An informal blog for talking about media production – from technology to story – as well as developing brand identity through creation and distribution of digital content.
This past week Emily and I brought together some wonderfully smart people to talk through file organization and the specific challenges we have when working with audio and video media. I learned so much from our guest presenters, and I look forward to incorporating tools and techniques from their presentations into my workflow. Session Description: Have you ever gotten tangled in a web of disorganized video and image files? What are the best practices for organizing and storing images, audio and video? What is the difference between interpretive content and collections content? What constitutes a work of art and a backup work of art when discussing file types?
Anna Chiaretta-Lavatelli and Emily Lytle-Painter, co-chairs of MCN’s Media Production SIG, will explore issues around digital file storage and organization in cultural organizations with the follow speakers:
Heidi Quicksilver, The Jewish Museum Crystal Sanchez, Smithsonian Institution Patrick Heilman, DIA Art Foundation
This is an informal “radio show” style chat with short “presentations” and Q&A.
Here is a presentation of an Artist Talk which I just produced for BAM last week. We tried something a little different than ever before: including footage from the performance in the edit. I'll share some insight below and I also have a question for the community about microphones...
Cameras:
We filmed this with 2 cameras (Panasonic AG160a). The clips from the performances were filmed with the same camera and also a Panasonic HE120k (remote control operated) and captured with a KiPro. Sound from both events was provided by the house board.
Audio:
I'm working with our production group to improve the microphones we use during Artist Talks. These microphones are good because they avoid feedback issues that we have had in our spaces, however, they create some undesirably breath-y noises that we have to fix in post. Any recommendations from the community here on lapel microphones or other options is greatly appreciated.
Post Production:
This is edited in Final Cut 7.0 using both the multiclip editing tool and then adding the performance footage. All the audio was mixed in FCP as well.
Notes:
We are really excited to have the capabilities to produce a presentation like this so quickly. We likely could have done this as a webcast, though there would not have been a way to include the performance footage. I am excited about future webcasting that we might do at BAM, but I also really like this approach to creating a presentation of an Artist Talk online with enhanced content. This was the first time BAM has filmed, edited and released an Artist Talk before the run of a performance is over. Not only did we have a chance to impact audiences that had yet to see the performance, but perhaps even reach some that had not yet bought a ticket.
I think this talk in particular is a great example of the richness of humanities programming at BAM.
Not many people realize what goes into archiving a live performance. Of course, this can vary greatly depending on several factors, including the nature of the performance and the resources at your disposal (including equipment).
Arts organizations large and small, as well as artists and their companies are increasingly facing the need to film performances.
At BAM, I am responsible for archiving hundreds of "events" every year. Each one is unique and requires some planning and consideration. Our performances range in genre to include dance, opera, music, theater, cirque nouveau, and installation or performance art.
Our archival mission serves our institution, but also is a wonderful service that I am proud to provide for our artists. Many of our artists might never have the resources at their disposal to film their work in high definition and this might be the one and only time to document the specific work. I will often ask an artist if they have any specific direction for the archive shoot.
Our standard setup is a single camera archive. In some of our venues this is a video camera on a tripod operated by a professional operator. In other venues, we have recently installed a robotic controlled pan-tilt-zoom (PTZ) system. This system is also operated by hand, but is different from the classic camera-on-tripod-at-back-of-house setup. I'll break down the gear a little later. First, I'd like to describe a little bit about our approach to producing the archive.
Production
The hair-pulling conundrum is the first obvious question facing you in any single-camera shoot: how much should I zoom and pan?
Over the past few years, I have come to the conclusion that an archive is best filmed as a wide shot of the entire stage. With perfect focus, exposure and framing, I find that I am much more comfortable watching this aesthetic than when the operator over-works the zoom and pan. It also is the purest "document" of a performance as it guarantees that all entrances and exits are on camera, and the show is captured in whole.
There are certainly exceptions to this rule. Music performances allow for the most freedom (perhaps because the movement is not choreographed). Dance can be beautifully captured with thoughtful camera movement, especially when a solo is tracked perfectly across the stage. When filming theater, I will often direct an operator to zoom into a scene or a character when blocking and lighting focus attention to a segment of the stage. Remember, I'm talking about as single camera shoot here (I'll gladly cover my approach to multi-camera shooting in another post).
These archives hold value for a number of interests: students and researchers may want to study the work and often times the artists use it to seek future presenters, or create a trailer of the work for marketing and promotion. Of course, each of these uses may dictate a different approach to filming. If a show has been filmed before, I will often try to find a new or different way to film it so that the BAM archive holds a unique document.
Editing
All our video is born digital (no tapes) and once we've finished filming a show it is time to make a titled master. The titled master includes adding a scrolling credit to the front of the footage, some minimal color correction if needed, and some balancing of the audio. For the large majority of archives, the audio comes in two mono tracks (a mono feed from the sound board and second mono recording of the on-camera microphone).
Delivery
The final archive delivery include the following:
Untitled Master (a disc image of the original media from the camera)
Titled Master (output as an uncompressed video file or Apple ProRes)
A screener DVD (this will soon go away, fingers crossed, as we build a digital database with proxy files for easy viewing and access).
I could go into a lot more detail about many parts of this workflow but just wanted to give a rundown in case any of this is interesting to this community. Please feel free to ask questions and I'll gladly explain more. Open to advice on any and everything—I am always open to ways to improve our archival methods.
I'll end with a burning (and slightly post-apocalyptic) question: will we ever be replaced by machines?
When we installed that remote-controlled system it immediately opened the door to a possibility that an archive could be filmed from a distant office, rather than putting the operator in the house. The efficiency is seductive. I could record 5 venues from a single computer. However, I'm fairly certain the human-quality of camera operation would significantly reduce the quality of our archives. Being present in the house allows for the best real-time response to lighting changes, for example. What do you think? Should the human hand ever be taken out of the archive?
