Video Production/Convergence and collaboration model
Draft for a model of online Video Production
[edit | edit source]Creating a DVD or a programme for Tv with a decentralised production team communicating and exchanging Video content, research and subtitles via the Internet is now possible.
Are there any ways we can help make the process easier by sharing resources.
To find this out we can have a look at a possible workflow, analyse and improve it and potentially use it for a base for a Production project to test this way of working.
The best way of representing a possible way of working together is a diagram.
It can also be expressed as follows. Divided into 2 possibilities of distribution one unedited direct retransmission of the Video segment uploaded by the original producers. The other a model for editing and contextualising this content.
Technical notes
[edit | edit source]Uploading Dvavis, or Dv quicktimes for use in Premiere or Final Cut pro is the simplest way of collaborating online.
Final Cut pro also supports XML which creates other possibilities for collaborative video making.
http://www.echochamberproject.com/collaborativefilmmaking
No Derivation model / Submitting finished Segments
[edit | edit source]Aim: Creating a high quality resource of online Video files and subtitle files which can be retransmitted on DVD, Cinema and community screenings, TV, Cable, Satellite.
What is needed:
- Video collectives who can create a video and subtitle file of their content and who are prepared to distribute it under a creative commons licence
- A space to upload large quality video files (like http://archive.org)
- A network of translators who can work with subtitle files
- Links to good resource and documentations files to make the process easier for users of the system
The original production team take on the encoding and uploading of their work. This should be uploaded in full [dv avi/ mpeg2] and preview quality to a public/ private server. It should probably be made available under a non-derivation licence. The video file should definite be made available with a subtitle file [*.srt format], which corresponds exactly to the Time. There are subtitle notes here for more information about why this is very important http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Video
Subtitle files are passed to translation collectives who translate the original language file to as many languages as appropriate. This process may use some of the existing subtitling / translation collectives. But currently there is a need for more skill sharing for using subtitling software for translation. Specifically the Indymedia and Babels collective.
The original video file and translated subtitle files can be showcased in a public or private webspace. It can then be downloaded to create DIY pick and mix DVD's / screening tapes.
It is likely that the translators would work with the screening collectives to select and translate the segments of video that best suit their target audience. As such there is no obligation for any group to take on translation which they feel to be unnecessary.
The example used above of a DVD is arbitrary, The output could be any suitable outlet; Satellite TV such as Free Speech, peer to peer networks, website distribution. The choice of a creative commons licence for non commercial use allows other outlets to approach the original production group to ask for right for retransmission for cable or terrestrial channels. The key focus here is making the Video file available high quality.
This process is similar to the European Newsreal model which is described here http://europeannewsreal.indymedia.org There is a recent post on their email list which discusses the advantages and disadvantages of this process http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/european-newsreal/2006-May/0523-77.html
Editing and contextualising model
[edit | edit source][this is similar to the Deep Dish / Undercurrents / Asia 247 model and incorporating online submission]
Aim: to create Edited programmes from films and footage submitted online. This will create programmes with better context for viewers.
What is needed:
- Video collectives who can create a video and subtitle file of their content and who are prepared to distribute it under a creative commons licence
- A space to upload large quality video files (like http://archive.org)
- A network of translators who can work with subtitle files
- Links to good resource and documentations files to make the process easier for users of the system
- Editorial collectives who can effectively contact, work remotely with original video producers, establish trust and edit content sensitively and checking that original producers are happy with the final result.
- Outlets to distribute edited content to.
The original production team take on the encoding and uploading of their work. This should be uploaded in full [dv avi/ mpeg2] and preview quality to a public/ private server. It should probably be made available under a non-derivation licence. The video file should definite be made available with a subtitle file [*.srt format], which corresponds exactly to the Time. There are subtitle notes here for more information about why this is very important http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Video
And editorial team previews this material and decides on a the theme and target of a specific production, which could be a DVD or a 23 minute programme. This editorial team then contacts the original producers to gain permission to edit their work, and negotiate rights, payment and use.
As such editorial decisions are hard to make in large groups especially in online situations over email lists, for example, it may be suggested that a maximum size for such a collective is 4-5 people.
The editorial team then work with the translation collective to get subtitle files of their edited work. This process may use some of the existing subtitling / translation collectives. But currently there is a need for more skill sharing for using subtitling software for translation. Specifically the Indymedia and Babels collective.
The editorial team then output the finished work as a non-derivative licence and makes it available in what everways they want to. DVD, for download, as Mpeg2 files for cable and Satellite retransmission, peer 2 peer, etc. If the editorial team charge for the finished programme, they should have negotiated a clear way of dividing the revenue between those involved in the process.