[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

[(Anonymous)]

But I don't think there's anything wrong with saying "that swooshy thing over there," yet I see some who feel apologetic for not having the "right" vocabulary to convey their reactions. I'm certain it's not purposeful, but they end up feeling like their responses aren't as meaningful as those of someone who talks the talk. And others may just not comment at all for this same reason.

Now I've read yours and some of the other comments explaining the whole retarded elitist pretentious bitch cabal whatevah nonsense, and yes, I admire standing up to those who are trying to knock you off your feet by making the insult work for you. Maybe they're a badge of honor to some. To others who don't get the joke, though, they stand for separation of the wheat from the chaff.

It's unfair only to the extent that it won't communicate with a portion of the audience.

What I've really liked about this post is that you are concerned with the audience and how they can connect with vids. Of course there's nothing wrong with vidding for yourself but I think on some level one's always aware of the audience. As far as not communicating with a portion, also, as stated in the comments here, that's always a danger. It's the old please some of them some of the time, etc. cliche.

What I'm highly confused about is why you think that *we* think that it's impossible to do it without the soul searching and discussion. Where do we demand this process for everyone? Mostly we're just saying what works for *us*.

You said in a previous comment: It's the same for me, when I see that the vidder doesn't seem to care and feel that intense love of vidding that I do, I'm not sure that I want to see their vid; why would I be interested in their product if they're so dismissive about the things I love?

How would you know if they don't care? Is it because they preface the vid with a bunch of LOLthis vid iz probly the sUXors but plz watch it anyways!!!!111! or because they don't write a thesis about the process they went through in the creation of it in that same post? Can you respect vidders who aren't as meta as you and others in this fictional cabal? More importantly, do the meta-lovin' vidders repect the opinions of those in the audience who give effusive albeit low-tech feedback? If the answers to these questions are yes (and I know you certainly can't answer for everyone), then hey, I'm happy.

[permetaform]

yet I see some who feel apologetic for not having the "right" vocabulary to convey their reactions.

and usually the vidder responds by saying that it's not a problem and the feedback is great.

How would you know if they don't care?

Simple; I watch the first minute of a vid, and I can usually tell if it's to my aesthetic or not. I usually don't pay attention to where it comes from unless it's the name of a vidder that I recognize to come from a completely different vidding aesthetic background than I do.

Can you respect vidders who aren't as meta as you and others in this fictional cabal? More importantly, do the meta-lovin' vidders repect the opinions of those in the audience who give effusive albeit low-tech feedback?

yes and yes; that's often the best kind of feedback. hannahrorlove and musexmoirai are both non-vidders and non-technical people who gave effusive feedback in this post.

[(Anonymous)]

Well then I have brewed a tempest in a teapot and apologize sincerely. I only wish others who are too intimidated by what they see as an elitist brigade (an impression certainly not helped by the doofy icons) figure this out somehow, but it ain't a perfect world.

[laurashapiro.livejournal.com]

Chiming in late, here. I just wanted to say that I value *all* kinds of feedback, regardless of the viewer's knowledge of any technical film or vidding terms, regardless of whether they give a wet slap about meta.

Further, I am constantly encouraging viewers, in posts, in comments, and privately, to send whatever they feel, even if it's just "I loved it" or "It didn't work for me" or "I thought that swooshy thing was great." The vidder is going to know what the viewer meant by "that swooshy thing", and far from denigrating her, they're going to be pleased as punch that she took the time to comment, that she was sufficiently moved by the swooshy thing to say so.

Do I think it's helpful for vidders and viewers to learn technical terms so that they can communicate more clearly with one another? Sure. But it's not necessary. Feedback is treasured, regardless of style, and feedback on vids is rare enough that even the three-word comment is worth exulting over.

Also, while like permetaform I find vidding meta and analysis fun, I certainly don't expect everyone else to, nor do I think that meta-frolics are a requirement of a good vidder. I've seen hundreds of great vids made by people who don't blabber on all day about vidding the way I do. I absolutely respect them, because they make great vids. How they get there, and how much time they invest in thinking/talking about it, is really not the issue.