Showing posts with label online. Show all posts
Showing posts with label online. Show all posts

Thursday, July 30, 2009

I am. Online

Amy and Lauren's wedding

My neighbor, Mr. Casuccio from downstairs, said to me once that he opted out of buying a digital SLR because he'd start taking too many pictures. "I don't want to document my life the way many people do."

I do. So do an astounding and ever-growing number of people on the Interweb, from grandparents competing to have the best-documented infant on facebook to the Western European and American brigade that populates the realms of vimeo.com or blip.tv.

In an environment of instantaneous publication and feedback, artistic progress is collective. Community comments encourage, give technical advice, infuriate, drive towards change or development. With technology simplifying what used to be tied to hardware, editing and distribution are easy to navigate. And recording material - on your commute, on Sundays playing soccer in the park, before a concert - becomes a pass-time activity for people with access to intimate moments. Insights into their own lives.

Of course there are no rules in video publishing these days. A lot of people post videos in every stage (and here I'm talking about aspiring filmmakers from all backgrounds). Many videos are experiments, short-term projects, some thought out more or less. This gives insight into the artistic process. It's educational. Tricks are unveiled or the used equipment listed. Storytelling structures become apparent. You school your eye and emotional sensitivity.

Most importantly:
Life becomes one progressively more beautifully shot movie.
But are we missing something here?


Saturday, December 6, 2008

Train/Bed


Train/Bed from Lam Thuy Vo  and Daniel Paul Ross on Vimeo.

Music by Nattapoom and Lam (thanks Nattapoom!)

Monday, November 17, 2008

One-(wo)man-band

My job is to be a videographer. Translated from jargon-heavy web lingo to everyday speech this means I shoot, edit and script videos and one day possibly even slideshows. 

Whenever I pitch a story package, however, I extend my job description. 

One-(wo)man-band. 

The problem with this is not that you have to suddenly present a story in three different formats. That's just having to juggle different software and taking into account a lot of production time. What killed me was that I realized (possibly too late) I had to report on three stories about the same theme with slightly different angles. You see, components have to complement not re-iterate. And that's where it got icky. 

So here are a few lessons I've learned from this and I hope some of you will find it useful:

  1. Preparations: The key to all of this seems to be pre-reporting. Finding your story angle for the print piece in advance will help loads. So once you've got that pinned you can see what's missing or under-explored. The misconception I had was that I could predict which part would play which role. I thought I knew in advance what I would need for each component. But interviews always change your angle on the story, ever so slightly. Hence, figure out the print component. Then the additional components will crystalize when you realize which parts you weren't able to explore in the print story and are important to get the whole picture.  
  2. Material: That's a biggie. Not only does the article need a still image. The video needs about 10 images of what you couldn't get on tape while filming the office of your interviewee or visiting a space where an event took place. And the best graphics have great visualizations of data you need to get from your source or have crisp and beautiful images that are cut out or processed in one or another way. So a grocery list while reporting multimedia-style might be: a few photos (for article), images from things your interviewee talking about (for video) and illustrations/3D models/powerpoint presentations/stills/data (for graphic). 
  3. Time: Unless you have a team of people working with you, you might want to do this sort of reporting only for enterprise stories.

Suggestions and comments welcome!


Tuesday, October 28, 2008

New photoshop-like software out: Phoenix

It's an image editor that works just like Photoshop. It's got magic wands, layers, masks, blend modes: the whole enchilada.

And according to the photo-tips newsletter site Photojojo this is why we should like it:

It's web-based, so you don't have to download any software or use up space on your hard drive. You can use photos already on the web, too: Flickr, Facebook and Picasa all work.

There are 40+ free tutorials that range from beginner to advanced, so you can learn how to use all them fancy tools.

There's a very good free version, as well as a souped-up hotrod version that's actually worth paying for.

Find a demonstration here: