[viddish] Gattaca WIP, Connecting with audiences, and Other thinkyness

[permetaform]

lierdumoa and I knew that we shared scary scary vidding brain wherein we knew roughly 80% of what the other was thinking in regard to vid-like things and to test this out we vidded for a weekend with the same fandom and the same song.

It is of great amusement to both of us that we came up with entirely different vids; granted, part of the reason is because I was experimenting with a totally different style.

How Soon | 640x480 (.wmv, 30 Mb)
_{Source: 'Gattaca', owned by Columbia
Song: 'How Soon Is Now' by Love Spit Love
Summary: unabashed WIP}
Extras: Vidder process notes.

I don't think I ever would have the urge to rework this into something tighter, so I present the following to ya'll as a WIP (or is that a VIP? Vid In Progress?). It's a lot more loosely beatwhorish than my other vids, although it still makes me vaguely happy, probably because I can see in my head what the effects are supposed to look like. And the effects-only-I-can-see give me enough glee that I'm less compelled to actually render them in the vid, especially with new and shinier things on my to-vid plate.

Long story short, I'm still curious as to what ya'll think of this vid style, 'cause it's so different from my regular one. To be honest, I thought I'd get bored of watching it, but I don't, and I'm not sure why.

I'm also wondering if there's...how should I say it...disenfranchised viewers out there? ie. vid viewers who are disappointed by today's fanshionable vids because it doesn't connect to them somehow?

If so, what is missing in our current attempts to connect to the audience? Is it the fact that the song is not connecting? Are the clips moving at too fast a rate? Is it the fact that the vid is too ivory-tower avant-garde-ish? Are the songs too long?

The reason why I ask this is that my personal view on art is that its purpose is to connect with people. That's why it is perfectly reasonable for me to view entertainment as art, and it's facinating to me what captures people's attention and what doesn't.

How do I communicate with you?

Or rather,

How do I, as a vidder, communicate with you, as a viewer?

And specifically communicating to a viewer that is not part of the echo-chamber that is all too easy to fall into in all walks of life; how do I communicate with the Other, that does not already see eye-to-eye with me?

Is this communication even *possible*?

I'd like to believe that it is.

For instance, poison_pagan has a totally different vid aesthetic than me, and to be totally honest I read poison_pagan's reviews for the ones that she rates 6 or below, 'cause those vids I tend to like the best. It's simply a different aesthetic.

Question is: is it possible to vid to both aesthetics simultaneously?

Also: *should* it be a goal to vid to both aesthetics simultaneously?

[edit] addendum via thought from laurashapiro: this is a false binary, but here for now for the sake of argument. There's multiple audiences, but can they be communicated with more than one at a time? [/edit]

To borrow morgandawn and laurashapiro's metaphor (god, I love how those ladies makes me think ::blows kisses::), one cannot and should not expect a person who likes PWPs to absolutely adore long angsty epics; they *might* also like it, but it's not a certainty.

And to be honest, fic-wise, I really usually love only the short stories. It's the rare long-fic that I am able to like/invest in. Why should it be different for vids and vid watching?

...

wow, that was rambly. Feel free to respond to any or all parts of the above. ::hugs flist:: Connecting with one's audience is such a fickle matter; wickedwords tried to start a conversation about this last VVC (::gives major props::), but it got choked by the challenge vid-show. She is absolutely right, however, that this conversation should probably take place and I adore her brain for realizing this and bringing this realization to people's attention.

For reference, laurashapiro's great Connecting With Audiences panel notes.

[edit] and her thoughts on vidding Farscape (aka. vidding for multiple levels of viewers)

[edit2] I don't want to be totally catering to the audience, but the fact is that you can't connect your piece with your audience unless you understand your audience enough to understand what they *don't* know, and be able to fill in those gaps. The step that takes them a bit beyond what they already know is, then, the second half of art; it's connecting them back to *you*. Full circle.

[edit3] OHHHH, cathexys' comment, from lierdumoa's made me realise that some of the flashier effects in vids actually *looked* more complicated than they actually are and thus get applauded more. ::headdesks:: This is what you get for being in an echo-chamber, I was totally confused as to why people were so ga-ga over the effects in the Oz version of "Chemicals Between Us".

[edit4] sockkpuppett's brought up a really good point: how do we define an audience? Personally, after these discussions, I'm thinking that an audience is a group of people with a similar knowledge and/or aesthetic base.

The reason why this is important is because a vid that you plan to show a particular audience has to both fill in their gaps of knowledge AND recognize what is already common knowledge and shorthand that.

One of the most brilliant shorthanding's I've seen is shalott and melina's The Mountain vid, wherein they used one perfectly placed shot (of Boromir rubbing his sword handle while Aragorn watches, or was that the otherway around...) to summarize the Aragorn/Boromir relationship, which OMG, was more effective than a complete vid.

[edit5] by elynross:To me, taking the audience into consideration is something that comes in, in part, during the beta process, and involves making sure that to the best of your ability, you've communicated what you want to communicate

[...]

What matters to me is the care and concern of the vidder involved, the intentionality, the skill and/or the signs of talent that can be hidden in the vid of a less-skilled vidder.

[edit6] by musexmoirai: "I think the different expectations often arise from the fact that songs in comedic vids tend to be specific and removed from the fandom shown, so there's a sense of 'wow, that's clever,' when someone is able to find a particularly good match of song/image. Whereas more emotional, serious songs with slower beats tend to have more universal lyrics because of the emotions expressed. So I end up looking for interpretation and it gets a little boring when every kiss is a kiss."

[edit7] from this thread by lierdumoa: "I think the vast majority of live action effects are designed to be subtle. You're not supposed to see them -- you're supposed to feel them. [...] I think anything that's put in to tie the vid together rather than break it apart is going to be harder to notice for someone who's not looking for it."

[edit8] discussion on clean aethetics

[edit9] by hannahrorlove: "I think knowing the fandom is important to 'getting' a vid, but not completely necessary. If the vid-maker has a goal in mind and is able to communicate that - "this is a tragic love story," "this is just too silly to be believed" - then they succeeded in their goal. [...]

You cannot communicate with everyone who might see or interact with the vid, but you can try to reach out to most. This is probably done by just making the vid clear in terms of what its message is."

NOTE: these highlights are not comprehensive, nor complete

Your thoughts?

Comments

[jmtorres.livejournal.com]

Is there any chance of you releasing this vid in another format? I can't play WMV9 and I was so looking forward to this.

[permetaform]

I've deleted the main file, but I'll take a look into it =)

[sarahtheboring.livejournal.com]

I don't think there's anything wrong with not connecting with part - note, part - of an audience. (Because it's always a part. Some people are going to dig what you're doing, and some won't. Way of the world.) That said, I am the disenfranchised, which is why I lurk around vidding rather than AMVs half the time.

If so, what is missing in our current attempts to connect to the audience?

Nothing - see above. Also, I don't get the feeling that most people are trying to connect with us at all. They're showing off the bling. Which is perfectly okay - lots of people love shiny things. The AMV world is built entirely of shiny things. They merely represent two (of many) different approaches to the same medium.

Is it the fact that the song is not connecting? Are the clips moving at too fast a rate? Is it the fact that the vid is too ivory-tower avant-garde-ish? Are the songs too long?

Depends on the video. Generally, though, I often get a feeling of what I think the editor is trying to get across. Telling a story, exploring beautiful imagery (which is what I got from the Hero vid, and probably missed the point by a mile), celebrating the fandom, showcasing the song, whatever. If the technical end isn't up to scratch it can seem like their message is muddled, or is clearer in their heads than it came out in the end, and in those cases I can respect their effort but the end result doesn't grab me.

If the goal is clearer (everything is in line as far as editing goes) but lies along a different angle than I (personally) go for - again, nothing wrong with that - it will be interesting to see but leave me cold. I will nod and say wow, that was nicely done, and remember it if well-made videos come up, but not be personally moved and will probably not watch it more than once or twice. This is the reaction I get from the vast majority of AMVs. Vast majority.

And this is not because they're busy/effectsy/bling-ful. Some of my favorite videos are blingy ("Stop the Rock" comes to mind; it's a brainless dance video stuffed with effects that I love for no apparent reason). It's just that I'm coming from a different angle than they are with regards to the medium. I'm not really here to see the pretty, all by itself. I'm not very visual, and at the end of the day I don't really care about pretty visuals unless there's more context or if it meshes well with the song. (Pretty movement, that catches the reptile brain a little more. But still, there's a reason I'm a reader and not an artist.)

I'm in the wrong fandom, entirely, and I'm aware of this. That's just the reason, not an excuse or an indictment of anyone.

My point, should I have one, is that everyone has a different approach. There is no "failing" to connect with an audience; there is simply connecting with one part of the audience or another. If the question is "how do I connect with the part of the audience that's here for another reason than I am," I'm not sure - I'm not sure that's even a good idea. Tastes vary, that's all. There are thousands of people grooving on the same things you are, and ...not to sound evil, but isn't that enough? Must one be adored by literally everyone on earth to be happy?

Question is: is it possible to vid to both aesthetics simultaneously?

Yes. I'm falling short of examples right now, but when I get home to my collection I can probably think of some. I think it's mostly in vidding that people have this dipolar view, that effects == random and no effects == good. That's completely backwards from what I know. Effects-less videos are worthless in the AMV arena, so much so that they had to create a playpen category for them in their last big poll just so something not full of effects could be recognized.

Also: *should* it be a goal to vid to both aesthetics simultaneously?

I think it's asking for a lot; I don't see why the adoration of thousands isn't enough. ;)

have rambled a lot. But it's a POV pretty much diametrically opposed on every level, so maybe it's worth something because of that.

[permetaform]

Also, I don't get the feeling that most people are trying to connect with us at all. They're showing off the bling. Which is perfectly okay - lots of people love shiny things.

XD, I think there might be an opposite reaction in vidding fandom...that there isn't enough shiny for some people.

exploring beautiful imagery (which is what I got from the Hero vid, and probably missed the point by a mile)

heh, actually no. I think of it like a vidding kata, and the meaning/context was only there to supply a framework for the tons of pretty. =D

If the goal is clearer (everything is in line as far as editing goes) but lies along a different angle than I (personally) go for - again, nothing wrong with that - it will be interesting to see but leave me cold.

ahhh...huh. You've sorta described the mind-heart disjunct we were talking about in class. The question I was asking though, was if it was possible to ever have something that firstly engages your heart, and then you find out there was more and more for your mind to chew on?

What I'm wondering is if it's possible to connect with multiple parts of the audience all at once? If so, how/why is that?

And it's not so much adoration of everyone on earth, but rather the fact that you're managing to connect to so many different people. That if some part of the message was recieved then it's at least better than none.

I think it's mostly in vidding that people have this dipolar view, that effects == random and no effects == good.

I think might be more 'visible' effects = random; if the effects are invisible or well integrated, I never see any complaints. sockkpuppett's vids, for one, are awesome in this regard, so are lierdumoa's, sisabet's, and lithium_doll's, just off the top of my head.

[sisabet.livejournal.com]

I want to see and discuss and do all this and you are making me have to drive home during lunch in order to do all this now!

::glare::

But that's okay cause vid-discussion! Connecting with Audiences! Whee!

*I* think you communicate incredibly well - but this is not news. I always get something from your vids even when they scare me shitless or cause me to froth at the mouth in envy (there is always the first "OMG SO JEALOUS" watch, followed by the "OMG SO PREEETTTY" watch) - but your vids are not a simple one-time-thru-and-you-have-it thing. As someone for whom watching vids is a serious part of their fannish interaction, I appreciate that. Other people do not. You mentioned poison_pagan's reviews and I have to agree - we are coming from a totally different aesthetic, here.

Same deal with crack_van, there are often vids rec'd there that I just boggle at being held up as an example of a fandom (especially when I can rattle off 5 alternate vids that cover a variety of topics and moods and are IMO stellar) and I think a lot of this is because there is a completely different vidding aesthetic out there in fandom-at-large and in the Vidding Fandom we are fashioning for ourselves with things like the vidder list and Vividcon.

If you love "Full House" and are a Joey/Jesse shipper and are active on message boards and read and write fic, but never interact with the more visual-arts members of your fandom and one day you stumble upon a vid to "Bring In the Clowns" and it is all about Joey and Jesse and OMGTHEIRLOVEISSOOLSENFIED you will *adore* this video. And you should because it is aimed at you and thank god it is out there because the joy it brings you is immeasurable.

That vid connected with its audience. It won't connect with me. I will Download it and save it in a special folder and possibly talk about it for a week on AIM, but I won't connect with it in a meaningful way. This is okay. There are plenty of people who are left cold by my own vids. This is also okay.

There are plenty of people who just hate "Full House" and this gives me hope.

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

I am beginning more and more to think about this as a learning process. In a way, I wonder whether vidding is like reading poetry in that there are poems that seem to go for the emotions and the pretty images and language and they make sense on first or second reading. And then there's the stuff you spend a lot of time mulling over, and these are the poems that I return to again and again, and enjoy them ultimately more, but usually on a more cerebral level.

And yes, there are some that manage to so both (the first poem in English that I ever "got" was Owen's Dulce et Decorum est, and I still think it's a great poem, and I know I "got" some vids before I started trying to actually lean to "read" them, some of which were yours, in fact... But I didn't get the same things out of them as I'm beginning to do now, and I know I haven't even begun to scratch the surface...

So, yes, I agree with you that there's a place for happy fannish vids that make the shipper and show fan happy (i'm wondering if someone like Frost or even a lot of the Romantics or Shkespeare would fall in here) and that there are vids that will only appeal to the educated "reader" (eh...just about all of modernist poetry?), and there are very few crossovers (who used that term? Laura?) who manage to do both...

And, permetaform, I don't think anyone needs to attempt to cross over, but I wonder if awareness of one's intended audience at least might not be a very useful thing. And I agree that it's a matter of aesthetic, but some aesthetics require better tools or better equipped "readers" than others, right?

re your post: would you mind saying a bit more about the differing aesthetics, b/c as an utter beginner, i went to poison_pagan's LJ and was trying to figure out why you'd love the one's she rates under 5 (b/c the couple I saw were ones I can't quite see you enjoying)

re gattaca...i need to see it again, but let's just say that i remember not liking the movie very much and your vid made me want to rewatch it...or maybe just rewatch the vid??? :-)

[permetaform]

_{but your vids are not a simple one-time-thru-and-you-have-it thing}

o.o

I've been thinking that my vids were too transparent and narratively simple, and making them harder as a result.

...oops.

_{Same deal with crack_van, there are often vids rec'd there that I just boggle at being held up as an example of a fandom (especially when I can rattle off 5 alternate vids that cover a variety of topics and moods and are IMO stellar) and I think a lot of this is because there is a completely different vidding aesthetic out there in fandom-at-large and in the Vidding Fandom we are fashioning for ourselves with things like the vidder list and Vividcon.}

ahhhhh, good point with bringing in the Vidding Fandom!! That makes a ton of sense, actually, why more and more there feels like a vidding fandom, 'cause there's in-jokes and our own fanon, except it's kinda a meta-fandom feeding off other fandoms...sorta. er...perhaps the term I'm trying to get at is echo-chamber?

[hannahrorlove.livejournal.com]

I have to head off for class before I can give detailed thoughts and feedback, but this I will say:

That is a work-in-progress? As far as I can tell, it is complete. It tells the story, and it tells it well. I have seen the movie, so the ending was a bit confusing for me ("I thought she gave him her hair") but then realized it was intentional on your part, to emphasize the Jerome/Vincent relationship.

I was only bugged by the scrolling "Gattaca" script (I would think you would know the source movie is Gattaca if you are watching this, making the script unnecceary) and the fact that you did not use the version of the song by the Smiths. However, the latter reason is an entirely personal one and I find I like this version as well, even though it is great fun to hear Morrissey croon.

More will come later.

...that is a WIP? Man.

[permetaform]

o.o ohhh, ooops. It's not Gattaca script, it's DNA code that's scrolling. There's four letters in DNA code, and they're comprised of the same ones that make up the word Gattaca which I thought was smart on the part of the movie. (maybe if I made the lines of the text longer??)

That's a WIP in the way that it doesn't 'catch' every beat, and I usually try to catch the beats. Again, different aesthetics. =)

[laurashapiro.livejournal.com]

Many, many thoughts here. First: downloading your vid now. Hope to have something useful to say about it, but it's going to be a busy day at work, so it may take me a while.

Second, it should be noted that "Connecting With Audiences" was not my panel alone; wickedwords co-modded and, IIRC, came up with the original idea for it. And she'd be a great person to rope into this discussion, because her vids seem to appeal to a very broad audience but sometimes are treated dismissively by your so-called Living Room Vidders. Rache vids are fun and sexy and funny and charming and you get it all in the first go. I think this is a wonderful skill, and one I wish I had.

Thirdly, and I think this is important: your post sets up what I believe to be a false binary, that there are only two vidding aesthetics. While I certainly see the division you are making (and, in my conversation with morgandawn, I may have reinforced this idea), I think there are many, many different vidding aesthetics. One of the things Rache and I talked about in our panel was that you don't just connect with *the* audience, you connect with *audienCES*, of which there are many. And they bleed over into one another.

As I emphasized in the panel, I think it's up to the vidder to decide which audience(s) each of her vids is targeting, and then to pursue that audience with all energy -- both in creation and in distribution. And I think it's perfectly fine to say "This vid is only meant for obsesso-fans of Fandom X, and nobody else will really enjoy it" or "This vid is meant to play well at this particular con's premiere vid show, and it probably won't grab the general public" or "This is for fun and squee and shininess and I want as many people as possible to groove on it, but it's not all that deep and might miss the super-intellectual types". Any of these strategies is perfectly okay, just as their target audiences' tastes are perfectly okay. The difficulty comes with, as Morgan always says, unclear or faulty expectations, which is why communication between vidder and viewer is so important, and why (IMO) the Escapade vid show in particular is so often fraught with emotional tension: lots of different types of audiences within that audience, lots of different types of vidders submitting lots of different types of vids, and nobody is going to wind up with a vid show that fulfills all, or even most, of their expectations.

Vids shouldn't have to be all things to all people, and vidders shoot themselves in the foot when they try to vid with that goal. The most likable vid in the world is going to go unliked by *someone* -- probably many someones. Why angst over it? Figure out what your style is, what kind of art *you* want to make. Then find a way to show it to the kind of viewers who will appreciate it.

[permetaform]

=D recredited, will respond to rest of post in a bit

Not Only Are There Multiple Audiences - They Change

[morgandawn.livejournal.com]

Laura wrote: "your post sets up what I believe to be a false binary, that there are only two vidding aesthetics. While I certainly see the division you are making (and, in my conversation with morgandawn, I may have reinforced this idea), I think there are many, many different vidding aesthetics. One of the things Rache and I talked about in our panel was that you don't just connect with *the* audience, you connect with *audienCES*, of which there are many. And they bleed over into one another..."

Me: What makes vidding fascinating to me is the fact that, like poetry it has an unusually subjective interaction with the viewer. But any work of art - music, vid, book - lives and dies in the space between. The interaction between the work and the audience. It is an ever changing space - moments in time, that can never be recaptured. So at times a vid will work on one level with one person - and a different level with another person or even sometimes, with the same person.

I think this goes beyond Living Room Vid/Con Vid (although the setting plays a huge role, second only to song choice and fandom).

But the mix is what is key: fandom, pairing, setting, song chocie, style (fast cuts/effect heavy), audience expectations, audience experience with vids .. the list is endless.

So each time a vid is shown or viewed, it 'tastes' differently.

Think of this like baking a cake - it never comes out the same.

It is still hard for me, however, to connect with people who approach vidding (or fandom differently) - who ask for pie when cake is being served. Or tell me they dont like my cake. Cause it took so long to make it. and I'll never have that recipe again. Oh drats.

[permetaform]

added note about the false binary =) thank you for pointing that out!

_{The difficulty comes with, as Morgan always says, unclear or faulty expectations, which is why communication between vidder and viewer is so important}

::major props::

_{The most likable vid in the world is going to go unliked by *someone* -- probably many someones. Why angst over it? Figure out what your style is, what kind of art *you* want to make.}

See, here's the thing: I've been trying to change styles from one vid to the next, just to get practice in different forms/styles. In the end, the art I want to make comes down to two thing: connecting with different audiences and beat-whoring.

The beat-whoring is inherent, I can't stop that if I tried. The most I can do is tamp it down to the current Gattaca vid's level, where I mostly used small internal motion or caught the silent beats.

The connecting with different audiences, is a bit more difficult; especially as morgandawn's pointed out that the audience changes. Also, the audience I *want* to connect with at any one time changes too, and I keep wanting to reinvent portions of my style, just to keep myself on my toes.

[childofatlantis.livejournal.com]

I hope you don't mind me commenting on your LJ, but I was just wondering if you were planning to unlock your vidding entries anytime? Your tutorial index is really useful, but I can't get to any of your own linked entries about it. :)

[permetaform]

o.0 they're already unlocked I thought?

I see your Ramble, and I raise you an even *bigger* one! ;D

[dualbunny.livejournal.com]

(Yay, new vid!)

Vids for pretty movies are always nice to watch. :) I like the simplicity of this one actually. And while I liked the idea of the scrolling genetic code, it didn't add much for me. I wanted to see the movement compliment the beat I think. Something to make me feel like it was there because it was important. It just sort of made it hard for me to keep my eyes up on the other action, because they kept getting pulled down to the bottom of the frame. But like I said, I liked the idea of it. And that you went in that direction of experimentation. That's always cool. ;)

Seriously, I feel like I should be stressing the amount that I liked the addition of it, even if it didn't click for me. It may be that for other people it actually worked just fine. The song is of course now firmly stuck in my head. ;D And also a nice choice for the movie. One that could definitely go different ways with different characters.

I've also been having a blast reading the discussion you started.

Honestly, I don't believe we communicate as vidders, any differently than any other form of communication. Sometimes what we say is very calculated. Sometimes we just want to shock people and get a rise out of them. Sometimes we have something close to heart that we want other people to love with us.

I don't think that's the way you're asking it though. I get the impression you're more concerned with the nuts and bolts of how that desire to communicate "x" is brought across. Which is going to depend on what "x" is. You could certainly approach anything with a very calculated mindset. Using everything you know about how humans generally process visual cues, what feels comfortable to them, what throws them off, how most people react to specific colors and motions, you could assemble a visual composition that should hit the right buttons to create the reaction you want.

And even then, there are going to be some people that don't fit. The visual arts have been doing this for ages. And some people appreciate the intention behind certain artworks and some don't. And there are lots of people that sort of do. :)

I like the idea of keeping an audience in mind, but since I'm not actually selling them anything, and I have nothing to profit from how widespread or minute the reception for a vid I make is, my final decisions are very rarely concerned with what other people are going to think of them. I won't say never, because that's not true. But really, I'm making the vid, because I want to see it. That's my individual reason for vidding. One some share and some don't, would be my guess.

Just like literature and other visual and aural arts, people can be trained to appreciate nuance and intention. It really can be the difference between getting the foothold that leads to real love for something, and being repelled--thus passing the opportunity up. But that's something that's awfully hard to plan for. :) I suppose you could try to display your work in venues where the people who have already caught on to that, or just get it naturally, are more likely to be, but that could be unintentionally limiting if it got taken too far.

As you can probably tell from my own rambling, this is something that fascinates me too. Especially in respect to visual arts in general. I feel like it's a constant struggle to find the line, as an artist, between making something to communicate with other people, making something that purely communicates in your own unique language, and making something that other people would consider consuming/purchasing. The age-old issue of selling-out.

Re: I see your Ramble, and I raise you an even *bigger* one! ;D

[permetaform]

will reply to this momentarily, omg thank you for such a thorough comment! ::glompity::

[musexmoirai.livejournal.com]

Hey, long time no see.

Fascinating discussion. I'm not a vidder (one of those literary fannish types discussed above) and my only visual arts experience is two years of high school drama. But I'll take my best stab at this anyways.

As mentioned above, there are different kind of vid audiences, but, beyond that, there are different types of vids (narrative, emotional, impressionistic, comedic, etc.) I don't know about other vidders, but I change my expectations slightly for each type. For example, I would appreciate a very close match of words and images in a comedic vid, much closer than those in a narrative vid, like when the characters' mouths are timed to make them look like they're singing/saying the lyrics. I wouldn't expect that of a dramatic character-driven vid. And in those dramatic vids, I'd be more willing to accept images working as metaphors and not an exact match for the words (e.g. the lyrics say 'kiss' and a character touches another on the cheek).

I think the different expectations often arise from the fact that songs in comedic vids tend to be specific and removed from the fandom shown, so there's a sense of 'wow, that's clever,' when someone is able to find a particularly good match of song/image. Whereas more emotional, serious songs with slower beats tend to have more universal lyrics because of the emotions expressed. So I end up looking for interpretation and it gets a little boring when every kiss is a kiss.

So, there's that difference in expectations that makes it some people like a vid and not like others. Not that they don't like a certain type (narrative vids) or whatnot, but that sometimes it takes a while to figure out what type this vid is. I have seen vids that I thought were one type only to realize that I was wrong, revised my earlier assumption, and re-watched to greater enjoyment. But what can happen, as it has with me, is that I watched a vid, didn't realize what type it was and thought, 'that vidder totally missed the point.'

So, as a vidder, you've got that working against you. You've also got the context in which the audience recieves the vid, like familiarity/fondness with/to the song, familiarity/fondness with/to the fandom, etc. Usually, vids are not vidded to songs I'm familiar with, so the first time I watch a vid, it's information overload. There's the old familiar images being reinterpretated in new ways and the new song I'm trying to absorb. Sometimes, I end up missing some lyrics and only catching them on a later watch. It's even worse with fandoms I'm unfamiliar with. I could enjoy the vid but not fully realize the signficance of the clips used because I have removed them from the context. Just like in the way a person who hasn't seen Gattaca may have not been aware that of the extent of the Vincent/brother struggle and so that part of your vid (young Vincent) may not resonate as strongly. They may get it (Vincent ripping himself out of the family picture) but you need to be familiar with the context to get the full impact.

Admittedly, too, it's easier to get into the song if it seems to fit the fandom. Like a LotR vid set to Indian belly-dancing music would probably make a lot of people go 'WTF.'

Basically, what I want to say is that, as a vidder, there are a number of factors working against you and a number of reasons why you may not be able to reach a certain audience. It helps that you include notes with all your vids, because then I know what to watch for and appreciate. Even a line summarizing the vid can be a great help for someone like me to figure out the goal of the vidder.

I've found that your vids are strong on symbolism and parallelism, to the extent that you even end up creating your own symbol. Like in your PotC vid, 'Gravity,' the coin almost seems to stand for Jack's need for vengence against Barbossa, and when it's dropped, his life takes a completely different direction. Sometimes, your use of parallelism makes the vid almost seem circular and I can see why people would get put off by that. It's like they get a 'we've see that before, enough already' vibe. I like it just fine, but then I like your vid style. I am such a technophile. I love it when vidders show off their skills with filters, fades, matching images to beats, etc.

[permetaform]

I think the different expectations often arise from the fact that songs in comedic vids tend to be specific and removed from the fandom shown, so there's a sense of 'wow, that's clever,' when someone is able to find a particularly good match of song/image. Whereas more emotional, serious songs with slower beats tend to have more universal lyrics because of the emotions expressed. So I end up looking for interpretation and it gets a little boring when every kiss is a kiss.

NEAT THOUGHT! mind if I quote it in my post?

I have seen vids that I thought were one type only to realize that I was wrong, revised my earlier assumption, and re-watched to greater enjoyment. But what can happen, as it has with me, is that I watched a vid, didn't realize what type it was and thought, 'that vidder totally missed the point.'

ahhhh. Question, did you get that with my Gravity vid? 'cause it totally wasn't a Jack Sparrow character study, but more of a me-and-my-micro-fandom character study with Jack as a puppet/blank slate to project on

Basically, what I want to say is that, as a vidder, there are a number of factors working against you and a number of reasons why you may not be able to reach a certain audience. It helps that you include notes with all your vids, because then I know what to watch for and appreciate. Even a line summarizing the vid can be a great help for someone like me to figure out the goal of the vidder.

Would encouraging a line summary of a vid to vidders help for most vid-viewers you think?


I've found that your vids are strong on symbolism and parallelism, to the extent that you even end up creating your own symbol.

eee! thank you!

Sometimes, your use of parallelism makes the vid almost seem circular and I can see why people would get put off by that. It's like they get a 'we've see that before, enough already' vibe.

::nods:: that was one of the things that I was worried about in Hero vid, but that vid is so heavily laden with metaphor in a metaphor filled movie that I felt that I almost HAD to repeatedly bracket the scenes or they wouldn't even approach the intent that I'd arranged them with.

I like it just fine, but then I like your vid style. I am such a technophile. I love it when vidders show off their skills with filters, fades, matching images to beats, etc.

awww ::glompity::

wait...was it you who I'd first given that Jack/Will vid to, for a beta? I'm thinking of remastering it and releasing it, (finally)...

[musexmoirai.livejournal.com]

I wanted to include some thoughts on your Gattaca vid in my last post, but LJ wouldn't let me *pouts*. Here they are:

-There's a lot of circular imagery in this movie, isn't there? I didn't notice until your vid. But the beginning? Cuticles, glass rooftop, elevator railings, spiral staircase, wheelchair, drops of blood, fingertips, champagne glasses, centrifugal machines, glasses, lightbulbs, etc. Especially at the beginning. In fact, the beginning and end of the vid seemed a little disjointed as the beginning looked more like a series of impressions (many circular images and images of hands) and the ending looked more like a narrative.

-Liked the Vincent at lightbulb clip at "I am the son..." Doubly clever. Vincent (the neglected son) and the lightbulb with satellites orbiting (the sun).

-I'm being picky here, but I would have loved a shot of Eugene pulling himself up the staircase cuz, hey, he already threw himself off the chair.

-The song's a pretty good fit with the movie. It's a different song choice from your usual vids, but you've acquitted yourself very nicely. There are some problems with beat but they're not that jarring.

-Neato trick with the scrolling DNA code and how it appears at certain times: when there's something onscreen that provides DNA, when the characters are asked to prove their identity, and during Vincent's transformation into Jerome. Emotional/introspective scenes didn't have that scroll. That has to be intentional, right?

-Wow, there's really a lot of blue and grays in this movie. Knowing how you like to work with color, I wonder if that presented any problems.

I'm sorry if this post doesn't make too much sense. I'm not really too good at analyzing visual images (probably totally out of my league here), but I hope this post helps you anyways.

OT Question: Do you still follow Smallville? I'm currently looking for a beta for the SV season 4 one-shot fic I'm working on.

[permetaform]

I didn't notice until your vid.

o.0 I didn't notice until your comment. XD ::highfives you::

-Liked the Vincent at lightbulb clip at "I am the son..." Doubly clever. Vincent (the neglected son) and the lightbulb with satellites orbiting (the sun).

::grins and glomps you::

-I'm being picky here, but I would have loved a shot of Eugene pulling himself up the staircase cuz, hey, he already threw himself off the chair.

nah, see, *Jerome* is going up the stairs. *Jerome* is rising, Eugene is static. ;D

-The song's a pretty good fit with the movie. It's a different song choice from your usual vids, but you've acquitted yourself very nicely. There are some problems with beat but they're not that jarring.

It was one of those simultaneous vid bunnies I get with lierdumoa. It was made in a weekend...::wry grin:: I don't much feel like poking at it more.

-Neato trick with the scrolling DNA code and how it appears at certain times: when there's something onscreen that provides DNA, when the characters are asked to prove their identity, and during Vincent's transformation into Jerome. Emotional/introspective scenes didn't have that scroll. That has to be intentional, right?

YES!! YAY! YOU CAUGHT THAT! ::GLOMPS YOU::

-Wow, there's really a lot of blue and grays in this movie. Knowing how you like to work with color, I wonder if that presented any problems.

Actually, I did sorta a work around with clip choice: golden for earth things and blue-gray for sky things.

I'm sorry if this post doesn't make too much sense. I'm not really too good at analyzing visual images (probably totally out of my league here), but I hope this post helps you anyways.

see, too many people think this when leaving feedback for vids: this is EXACTLY what I ADORE seeing in feedback. ::SNOGS YOU::

I know SV, but not season 4...want me to send some feelers out?

[(Anonymous)]

Posting anon. I hope this isn't a problem. I was directed to this discussion by several people on my friends' list and find it all so amusing. I think it's great you brought it up, permetaform, and the following is not directed at you but is just my general feelings on what I've seen in this thread.

How to connect with your audience? OK, this is such a very hard question, which is why there are so many Very Important Vidders throwing in their two cents, which amounts to a lot of ego stroking and the throwing around of Very Important Vidding Terms like "false binaries."

IMO, the best way to connect with the audience is to convince them that you're actually having fun with your vid, even if it kept you up nights and you wanted to send your monitor out the window. I really think it's that simple. The quickest way to turn me away from a vid is to find it in one of these self-proclaimed pretentious, elitist bitch cabal-type journals. (I'm sure the preceding terms came from some long-ago in-joke to which I'm not privy, but I just don't get it.) I'm not going to argue that quality is important, and it is great when vids attempt to go beyond the "pretty" and "shiny" and aim for the brain and higher emotions. That's great, man. I'm right there with you. But can't we just be honest about the whole thing? It ain't high art. It's a derivative medium. And I personally can't stand to read posts where the impression is that most of the commenters are taking it all too seriously. When that is the case, I as the audience disconnect. I as a vidder roll my eyes.

As Edina told the snooty shopgirl in Absolutely Fabulous, "You only work in a shop, you know. You can drop the attitude."

[permetaform]

Is no problem, and frankly if posting anon is how to to stir up enough discussion on this topic, then is all good.

Here is an idea I'm throwing back at you:

This IS fun, for me. I analyze the SHIT out of my media and my source, and I get delighted by quality. By engaging my brain, I get a source of pleasure that is additional to even the visceral pleasure of a quality work.

Personally, I don't believe in high art. Art is art is art. Is Warhol art? He's completely derivative, with his own twist. Same for Woody Allen. Is Sin City art? Some say yes, some no; it's a complete derivation of a comic derivation of film noir which is a derivation of realism. Is 5th Element art, as opposed to Blade Runner? Both are derivations of cyberpunk, which is just pop art, not high art omg.

The argument can go around and around; but I'm going off on a tangent...

I know when I go off analyzing these things, it's from a sense of fun; it is fun to me to improve my skill in vidding. Call me a perfectionist or whatever, but it *is* fun. And it's fun to me to bring to bear analytic abilities I've gained elsewhere to better understand why things work, because it's fun, to me, to understand things.

Sure, a person can 'only' work in a shop; but why can't she do the best job she possibly can?

I'm sorry if it seems to you that we are being aloof and pretentious; I'm not sure how to change this, because all discussion is welcome, and I don't know if it's my phrasing or...what. I am not *trying* to be aloof, but if I don't know what it is I'm doing that might make me *seem* aloof, how can I ever change?

[luminosity]

I call 'em "VIP's" too. Speaking as one of those vidders who *loves* talking about process, meta, technique, emotional thrust, viewing, false binaries, etc.

*cough* :)

oh wait. [changes icon]

[permetaform]

::giggles at you and hugs hard::

About the audience

[elynross.livejournal.com]

I was saying to Lum that while I think you can aim for a type of audience - Escapade v. VVC v. MediaWest, slash fan v. gen fan v. het fan, specific fandom fan, fan of fandom fan, con vid v. living room vid, etc. -- I wonder if worrying too much about the audience isn't kind of a mistake. That is, I think a vidder (or writer) *should* consider their audience, in some ways, if you're sending a vid to a con, or trying to decide where to advertise a new vid, etc. I think you can aim at trying to please a specific portion of your audience, as well. But overall, it seems to me that trying to take the audience into too much consideration, particularly if it's at the expense of pleasing yourself, can give rise to expectations within the vidder that may or may not be fulfilled.

To me, taking the audience into consideration is something that comes in, in part, during the beta process, and involves making sure that to the best of your ability, you've communicated what you want to communicate -- made the vid you want to make, without maintaining too many self-indulgences that may not work to communicate well. (For instance, holding on to particular clips for reasons of personal liking, when your betas are unanimous in saying that they really don't do what you seem to want to be doing, or don't do it as well as could be done.) Your beta is your "test audience," in a way. If you want to know how it plays to non-fans of the fandom in question, you find a beta that doesn't know the fandom. If you want to know how it plays to an example of a less sophisticated viewer, ditto.

But any choice you make to tailor it to a particular audience bears the risk of changing the reactions of another portion, to the point of possible alienation. There is no monolithic "audience" with uniform tastes, so there always have to be choices. Ultimately, you can only know your own reactions to your vids -- tempered by reactions of those you trust to view it and talk to you about it as honestly as they can. Because as you can see, with you thinking your vids are too transparent (ha! as if! *g*), we're not always the best judges of our own work.

I think that a balance is needed, most times. Yes, you want to communicate and please your audience, but with the widely varying ranges of sophistication, it's not always guaranteed you're going to be able to please the full range -- and then you have to choose. Ideally, you have a vid that's catchy and pretty for those who don't enjoy working at enjoying their vids, while there's a story and some theme and fancy stuff (which may or may not involved special effects) for a more sophisticated audience. And sometimes your sophisticated audience just enjoys a simple, straightforward vid, done well. *g*

I remember after the first VVC, the question of whether simple "my guys love each other" vids were passe came up, and some vidders&viewers I really respect opined that they were. What I came to realize is that for *those people*, that simplicity was no longer enough to engage them. They needed the complexity of a bigger story, the emotional impact of something more, etc. For me, though, it can be a breath of fresh air to watch something like killabeez's Jeremiah vid, Because, or her HL vid Don't Mind Me, because there's such love for the characters and the shows in them for me. What matters to me is the care and concern of the vidder involved, the intentionality, the skill and/or the signs of talent that can be hidden in the vid of a less-skilled vidder.

Re: About the audience

[permetaform]

To me, taking the audience into consideration is something that comes in, in part, during the beta process, and involves making sure that to the best of your ability, you've communicated what you want to communicate

ahhh, process note, mind if I quote above?

Because as you can see, with you thinking your vids are too transparent (ha! as if! *g*), we're not always the best judges of our own work.

::wry grin and agrees::

What matters to me is the care and concern of the vidder involved, the intentionality, the skill and/or the signs of talent that can be hidden in the vid of a less-skilled vidder.

dude, YES. can I quote you?

[ranalore.livejournal.com]

Well, you know I'm not a vidder, nor do I play one on TV, but this whole discussion sounds very, very familiar. You made the connection yourself with the mention of PWP versus long and angsty epics. This is a question every writer faces, too.

Thing is, if both your PWP and your long, angsty epic are the same pairing in the same fandom, you'll get some overlap of your audience. Or if they're different pairings, different fandoms, but both deal with a similar relationship dynamic, you might get overlap. Or different pairings, different fandoms, different relationship dynamic, but same writing style. All the comments on multiple and overlapping audiences are so true, as are the comments about how audience changes, and how what works for someone in one moment in one venue might not work for them again. Or what doesn't work, might on a later reading. And really, with so many variables, it's no surprise to me that most authors end up saying "I write for myself," even if it's not the literal truth.

I write for myself, but I also find myself adding touches or twists I know a particular person will like (usually one of my betas, the only really "reliable audience" I can be said to have). Usually, if I manage to reach a particular audience, it is by accident. By which I mean, I might have meant to reach them, and I might have grabbed betas who could give me an "in" into the way to write for that audience, but I still think it's largely serendipity that I manage to pull it off. And that's just too uncertain for me, so I've gotten more and more zen in my approach to thinking about my audience. I'm still attempting to communicate, and I'm still happy to know I've managed it, but I've reached the conclusion that, for me, actively trying to steer a story for a particular audience is asking for a meltdown.

It sounds to me like this is also a problem a lot of vidders face, and I have to admire those vidders and writers both who are willing to take the kind of stress involved in tailoring to an audience. Of course, I recognize the stress is likely an individual quirk and not everyone is going to freak themselves out trying both to serve the story/vision and to reach out to a certain segment of the fandom.