Sketch TWO: Comparing Narratives – Enhancing with Audio

Following the previous sketch. I decided to make a continuation to the participatory alternative narrative. During the walk up the stairs in 89 steps, Martha feeds you information to you while you walk up the steps. When you stop, she will tell you ‘her dog can do better’ or ‘we wasted enough time, let’s continue.’ I decided to replicate that idea into two comparison shots. I walked up the staircase slowly for the first shot and I ran up the stairs the next. Unfortunately, I could not record my audio so I inserted a text on where the audio should come in. The audio follows the way you continue the narrative. If you are too slow, someone will say to hurry up and if you are too fast, someone will say to wait for them. It makes it more interactive in a sense of you are there to experience it.

This one was fairly easy to do. Just run up and down the stairs at different pace. The only problem I had was starting the shot at the same place. To encounter this problem, maybe I need to have a mark so that I capture the angle. Other than that, this was an interesting aspect to work on.

From this, I realise that the audio really enhance the participation in the narrative. It feels like someone lags behind and calls out for you when you are too fast or someone tells you to quicken your pace when you are too slow. You feel like you participating because you feel a sense of presence in that short.

 

Sketch ONE: Alternate Narratives

I decided to look at the participatory and technical elements of the interactive short. My biggest challenge was how to put it into a video format. I was not fluent in html and coding and I want to have similar experience through video format. I took some reference from other interactive commercials or web series to help me reconstruct this video. There was a part where Martha received the call from someone but I had accidentally clicked ignore. When I clicked ‘Ignore’, I was still stuck at the same spot, the story did not progress so I had more time to venture around to see other information pop-ups under the ‘Listing’ chapter.

I used an example from a commercial with alternate endings – Tipp Ex about the Hunter shoots the bear or not. Using YouTube annotations, the participants are linked to the narration of their choice. This was an easy concept as it was just putting text on a freeze frame.

From this sketch, I realised that even though you are given an interactive short where you get to choose the sequence of the video, filmmakers still have the ultimate control. The ending will always be the same as set by the filmmakers. Seeing that I could not progress with the story when I clicked ‘Don’t Answer’, it gave me a clear view that the filmmakers still have the sequence set but they just want participants to interact with it.

Project TWO: Participatory Aspect on Interactive Online Videos

CONCEPT STATEMENT:
Our group has chosen the online video example, 89 steps from a documentary short turned interactive by UnionDocs. If we contextualise this project in relation to the case studies we have researched on for our project one, it would be placed in the genre of interactive online video practice. We will produce a number of sketches which analyse the narrative/non-narrative form of this online video practice. Each of these sketches will focus on different aspects of the project as a way to understand how it has been made and how relations have been formed between shots to a narrative/non-narrative structure.

Blog on 89 Steps: http://www.pbs.org/pov/blog/povdocs/2014/09/pov-interactive-shorts-qa-with-christopher-allen-89-steps/#.VRhxC5OUen0

SKETCHES:
This is a list of sketches we have made. Take a look at Peter’s case study on 89 steps:


1. An approach to re-create the interactive alternate narrative of 89 Steps’ ‘Answer/Don’t Answer’ during the ‘Listing’ chapter where the realtor called to tell that the apartment is sold. I used the stairs to allow participant to go up the stairs at a slower or faster pace. Using YouTube annotations, the participants are linked to the narration of their choice. This was an easy concept as it was just putting text on a freeze frame.

2. Following the previous sketch. I decided to make a continuation to the participatory alternative narrative. During the walk up the stairs in 89 steps, Martha feeds you information to you while you walk up the steps. When you stop, she will tell you ‘her dog can do better’ or ‘we wasted enough time, let’s continue.’ I decided to replicate that idea into two comparison shots. I walked up the staircase slowly for the first shot and I ran up the stairs the next. Unfortunately, I could not record my audio so I inserted a text on where the audio should come in.

3. Interactive mode into video format. I found the scene of looking around Martha’s apartment. I wonder how to make it into a video format. I did two comparisons, using a pan and using pictures to create panoramic view. I had difficulty adding people and movement into it.

4. Participatory aspect using technical skills. I realised they shot in first person point of view which was Martha’s point of view. That gives viewers a sense of participation. I felt the need to use this element to see how this technique works.

5. The flashback technique. I was intrigued by the use of pictures and flashbacks of the same room during the Listing chapter.

For Peter’s five sketches: http://www.rtfold.com/category/sketch/

Reflection: Week 4b “Issues/Problems in Studio OVE”

Today we learnt to write a good reflection. The 4Rs are good guideline to writing an effective, impactful reflections. Our first exercise was to write a reflection blog post on the issues or problems that came up during our studio sessions for Online Video Experiments. Here goes!

Reporting:
Back in week three, we were discussing about the sketch ideas. My partner, Peter and I were discussing to come up with a concept statement. We put our two case studies together and came up with a vague statement, “We aim to achieve a participatory narrative where the user decides through interactivity.” It was too broad so we narrowed down to ‘multi-narrative in terms of participation‘. Peter suggested, being inspired by the interactive documentary, he thought of constructing a multi-linear narrative of a mundane life. Unfortunately, we had not gotten the idea of this project so we were off track.

By the end of week four, we had gone back on track after many feedback from Seth and our peers. We were supposed to pick out certain elements from one case study and re-create them to understand the process. We were not supposed to create original contents in relation to our case study but break things down from the case study. Now we know!

Relating:
It was an eye opening process when I made the first mistake. It made me understand the project clearer. I still had questions on the process of sketching at that time as it was a new concept to me. We used Peter’s case study as an inspiration to start our sketches when we actually just had to use the case study to tear apart some elements and recreate them in a way that benefit us to learn. I definitely have a clearer structure on making my sketches now. The skills required for me to complete this sketches are a little easier for me as we are just recreating certain aspects from the case study.

Reasoning:
One of the reasons why this issue has to be addressed because one mistake in the beginning can lead to a different path. The sketches are to prompt you to research on the different elements from the video itself. If we do a different style, it does not fulfil the criteria from the project brief.

Reconstructing:
This issue is definitely a crucial problem that needs to be tackled at an earlier stage. With the time constrains for these ten sketches to be completed, all my uncertainty has to be cleared at an earlier stage or I would be rushing my work at the last minute, producing a quick and shallow sketches. Making mistakes in the beginning is a good thing so that we can learn from them and we know not to do it the next time. My teacher in high school once said, ” They are not mistakes, just learning experience.”

Reflection: Week 2–What is Online Video to Me?

It has been two weeks of being introduced to online videos and I pretty much think that this is a very subjective definition. It really depends what it is to you. I watched through a few presentations from my peers today about web series, interactive narratives, tutorials and reviews from the web and it got me thinking that online videos come in different forms and genres.

The best way to understand what online video is comparing it towards traditional media like cinema or television. If it is a copy of a film from the television, it its not exactly categorised as an online video. Online videos are short, DIY and in a less professional format that allows us to create video content almost daily. An example of daily contents are video logs or short comedy skits.

We also had an interesting discussion today. Would it still be considered an online video if it is just still images and audio soundtrack? My opinion would be no it would not be an online video but if it is a series of images like a montage I would say it can be considered. Arguably, our lecturer, Seth had made a good point if there is soundtrack, and duration, it could be considered a video.

A lot of things to ponder about for online videos. I hope to get a grasp in this practice by the end of week 3.

Cheers!

Case Study #2: Interactive Commercials Online

 

 

gshock

 

Game: Five Minutes – G-Shock Interactive Short

Video: Five Minutes – G-Shock Story only

I found this interactive commercial through a friend. The plot is about a father and daughter surviving the zombie apocalypse. The father has been bitten by a zombie and is turning into one. The only way to save himself is to remember his past. If he does, he is free from the virus. In order to remember his past, the viewers (us) have to ‘connect the dots’ for him (no really, we had to connect the dots).

5min6

 

I suppose I could categorise it as an online video because this advertisement is more of a game video where you help the characters to progress in the story. You need a flash player to play this game so I doubt you can interact on televisions or in cinemas. I find it interesting that this product placement tactic was a little different compared to the rest because this was in a game mode. The various ways that online videos use to interact with the viewers, whether it is just reaching out to the fans or product placement, seems to interest me a lot. I like to think that we can communicate to an audience with the forms of interactions no matter how far apart we are. With the use of Internet we are allowed to do just that because the World Wide Web allows us to do just about any thing world wide, duh!

Case Study #1: Analysing Away We Happened

Away We Happened

 

Link: Away We Happened-Episode 1

I just did a summary of this case study in my previous blog post. I thought that everyone’s presentation was so good that I should do another. So we will be looking at why I think this web series should be categorised as an online video. I believe that this mini web series has been catered for the Internet because they are looking for participation through this interactive short. Let’s take a look at some of the criterias:

1. Style/Genre
This series is a rom-com with fast paced cuts, quick and witty with a few cheesy sappy conversations. Sarcastic comments are thrown in as well.

2. Duration
The first episode was about 7 minutes long to introduce the characters. There are more characters introduced into the series later on. The rest of the episodes are about five minutes long ending with a 14-minute episode finale.

3. Audience
Wong Fu Production’s fan base consist of young teenagers who spend most of their time surfing the net. Wong Fu Productions have 2.4 million subscribers so AT&T users are combined with these young fans that this web series raked up 6-million views in six weeks.

4. Is it online video?
bI think that this style of content is catered for the Internet because they are short and just for pleasure. This is a low budget series as well. With the interactive aspect, the votes are all done online under AT&T.

5. Reason
The reason of this collaboration is for AT&T to do crowdsourcing as well as product placement for HTC. The quality of the video is at a professional level but if you check the past videos of Wong Fu Production, they worked their way up to this professional level,

6. Involvement
This series is to gather participation from the audience to submit ideas of how to continue to story. The ideas are then posted to be voted and the most voted will be the next episode. This style of interaction intrigues me because this actually allows filmmakers to know what the audience want to see in a story. Who would go for the more cheesy story lines or the more quirky and funny story lines.

––

What interests me in this case study is that I enjoy how they incorporated the participatory aspect in this interactive series. The multi-narrative side of this film intrigues me. Those multi-linear interactive commercials catches my interest as well. This has a slightly simpler style of interaction because you vote for the next episode instead of choosing to ‘run away from the bear’ or ‘dine with the bear’.

 

That’s it then!

Do the happy Jen dance!

Case Study #1: Summary – Away We Happened

maxresdefault

Introducing… Away We Happened (2012) by Wong Fu Productions and AT&T !

 

Why this video?
I have been a huge fan of Wong Fu Production so I decided to use this film as my case study. Wong Fu consists of three Asian-American who graduated from the same college about ten years ago and they moved to Los Angeles to start a company. They are mainly on YouTube making short skits and some short films – varies from comedy to drama. They have a huge fan base with 2.4 million subscribers. Their audience are mainly young teenagers who spend most of their time on YouTube.

What is this video?
It is a web series called ‘Away We Happened‘ and it stars celebrity YouTube artists like Victor Kim, Jen Buescher, Ki Hong Lee and so on. This mini series is revolves around the relationship of this couple, Daniel and Jean who had their suitcase swapped by accident at a cafe in New York. They met up to return the respective suitcase and their love story bloomed from there.

This show is not fully scripted during pre-production because Wong Fu made this an interactive video so they film the first episode and they give the viewers to continue the story. They will put a list of questions for the people to answer at the end of each episode. At the end of the week, they will vote the best way to continue the film and Wong Fu will post the next video. The series ran for six weeks with six episodes. Each episode is about 5-7 minutes long with the finale running up to 14 minutes long. It is naturally the standard online video duration – short and concise.

Is this series sponsored?
This was a collaboration film of Wong Fu Production with AT&T. It was a low-budget film sponsored by AT&T. Product placement advertising is very heavy here because throughout the video the phones are extremely visible. AT&T used this collaboration as a crowdsourcing tactic as there are plenty of young viewers watching Wong Fu’s films. Within the 6 weeks of the web series, AT&T gathered six million views.

 

For further analysis, I posted it on my next blog post. Check it our here !

OVE Studio: Day ONE !

After two weeks of summer break, I am finally back to blogging! I think ever since that intensive course with Networked Media, I found that blogging isn’t as bad as I thought it would be. Anyways, let’s move along to the topic for today!

Online. Video. Experiments – Experimenting videos that are available on the Internet. I picked this class to learn the various online videos practices. I believe that with technology these days, the videos online are spreading like wildfire. I want to understand the hype of all these.

I came into class with an empty mind, I probably ended class with an empty mind as well. I have to admit that this studio concept is all new to me that it probably was a little confusing. Just a little recap.

1) We are having a new learning concept – ‘practice based research’.

2) We will be doing blog reflections to keep our research progressing daily

NUMBER ONE! The thing that caught my interest is that we would be experimenting  on online video practices. That means we make an online video from scratch and research on it instead of just analysing past projects. My lecturer had mentioned something related to this practice before and it opened my learning tremendously. Copying someone’s style of editing is not cheating but more of a learning process and if you are more creative, find easier and a more effective way to edit it.

NUMBER TWO! Seth had mentioned in class about the importance of reflection. I find this technique rather useful. It is just writing things that comes to your head to keep it visible for you. The good thing about these reflections are they are not formal academic writings and you can always come back to edit the information or add more when you come across the same topic again.

  • Archives