The new way to quit…and what happens after

The web2.0 world – where responses sometimes gets just as much attention, or sometimes more then the original  video/article/post themselves!

So, the long and short of it, a woman working for a media company makes a rather entertaining video about her long working hours and her dislike towards her job in order to quit.
It’s gone viral, everyone loves it….power-to-the-people kind of stuff…
…and very good PR…

A facebook friend of mine posted the link,

Show Gen Y viral videos, they’ll spend company time watching them. Teach Gen Y to make viral videos, they’ll publicly shame you on YouTube.#modernwisdom

Parodies have popped up everywhere –


But then, what I find even more amusing is the response from her colleagues and boss:


Arcade Fire’s REFLEKTOR

Arcade Fire’s REFLEKTOR

Not only is it a new song from Arcade Fire, but it’s the beginning of a new concept and it has so much potential.

Seven and a half minutes of interactive video, portraying a woman’s journey between two worlds, it’s kind of reminiscent of the days where you used to click to change the psychedelic animations that came up on Windows Media Player. It’s trippy, it’s pretty awesome. Use your mouse (finger on a tablet) to manipulate the images and effects – it’s impermanent, it changes each time, but it’s interactive and its something new to the music video scene.

A new way to view, it’s a product of Google’s Chrome Experiments. Comprised of a new(ish) showcase of web experiments building on the concept of what Web 2.0 really offers. It is primarily focused on mobile content and devices (its got QR codes, yes), however the Arcade Fire project is viewable straight from your laptop and if you’ve got  a camera it even features YOU!

Where will this go from here? Who knows….

*Arcade Fire have also released a not-so-cool-but-still-hipster-enough film clip

will the frame change everything?

It’s interesting that our phones are designed to be held vertically – and so thats the way we film (sometimes)… it’s less obvious, it’s less intrusive – it’s got me wondering what it would take to change the way we watch films altogether…Image

Could this small detail have an influence on the way we create our films (well it already does) – I guess my real question is how much influence could this have on the way we view and create  media?

Like Instagram, Vine offers a square frame (seemingly more practicable allowing users to shoot either way) – this is useful, until you need to integrate it with other media (videos etc). I like the square frame, and I like what it allows us to do. It looks modern yet it makes me think of 120Film – the shape is fashionable.

some thoughts on editing: we’re going soft

Adrian’s lecture this week focused on the medium of soft video, and the opportunities available to edit soft video – there are plenty of them…
At the base of it all, he highlighted that it is the need to understand the process that is editing, rather then knowing how to best use the software that is favoured at the time. That seems to me to be one of the central goals surrounding many of my core subjects , and it it the theory that surrounds a university education – it’s about being able to think, and then being able to do.

But, I digress,  back to hypertext, videos, quicktime and all that..

Maybe, I’m already an old fart: not keen on 3D TV, and unwilling to Kindle-it-up, but beyond all of that, I find it sooo difficult to edit text from a screen. That is why my blog is so informal, and probably, no definitely why it reads as a stream of consciousness sometimes. It is pre-meditated, but, in no way is it edited to the extent that I would edit a video, a piece of sound, or an academic-style essay.

I have problems with editing – it seems like such an infinite process.
I am unable to judge when a piece of work is good enough, rather then over-worked. My exam strategy was just to write, read over it quickly and then hand it up, unfortunately that doesn’t work so well in the real world. It has influenced my ability to procrastinate, leaving myself to bang out work at the last minute, letting the deadline motivate me to produce the best that I can.

I cannot deal with editing text on screen.
With video editing I can only ever work in short bursts, and need to change screens to get a different look at colours, and resolution.
When it comes to image, and especially anything working with colour I can only work for a short time without running around in circles and eventually I need to wear a blindfold to bed, it just gets that intense.
I always want to print out my work and look at it.
I want finite records and copies of how it was, what needed to be changed, and then how it was changed. The blog is not like this. An updated blog post does not show you the old one (at least not on wordpress anyway). I do take time and care in creating posts, but I don’t like to go through the process of editing the whole thing top-to-bottom once I’m done, instead adopting a paragraph by paragraph method which, according to the writings about academic writing is BAD. But this method, paragraph by paragraph, supports the post-industrial movement – some aspects more so then others (dirty, messy).
It will change, it can be updated, it’s to set in stone – but to what degree should it be fixed, can I do a complete 180 on my point of view?
– Is this method of breaking the boundaries just a way of sticking it to the rule book that suggests writing should be premeditated and edited?
– When do we go too far? When am I just becoming an apathetic tertiary student just going on about – what it is to be educated in society and the way the world is rapidly changing?
– Is a lack of structure simply being lazy? or is it more then that, is it about getting ideas out there, quickly?

And, what is the act of editing these days?  Regarding text, I feel it would be completely inappropriate, even disrespectful, to say that control-click on a word underlined with red dots can be classed as an act of editing.

Lenny. numero uno.

Looking at students work is probably one of the most helpful things to do in terms of feeling like you can/can’t achieve that. It’s also easier then having to thumb your way through the number of weird and angst filled short films on vimeo.
They have been good to watch, don’t get me wrong, but there’s only so many short films about substance abuse that I can watch…

The Lenny exercise has opened my eyes up to the rhythm of editing. And filming. Whilst this was not a final piece, it goes to show how much of a difference shot construction and audio quality make.

Thinking about when you want cut to someone in the frame or entering/exiting the frame is important – they can begin out of frame, then move into frame however, this should not happen repeatedly, it gets boring, and it looks tacky.

The two mid-shots that were taken during the exercise proved difficult to cut up because the angle at which they were taken was too similar. I wanted to get some better looks at Lenny’s face, but they just weren’t there.

Also, the footage that we were given was very static in terms of camera movement. It was always people entering and exiting frame rather then the frame moving with them. I think, at times, we are encumbered by the tripod, feeling that the camera must remain on the tripod and therefore must remain still. (I guess one plus on DSLR’s is that they are easier to handhold – as long as you know what you’re doing with it!)



Martin Scorsese writes that he “love[s] the restrictions of the frame”¹. It can exclude and it can include. It can restrict the knowledge of the audience if we choose for it to do so. Whether they are conscious of it or not, directors produce films indicative of the way in which they see the world. In cinema studies we  are always taught that directors do everything for a reason. In my own practice (and especially in group work) I have felt that this is not always the case, but perhaps it actually is – the reasons are just not apparent to myself at the time of ‘making’.

At first, my Sketch Tasks did not appear to be linked, there emerged no common thread; sometimes they felt like they were about nothing (something that looked nice, something that was interesting at the time). The videos are as they have been designed to be; raw, unplanned, dirty, unrehearsed. But they do have things in common. In the creation of my sketch tasks, I have selected what is in the frame, and what is outside of it. Sometimes this was a conscious effort (excluding my shadow or reflection in order to create a more mysterious feeling), other times it was not – but it happened all the same. When I consciously engaged with my surroundings (and broke away from the digital grind) I did not find it hard at all to uncover material that I felt was worthwhile capturing. Once I began to practice experiential learning (as outlined by Mason²), I found I was more frequently stopping to think about what I was looking at and hearing. I found it easier to spot things that would spark my interest.


In my Korsakow film I have set out to connect all of my films in a way that is poignant and reflective of my own experiences. The biggest, most obvious connection being that all the sketch tasks were created by me, and therefore indicative of the way I see the world.
My sketch tasks, being varied and experimental have no common thread – they are not even filmed using the same devices. I used as many different apps and camera devices I could get my hands on in order to best experiment and appreciate what certain devices and applications could provide and others could not. (See earlier posts in regard to my anguish about Android apps)

I thought long and hard about what text I could use to connect the videos and the process and kept coming back to the idea that I wanted to communicate a particular viewpoint (my own). I have chosen to use text from Voltaire’s Candide,  because I want my creation, my k-film to be meaningful. Voltaire’s works are of particular interest to me and I find it to be a fairly accessible text. Moreover, the phrases I selected can all stand alone, and at the same time when strung together they create meaning.


I began this task feeling that it was largely an exploration on my part. Having no target audience outlined (in the structured, regulated way one would expect from a media task), it seemed as though we were making it more for ourselves, then for an audience. Like much of the content uploaded onto the internet it begins by being made by the maker, for the maker. Some of it is worthwhile, some of it not so. That is why we need filtering online. My work was not created with an intended audience, it is an exploration of the software. However, I would be interested in receiving feedback from the online community. I am interested in learning more about the people who use Korsakow, and the audiences they target with their works.

I found structuring the kfilm a difficult task. It does allow for a certain degree of manipulation of what can come next, however, I felt that my kfilm would work better if it was more random. It was perplexing to note that  when I began my first draft, using a limited array of keywords,  the same videos would turn up until their ‘lives’ had been depleted – and then the film would abruptly end. Following this I began to re-think my keywords, grouping my videos to create a structure and flow; ordering (or ranking them) to pave the way for the ending  – sometimes this works, and sometimes it does not. Unfortunately, I feel this is inherent in the nature of Korsakow and the kfilm.

I feel that I have been successful in creating a series of sketch videos linked in an interactive and engaging way. Whilst there is no apparent narrative nor an intended audience, there is a common thread in all the videos. The text is all derived from the same source and creates and interesting story about my work and my shared view with Voltaire on the world.
(I feel it’s more appropriate to use story rather then narrative, but I’m still not really sure that is even the best term for it!)

Watch the film here!

Continue reading