This week in class we were asked to choose a quote from ‘We’re happy and we know it: Documentary, data, montage’ (Dovey & Rose 2012) that is related to our developing concept for the project. My group and I actually found this task relatively difficult, as while we have developed a concept, it is not yet refined. For the project we want to explore how people interact with spaces, and present this in a way that creates a sensory experience for audiences.

We looked into a few of the possible quotes that could relate to our developing concept, however I believe that the most relevant is that related to ‘spatial montage'(Dovey & Rose 2012), which is the ‘juxtaposition of images within multiple computer windows’ (Dovey & Rose 2012). Dovey & Rose (2012) discuss spatial montage in the modern technological world and what that affords in terms of documentary making. They consider the potential of spatial montage relevant to the Kuleshov Effect, wherein meaning is derived from the juxtaposition of images through the editing process. However, in the case of spatial montage the meaning can be derived through the audience making associations of disassociations between the numerous on screen media. The actual quote I believe to be the most relevant to our project is ‘spatial montage lends itself to the presentation of connections‘ (Dovey & Rose 2012). The Whole Picture by Tony Telson (2017), is an example of utilising spatial montage to generate associations. The quote at the beginning of the project ‘I think it is important to let associations form between apparently disparate ideas’ (Andrew Motion, cited in Telson 2017), accentuates the notion of the audience making connections between the various media fragments even if they are seemingly unrelated. This makes me question whether audiences will always try to make associations between unrelated fragments? Is it innate for the audience to try to create a story from nothing?

Connecting this learning and understanding of spatial montage back to the upcoming project, we will inherently incorporate spatial montage. As our initial vision for the format of our project was conceived with the Korsakow software in mind, we intend for the interface to include multiple fragments of media on the one screen. At the moment our idea for the interface is to have one landscape shot surrounded by multiple close up shots. However, dissimilar to ‘The Whole Picture’, it is our intention that the associations and connections between the various close up shots are obvious to the audience. We want the  audience to make visual connections as well as other associations between the various media fragments. We want to create a sensory experience for the audience through the aesthetic and movement within the shots, portraying how we interact with spaces and what this may mean to the audience.

We presented our idea in class to other groups and received feedback in terms of what they liked but also what we could improve on. Generally, our concept for the assignment was well received by other groups. Albeit we did struggle to articulate our idea for the project to the other groups, once it was understood we were met with largely positive responses. However, in terms of improvement we did receive feedback that we need to refine the interaction aspect of the project. In terms of how each interface will link to the next through audience interaction and connections between landscapes. This aspect of our idea definitely needs to be developed more, however we are still struggling to develop a way in which to achieve this.

Dover, Jon and Mandy Rose. “We’re Happy and We Know It: Documentary, Data, Montage.” Studies in Documentary Film, vol. 6, no. 2, Jan 2012

 

We have commenced brainstorming for the upcoming project. This project has a few more parameters in relation to the previous project. We have been looking into the potential concepts, themes, constraints and construction of the project. An aspect that has driven our concept thinking is the platform we have to utilise to portray the project, Korsakow. The way in which content can be manipulated and arranged on the screen, as well as the ability to link between videos has aided us in formulating a general prompt for our project.

Through focussing on the constraints first, we decided that we would like to construct the project through landscape and extreme close up shots that come from within the landscape. We still have not worked out the specifics in terms of the overriding question or prompt that will inherently guide the themes of the project, but we are considering colour, shapes, textures and sensory experiences.

This week I looked into the work of Jonathan Harris, specifically his project The Whale Hunt. This project is interesting to experience particularly in relation to constrained work as well as modularity. Through this project Harris wanted ‘to experiment with a new interface for storytelling’ (Harris, 2007). So he documented his experience of hunting a whale but with specific parameters involved. The major constraint to the project was the timing of taking a photograph. He took one every five minutes, but at times of excitement up to thirty seven within five minutes in relation to his heart beat. In terms of modularity, the photographs are presented in a way in which each audience can cater the project to their interests, whether this be in a linear manner or otherwise. Each fragment of the project functions on an individual level, but as a whole it tells a narrative.

In terms of constraints, our initial ideas for the constraints are not so restrictive or unique as those in Harris’ ‘The Whale Hunt’, rather we would just like to have consistent lengths of 10-15 seconds for each landscape and close up. Another constraint is that we intend to have five landscape shots and ten respective close up shots for each landscape. We would like to link from each landscape to another landscape shot, however we have yet to figure out exactly we will connect between spaces.

With the small scale project completed I am now able to look back and reflect. My partner and I have created The Case of Maria, an interactive non fiction platform that explores the unsolved abduction and murder of Maria Ridulph. While The Case of Maria is not what we initially thought we would create, I still believe that we have created a project relevant to our initial intent regardless.

The Case of Maria was produced with the intent of focusing on two major characteristics of many online screen productions- hyperlink driven and cross platform. These qualities guided the process of creating the project. The Case of Maria is a centralised platform that incorporates various media pieces including video, photographs, news articles and hyperlinks to Instagram, Facebook and YouTube.

The main challenge we encountered was creating an interactive cross platform project that engaged with audiences enough to motivate them to click the hyperlinks and essentially cross platforms. When faced with the issue of modularity, we realised that having separate media products on separate platforms with hyperlinks between them would be disengaging. Therefore, we decided to centralise all fragments of the project onto one centralised platform. The major aspect of the project is the videos, broken into two chapters, which chronologically outline the case of Maria Ridulph. The videos are uploaded onto YouTube, and provide hyperlinks back to the major platform. Moreover, we also provided hyperlinks to a Maria Ridulph Facebook group and the #mariaridulph feed on Instagram.

Creating the project allowed me to focus on the overriding characteristic of interactivity, as both the qualities of cross platform and hyperlink driven are innately interactive. Relative to the difficulties of incorporating the cross platform characteristic, we also struggled to generate audience interaction. Creating this project has allowed me to understand content creation with the intention of generating audience interaction. As I reflected on in my third development post, I have never thought about audience interaction from the perspective of the producer. While it is relatively simple to create numerous media artefacts on various platforms, generating audience interaction is actually relatively difficult. In the end we decided to utilise not only structure but content to attempt to generate audience interaction. At the end of the second video we asked the question ‘Who do you believe is the perpetrator?’ and also included a poll on the website with the same question. The intent behind this was to urge the audience to click on the hyperlinks and obtain a better understanding of the case so as to generate an opinion on the case and answer the question.

Throughout the process of developing the idea for The Case of Maria and also producing it I found myself grappling with the concept of linearity, as I explored in my fourth development post. While my partner and I were sure that the overall project would be non-linear due to its interactive components, I was more focussed on how we would portray the case in video form. The intention for the videos was to give an outline of the overall case. The videos were intended to be supplemented with the other forms of media and hyperlinks. Initially, I wasn’t sure if I wanted the videos to be linear and I explored ways in which to present the narrative in a non-linear manner. However, for the purpose of audience comprehension I believed it would be more effective in linear form. I would, however, like to further explore creating non linear work in an interactive situation.

While I believe that what we have created is an example of an interactive media project, I would like to create something much more immersive and consequentially more interactive. The question I have about the changing landscape of new media is, is this just the start of audience interaction or can it be taken to another level? How far will the ever evolving technology take interaction? Is it possible for lines between content producer and audience to be blurred even further?

 

 

 

The Case of Maria

 

The concept of linearity is something that I need to clarify my understanding of. I have always believed that a linear media piece is something that starts at the beginning of a story and finishes at the end. Linear narrative can be defined as ‘a story which may contain stylistic or temporal discontinuities such as flashbacks, but which is nevertheless conventionally read or told from the beginning to the end, in contrast to an interactive or hypertext narrative’ (Chandler & Munday 2011) .

So what makes something non linear? Is linearity only appropriate if there is a story? Is linearity based on chronological order? If linear narrative is conceived as being sequential then doesn’t that inherently make any interactive form of media non-linear? Seeliger et al (2010) describe non-linear video ‘as an approach, which makes video content at interactive experience’.

Linearity is highly relevant to the project we are creating and it also links back to audience interaction. Our intent is to take different fragments of Maria Ridulph’s case and upload  them onto a central platform, including photographs and newspaper articles. However, we also want to include the narrative of the case in the form of a video. I believe that the video’s will best portray the narrative in linear form. In this way, the project is both linear and non linear, however in its entirety I believe that it is non-linear.

In terms of audience interaction, content is another aspect we could incorporate in order to generate audience engagement. As the case we are presenting is an unsolved murder mystery, the project could be utilised to provoke the audience to consider who they believe the suspect to be. This could be achieved through asking this very question at the end of the video or by including a poll on the website, separate to the video. Another option is to create a separate poll and provide a hyperlink to this poll on the website.

Seeliger, R, Rack C & Arbanowski, S 2010, ‘Non-Linear Video: A Cross-Platform Interactive Video System’, SMPTE Annual Tech Conference & Expo, Hollywood, CA, pp.1-9

Chandler, D & Munday, R 2011, ‘Dictionary of Media and Communication’, Oxford University Press

Daniel Chandler and Rod Munday

This week in class we discussed Manovich’s (2001) work ‘The Language of New Media’, in particular the principles of new media he outlined in his work. An aspect of this discussion that struck me as relevant to the project we’re developing is the principle ‘modularity’ (Manovich 2001). This principle refers to how online media can be broken down into separate modules.  The question this principle begs about new media, however, is how each piece of separate media can function both separately and as a whole? This question has major implications on not only the way in which we think about media as a whole but also specifically to our project as well.

One of the major formal qualities we intended to incorporate into our project was cross platform which involves an inherent modularity. The potential for people to come across one singular piece of media from a platform is high and therefore it is important for context to be given, or for that piece of media to be able to function singularly. This understanding has changed the way in which I now think about how we are going to produce this project. Given the context of the project, a better outcome might be achieved if we eliminate the cross platform quality and incorporate another one. Our idea at the moment is to create a non fiction interactive piece focusing on a non fiction narrative based on the murder case of Maria Ridulph. Therefore, keeping each piece of media centralised to a singular platform might create more coherence and audience comprehension.

The interesting thing completing this project has allowed me to do is to understand new media theory from a producer’s perspective. As an audience I can easily acknowledge that cross platform modular media projects can function, for example a magazine company may produce a short video/article on snapchat with a link to ‘view the full article’ on their web page. If I am intrigued by the video then I may click on the link to the webpage. This kind of cross platform media functions both separately and as a whole. However, as a content creator I need to be able to create a media project that works cohesively whilst being modular. There are a number of options we could explore to achieve this including creating context through captions that urge the viewer to watch it chronologically. Or we could use other pieces of media such as photographs on other platforms and portray the narrative in a non linear manner.

Manovich, L 2001, ‘The Language of New Media’, The MIT Press, pp. 18-31

Sensory media has become a recent phenomenon and recognised characteristic of online screen production. Autonomous sensory meridian response or ASMR videos have become increasingly popular in recent years. ASMR is an experience of a tingling sensation triggered by a specific sensory stimulus. Most commonly, ASMR videos focus on auditory and visual sensations. For our practical test, we decided to explore this new field of sensory media and create an ASMR inspired video. We decided to focus on the auditory aspect of ASMR, and attempt to create a screen production that triggered an ASMR response.

Creating ASMR is interesting, as it is specifically catered for a niche audience. It is created for the purpose of triggering a specific response. The internet has become a landscape for diversity and creativity, it has allowed for niche communities to form and thrive through online media production. It was therefore interesting to conduct our test and think of ways to produce sound that would trigger an ASMR response and appeal to the niche ASMR audience. However, while ASMR is highly specific and niche, I have also come to realise that it can be extremely diverse. There are no restrictions in terms of length, some ASMR producers create short videos while others create forty minute videos- I have even come across a continuous live stream of ASMR. Moreover, the ways in which the videos can be produced is also variant. There are a large number of ASMR inducing triggers that can be explored through creating an ASMR video, from whispers to tapping.

Creating the ASMR inspired video furthered my understanding of diverse relationships between content producers and audiences, as fostered by the internet. ASMR videos are highly influenced by audience interaction. Throughout the making process I felt as though I had more of the audience in mind than I usually would when creating content. I felt more of a connection to the audience in the way of questioning if the sounds we were creating would actually appeal to an established ASMR audience. Producing this video has allowed me to further understand content production catered for a highly specific audience. It makes me wonder if online screen production will become more specific and audience driven with time or if niche content such as ASMR will become obsolete?

This is the practical test that Jackson and I conducted in response to the formal characteristic of online screen production, sensory media. In recent years ASMR as a form of sensory media has become increasingly popular. It is created for a niche audience and in order to serve a specific purpose, therefore it was interesting to explore creating an ASMR inspired video. For the purpose of this test we believed it was more important to focus on the audio and therefore decided to utilise creative commons visual graphics. On reflection, it could be interesting to explore the visual side of ASMR, however it is predominantly audio based so therefore we thought we would start there.

The Creative Commons material we used included:

https://archive.org/details/morphingwhite

https://archive.org/details/orangeparticles

http://zfootage.com/free-hd-black-white-background-loop/

Initially, I was restricted in my view of online screen production. I viewed it as too closely aligned with traditional media. The interesting thing about online and traditional media production is that projects can move between the two platforms. For example, the television show Broad City was initially a web series that was then moved to traditional television. In my opinion, lines are being blurred between online and traditional screen production as the internet grows and technology expands.

As I was exploring various web series, I came across God Particles – a four part series that explores four character’s lives in the event of the potential end of the world. God Particles is interesting to examine as a web series as it has characteristics of both traditional and online screen productions. The series is of quite a high production standard- it hasn’t been made on a low grade phone camera by a twelve year old exploring film. It is also fairly traditional in terms of its linear storyline and centralisation to one platform. Yet, God Particles also has characteristics that make it consumable on the internet. In terms of content, God Particles features a sense of dark humour that is almost omnipresent on the internet. Moreover, there are only four parts to the series and each part is relatively short in length. Differing from traditional media, the internet caters an environment where practically any length of a screen production is possible. God Particles is the kind of series that was clearly developed for the internet, but could still be adapted for television.

As I initially commenced my exploration of online media by discovering more traditional web series I wanted to expand on my understanding of what can be produced for the internet. I have also come to realise that there are certain aspects of the internet that have allowed for the creation and distribution of content extremely dissimilar to traditional media productions. Something I have always known, but not analysed is the vastness of the internet and the inherent impact this has on the content produced for the internet. The way I view the internet is as an infinite open space within which content and information can be uploaded. There is a decentralised and unregulated aspect of the internet, which has fostered a creative freedom that allows for extremely diverse media products.

One aspect of the internet is its web like interconnectedness, as various links, tags and sharing create a network of content. This kind of understanding of the internet brought to my attention the relevance of interactive screen production. This kind of screen production is something that has been created through the affordances of the internet. Thinking about this, I remembered an interactive fortune teller YouTube video I came across when I was younger. The video is part of a network of videos, connected through hyperlinks. The project is non linear in that the story can be changed through the actions of the audience. This kind of interactive media is interesting as it gives the audience a greater sense of autonomy.

The internet allows for greater connectedness between audiences and content creators. As anyone can produce content, share, like and interact, this blurs the lines between audiences and creators. It creates a space where almost anything can be produced, with audience in mind or without.