Category Archives: reflections

Participation during IM1

What did you do well? 

  • This semester I did very well at learning how to condense what I learnt, read, and written, and consolidate them with my thoughts in order to produce concise but detailed blog posts.
  • I explored may new forms of interactive media, and reviewed them using various insights I had learnt through the course material, as well as strengthening my critical analysis/evaluation skills (using De Bono’s method).
  • I grappled with concepts until I really felt that I understood them (at least to the capacity I can understand them at the current time in my life/academic career).
  • I have participated fully in the group project, and tried to play to my strengths and support my team members.
What have you learnt to do better?
  • I have learnt to embrace the possibilities of different forms of media, change how I think about conceptions of film/audiences/authorial intent/making/linearity/narrative/sketching.
  • I have learnt to think about poetics, and focusing on what a work can do rather than what we want it to do.
  • I have learnt how to understand database documentary much more than I originally did.
  • I have learnt how to let go of ‘old media’ traditions which don’t necessarily apply to the current entangled media sphere we operate in.
  • I have learnt how to use the content management system of a blog much more effectively.
  • I have learnt how to communicate some of the lessons from the course material in a relatable way, as evidenced by the conversations I held with friends and family and documented throughout the twelve weeks.
What could you have learnt to do better? 
  • Time management was not my strong point this semester, and I frequently drafted many blog posts, but never went back to edit/publish them. Although eventually, I did get all of my blogs published, I could have been more responsible to my deadlines.
  • I also could have engaged with the reading materials more comprehensively, however I believe that I still gained valuable insights from them, and became more lateral-thinking and ideas-driven in doing so.
  • Whilst I did complete most of the troubleshooting posts I endeavoured to do, I didn’t use as many of the resources I said I would have (such as YouTube and Lynda.com tutorials).

You can find my participation criteria and contract here.

Week 12: Summary

And here it is: the long-awaited summary of Integrated Media 1.

Some of the take-away lessons I’ve learned over the past 12 weeks are:

  • To embrace the infinite possibilities of lists.
  • To question the Hollywood model of film and what you can achieve through the medium.
  • To understand that our current media environment is fragmentary.
  • To think about how to make things differently using poetics and meaning.
  • To think about the concept of linearity and where it sits in our life.
  • To understand that we are in a post-industrial state of media making, where all of the rules about practice and value are different.
  • To consider what an artefact can do instead of thinking about what we want it to do or what we think it ought to do.
  • To realise that it’s not about the instrument, it’s about what you can do with it.
  • To surrender any idea that you can control an audience or how they interpret a work, but instead understand that they have agency and you can empower them through interactivity.
  • To reassess how I conceive the process of making/sketching/emergence.
  • That I will strengthen my media-practice if I continue to develop as an ideas-driven practitioner.

(Image via flickr)

 

Week 11: Reflections

This week seemed to give us an arsenal of knowledge for how we can think about things as filmmakers. Below are my observations.

Interface design is incredibly important in Korsakow. Think of it as mis-en-scene. You are composing a visual space, which you will use to direct people. Don’t underestimate your audiences by showing them everything. You’re creating a world which you want to invite someone into, so that they can explore on your behalf. Don’t signpost everything, because there is poetry in absence and presence. It’s about seduction and reward: that’s what exploration is.

When thinking about how you curate your k-film, you have to think about what you include and exclude (because we all know about the politics behind these actions, right?). You have to think about video, sound, and if there will be layers in the piece? You also have to consider which software/medium is right for your message, such as whether you will used a participatory form of creation or a closed database system like Korsakow. Decide what kind of linearity it will follow. Start sketching. Think about the indexing, key wording, themes, patterns and taxonomy you are creating as you go along. Think, using granularity, about your fragments as individual units – what do they look like? How long are they? Consider remix, and how they are going to be put together, combined or recombined.

As a filmmaker, let plurality and multiplicity happen. There will never just be one relation, and you won’t ever get to decide what the relation/s is/are. Listen to the content and the meanings behind it. Don’t subscribe to the colonising idea that we treat our media according to what we want it to do, instead of thinking about what it can do. Don’t invest so much in the notion of conclusion – this is not a trait that bestows quality on your work. Make a film that lets the viewer have an experience that they want and like. It’s all up to you as a filmmaker.

(Image via flickr) 

Week 10: Reflections

The first question of this week’s symposium was “how can we emphasise moments of contemplation through making our Korsakow films?” Adrian said we should encourage the viewer to discover the poetics of our K-films. Their relationship with the content will change as they navigate through the film, so create relations that aren’t literal. Remember that the design of your interface can reflect your intentions of contemplation too. He made the point that repetition is a tool that is often used to inspire contemplation (such as meditation and religious practices). Think about how you build something with your camera and your software, and open up a conversation with these.

Adrian spoke briefly about the idea of ‘gaps’ which need to be filled in by the audience. He said that the more gaps a work has, the more it regards itself as poetically higher. The less gaps, the more popularist it is. I personally have troubles with this – what about people who go against the grain and love both? For example, I have a borderline unhealthy love of binge-watching British and American television dramas – but it’s healthily balanced with academic engagement, exploration and experiment. What’s to say that something popularist can’t be sophisticated? Or vise versa?

In a discussion about Korsakow keywords, it was agreed upon that due to the fine line between showing and telling, and the respect that this deserves, it is better to make your keywords mood or meaning based, as opposed to visual based (which merely skims the surface of what relations and power a work can have). A title or a short statement at the beginning of your film can be a useful tool for giving a frame to contextualise and understand the work within.

Finally, we had a look at the Kuleshov effect, which is fundamental to our understanding of cinema. The juxtaposition demonstrates that meaning is not internet to the shot – it’s established by the relations between the shots. Therefore, meaning lives outside the shots.

(Image via flickr)

Week 09: Value

This week I wanted to discuss the concept of ‘value’ and what makes a media artefact valuable.

It’s so incredibly and laughably subjective that it’s almost not worth talking about – but hey, I’m going to try anyway.

I think the overwhelming thoughts I have at this moment in (media) time/history, is that we’re so swamped by a media environment of saturation.

On YouTube alone, 450,000 years of video content are watched each and every month worldwide.

Video has become a bit of a ‘throwaway’ piece of culture which we treat as ephemeral amidst a sea of mediocre offerings.

So what makes a piece of content worthy of your attention? What makes it good?

Do you know what?

It doesn’t matter.

These days, it does not matter.

If IM1 is teaching me anything, it’s that I have to learn to let go of the paternalistic notion that I have any control over the content I produce and the audiences who may find and interact with it.

The media environment that is forming, evolving and adapting around us is one that is the opposite of traditional/legacy media: it embraces change, interactivity and experiments. Or rather, those involved in this ‘new’ environment embrace it. And they will find your work if it’s doing something worthwhile. Never underestimate the agency of your audience.

(Image via flickr)

Week 08: Documenting

This week I wanted to write a post about the concept of documenting.

I love taking photos. A lot. My iPhoto library will back me up on that one. But do I, and those of my generation, purportedly raised by the internet, take too many photos? Do we forget to be ‘in the moment’ whilst we’re documenting the moment?

This is a very common thread of ideas, often spouted by older generations who talk about the time when they only have one roll of film to last them a month and you had to be scarce with your photo-taking opportunities. That’s great, and it worked for them. But I love that I have the power, technology, space (physical and digital) to take as many photos and videos as my heart desires. I embrace it as part of the culture I’m a part of.

But that doesn’t mean I don’t often stop and think about whether I’m taking more time ‘getting the shot’ than I am enjoying the surroundings. Whenever I go to a music concert, I want to be able to remember all of my favourite bands singing all of my favourite songs, so I will often take video footage of them. But sometimes, I find myself watching their live performances unfold through the screen of my camera or smartphone instead of looking directly at the action unfolding on the stage.

But I wouldn’t sacrifice the memories attached with having these photos and videos. I love reminiscing and being able to go back and relive the excitement from my prized moments of adventure again and again.

I watch a lot of YouTube, and some of my favourite vloggers often attend YouTube conferences, meet-ups and parties. With vlogging camera at (a flattering) arm’s distance away, then let you into their world and what they’re experiencing. But in there ‘performance’, are they forgetting to experience their surroundings simultaneously?

Around the same time I was thinking about all of this, one of my favourite YouTubers published this video:

I like how she talks about the connections and relations you make with people when you’re not worrying about the ‘post-production’ or ‘editing’ of these moments (both real and metaphorical). I think this relates into the conception of meaning-creation that we’ve been looking into this semester in IM1, but more importantly, I love how digitalised content can allow you to relive those moments of connection again and again… in full HD.

(Image via flickr)

Week 08: Reflections

Constraints, constraints, constraints. The magical word of the semester.

What we discussed this week was about how formal constraints actually allow creativity. In fact, creativity can’t happen without constraints. For example, in music, there are only certain notes that you can use. And if you decide to write a pop song, there’s a structure you follow.

Image via flickr

Image via flickr

As young media professionals, we need to stop waiting for inspiration, or the lightbulb moment, and just make. We need to realise that we do have things to say and things to make if we can learn to stop, look, listen and notice the world around us. We must release ourselves from thinking we can only do this if we impose our will upon the world. We are so caught up in epistophelia – the obsession with explaining – that we take away all of the magic, poetry, mystery and responsibility as a maker. There’s nothing left. Our work will be didactic and dull if we think each clip has to explain itself. The clips don’t actually matter in themselves, but they matter by virtue of the relations which are formed. This is where meaning happens. Then, we are composing something.

We then spoke about the ‘essay film’, and how these too can be documentaries. Essays are filtered through the thoughts and subjectivity of the person making it – they are not trying to look at the world objectively (or if they are, they’re already failing). Essay films, therefore, invite conversation and dialogue. They invite the viewer to join the filmmaker as they think through and explore something.

Once again, it was drilled into us that our interpretation of a text has no relationship to what the author intended. Context can never be preserved – we read films/television/paintings/books differently over the years as our own experience and worldview changes with our environments. Intent does not survive anything – it’s the easiest thing to break. That’s why we have satire and parody.

We finished by discussing the fact that expression and exploration are tangental and multi-linear in nature. We think that linearity comes first and that multi-linearity is a new thing. It’s actually the other way round: ideas aggregate around each other and always have. This is the way we experience the world, through webs of association. Whereas linearity imposes order, hierarchy, priority. This helped me to clear up a few things which I was wondering about last week. 

(Image via flickr)