Reporting

Today was the presentation of project 3 to a panel of four RMIT staff in the interest of generating useful feedback for the development of project 4. The panel said that they enjoyed the presentation and thought that it was clearly explained, mainly in reference to the journey from case study to the exploration of project 3. However, feedback became quickly centred around determining whether pursuing a live broadcasting service was the best option. The panel were unable to see any of the other sketches, so it was hard to demonstrate comparisons, however it was clear that a focus on a live service may focus future directions too specifically around the technology rather than the form, as well as potentially remove the possibility for a large amount of skate video’s aesthetic appeal to function (such as music and digital video manipulation). This is relevant because these factors could stray our future direction away from the aims of the studio. I think the panel raised an interesting argument to consider more closely, whether live broadcasting is the most suitable direction for future explorations, or whether returning to study of other sketches may be useful in discovering a better alternative.

Relating

I have noticed similar notions to this during the transition from project 1 to project 2 of this studio. That transition featured Errol and I having a strong, misunderstood focus on the technical qualities and stylistic elements of skate video as an example of online video practice. When it was actually far more important to focus on the narrative/non-narrative structure of the practice, in reference to the particular form (or potentially hybrid form) of the case study. Gearing our experimentation towards notions of form aligned the project much more closely with the aims of the studio. I have learnt from this past experience the importance of not getting caught up on the technical elements of a work, but for the purpose of this studio focusing on form from a simplified standpoint. Do not over complicate the experiment because that leads to confusion from the central focus of the experiment.

Reasoning

The factors underlying this issue I believe are premised on my prior education module being engulfed by notions of satisficing and technical recreation. Satsificing refers to accepting the first solution to a problem, without encouraging further investigation and generation of new ideas. This, in combination with my previous media education being focused around displaying an ability to recreate media by imitating the stylistic features, is what immediately draws me to technical elements when analysing a case study for example. These are important factors to consider because they indicate that it is vital to really prompt continuous brainstorming and idea development in order to do well in this studio, as well as adapt our professional practice to the changing world of online media.

Reconstructing

In future I will encourage myself to explore further solutions to potential issues or areas of development, attempting to transfer my focus away from notions regarding media technologies and more towards a representation of form. The main way I can think of achieving this in regards to the development of project 4 in this studio, is to experiment with effect of live broadcasting on skate video more so, to explore the array of possibilities and questions that are raised. This would hopefully provide the foundations to identify and direct the exploration down the path of an exploration of form. However, furthering notions of speculative sketching (as an alternative to satisficing), I will take a step back from live broadcasting all together in order to explore and brainstorm other potential possibilities for project 4, before selecting live broadcasting so quickly. This could potentially provide the change we need in order to address the feedback given during today’s studio.