ASSESSMENT

W4: reassessing PB1

Bogost’s second chapter was illuminating and it’s helped me understand just a little more about what we’re trying to achieve with this studio. That’s always difficult to apply at the time, but at least I can go back and reassess. On that note:

Aw, it’s not that bad. I just wanted an excuse to ping Clueless, which is going to be my fun film of the week.

What I realise, though, listening back to my work, it that it’s so so so narrative-heavy. It would’ve been so easy to strip it down, if I’d known at the time. There are some good little elements to it, and my thinking is there at least, but Ellie of a fortnight ago really needed to put that into a story.

But that’s okay. It’s alright to not have a handle on complex and confusing theory by the second week. I’ve learnt from it, and that’s propelling me forward. The work I did in the group is already so far removed from PB1, and it’s been two-odd weeks. That’s something to be proud of.

This whole degree’s been great on a whole to teach me that it really, really is the only way to learn well. Fucking up gets me to a better place, and it’s very liberating. That freedom is diminished by the 70%-average qualifier for entry into my master’s hanging over my head, but whatever.

(Not whatever. I’m terrified. Let’s not talk about it.)

Week Two: aftermath

What went well? How can I build on it?

  • Good ideas! I’m really happy with my visual representation  — in theory, anyway. They were varied; I didn’t feel like I was repeating myself. I gave myself a lot of time to think about it which I plan to continue — it’s important to respect the abstract stage as much as the planning or making.
  • I’m proud of the patience I demonstrated with the found images. That stuff takes forever and usually I avoid it. I’m glad I dived into something I knew was going to be a bit of a drag and, though it’s far from polished, it’s probably my favourite section of the three. The lesson? Stop avoiding things you think are going to be boring.

What went poorly? How can I do it differently next time?

  • Ellie: you’re not a filmmaker. At least you’ve made peace with it. But there’s no harm in getting a little sharper. You must be better than first year, at least in audio editing, because there were plenty of things that you recognised were worth fixing (even if you didn’t go through with it and do them). It wouldn’t kill you to work more on your filmmaking and editing skills because frankly, this video is beyond amateurish. It would be an insult to amateurs to call it that. Your execution is… not great.
  • Tweaking irrelevant details. That time could’ve been better spent editing out all the peaks in your audio, for instance (turns out I have a heavy “P” sound). I know this assignment was meant to be lo-fi, but my time management would’ve been better if I’d assessed my priorities at the very beginning.
  • I’m torn on the lo-fi issue. Where does it end and sloppiness begin? Is there an issue of personal pride to take in? On the other hand, I feel like I accurately (if not elegantly) represented my ideas. Self-doubt is an issue no matter what. These are questions you should be asking earlier on, not when you’re slapping together dough in your kitchen a day before the thing’s due.
  • Try not leaving your upload until the last minute!!!! Damn!!! This is your third year!!! Come on!!!!

 

Week Two: attribution for found images

 

 

 

Reflecting on PB #4

Transmedia is a marathon. If the lengths of the readings early on didn’t clue me in (I’m kidding… mostly), PB #4 has certainly cemented it as a fact. Overall, I’ve taken more out of Story Lab than any of my other studios thus far. I think that’s a credit to the amount of scope we were afforded; we were given the foundation to have a strong grasp of the concepts of transmedia storytelling, then given the range to create something that pushed that knowledge in a practical sense. I’ve had fun. I’ve bitten my nails to the quick and I kicked a bus shelter pretty hard in frustration one time, but I’ve had fun. It’s given me an opportunity bring and build on my previous media skills, from One and Two, as well as my own personal interests, talents and research. PB #4, and Story Lab in general, has been extremely rewarding and I feel very confident heading into the second half on my degree.

In week seven, I reflected on what I anticipated and planned for Pocket Museum. I’ve boiled down those thoughts…

  1. Divided accountability (to ensure each area is taken care of & no one person is unfairly swamped) – the audio, film, website and app
  2. Pocket Museum as “a transmedia exploration of the life of John Mitchell Christie through an app, website, audio and visuals” – key phrases: immerse, explore, engage, contrast, cherry-pick, convenience
  3. A new experience: to educate and to entertain; engaging in a way that an exhibition or walking tour is not

So, how’d they go in the real world?

  1. Our system worked well; no area was neglected and, by keeping to our strengths, we worked to create something of a quality I’m proud of. Amy and Brontaë (working on the website and app, respectively) and Jen and me (the webisodes and audio) naturally drifted into pairs; I helped Jen with the filming, as expected, and Amy and Brontaë collaborated. I regret that I wasn’t more involved with their side of things – I think it’s a learning opportunity missed; also, since I didn’t know how much or specifically what they were shouldering, I wasn’t able to offer as much help as I potentially could have. I consider my duties to have been relatively light – the recording went smoothly and the editing was relatively straightforward, as were the other tasks I completed. I don’t feel that I’ve let my group down whatsoever, but I think I could have spent more time making myself useful to the others. On the other hand, we had no formal system in place for making sure that the workload was equal – generally speaking, we had a “I’ll do it, I’ll give you a yell if I need you” mentality. In future, it might be a good idea to have formal weekly or fortnightly audits to ensure that nobody does more or less than the others. I genuinely can’t say if I did disproportionately less work because I don’t have a full idea of how the others did.
  2. We ticked those four boxes! We have an app, website, visuals and audio, and each contribute a different thing to the whole or can be enjoyed on their own. We were careful to avoid too much overlap – we did have to make do thanks to limited funds and time, but what we’ve done shows a thorough understanding of the principles of transmedia storytelling. Users can immerse themselves in the artefacts by engaging with an app and website that are easy and logical to navigate. Through this, they can explore Christie’s world at their convenience, at home or on the go. The contrast between perspectives allows the user to examine Christie’s stories from multiple viewpoints and jumping-off points; they can enjoy all or cherry-pick. 
  3. I can only speak for myself, but I’ve found the content we’ve produced both educational and entertaining – and I’m neck deep and should, be rights, hate it. I believe we’ve found ways to present history – arguably dry, from time to time – in an engaging way. Although we didn’t have the resources to create a little sprite, as was suggested at our pitch, I think framing the audio from Emilie’s point of view adds a smilier levity. We’ve been careful to make this a very human look at Christie’s life, which pushes us beyond a exhibition or walking tour – of course, many of these are taking a transmedia route as well. But it’s always been at the forefront of our thinking to create an experience for people who may not be history buffs – the kind of people who might not be the target audience for a traditional educational experience. I believe keeping this requirement in mind, above all else, is what’s helped us achieve our goal.

Project Brief #3: Personal Statement

My group has divided responsibility for each medium of the project. I suggested the inclusion of an audio component so, naturally, I’m taking responsibility for it. This doesn’t mean that I’m expected to complete it by myself; rather, I’m in charge of making sure that it’s completed and allocating roles within it when needed. Audio is less demanding than film, so depending on her requirements I’ll be helping Jen. I’ll also be involved in the app and website, as much as Amy and Brontaë require me to be. We’ve divided responsibility in this way to ensure that every aspect is taken specific care of while also ensuring that one person isn’t stuck with a disproportionate work load.

I understand Pocket Museum to be a transmedia exploration of the life of John Mitchell Christie through an app, website, audio and visuals. It aims to be as immersive as possible, encouraging the audience to visit historical Melbourne and experience an augmented reality. Through images from the era and an audio component comprised of narration and soundscapes, the participant can explore the space and contrast the modern day with the world John Christie experienced. Online, the viewer can dive deeper in to this universe through a series of biopic websites centred around the escapades of the man. The accompanying website serves to collate all the information with a more linear approach, which the audience can use to supplement their real-world experience or enjoy on its own. Participants can cherry-pick elements of John Christie’s life that interest them in small, digestible packages, or they can fully immerse themselves in his history. If they’re curious about an element or have something interesting they’d like to share, they can engage with the community and us via our social media channels and hashtag, #johnmitchellchristie.

Ultimately, the project serves to both educate and entertain the public, engaging them in a way that an exhibition or walking tour could not. The seeming lack of interactivity is countered by our social media presence on Facebook and Twitter, which serves to foster community in the audience. Because he already exists, there’s a pre-existing universe with a wealth of information for this community to explore. It’s our aim that Pocket Museum will reach people who have an existing interest in the history of Melbourne, but go further to capture a wide-ranging audience who may find history dull through traditional storytelling methods. By opening up the city of Melbourne to the story, participants can dip in and out of the story at points that interest them and can make stronger connections with history by being in the space and therefore forging a link to their own lives. Perhaps a relevant spot is around the corner from the place they get coffee every morning or on the route to and from the train station. By using transmedia, and an easy-to-use app as its centrepiece, Pocket Museum aims to make the history of John Mitchell Christie accessible and engaging to a broad audience.

PB #1 exegesis

Project Brief 1 contained, for me, an ugly little second-person whinge.  Obviously I’m not exactly thrilled with it — I guess it has its moments — but it was a very deliberate exercise. My exegesis is below.

Straight off the bat, I know that this story’s pretty subpar. It’s just that Matthews’ specifications for a successful short story annoyed me to the point of wanting to do them in as thoroughly as possible (the irony being that in doing that, I proved him right). Rather than pin down the reader to a very specific sense of time, place and character, I wanted to experiment with letting it float in the air, as ambiguously as possible. If it were presented a play, as Matthews suggests a good short story would be, I’d like it in a pitch-dark theatre with voices run through scramblers.

Time and audience are two other narrative elements that I wanted to play around with, seeing that we’ve covered them so thoroughly so far in the Story Lab. I chose the structure of a week because I thought it would be easier to play around with; relying on my audience to know Thursday comes before Friday seems a fairly safe bet. I wanted to leave little clues in that would only really make sense as the story’s read, like the saga of the $7 Harper’s Bazaar. As for the audience, writing in second person made it harder to pin down the narrator and therefore easier to identify with them, broadening it as far as possible.

Studio & field

http://federate-radio.weebly.com

 

 

Every Great City
Studio 

What makes Federation Square tick? Why do people go there instead of somewhere else? I don’t know if these are questions you can answer in three and a half minutes but it’s all about the journey (of discovery), man.

Featuring Satie’s Fantaisie-valse

great city

            I really struggled to think of new ideas for A3. Ultimately, I’m much happier with the route I took for Every Great City than Bored, Stressed, Stuck in a Rut (which I’ll discuss in that reflection). After my feedback from A2 I realised that I needed to find a focus rather than “misc Fed Square”. What could I do and how could a structure it in a way that was varied and compelling to listen to?

 

I was worried about getting enough to texture in – and, as these things usually go, I ended up with more and better texture than my field piece. I was inspired by American-style informative, explorative podcasts like 99% Invisible, which hop between producer narration and different vocal and recording textures. I’m aware that my piece is a very rough approximation of this, but it prompted me to think about the different ways information can be gathered and displayed – a phone call rather than a straight interview, the different tone my voice took on when I was reading from the internet. I’m proud of this piece, as amateurish as it is, because I see it as another step forward in my learning.

 

After some thought, I decided that the easiest way to create an examination was to ask a question. That came easily enough to me; since Fed Square is a hub for people to congregate, I would ask why. However, what was originally intended to be a serious piece was pushed into (arguably lame) comedy when my sources failed to come through – specifically the real psychology major, who was unwilling to have her voice recorded. The brusque phone call was actually recorded with an “actor”. It was inconvenient but very good experience to see how a failed idea could spark a new one and turn the piece in an entirely different direction.

 

I also worked harder to include a sense of structure in my piece based around the idea of acts. First, the so-called study, and then the casual interview with my grandma, finally leading into my reflection and sleep-addled realisation. Listening back, I’m surprised by the gulf between vocal textures; as I was recording, I imagined that my voice was essentially the same all the time. The differences between semi-scripted narration, reflection, middle of the night rambling, on the phone and reading other people’s comments was a pleasant surprise and has given me lots of ideas for future textural diversity.

 

Overall, I think this piece demonstrates a rate of learning that I’m satisfied with. It’s not especially polished or professional but I think it shows crude development of structure and texture. Moving forward, at least.

 

Bored, Stressed, Stuck in a Rut
Field

Federation Square is full of people killing time and (sometimes) brain cells. What do they do when they’re feeling chronically bored and confused? Your producer explores her own frustration and lack of inspiration through the ideas and opinions of passers by.

 bored stressed

I think the limitations present in a location like Fed Square paired with my own level of skill come across without subtlety in this piece – not just literally, as I frame it around my own frustration (a concept I regret because I think it’s been done to death and isn’t funny or interesting – obviously it was born out of desperation). Listening to it, the editing is choppy and uninspired and my monologues sound tired in every sense of that word. I’m glad at least that I pushed myself beyond the mistake from A2’s Just different – rather than creating a monotonous rhythm of one vox pop snippet after another I managed a slightly less, but still very monotonous rhythm of vox pops interjected with my own thoughts, along with the (very minimally) different texture in the final reflection on the nature of the space.

 

When it came to editing, I felt very limited by the material I’d gathered. I went in feeling very vague and, even though I tried to flip that on its head, what I did gather was often repetitious or too convoluted to use. In hindsight, a moment to rephrase the questions I was asking and a few more interviews with these new questions could have provided more material to use. More conscious thought about texture would have also helped, although I did make a few attempts to gather different sounds. I have also learnt that “keep doing what you’re doing, just act like I’m not here” works about as well for audio recording as it does photography and videography; that is, not at all.

 

It’s a small thing, but I’m pleased with the way I managed to tie themes of stress and boredom (which are obviously free of location) to Fed Square itself. I think this is a piece that’s relevant to the space its in.

 

In this case, there isn’t a particular work or reading that I took inspiration from. I spent a lot of time listening with care to those in the Drive as well as my usuals and, aside from creating a piece of fiction I didn’t feel equipped to execute, there was nothing that sparked something for me. In honesty, the work that had the biggest effect on this piece is Just different, which I mentioned above. The paralysing effect of only having an idea of what not to do as opposed to what I could do comes through loud and clear.

 

In future, I’ll plan ahead and look at any future work I may need to do in order to pace my ideas. Racing into A2 meant that, by the end of A3, I was drained of inspiration. I think I could also benefit from having a stronger idea and rough plan of what I want to end up with, which is something I’ll experiment with for A4. While I’ll revisit it and remain flexible based on the raw material I gather, I think it could be helpful in guiding my questioning, field narration and collection of ambient sound.

 

 

Producer & participant

“Recording yourself recording yourself recording yourself” – producer 

I wander through my memories of Federation Square as well as the place itself, reflecting on minor teenage rebellion, poorly maintained bathrooms, the people I see and, more than anything else, the strange drive we all have to record these poignant, pointless moments.

 Screen Shot 2015-08-17 at 4.16.46 am

I was interested in exploring Federation Square as a collection of memories and experiences rather than a place in itself, so I decided to focus on my own history with it for my producer piece. I have a lot of memories associated with it and decided to explore those as well as including location narration to expand on the idea of Fed Square as a shared space.

After Just different, I knew I needed more variation and textures. Wandering around Fed Square with a microphone didn’t exactly yield the content I expected and was frequently derailed as I followed my train of thought. I had to rethink my piece around the material I had since I wanted the location narration to have that improvised element in contrast with the studio recording. I’m happy with the segments I isolated as I think they help round out the sense of a populated space without taking the focus off the producer.

I knew I would feature my voice almost exclusively, which is why I felt it was very important to include a section of pure ambient sound to set the scene. I decided to have so close to the beginning of my piece to create a sense of the space the listener could picture for themselves, creating a sort of stage for my anecdotes. I wanted to fix the piece firmly in its location to avoid it turning into a series of reminiscences and random observations. I’m happy in theory with the idea, but I’m not sure about my execution (like so much of my work in this course so far).

I’m satisfied with how I’m progressing in Media 2 but I know I still have a long way to go before I’m at a level I’m satisfied with. I want to focus on the complexity of my work and experiment with different textures and elements, but at the moment I’m struggling with finding a way to make them work cohesively. I think, like most of the media skills I’ve been exposed to so far, it’s a matter of exposure and practice.

I loved the way Dear Birth Mother and Tupperware intertwined different vocal textures and I took a lot of inspiration from these pieces; especially DBM, and the way it used the letter as a backbone for the feature. I wanted to have a similar sense of structure, which I don’t think I managed to achieve; it was too tempting to segment my piece into rough themes. I think losing that semi-formal structure did take away from my piece but with only three and a half minutes there wasn’t a great deal of time to establish a solid structure anyway. It’s an idea I’d like to explore in the future.

 

“Just different” – participant 

An abstract collection of voices from around the world tied together at Federation Square think aloud about their lives, in Melbourne and abroad, and come to the conclusion that perspective is everything.

IMG_2369

I didn’t know what I would get out of the people at Federation Square, but I knew I wanted to ask them about their lives, in Melbourne and abroad. I didn’t have a strong idea of what my piece would be and let myself be guided by the thoughts and ideas I recorded. I spoke to some extremely interesting people but there was very rarely a common theme that linked them beyond the city we’re in and the fact that they might not necessarily have originated here. I didn’t really have any set questions I was seeking out answers for, although since so many people were travellers that became something that I focused on.

In many ways, I was disappointed that people were so positive (that, or were negative in a way I don’t plan on distributing) – I think the material I gathered ended up affecting the balance of the piece. I would have liked to have explored people’s thoughts on the negatives of Melbourne more than I did.

It’s made me realise that in order to get a truly balanced piece I need to ask better questions. “What do you think about x” isn’t enough – I need to be specific, and ask directly for the pros and cons. I also noticed that a lot of answers I received were nearly unusable since they were taken out of context. You can barely, if at all, hear my voice, and when I asked a question the interviewee usually launched into their answer without referencing the question. For example, a two-way conversation about if they’ve enjoyed their travels translated when recorded to “Yes; all over, lots of – ; no, I don’t think so… I enjoy it a lot, I think I’m getting better, but I wouldn’t say that; pretty much, yeah.” Not helpful.

I was influenced by Just Another Fish Story, which has captivated me the most out of any of the listening that we’ve done. I like the way all those different voices and experiences came together to give real texture and depth to the story. I wanted to try something like that around a shared experience – in my case, the experience of being in Melbourne. I think my piece has a vague sense of structure but nothing approaching the beautiful sense of flow Fish Story has.

Recording was a hurdle for me. I went out with a Zoom recorder and a shotgun microphone – which I feel are good tools for the level of technical skill that I’m at – but need to work on harvesting a clear and balanced sound. Obviously, I need to record in mono next time if I’m using a shotgun mic with the Zoom. By the end of the course I’d like to expand on my skills to produce a sound closer to what I want but at the moment I want to focus on my structural and textural skills.

A1 reflection: Aw, saw Beyonce

My chief emotion during this assignment was frustration. Frustration with WaveLab, frustration with myself, fortunately no frustration with Bee who was a delight.

It’s clear to me that if I want to succeed in this subject and in future endeavours I need to master WaveLab. That could be easier said than done since there are so few online resources. There were things I wanted to do with my audio piece – in particular, tidy fades to make the piece lest abrupt – that I simply couldn’t figure out how to do. Exporting my piece was another problem.

That said, I can’t lead a software-centred witch burning without acknowledging that also held myself back. I listen to a lot of radio documentaries but I realise that my listening has been mostly passive. I know what good radio sounds like but I haven’t focused on what makes it so good. In future, I’m going to listen more carefully and when something strikes me as really working I’m going to take note of it. Not to copy what they did, of course, but to understand how it works and why.

Another concern I have is around copyright and fair use. I did use music in the background of the piece and I’m not entirely convinced what I did was up to scratch. It’s something I’ll have to learn about very carefully and specifically and I realise that if my assignment infringes copyright I’ll have to take it offline.

It wasn’t all terrible. I knew I would have an interesting interview with Bee and I was excited to use what I got from her. It’s interesting, but I didn’t realise the amount of pressure I would feel to represent her accurately. It would have been easy, for example, to pick out all the stories from her life and travels when things went wrong and to use those to paint her as a bit of a whinger. That wouldn’t have been accurate at all but it was important to include a few of those stories to add depth to the piece. I think I kept the balance between positive and negative fairly well, but like anything it’s a skill I have to practice.

Overall, I enjoyed making the piece when I knew what I was doing with the software and I’m looking forward to working on more.

10501746_10152491940719462_3742696252252641641_n

Project brief #4: reflection

Project brief #4’s social experiment went in directions I didn’t expect. I think we did well with the diversity and relevance of platforms we engaged with and the theory we explored that led us to make those decisions. Looking at the audience from a producer’s point of view was a take that interested me because the way content is produced and distributed has changed so drastically with the popularisation of social media and the internet. I’m fascinated by the way the audience has, in many ways, become the producer and especially the distributor. Cate Klancey was a great medium to explore this change in audience dynamics. The theory that motivated our decisions was strong and I think that blogging our findings as we went (on https://cateklancey.wordpress.com) was a good way to supplement and add texture to the videos and social media.

 

Unfortunately, because we put Cate Klancey out into the world, we gained very little information to work with. Our lack of data meant that we had to rely on research for most of our information. The nature of our experiment meant that it was unlikely from the beginning that Cate would be ‘accepted’ by audiences, who are notoriously good at detecting anything inorganic. It’s a shame that we didn’t have the opportunity to draw our own conclusions about audience engagement and participation. Tragically, not every video will achieve the awe-inspiriting popularity of ‘Dog screams like a man’.

 

An alternative could have been to reach out to a former reality star and use their “celebrity” base (which Cate obviously didn’t have) to kickstart a campaign. Logistically (and possibly legally), this would have been nearly impossible but would have given us a better chance at actually connecting and interacting with a relevant audience, rather than one comprised of Russian spam-bots and 12 year-olds from South Carolina. The fact that most of Cate’s followers were gained through the #followforfollow hashtag meant that a majority of her following was disengaged, only having followed her to boost their own follower count. We debated buying followers, but that would have weakened their quality even more. The theory follows that potential audiences are impressed by a large follower count and are therefore more likely to follow. As we were examining audiences from a producers point of view, this was an option, but since were motivated to interact with any followers we did gain as part of the experiment we decided against it.

 

Collaboration is something I’ve struggled with in the past. I often find group projects frustrating and was very lucky to work with a team that were receptive and honest communicators. In some ways, it would have been a good learning experience to work in a relatively low-stakes situation with a group that was completely dysfunctional but overall I’m glad that I could learn and solidify some collaborative skills.

 

My belief that communication is key has been strengthened by this assignment. Every group member needs to attend the meetings, respond to texts and emails promptly and voice any problems they’re having with their workload or other members of the group. Fortunately, I don’t believe my group suffered too much from any communication problems and overall what we did worked. A group message service, like WhatsApp (which we used) or Facebook Messenger was essential for keeping in touch and is something I’ll continue to use in the future. Sharing the Google Drive first thing was also good and afforded everyone equal access to see and upload documents, rather than having a ‘gatekeeper’ who was in charge of uploading everything. Finally, a blog that we could all update with our findings as we went was an easy and well-presented way to present a portfolio of our information that we could update as we went along. Open sharing tools like these are fantastic and I’d like to build upon my knowledge them for future collaborations.

 

Creating a contract was very helpful in initially setting our goals and standards. Next time I do a project like this, I’d like to make it even more specific and refer back to it more often. It was difficult to create it with formal tasks and goals when our project was constantly evolving and I felt that there were occasional problems in dividing the work. I’m not sure how to address this problem but knowing that it could be an issue means that I’ll focus on it future projects and develop a solution through experience.