[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

[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?

[(Anonymous)]

I'm really trying to speak as the audience, which is pretty much the only reason I responded in the first place. I avoid like the plague posts in which vidders discuss amongst themselves their approach to vidding since vidding is such a visual medium and it's very hard to translate that textually. And then there's the whole tone of exclusivity that can occur. I know those "in the audience" who find those posts very intimidating (which is the opposite of what I thought of this post when I started reading) and they end up not participating because they don't know WTF is being tossed about and don't want to appear newbie-ish.

So yeah, there is a good amount of pretension in vidding meta that makes me personally wary of what's being produced by said vidders, like if I don't get what they make I'm dim and lack perception. I suppose by doing so I'm being exclusive myself. And like you said, it can all go 'round and 'round from there.

I just wanted to give the point of view of those whom I know feel this way about BNFs in the vidding community and thus are maybe missing out on some cool vids--I guess it's all about preconception.

"Without the critical faculty, there is no artistic creation at all, worthy of the name."

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

i have no idea if you're gonna read that since you commented anonymously, but as someone in the audience who also has very little clue beyond the oh, my two guys together in my favorite shots, i really wish you didn't try to "speak as the audience." There are always people who do not want to think about works of art just as there are always folks who do. Vidding is a community with its own terms, its own aesthetic principles, its own history and meta just like any other.

And while I am the first person to defend *any* type of writing (however bad or OOC *I* may find it) as long as it has an audience and creates enjotment, I want the same courtesy the other way around. To call concern for one's craft pretentious is like saying you can only enjoy writing that comes "from the soul" and hasn't been edited or about which the author has not thought. While such romantic notions (which, of course, is an utter misnomer since even the Romantics edited and revised and "metaed" like crazy) are still widespread, it would be a huge mistake to universalize them or to assume that all viewers just because they are not educated in the terminology of the field yet *don't* want to be.

I am about as newbie-ish as they come in terms of vidding, and I have had nothing but help, explanation, and support from pretty much total strangers. I don't run around telling them they shouldn't analyze their craft or put emphasis on what's important to them. But I do ask fairly stupid questions...and have yet to encounter someone getting nasty (even if I feedback them with a vid they didn't even make :-)

Re: "Without the critical faculty, there is no artistic creation at all, worthy of the name."

[(Anonymous)]

i really wish you didn't try to "speak as the audience."

Correction on my part. I'm just representing a very multifaceted audience, but one I hope you would agree exists beyond just myself.

To call concern for one's craft pretentious is like saying you can only enjoy writing that comes "from the soul" and hasn't been edited or about which the author has not thought.

The pretentious aspect of my comment comes from a lot of these vidders referring to themselves that way, in an annoyingly non-funny manner. But the proof is in the pudding, so who am I to argue?

I am about as newbie-ish as they come in terms of vidding, and I have had nothing but help, explanation, and support from pretty much total strangers. I don't run around telling them they shouldn't analyze their craft or put emphasis on what's important to them.

That's great for you. As a vidder I respect these people to a degree but can definitely live without their input. As one member of the audience, they just rub me the wrong way. Just one person's opinion is all.

Re: "Without the critical faculty, there is no artistic creation at all, worthy of the name."

[permetaform]

As a vidder I respect these people to a degree but can definitely live without their input. As one member of the audience, they just rub me the wrong way.

...honestly tho, how are they forcing their input on you? Is there something specific where several people are literally forcing their ideas on other people? Is there something we can change in our communication to you?

Re: "Without the critical faculty, there is no artistic creation at all, worthy of the name."

[(Anonymous)]

Of course I don't feel like anything is being forced on me but here's the basic gist: I only have so many hours in the day. I choose to spend my extra time doing things I care about, which includes watching vids and occasionally making them. Since I'm not passionate about vidding meta I avoid it. But I've gotten the vibe that if one doesn't get involved in the meta, then one won't be able to fully appreciate the vid. That is my assumption from being involved in fandom for awhile now. Maybe I'd just like to see people not feeling like they should apologize for not knowing how to frame vidding feedback when they give it. And that I do see a lot.

I'm sorry I can't reply to other comments I've gotten from other journalers since last night, but I've got to get to work. I appreciate you addressing me with respect and honest curiosity. I feel better that I've said what I wanted and hope I've managed to relay some of the insight you were searching for when you started this post. Thanks for the outlet.

Re: "Without the critical faculty, there is no artistic creation at all, worthy of the name."

[elynross.livejournal.com]

Oh, you so rock, and I totally adore you at this moment! Not a vidder, never will be, and so *completely* not a member of the audience she's talking about.

Re: "Without the critical faculty, there is no artistic creation at all, worthy of the name."

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

*g*

(and i really just wanna use my wilde icon again ;-)