I was intrigued by theweathergroup_U initiative at the Sydney Bienale. KD said to check them out for potential VD colloboration. I have had contact with David in the group previously through an experimental video screening of ‘The Hazzards’ at UNSW. Part of the summary of what they are about as a collective:
theweathergroup_U is a collective interested in pursuing experimental methods of audio-visual media production, environmental mapping and monitoring technologies, and processes of community-based interaction and knowledge exchange. As artists and media workers, they are primarily concerned with cross-cultural digital storytelling methods. Using the interlocking themes of weather, ecology, climate, geography, communications and collaboration, they seek to explore different ways of seeing, listening and documenting the interactions with natural systems that punctuate our daily existence.
Today, I presented the ‘Glasshouse Birdman’ prototype in a MCD studio postgraduate session. Many people present where not aware of my research topic. I decided not to provide any context to see what people thought I was researching. Initially there seemed to be some frustration with how the prototype was presented, especially if as I described the plan was to present VD for use in real-life scenarios. People suggested that the prototype looked to polished and finished rather than being a work-in-progress. A version that looked more like a sketch (drawn in crayon) with other supporting visual diagrams was the suggested alternative. Something that showed the process and behind the skin structure.
With the floor open for what this specific practice was researching there was some discussion about exploring non-linear narrative with a point made that this was not necessarily a new area of research. Therefore, where was the research going to be taken? A question that instigated some ideas on what the practice was exploring in terms of new territories. Classification, Tagging, Folksonomy emerged as one tangent - social media. The semantic web another. The idea of looking at how narrative is being compressed led to thinking about new types of audiovisual literacies. I mentioned that one thing I found myself doing is comparing production processes. These are the differences between how I would have recorded and post-produced a work like this for a linear montage edit. There was a suggestion to look at how this content would be structured in a linear version which I have been planning.
I pointed out the difficulty of working with so many new fields of study like interaction design, design research, software development and how none of these fields are where I come from in terms of prior knowledge. One idea was to find a specific theoretical model to bring all these together as way of critiquing and theorising the research. Experience Design was one suggestion. The session was useful particulary in terms of thinking about a revision of the research focus and questions. The original research topic is very broad but has influenced the resulting practice as a form of critique on online video practice. But, the topic could be revised along with the research questions in terms of shifting the focus at this stage to a focus on a new emerging territory.
Reference: Bill Buxton, Sketching User Experiences,: Getting the design right and the right design, San Francisco, Morgan and Kaufmann, 2007.
The Glasshouse Birdman prototype is coming together as a work-in-progress. It has been a useful experience to learn how this type of production is recorded, authored and structured.
Montage editing: In comparsion to the usual broadcast production there seems to be little need to use montage editing. In most cases the granular nature of videodefunct works with scenes as short duration single continuous shots. Even dialogue with the style of approach suits being uncut. I was surprised that this would be the case in a documentary style prototype. It is amazing how much conversation and observation is presented in small self-contained fragments. In fact montage editing seems strange in this environment not only from a production perspective but also as clips. The multi-channel composition asks for scenes to be realised as shots played back concurrently rather than edited into montage sequences. The breaking up of time in a montage sequence seems very odd after working with single continuous shots. Although, I think sharp short montage sequences could be used to enhance single continuous shots in the triptych. Also, longer edited montage sequences, I found due to edits and change in shots information ended up being big file sizes with compression. I
Recording notes: I did find myself shooting with the zoom and handheld camera moves I would not normally use to get coverage as part of aiming for one continuous shot. Working solo I experimented with a radio mic because I knew this work would rely on Terry telling stories as he did things. Also, I had to dress in Terry’s clothing as the birds freaked out when I was around on the first day, so a audio person would have made things even harder. In retrospect, the radio mic sound brought up ideas about online video audio where in comparison to television and cinema the subtleties and complexities within reason are not so important or even lost through most computer speakers. The radio microphone recorded the audio close to the Terry including his dialogue and sound associated with his actions. These sounds in miniature video frames are what is needed to make things clear for the viewer, the sounds that help communicate what is happening on screen. But, I did have some technical problems with the radio mic on movement which could be refined. Also, more time could be put into mixing in atmospheric underlay to make things richer and make up for all the audio being recorded close and narrow through the radio mic. Post-production processes do need to be simple though when you are working with so many singular clips.
In the hypertext environment where the clips are highly granular, self-contained and inter-linked, a lot of the content can be used, with all sorts of supporting narrative threads. I even considered a behind the scenes category for example. There is real opportunity to be self-reflexive and work very informally compared to the restrictions of a single montage edit in terms of camera coverage, the narrative structure and what has to be discarded. In this example it is really surprising the ratio of content that is usable. A highly sustainable way of recording.
Categories and Tags: I am starting to make narrative structures work using categories and tags in hierarchical levels. The user enters categories then brings up tags. The narrative can be contained within a category by keeping the tag only within that category with no cross-references which leads to a type of dead-end for the user. Introducing some tags that cross-over into other categories utlises the hypertextual nature of the interface and makes the multi-channel viewing more dynamic. The trick seems to be to keep tags to a minimum and make the cross-over choices with some consideration. I did find myself re-thinking categories as I got to know the material better.
Interface design: There could be some changes to the way the interface is modified for this content. For example I like the three audio tracks running with the louder being moused over. But with the single person focus there is no real need to hear three lots of dialogue across the triptych - the volume could be lowered on the clips not being watched. More later on other revisions with the categories and tags.
1. Log material and get a sense of the content
2. Loosely think about categories by making connections across the material (try sketching a map)
3. Start with individual stand alone clips as a way of determining what might work as montage sequences. (export into temporary category folders)
4. Work out which clips should be edited into montage sequences to help develop specific narratives within the overall content. (think about maintaining the shortest durations possible)
5. Review all the exported clips and emerging categories.
6. Think about the titles and tag - keywords. (Look for associations across tags with the aim of keeping the amount of tags applied to each clip at a minimum)
7. Think about how categories can be used like chapters or sections for developing particular narrative tangents. (These are sections that offer less choice across the content with the aim to steer the user down particular narrative paths.
8. Review the tags by testing the player. (Look at user testing if needed)