|
|
Post by franzeska on Dec 10, 2011 12:10:52 GMT -5
From the Vidding Glossary thread: I think "con" vids vs. "living room" vids is a topic we could (and should!) discuss endlessly here. Basically, it means vids that play well to huge rooms full of people who are going to see them once vs. vids that play better in your living room where you have time to rewatch and analyze. It hadn't occured to me until now that there could be a difference but that makes so much sense. Ah, but I'm not sure everyone agrees there's a difference. Once upon a time, maybe it made more sense, but with a lot of people primarily watching at home and some cons like VividCon promoting silence and intent watching, the boundaries are blurry. This is Mary van Deusen's term, isn't it? I can see why some of her vids would definitely be more of a "living room" type. I do think Big Dumb Comedy plays better in a crowd. (Not just a con crowd: in college, I walked by plenty of dorm rooms with a bunch of people clustered around a monitor laughing their heads off at some AMV they'd downloaded.) If other people are laughing at the obvious gags and silly lyrics, it makes me laugh more. I've also heard people talk about the need for pacing things differently for a con audience (so, for example, it can finish clapping/laughing before the next big joke). My most recent vid I showed at a con didn't get laughs until half way through, and I think the reason is that it moves quite quickly and is to a song people didn't know. If I show it at another con, I'm going to stick a title card at the beginning to help orient people more quickly. Opinions, anyone? Is there such a thing as a "living room vid"? |
|
|
|
Post by killabeez on Dec 10, 2011 12:31:04 GMT -5
I've also heard people talk about the need for pacing things differently for a con audience (so, for example, it can finish clapping/laughing before the next big joke). My most recent vid I showed at a con didn't get laughs until half way through, and I think the reason is that it moves quite quickly and is to a song people didn't know. If I show it at another con, I'm going to stick a title card at the beginning to help orient people more quickly. I think that's a great point, about the title card/credits. It definitely helps, especially if your fandom and/or song are unfamiliar to most people. And I also think you're right about the unfamiliarity of a song/quick lyrics making for a quiet room, even if people are enjoying the vid. I showed my current VIP to my husband a couple days ago, and was a bit worried that he wasn't laughing until it got through the first chorus. But he said it was really funny, he was just trying to parse the lyrics and figure out where the song was going. (He always tells me if stuff sucks, so I believed him.) ETA: as for whether i believe there's a difference... for me it has to do with whether a vid is made for people who already know the show or not. Title cards can definitely help with that. There are also fandoms that I think are more accessible to non-fans (like Dr. Who and Farscape) because they have a lot of broad action and emotion. Then there are those like The Wire or Pros where I think a conscious effort has to be made by the vidder if they want non-fans to follow the vid. Sometimes that conscious effort is the choice of song. One of the many reasons I loved Cappy's vid "Pursuit of Happiness" is that she singled out one character to tell his story, and that made it accessible to people who didn't know the show. |
|
|
|
Post by winterjasmine on Dec 10, 2011 13:28:30 GMT -5
ETA: as for whether i believe there's a difference... for me it has to do with whether a vid is made for people who already know the show or not. Title cards can definitely help with that. There are also fandoms that I think are more accessible to non-fans (like Dr. Who and Farscape) because they have a lot of broad action and emotion. Then there are those like The Wire or Pros where I think a conscious effort has to be made by the vidder if they want non-fans to follow the vid. Sometimes that conscious effort is the choice of song. One of the many reasons I loved Cappy's vid "Pursuit of Happiness" is that she singled out one character to tell his story, and that made it accessible to people who didn't know the show. I don't know if this is going off topic for this thread, it might be a whole 'nother conversation entirely, but the concept of making vids for fans vs non-fans is something I'd love to see discussed. Do you (or does one) vid as you would write - with an audience in mind? And if so, how do you vid differently when vidding for fans vs non fans? Or when you vid are you trying to do something else with the source, where people take from it what they will, fan or not. Jaz |
|
eunice
Pub Enthusiast
Posts: 116
|
Post by eunice on Dec 10, 2011 13:37:13 GMT -5
I don't know if this is going off topic for this thread, it might be a whole 'nother conversation entirely, but the concept of making vids for fans vs non-fans is something I'd love to see discussed. I don't think it is off-topic though, 'cause I think one of the reasons some vids go over better in a con setting is related to fandom familiarity. With the exception of narrowly focused one fandom cons, the audience is going to be made up of people with varying levels of familiarity with your fandom and that absolutely affects response. A heavily context dependent vid that doesn't have a clear narrative or some other hook (cool visuals or whatever) risks losing the part of the audience that doesn't know your show. And since, as franzeska points out, audience reaction tends to feed on itself in that setting, if you have half the room yawning it can bring down the reaction of even those who might appreciate it more in a different context. |
|
|
|
Post by winterjasmine on Dec 10, 2011 16:28:19 GMT -5
That's a really good point. I've not been to a con where vids are shown, but you're right, in these situations it's more likely that there will be people with varying levels of familiarity with the show.
Jaz
|
|
|
|
Post by legoline on Dec 11, 2011 3:32:41 GMT -5
I've never been to a con that was directed at more than one fandom, and only two of them showed fanvids in between panels, so this is really just guesswork and musings, but...
I would assume that the less subtle and more blatant videos work better at conventions. Videos of the "Character XY rocks and here's why" variety because they're easy to understand and everyone in the audience will get them, and thus you probably get the most reaction from the crowd. Same goes for comedy vids. (This is really just me guessing.)
Also, I think it may have to do with the type of source you're using. Films like the Lord of the Rings trilogy were made for the theatres, their visuals demand to be watched on a screen bigger than that of a laptop (or even a flatscreen in a living room). I guess if I were making a LOTR vid for a con, I'd seize the chance to include all the gorgeous footage of New Zealand and go wild with that ;D The scene where they light the beacons, for instance, does lose some of its impact when watched on a small screen. I bet that goes for lots of other films, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by winterjasmine on Dec 11, 2011 16:43:21 GMT -5
So when you're looking at making a 'con vid' you might look at the source in particular before you even look at the type of vid you want to make or editing in a particular way?
Jaz
|
|
|
|
Post by franzeska on Dec 11, 2011 23:25:21 GMT -5
Do you (or does one) vid as you would write - with an audience in mind? And if so, how do you vid differently when vidding for fans vs non fans? Or when you vid are you trying to do something else with the source, where people take from it what they will, fan or not. The fandoms I've been vidding are all things I expect a lot of people not to have seen or not to have seen in a couple of decades. I've made a couple of episode vids that were very much about my own reactions to those very specific canon events. When trying to come up with ideas for vids to show at cons or that are supposed to be recruiter vids or in some way address a wider audience, I usually avoid ideas that require recognizing footage. I'm also more willing to use footage that looks perfect but that has a canon context that's not quite right for that part of the vid. I only read fic for canons I know well. I'll watch any vid that's pretty. I tend to write and vid with that in mind (even if it isn't true of plenty of other readers and viewers). |
|
|
|
Post by fabella on Dec 12, 2011 7:31:01 GMT -5
I'd like to add that in Con vids it's almost more important to grab the viewer immediately and not let go. The same can be said for a living room video, but with a con vid, you've got the one shot. Big Emotion (be that emotion anger, love, humor) seems to be key in a con vid, whereas a living room vid gives a bit more room for thinky thoughts on average. Of course, there is always the best of both worlds, a con video that plays well to the living room as well. Maybe it's just because I'm a vidder, and I can kind of deconstruct the vidder mind, but many a con vids have played well on second viewing. Maybe it's just that a con vid has to have a superficial awesomeness for first viewing, that just continues to be more awesome once we get a chance to dig deeper?
|
|
|
|
Post by obsessive24 on Dec 12, 2011 8:26:02 GMT -5
Maybe it's just that a con vid has to have a superficial awesomeness for first viewing, that just continues to be more awesome once we get a chance to dig deeper? LOL, I dig that and agree. (Although I'm inclined to think I'm that way in general, not just at cons. Too little time and too many vids to watch; a vid really has to grab me from the first viewing to get me to watch it again in any circumstance.) I saw a draft vid last week that I thought would go over great at a con setting, despite it being quite slow and not flashy and to a very obscure fandom. I wasn't sure quite what that was, but fabella, reading what you said, I think it came down to being immediately emotionally accessible, even if the viewer has no knowledge of the source. Of course there are also times where a big con vid ends up being only superficial awesomeness that doesn't really stand up to repeat viewings in a more analytical atmosphere, but that's not IMO a failing if that was the vidder's intention all along. One other thing I've noticed, in cons and at the movies in general: comedy, even bad comedy, seems that much funnier when you're watching with a big group of people. When I watch anything Judd Apatow at home I just end up with irritated eyerolls. But if I'm seeing the same thing at the movies, I dunno, giggles get contagious. I find that's true of Big Dumb Comedy Con Vids as well. |
|
|
|
Post by killabeez on Dec 12, 2011 11:06:20 GMT -5
So when you're looking at making a 'con vid' you might look at the source in particular before you even look at the type of vid you want to make or editing in a particular way? I would say sometimes it's not the source, but the song. Both are important in reaching a large audience. For example, a few years ago, astolat and cesperanza's Dead Zone vid to "A Day in the Life." I'd wager to say that few of the people in the audience were familiar with Dead Zone. But nearly everyone was probably at least passingly familiar with "A Day in the Life"—and even if they weren't that song tells a story, and spans some really powerful and evocative music changes. So the song was accessible, even if the fandom was unfamiliar, and it went over very powerfully in the con setting. Then there was flummery's Odyssey 5 vid (with the famous exploding Earth). Again, not a fandom most people knew, and not really a familiar song, either. But the theme of the vid was so universal (family) and the song was easy to parse on first hearing. I think it took the audience a little while to grok what was happening, but because the vid takes its time building to the climax, it gathered up the audience as it progressed. |
|
|
|
Post by obsessive24 on Dec 12, 2011 11:21:48 GMT -5
But the theme of the vid was so universal... and the song was easy to parse on first hearing. I think it took the audience a little while to grok what was happening, but because the vid takes its time building to the climax, it gathered up the audience as it progressed. Ditto Flummery's Doctor Who vid, "Handlebars", IMO. Even if I didn't know the context, I think that vid would have grabbed me from the get-go because (1) the lyrics are really easy to parse; (2) the narrative was really clear and impactful; and (3) the visuals were big and pretty and explody. All good things in a con vid. ;D It's important to think about clarity of lyrics in a con vid. I think you can approach it one of two ways: either use a song that's extremely clear or familiar, or else note that the lyrics aren't going to be crystal-clear upon the first hearing, and vid accordingly - i.e. perhaps place less reliance on lyric/visual ties for impact. This isn't to say that the visuals shouldn't still tie to the lyrics, but perhaps the impact of the vid shouldn't turn on whether the audience could parse the lyrics upon their first view. |
|
|
|
Post by killabeez on Dec 12, 2011 11:22:42 GMT -5
but fabella, reading what you said, I think it came down to being immediately emotionally accessible, even if the viewer has no knowledge of the source. This! I remember AbsoluteDestiny's Escapade vid to Do You Realise? a few years ago. The source wasn't familiar to many in the audience, and I think the music was not largely familiar either, and yet, the vid was loved in that setting. Again with the universal and emotionally accessible themes. |
|
|
|
Post by killabeez on Dec 12, 2011 11:24:52 GMT -5
Ditto Flummery's Doctor Who vid, "Handlebars", IMO. Even if I didn't know the context, I think that vid would have grabbed me from the get-go because (1) the lyrics are really easy to parse; (2) the narrative was really clear and impactful; and (3) the visuals were big and pretty and explody. All good things in a con vid. ;D Yes, I thought of that vid after I posted, and also their Joan of Arcadia vid to Big Red Boat. In both cases, I didn't know the source or the song, but found them immediately accessible. They happen to have a gift for con vids. |
|
|
|
Post by morgandawn on Dec 16, 2011 12:08:56 GMT -5
I've also heard people talk about the need for pacing things differently for a con audience (so, for example, it can finish clapping/laughing before the next big joke). My most recent vid I showed at a con didn't get laughs until half way through, and I think the reason is that it moves quite quickly and is to a song people didn't know. If I show it at another con, I'm going to stick a title card at the beginning to help orient people more quickly.... To which Killa added: "I think that's a great point, about the title card/credits. It definitely helps, especially if your fandom and/or song are unfamiliar to most people. . I created an entry on Fanlore about Title Cards, using an exchange that Sandy Herrold and I had in 2008: fanlore.org/wiki/Title_Cards_On_VidsWe've always disagreed on how often to use Title Cards (she felt they were more often than not necessary, I felt that they were part of the editing process - meaning sometimes you'd use them, sometimes you'd not, depending on the effect you're going for.) But Sandy's main vidding focus was to make accessible vids that reached as wide an audience and moved as many people as possible. In writing terms it would be the difference between writing the menu at Mom's Diner vs. James Joyce. What fascinates me, is how, in my mind, so many of these topics (con vids, title cards etc) really circle back around to how editing choices impact your audience (expand/contract). I think I am more focused on the structure of things and the whys as opposed to the musts/shoulds. MD |
|
