The beginning of this sequence was something that I thought may be an interesting avenue as it is quick paced and instantly makes you want to engage with the content. This video illustrates the power of editing, something that our group has just started to undertake. Not having much experience regarding editing this it is a very interesting aspect of our project brief. Other members in my group seem to understand the editing process far better than myself, which is a great thing — being able to learn from my team members. Some sequences I have found become far less awkward after editing, which was one of my major concerns coming into this project brief. I am very satisfied with how our group project has been coming along, I feel we were able to explore all our ideas, I also feel there was very even contribution throughout the process of creation.
This week’s lectorial was centred on the idea of remix culture and its place within media. One idea that was particularly interesting was that of copyright and how remixing fits into the ethics of copyright. If an individual alters a song so far from its original intent does that then make it okay? My personal opinion is no. When an artist has created a piece of work it should not then be open to any interpretation or variation. We were introduced to Greg Gillis or commonly known as Girl Talk to further explore the ethics of remix culture. Girl Talk uses a multitude of artist within one remix and alters them far beyond recognition. Gillis strongly believes he has the right to change/alter music however much he wants, and to not allow him to do it hinders his creativity. The copyright expert featuring in RIP!A Remix Manifesto believe Gillis is simply ‘taking something it was and making it into something it isn’t. This idea is very interesting when considering the ethics involved with remixing, if an artist only ever intended their work to sound one way, shouldn’t it only be presented that way. On the flip side, however, if another artist has another vision should they be a will to create/change a piece to make something entirely new.
This week’s tutorial was once more focused on our project brief and presenting our ideas to our tutor. Most of the class time was spent on finding footage of protests and rallies to help enshrine our contention. Recently, we interviewed an activist for ‘no room for racism’ to add some talking heads to our project brief. Asking individuals to help is something our group has grown in confidence with: initially we were afraid to ask for help from secondary sources. Using talking heads allows our narrative story to have validity — people like this do exist.
Another portion of this tutorial reflection was spent concluding all our filming. Finishing filming is a very satisfying aspect of this week, being the most time consuming aspect of this project, we can finally start editing and finalising our project brief. Throughout the filming process I personally learnt many things regarding camera angles and acting — things I have never really experienced before.
Although the last few tutorials have been roughly aimed at doing the same thing, ‘seeing where we are’, it has been a great opportunity to check in with group members and our tutor to confirm that we are still on the right path, ensuring the best possible outcome.
This weeks tutorial was focused more-or-less on updating each other on our progress and what challenges we have been facing. Most groups seemed to be at relatively at the same stage as my group that was reassuring. It was great having the opportunity to ‘touch base’ with one another and just to confirm that whatever ideas have come to us since the previous week seemed like a good idea. One change our group has made from last week is to focus less on a ‘mocumentary’, but rather look at creating a dialogue that explains our concept of ‘slactivism verses activism’ while also using ‘talking heads’ to validate our arguments.
The biggest issue our group is having is a. Pinning down our main idea, which I believe we have done now, but also be confident in bringing our ideas to the table and knowing they would be seriously looked at. One idea I thought we could use was instead of having all our dialogue face-to-face we could film conversations over text and Facebook, as what we are looking at is technology and social media. This idea was adapted in our project brief and we all seemed to like the outcome.
Copyright is another issue some groups have been facing, what’s appropriate and what isn’t. Our group may like to use the very beginning of Primal Scream’s ‘Loaded’ in our project brief at some point as we think it could give some excitement to the video and it is very appropriate to the protest aspect of the video. Our main concern is that perhaps this could be in breach of copyright, after speaking to our tutor we came to the conclusion that using a small bit shouldn’t offend many people. If, after editing and using the audio it seems like there could be an issue regarding copyright we will review it and see if it’s worth the risk.
Firstly they’re often concerned with structures within an organised society including the police, local governments, unions and journalism. Marriage is often referred to today as an institution as there are many expectations and values encompassing the tradition, and it also forms apart of a legal institution. An institution can be defined as ‘an organisation founded for a religious, educational, professional, or social purpose’, in other worlds they are practises in which a societies expectations and values are upheld. The religious aspect of institutions is fairly thought provoking; if institutions are meant to reflect a community’s values should gay marriage naturally form apart of the marriage institution?
The group activity today was to explore the benefits and values of community media. The main consensus was that community media could offer differing and contrasting opinions; it is very accessible and low budget while also very beneficial to the local economy.
Martin ‘what do we want?’
When do we want it?
Gemma is on her computer at Starbucks writing a status:
‘guys we really need to start donating money to help the poor, it’s getting like pretty bad’
Friend messages her:
‘Hey omg ur status was amazing!’
‘Omg shh, I do what I can’
Martin texting friend:
‘dude, no one showed up again’
‘It’s not your fault it’s just no one knew about it’
‘Maybe try social media, text Gemma or something’
We see Gemma receiving a text from martin:
‘Hey Gemma it’s Martin I was wondering which social media website is the best for get people to come to my rally’s’
Gemma thanks for a moment then replies:
‘Get a MySpace lol’
We just see MySpace saying you have failed to make an account.
Martin sighs in frustration as random people walk past saying how much they love Facebook.
He makes a Facebook account successfully and we see him adding people and making a group for his rally.
We see Gemma receiving the invitation she goes to ignore but after seeing all the people who clicked attending she clicks join.
Very similar scene to the first.
Close up on Martin saying:
‘What do we want? and a group of people are seen supporting him.
Bleak and depressing, harsh and foreboding, Ludwig’s photo perfectly captures the nugatory nature of human lives against the seeming necessity of industry. The people sit and stand insignificantly against the vast chimneys that billow careless and dominant fumes. A sea of white, a sky of white— nature against man; man against man. The trees attempt to obstruct the truth, grey and weak — they’re a perfect insight. Change the background, what would we see? We’d see children playing innocently, men fishing mindlessly, a perfect winter’s day in a blissful haze. The background appears artificial, cartoonish in its lunacy, exists to create yet it destroys: the perfect antithesis of the foreground.
How can human creations outnumber humans? How can blue skies be permanently grey? These a mere few of the questions such images provoke, but perhaps the most thought-provoking question is, how can this photo exist? Few images have the ability to enable someone to question their behaviour or ignorance; this one does. The photo is both sobering and distressing yet it is only one photo, of one industrial plant, in one country, by one man.
Who really cares about audiences? Well for starters advertises, obviously, as their entire job focuses around identifying them and then establishing how to market to them. Secondly, production houses and individual program makers as to create works they must first acknowledge who would be interested in such works. Further individuals who have a direct interest in audiences and their functions include: social scientists, cultural theorists and media scholars. The change from Broadcast to the post-broadcast era inevitably led to mass changes in regards to audiences, including: broadcasting to narrowcasting and citizens to consumers. This point in particularly interesting as there are inherent contradictions will post-broadcasting, that although television allows for a mass audience often programs will appeal to a niche set of viewers — limiting the range of impact.
In this lectorial we were also introduced to the idea of fandom. Using Madonna and Portlandia as an illustration of how fanatics are born. The screening of Portlandia accurately depicted how easily one can become fanatical, and how once an ideal audience member watches or views something it can catapult into a complete obsession.
In this weeks tutorial the group chosen to do audiences for project brief #4 illustrated how they wished to convey audiences within media. Their idea focused around a feminist perspective — how a feminist could/would piece certain pieces of media. A very interesting and thought provoking idea.
A compare the pare idea that explores the modern-day social activist (social Justice warrior) against an ‘old school’ social activist. The idea intends to demonstrate both the negatives and positives of technology when it comes to raising issues, while also delving into the world of ‘image’ as opposed to actual philanthropic intentions. In a documentary style, we hope to demonstrate the effects technology can have on the world in a more niche scenario. The plot will illustrate the problems involved with sometimes-disingenuous ploys to raise awareness against the struggles on an ‘old school’ activist and their need to embrace technology to further their campaigns.
In this project brief we hope to illustrate the struggle and need of technology in the fight raise awareness for certain social issues. We also want to explore how technology and individuals have become synonymous with each other; and how this can lead to either a narcissistic approach to technology or an entire rejection of it. Ultimately, we hope to demonstrate the necessity of technology in a modern-day civilisation while also exploring how the ever-obsessive nature of public image can unhinge the power of social activism.
Either by acting ourselves of asking friends or family to participate we will choose two fitting representatives for the modern day activist and the old school activist. We will preferably choose two individuals who would, to some degree, consider themselves activists, to give a more realistic interpretation of the plot. Using perspective cameras and perhaps mock interviews we hope to further offer a realistic interpretation of the scenario. Although the idea will inevitably be developed and changed through the process of creation, ultimately we hope to challenge one another as well ourselves to ensure the best possible outcome.
As a group we will endeavour to make sure we have ample time to:
Week 9: Write dialogue and create storyboards and find the appropriate representatives for the characters.
Week 10: Loan and collate the appropriate technology to ensure the highest quality for the film.
Week 11: Commence filming.
Week 12: Continue filming and finish editing. Also ensure that every team member is happy with the outcome.
Most of the meetings and filming will take place at or near RMIT as it is easy for all team members to get there along with the resources that the university has to offer will make the process far easier than anywhere else. Any work done by team members outside the meetings will be posted on the Facebook group and reviewed in the meetings.