Dubbing vs. subtitles

A nun leads me through a 10,000 square meter shelter, which lies within a grid of red-sanded roads. Juicy tropical plants surround this fenced-off miniature village outside Ho Chi Minh City. She introduces me to the AIDS patients who live here, points to the 15 orphaned children who spend their days here going to school, painting the little metal carousel and ripping the weeds out of the front courtyard while awaiting their nearing death. 

The nun  shows me the ad hoc operating room. A faded baby blue statue of Maria stands guard as volunteer doctors come here to perform surgery on patients who suffer from AIDS-related sicknesses. Then she points to the crematorium where the remains of patients are burnt if they have no relatives that could take care of them.

She lifts her hand, her finger wandering from urn to another in the glass cabinet that is embedded into the crematorium wall. 

"This one died after a year."

"This is the mother of the girl you saw earlier."

"Look at the date here. She came in one day and died the next one,"

she said. 

In Vietnamese. 

This is where my problem begins. 

The colors were rich. The children's eyes large and dark brown. The male patients skin and bones. Fifteen kids chanting a song together. The grommet of the metal playground swing squeaks faintly in the background. 

And then a tonal language that makes no sense to most people who might see this video. 

 

Subtitles are like yet another element.

There are interviews, sound, visuals and now text. As someone who grew up bilingual and was forced to learn three more languages in her life, I tend to think that subtitles are friendlier, less intrusive and leave in the voice of the character. 

But subtitles are running commentaries, slight interpretations because there is no such thing as a translation. They are another factor, they are content. An additional, intellectual content that imposes itself on top of other visual and aural information. Full immersion in a story cannot be interrupted by white text trickling down on a screen, can it? 

And then dubbing? Dubbing brings in a whole other element. You need to find a different voice to add on top of the original voice of your interviewee, corresponding in gender and - to create the illusion of authenticity - in ethnicity. It's a way of making a story flow, of getting the audience to stay on the topic. 

So comprehension of a story, flow of a story therefore overrules authenticity?

There's no one rule (and looking for answers from other news media like the Washington Post or even on our own site seems to confuse me even further). 

But in a story where the content of the speeches is as important as the visual and aural understanding of a place, I guess, I'd go for dubbing. 

Any comments much appreciated. 

3rd Ward and such

My man had a show.

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!

Colbert Nation, the greatest Nation in the Marvel Universe

Find the story here:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122564868967191179.html#articleTabs%3Darticle

A graphic here: 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122564868967191179.html#articleTabs%3Dinteractive

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:

Reporting with two cameras dangling off your neck, pen and paper stuffed into your pockets and the line "would you put on that mic" in mind

So reporting for every format possible sucks. But what sucks more is not reporting at all. And if I gotta report in all sorts of media to get my stuff out, I will. 

Here a few things that have worked for me so far while trying to report for a package, i.e. a print article that needs video and photography as well (I'm not an expert, there are a million ways of doing this):

1.) Basic video and photo equipment: 

• a camcorder/camera with a wireless microphone attached on top, mounted on light tripod that you can easily fold up if you need to walk a couple of steps
• an SLR with a good zoom lens, autofocus, possibly a bounce flash attached (if dark)
• pen and piece of paper stuffed into your pants pockets
• a good backpack that fits all this and cushions it

2.) Reporting methods:

The interview: 

• BEFORE: you get in take 15 mins to get broll of the building, some interiors, anything you think could help introduce the interviewee visually. Is he an architect? Find some model buildings in his office, film him working on a project on his computer, etc. 
• DURING: I like to do the general print interview without the camera, that gives you an opportunity to warm up to the person and you can jump in when the interviewee is veering off topic/not answering your question. While the person is talking take some notes on WHAT s/he's talking about and write down a little list of things/topics/etc covered that you might need on tape to illustrate your story; THEN TURN ON THE CAMERA, by now and even before the 'print interview' you should have found your story angle. Ask questions directly related to the story, 4-5 important ones and get them to give you a succinct answer, even if they might have answered the question before (helpful: jot down the time code for that quote, that'll make editing much faster)
  
• AFTER: Now that you're done with getting interview content, both for video and print, get out your list of things/topics/etc  that you wrote down while talking to the person and go on a scavenger hunt for the stuff. Back to our architect, he spoke about a certain building that s/he's working on. Ask him to show you models on his computer or even miniature models that s/he might have lying around. Get shots of those things from two different angles and three different views (wide/medium/close-up)

A few things that could also make life easier:

• Ask people for their name, occupation and where they're from and tell them to spell their name to you on camera
  
• Time codes can save you lots of time. If you can sit down while your camera is on a tripod, write down a note and the time code. That way you can get the exact quote much faster.
• Separate video time from photo time. If you need both, get video with clean and undisturbed natural sound 
• Use wireless mics during Man-On-The-Street assignments. You can control ambient noise much better and won't have to hold camera and stick mic at the same time. 
• Breathe. Stop. Take your time. Video is most powerful when you have a strongly framed image in which the objects in the image are moving, not you. Shut up (very important when gathering natural sound), let the camera do its work while resting on a tripod and gather your thoughts for the next shot.

Things I'd like to have/need to buy: 

• A fanny pack - where I can stash the wireless microphone I'm carrying around when doing a general survey among people on the street (and where I can keep my pen and paper and some business cards)
  
• A mini-tripod that I can rest on tables, book shelves and even my chest
• Small bags to organize my stuff - good batteries, empty batteries, tapes, etc. When you have 10 minutes with the CEO of some company you'd better be prepared

Anyhoo... I'm putting this out because I train reporters in this and have thought about this for quite a while. Comments much appreciated. 

In your wallet

More "wallet" videos at www.wsj.com/video. Apple vendor and Tibetan immigrant Weser Dorjee tells us why he has two wallets and what he keeps inside both. (Oct. 19)