, I became more aware of the means of modularity in this particular way of storytelling and how my group might incorporate it in our project.

After being taught in class the demo version of the software and as someone, who is interested in learning new technological software I found the complexity of Korsakow very appealing. Unlike, any media or editing software such as Premiere or Final Cut that I’ve used before, Korsakow gives creative freedom to both producer and “user” (the one interacting or viewing a Korsakow project).

In doing so, the producer of a Korsakow project has to design several SNUs (Small Narrative Units) in relation to, it’s in and out keywords. SNUs, as explained in class and through Matt Soar’s (2014) article, are media fragments which are usually video sequences that have a particular in-keywords and out-keywords. Soar (2014) states that a Korsakow project will be viewed depending on the SNU’s in and out-keywords. This is because a Korsakow project can be of “absolute linearity” – where the project lies only in one particular order or “complete randomness” – where the project is viewed in multiple perceptions.

Furthermore, the keywords that describe a SNU cannot be seen by the user or viewer. But, it is designed in a way where an in-keyword connects with the out-keyword.  Thus, an in-keyword would describe what the media or ‘SNU’ is and an out-keyword would describe what other SNUs it would find.

When the SNUs are played, the way in which the out-keyword that connects to the in-keyword of other SNUs or fragments would be displayed in a form of previews/thumbnails. These thumbnails or previews are basically a glimpse of other SNUs or fragments the viewer/user can engage with. These SNUs are not particularly connected to anything other than its’ keywords that define it and where it goes through the project. Thus, among many things, SNUs, keywords and previews/thumbnails are characteristics of what makes Korsakow different.

It’s different in a way where we not only cannot edit in the software but, it’s better in a way where it complements what we usually have produced on Premiere to a completely interactive and new project – where it allows the audience or “user” to also be involved. Among many things, I also learned that the importance of a story to possess authenticity in fragments (thus, modular) as a Korsakow filmmaking concept of interactive storytelling that I have never really learned before.

From this new knowledge upon Korsakow, Sem, Samantha, Meita and I discussed the ways in which we can incorporate our developing, thriving and rough draft theme, ’emotion’ into an engaging interactive story. We came across the idea of emotion that goes parallel with colour and isolation.

We discussed the way we might utilise Korsakow as a tool for viewers to navigate our project in the basis of how they interpret the colours and visuals and what it might entail, without directly telling them what it might be. Thus, emphasising on how the users or viewers interact and make sense of our project in their own perspective or way.

However, being quite unsure and hesitant towards what this will lead to, I was excited to explore what my group and I will end up creating with Korsakow. We ended the week to research further on some of the Korsakow projects Hannah gave us and other inspirations that might help us to think on the suitable approach we might take for this assessment.

REFERENCES:

Wiehl, A 2016, ‘Database aesthetics, modular storytelling, and the intimate small worlds of Korsakow documentaries’, NECSUS Journal 11 July, viewed 9 April 2018, <https://necsus-ejms.org/korsakow-documentaries/>.

Wiehl, A 2016, ‘Database aesthetics, modular storytelling, and the intimate small worlds of Korsakow documentaries’, NECSUS Journal 11 July, viewed 9 April 2018, <https://necsus-ejms.org/korsakow-documentaries/>.