|
|
Post by pfbourassa on Dec 4, 2017 15:07:07 GMT
Now that episode 2 is up, we start our retrospective look at how things went.What went well? What was difficult? How can smooth out obstacles next time around? - Writing
- Shooting
- Editing
- Gif finding
- Marketing
- Audience reaction
|
|
|
|
Post by pfbourassa on Dec 4, 2017 15:57:21 GMT
To get us started:
I think it helped to write the Marketing copy out ahead of time in that Google Doc.
Maybe next time we can sign up for specific platforms as well.
We should open the Nominations up sooner.
Maybe right after the video is sent to the editor.
Then, there will be more time to deliberate and choose.
I feel like that went be fast this time around.
For Hosting, I think we should try to have someone helping the host film.
Give live feedback, and bounce ideas off of.
If that's not possible for technical reasons, we should schedule and expect a re-shoot for pickup shots.
More gifs.
I know this is hard, and I didn't help all that much.
But we need higher-quality gifs.
I personally don't like the ones with transparency.
And I feel that they should be funny. Relevant is first priority, and funny is a close second.
|
|
|
|
Post by heresanidea on Dec 4, 2017 16:30:10 GMT
I feel an iterative approach would have helped us here. Like come up with a shitty very low effort version of all stuff for which a low effort version is possible (I feel everything but the editing can have a low effort version).
This will allow early feedback from everyone, and equally importantly, will also give a chance for different roles to interact with each other more.
I also think gifs are important. They should be more like a stream of continuous thought rather than like the accessory images you find in a textbook.
Also this time the voice in the script seemed more coherent, probably because we had a creative lead this time. I feel that was a good idea.
I didn't contribute the the script writing, but was it easy to bring the coherence or to ensure its not broken? If it was a problem maybe we can create a parallel version that can be viewed by everyone but can be edited only by creative lead, episode head, and if required a few other selected by these two roles. That'll ensure anyone can contribute to the main script without disturbing the tone too much.
|
|
|
|
Post by pfbourassa on Dec 4, 2017 17:14:46 GMT
I feel an iterative approach would have helped us here. As far as I see this, every episode is an iteration. That's our fundamental unit. This falls apart a bit because we have a rotating cast, but we can still build our knowledge over time. What do you propose for a low-effort version? Shooting the whole script, and then sharing for feedback I can see is a good idea. But what about the script? How can we iterate that in a helpful way? Please explain this point a bit more. |
|
|
|
Post by pfbourassa on Dec 4, 2017 17:37:45 GMT
"My general view about the episode is that it was good and fun to consume. Despite having already read the script the gifs still really helped the long informative discussion about what usernames are and how it came to be. Good enough to watch again.
Time for a few criticism to improve a few aspects of it.
1. The delivery: I have one minor problem with the delivery that it lacked the enthusiasm or the "umf" that videos talking about something interesting has. There were almost no memorable moments where the presenter felt like bursting out with all ideas they were having and how not expressing them would make them have a cognitive meltdown.(subjective experience, I know)
Also, the reading from the script was too unnatural, maybe a little bit of rehearsing and not looking at it while delivering?
2. The images(zhaifs): I can see the allure of using a still image as it makes both editing easier and saves time making it look presentable but there were a few moments where I felt it would have been no effort to find certain gifs. I don't have a problem with stills, it's just AESTHETIC of moving images kinda distracting you feels weirdly appropriate. Would like to argue that we might need to create some gifs in case there are not some available(if we have the time for it). As much as I would like us to devolve into a gif creating discord that would still not be a good idea.
3. The Tangent: The tangent didn't seem that weird when I was reading it when compared to hearing it. The one where usernames create a veil of ignorance. This didn't survive the adapting text to video that well. It felt like it wasn't "earned" if that's what you can call it. It felt like the explanation of the philosophy behind it was kinda leading to everything that followed. It showed how it doesn't work(4chan) and proved to subvert it but still didn't say about the HOW or the WHY. Which feels kinda wrong. The entire anonymity still not allowing us to create a "just" society might be something for the idea forming block for the future(please someone less lazy than me add it) but still felt it all boiled down to "It should work, but as evident it doesn't...moving on."
4. The art design: As much as this group project should show be allowed to be free forming it on art design, I still would like to see some clean and well thought out design choice. The end credit could really use a patch up.
Also, am I excited for the comment response."
-Devil Dude
|
|
|
|
Post by heresanidea on Dec 4, 2017 18:21:52 GMT
I feel an iterative approach would have helped us here. As far as I see this, every episode is an iteration. That's our fundamental unit. This falls apart a bit because we have a rotating cast, but we can still build our knowledge over time. What do you propose for a low-effort version? Shooting the whole script, and then sharing for feedback I can see is a good idea. But what about the script? How can we iterate that in a helpful way? Please explain this point a bit more. An episode really is an iteration right now. We can do something like this: Script: The creative lead or the original idea haver too if required makes a very hasty low effort draft of the whole thing. Decidedly not spending more than say fifteen (whatever they consider to be low effort) minutes on it. Video: The Host/s do their stuff and try to make the video as close to the intended video with as little efforts as possible (we already do something like that for auditions). Untidy room? Eh just imagine it's tidy. Again, it should decidedly take less than idk.. Half hour. Editing/Animation: no need to find gifs, just show text boxes. I think PowerPoint can help here.. I guess it can show video while also having a text box at least in front.. so if you can't find gif, just draw a static doodle. If that takes time, just write it. Prototyping- an idea from the "design thinking" technique used in so many corporate scenarios. I think Finland is using the same strategy for approaching UBI or something.. I think it'll be amusing to do this first of all, won't take too much time, will increase interaction (especially important for when the community grows more), might help with marketing? (Like "here's a shitty version of this thing we're working on for funsies, wanna help?"), and would hopefully give crucial feedback on any obvious shortcomings in most cases; in the worst cases it might give some obvious red flags about an idea that sounded great but isn't all that great for a video for some reason (see "fail faster (extra credits)") and would make it easy to abandon it if required and choose better ones. This can apply also to roles, if at first you thought you wanna do it and then feel like it's troublesome, but now you gotta stick to it because obligations, etc. Then this is a good place to bail out if you so desire. I mean yeah, I see many benefits of prototyping. What do you say? |
|
|
|
Post by pfbourassa on Dec 4, 2017 18:31:59 GMT
@here'sanidea,
I don't see a huge benefit to the script section, since it's so malleable anyway.
Outlining, and asking for feedback is good of course.
Video I agree with very much.
The host and writer should work closely before actual shooting to make sure everything flows nicely.
Editing I'm not sure of. Once the editor has all the assets, they can finish the whole episode, and make changes.
In short, editing and writing non-destructive. They can be revised easily.
Shooting may require lots of set-up to do again.
Also, the script has to be good for the video to be good. So fail faster definitely applies.
|
|
