Twebivision

Wednesday’s SOPA/PIPA online protests gave me an unexpected gift: one of the best first days of New Media classes in the last several years. Thanks to Internet activists, the students were already aware of the congressional acts that may alter their use of the web and I was able to add some academic background and what the effect on user generated content may be.

I brought up two major lawsuits that change the way we use the web – both a bit frightening. The first is the 2010 Comcast vs. FCC case that Comcast won. The case overturned a ruling made in 2008 that stated that Comcast, who is an Internet service provider (ISP), could not regulate broadband speeds. In 2010, the federal court ruled that Comcast has the right to slow down bandwidth if a user is clogging the pipeline with Torrenting. Not only does this seem like a pretty big breach of Net Neutrality, but it gets scarier: Comcast buys NBCU very soon after!

Comcast, which is a major corporation and ISP, owns a television network, over two dozen channels, many websites, and a major movie studio. Hypothetically speaking, what’s to say that Comcast won’t slow down your bandwidth if you are streaming too much of CBS’ Rob (this is hypothetical of course)? It’s a scary premonition, but there is now a legal precedent for a corporation to do that.

Moving on, this same corporation can lobby congress to get these bills moved forward because there is no spending limit on money spent by corporations since another 2010 lawsuit, Citizens United vs. the Federal Elections Commission (pdf of actual lawsuit). So to break this down with an example: A user buys Internet from a provider (let’s say Comcast) who uses the Internet to download a pirated copy of Battleship (yes, the board game) the movie which is made by Universal and owned by Comcast. Comcast uses some of that user’s money to lobby congress to pass an act to go after its subscriber. (Hypothetically of course.)

My point is that the same court case that allows no spending limit, also allows publicly traded corporations to have free speech. This allows Google to take a stand against SOPA and PIPA and collect [7 million!] signatures on a petition against the bill effectively taking it down. So what does this have to do with online video?

My expertise and interest is in web based television. I try to always consider what Rob Barnett of MyDamnChannel calls “the last rebel group of television producers” how long they will remain independent. Barnett left the mega-corporation Viacom to start his own independent web television channel in 2007. While he left the corporate world for several reasons, he mainly left because of the amount of process was involved in getting content from the creator to the audience. By cutting out the middlemen, a content creator could simply upload their content to the web and gain attention (with far less of an audience, but at least the audience was authentic). At that time, web based television was in its infancy with only several web series online including We Need Girlfriends, Chad Vader and The Guild, all of which used copyrighted content in their series. The web offered the freedom of the constraint of corporate rules and regulations.

Chad Vader, Episode 1, July 10, 2006. With obvious copyright issues.

Web savvy creators like Next New Networks took advantage of YouTube’s upgrades techniques and made independent, interesting, non-corporate video content. The content was so good that it garnered the attention of YouTube’s owner, Google, who later aquired Next New Networks and created YouTube Next. Google, who does it’s best to “Not be evil” (its unofficial corporate motto), understands the value of niche enterprises – and buys them. In the years since the birth of web television, a lot of online video has moved towards the monetization of content. This has been happening forever on network and cable (The Apprentice is a one-hour informercial) and of course it will happen on the web, it’s inevitable. In fact, even Barnett’s MyDamnChannel is teaming up with the corporations (including his old co-workers at Paramount). It happens.

Jaron Lanier, one of the author of our modern internet and the guy who helped create Virtual Reality had this to say in his Op-Ed in the New York Times Thursday:

The adulation of “free content” inevitably meant that “advertising” would become the biggest business in the open part of the information economy…Once networks are established, it is hard to reduce their power.

One of my students expressed happiness about Google’s acquisition of Next New Networks and saw the move as “a sign of changing winds.” I mostly agree, the fact that a corporation sees user generated content as valuable is valuable to the user. But I also see it as corporatization of independent video. As Lanier pointed out, the web is often a fight between the “good guys” and the “bad guys.” But as we’ve seen in an earlier post here, as digital media is becoming consolidated – who the “bad guy” and who the “good guy” is becoming a blurry spectrum.

In my opinion, online video content’s evolution is going to be on the forefront of the fight against what we see as the good and the bad. Video is valuable. We have to keep our eyes open to the future lawsuits and bills and acts that may hinder (or aid!) its creation and distribution.

“Sex is different when you’re 30, there’s way more people involved.”

So says Aaron (actor/director Yuri Baranovsky), the lead character in Leap Year, after opening the door to his house to a friendly birthday surprise party. Leap Year is a new web series that debuted on Hulu last night. The show displays characteristics of the independent web industry gaining roots and aging maturely. Leap Year is about 5 friends, all in their late 20s or early 30s who have a distinct and realistic fear of job loss during a seemingly never-ending recession. Through the value of friendship and trust, they are convinced by Jack (Drew Lanning) to think about their more daring goals – independent start-ups.

It’s now time that web television becomes something to take seriously – these “independent start-ups” of production are no longer kids play or sandbox television, they are valuable stories that are significant to the culture of television. Leap Year is a show brought to you by Hiscox, Inc., a specialist insurer, and distributed on Hulu. At the same time Leap Year starts its distribution, Netflix is preparing for its Kevin Spacey/David Fincher web series “House of Cards.” Reuters calls the Netflix deal a “game changer” for traditional television.

When web television began about six years ago, it was driven by a young, 20-something creative force that was free to experiment in the new distribution outlet of the Internet. It was seen as purely creative enterprise by the oldest set of millenials and digital natives; even the deepest stories were seen as experimental. Around 2008 or 2009, a shift occurred not only in the web television market, but also on broadcast television. In the web television market, new channels were beginning their branded entertainment series (examples like MyDamnChannel’s Easy to Assemble or Revision3’s Diggnation) where corporate sponsorship was playing a large role in the construction and distribution of the series. In the broadcast market, many of the shows used characters based on the “beta person,” a character that resembles an internet personality: someone you don’t know personally, but can definitely enjoy watching. Take Thursday night on NBC for example: the night is made up of shows with characters that don’t represent any general group of people – they’re weird. Liz Lemon and Jeff Winger are odd specimens that half a decade ago could only be found in a quirky web series online, now they are enjoyable and endearing. The characters of The Guild almost seem too normal next to characters like Abed or Troy from Community.

Leap Year is a television show with characters that are mature and are facing real issues and have real desires and new plans; a lot like the people they represent: the creators of the show. The show does not skimp on any part of its production either: the actors are well cast, the script is well paced, there are EXTRAS! and lots of them! One of my favorite parts of the pilot episode was an extended take in the office near the middle of the episode. It shows that rehearsal was key to making this show go above and beyond what some viewers may even find on broadcast television.

The web series creators that started the web television industry didn’t stop after their first show, they grew and their work did as well. In the coming years, to pitch a web series will hold as much weight as pitching a traditional show and with that in mind, the curriculum in college will welcome the technique and culture of the web television enterprise. Leap Year is a strong sign of a still growing industry.

See episode 1 below:

Tonight at midnight, Ragtag Productions debuts My Future Girlfriend, the newest webseries by the team that created the “Beta Character.” Don’t expect My Future Girlfriend to be the same as the We Need Girlfriends documentary television series style. Steve Tsapelas, the writer of MFG, explains that this new show was conceived as “more of shorter version of a film as opposed to a shorter version of a television series” like WNG. “The goal was to make a shorter version of a feature [film] to show what can be done” with the web medium. Steve explains that in television shows, characters go through quite a change over a vast amount of time (and in WNG that occurred over a year); in MFG, there is a more of a self-contained story.

The show takes place in Los Angeles and was created over a few months last year. Similar to WNG, the characters of MFG are just becoming their own: not just out of college, but not yet settled in their career field. As young twenty-somethings, the characters deal with desire and the conflict between professionalism and love. Steve feels that although different from a television show construct, he “wanted to go past the superficiality of young relationships where sometimes love happens because the couple just simply likes the same things.”

Jumping into the sci-fi realm, My Future Girlfriend uses time-travel and takes cues and references to Back to the Future and the Terminator (as well as dozens more) movies and mixes a quirky love story even somewhat similar to coming-of-age movies. The lead character, Clark (Evan Gaustad), is the last hold-out in his friend trio to grow into his path.

Clark shows Christina a drawing of his future girlfriend

Clark’s roommates Christina (Kirsten Scoles) and Alan (Patrick Cohen of We Need Girlfriends) both enable him to remain immature while also giving advice on how to move onto adulthood. Christina and Alan both feel that he needs to find himself a stable relationship (or a relationship at all for that matter) and then move to maturity. Cue the creeping attractive female follower Lisa (Bridgette Hagerman, also of We Need Girlfriends) making it “too easy” for Clark to have a relationship. The two have the “easiest” date ever where Lisa seems to have all the same interests as Clark and he seems to find his future girlfriend. That is until Clark’s actual girlfriend from the future shows up… from the future…

Clark meets the interested Lisa

In this five part series, Clark realizes his potential as a grown-up and sees the benefit in love you have work for rather than just get.

The Ragtag crew ended up in LA after WNG was purchased by CBS to be made for air (still on the yellow light shelf) and in their time on the left coast, the group, made up of Steve Tsapelas, Brian Amyot and Angel Acevedo, were curious to work again on a creative enterprise. After talks with their agent, Steve wrote a script for a new plot and the Ragtag crew went into production mode.

Some of the things that differ greatly in production from WNG to MFG is the art of locations. In WNG, the characters spent a great deal of time walking from place to place in Astoria, NY, whereas the characters in MFG drove (you can get beeped at for walking in LA). That being said, the locations feel a bit detached. Jonathan Lethem, a writer many readers feel belongs to New York City, wrote in a different style in his LA narratives. More interiors, less city as a character. Same thing here with My Future Girlfriend. This developed more a of “Hollywood show rather than a down and dirty personal show” Steve explains. The look is different, lit like a film, tripod shots and dolly tracking shots. The director of photography, Jeff Billings, used the blues and dark shadows of the Terminator films and applied it to the show.

As you watch My Future Girlfriend, appreciate it as a something different than Ragtag’s previous work. Although on the vein of characters in search of love and maturity, the show is unique. The show debuts tonight at midnight (April 1) and the second episode airs on April 15th and the rest of the series is weekly after that.

As veterans of web television, its nice to see Ragtag’s experimentation with different genres of television only accessible on the web. Great characters are tough to come by on traditional platforms and Steve knows how to write what you want to watch, not what advertisers want to show. Check in with http://www.myfuturegirlfriend.com/ tonight to see the first episode.

Occasionally I receive emails from my colleagues with suggestions or recommendations of web series they had come across. I appreciate the emails because in my busy schedule it is sometimes tough to keep up with the shows that are produced for online distribution. The latest I was sent was from a professor who teaches television producing and theory. She included the link to The League of Extraordinary Dancers, a web series made exclusively for the web and distributed on Hulu this past January. I had actually seen and enjoyed the show, but had forgotten about it until she emailed me.

The League of Extraordinary Dancers, or The LXD, is a show about rival dance teams whose main source of superpower is their extremely high skilled dance moves. The show was made by director Jon Chu after the production of his movie “Step Up 2: The Streets.” Chu is clearly adept at directing dancers and working within this genre.

My colleague wanted to know my opinion and I said that I liked the show, but did not really see it as a web show. It wasn’t the production value or the skill of the dancers that made me think that the show should belong on television, but rather the fact that the show didn’t need the web.

When I say “need the web,” I mean shows that could most likely be aired on traditional television, network or cable, because they do not fit into a certain genre or support any product support for advertising dollars. Shows that need the web would be shows that aim their story arc towards a very small niche audience. Most television aims toward the general audience, which is nearly EVERY television viewer. The fact that Jon Chu chose the web doesn’t mean that needed the web for its distribution. Joss Whedon chose the web for Dr. Horrible’s Sing-A-Long Blog (which had high production value, expensive talent and a popular director) because Dr. Horrible could not be produced on traditional television. The show – a musical-drama-comedy-tragedy – doesn’t easily fit into a category, but what holds it back from traditional distribution is how the show ends. (I’m not going to ruin it, but those last few seconds are a bit of a shock.) Also, it is not say that odd endings make a web show a web show either, “The Sopranos” ending was a television shock moment.

To clarify, what I mean is this: web series should not be produced for the sake of pushing the limit or crossing genres, but should consider the smaller audience and not worry about the general public. The LXD could easily be made for traditional television because of the popularity of “So You Think You Can Dance” and “Heroes” (and it wasn’t created during a writer’s strike!). In Dr. Horrible’s, you not only cheer for the enemy, but you have to invest your feelings into him. Advertisers would balk at the idea of selling advertising to a show like that, it wouldn’t long on television.

Also, shows that go against the normal in their production always seem better for the web. Shows like The Guild or Anyone But Me utilize characters that the general public do not feel a connection or investment to but the story demands the niche characters. Take “The Big Bang Theory” for comparison, the writing and characters can make a general audience laugh and the general audience doesn’t have to understand the niche engineering jokes in order to remain invested in the characters.

For niche storytelling, the creator of the show has to be passionate about storytelling of their subject an not care about the audience. I will always refer to We Need Girlfriends in this case because the characters were unrelatable to a general public and the show’s story arc isn’t entirely a “feel-good” show. Even shows without story arc may need the web because of the niche feel. Very recently, the Wall Street Journal wrote an article on a web series called Subway Sessions. During my conversation with my colleague, this web show came up as a point.

Subways Sessions records musicians in the New York City subway with DSLRs and a small Zoom recording device. Their mantra is to present “unedited music” from the artist and this idea of “raw sound” doesn’t appeal to the general audience who usually tend to seek out big budget music videos and over-produced sound (the exception being Ok Go). On top of that, the bands that Subway Sessions choose are not well known to a general audience. Ranging from The Cary Brothers (pictured) to Pearl and the Beard to Patrick Park and even Damian Kulash of Ok Go’s solo act (told ya). These bands fit into a very specific group of fans.

The important aspect is that Subway Sessions needs the web for their distribution because most traditional outlets could not afford to take the risk on a niche audience no matter how loyal they may be. The web offers the principles of independence and the desire to produce for the audience you want, not the one the advertisers say you should have. The LXD is an excellent web show, but when I make examples of web productions in a web television course, I seek out content that would most likely not exist without its web distribution.

On several occasions I have posted Virginia Heffernan’s work from the New York Times Magazine and have glowingly agreed with her statements. Today’s article on the Video Studies in Hyperreality falls a bit short for the average reader. I myself have yet to see the heads-up-display in the cabs but I’m sure some readers have come across it in their NYC travels.

When I first came across the title of the article I was excited by the possibility of explanations into our media entrenched world and the possible advantages/disadvantages of such screen over exposure and the only bit that plays into this is the cabbie’s nonchalant: “It takes some getting used to.”

What I felt was missing from this article was references to Umberto Eco and Jean Baudrillard, those who have predicted this exact thing. (Even a Philip K. Dick reference maybe.) I understand where Virginia Heffernan leads the article towards the extreme advanced of microbiology video (as it is her area of expertise) but in her “Points of Entry” she only references Barthes, who IS a post-modernism hero, but not alone in the aspects of Hyperreality studies.

Via Frazz by Jef Mallett

This post was originally delivered as a lecture at WGA East’s Web Series Summer Camp on August 28th. (Discussion at #Digiday on Twitter.)

Today, content creators of all types are doing projects for the Internet. One of the biggest differences between doing work for traditional media and web media is the funding. When put in a situation to produce your own work, you’ll be up against dozens of struggles during the creation process. One of the most important aspects to thinking about your content in its finished form is to think about it visually before you start producing. It’s often said, a good production is in the pre-production.

The following are some strategies and tips to keep in mind while planning to convert a web television script into a very watchable program.

************************************************************************

So. You’ve written a script and you’d like to get it produced. Now it’s time to shop the script to agents, managers, companies and see who bites. They’ll hire a production crew, create the plans, set up a budget, cast actors, direct the script, put it through post-production and put it on a wonderful channel for all to see!

What? What’s that? That’s not easy to do? You’ll have to self-produce it?! Well where to begin?

When faced with the desire to create great programming without going through the traditional means (which could take years), you are often faced with the prospect of creating it yourself. A great number of web producers did not go to school for television production and are often at a loss when it comes to the ideas of how and where to start. In my years as a television student and then later as a television producer and now a television professor, I can legitimately say that most of all production is in pre-production.

Pre-production is the stage of production where you visually conceptualize your script for the screen. In some terms, your knowledge of screen culture should help you with this so long as you’ve watched and analyzed enough television. But no matter how much you think you can keep in your head, when it comes time to hit record on the camera, a lot of that goes out the window.

One of the easiest steps in pre-production with a short-handed staff (usually just you and some close friends), is the storyboard. The storyboard isn’t just for camera blocking; the storyboard is a reminder for some very important (and oft-forgotten) aspects of production.

When I asked several people about their desire to make storyboards, the most common response was: “I didn’t bother! As soon as I got to my location, the storyboards were useless because I didn’t remember the space my gear took up or my crew or whatever!”

With that in mind, the first thing to think about is location and it’s very important to bring a camera with you when scouting. This is, of course, unless you know the location very well (like your house or your friends place or where you work). But even after seeing your location, sometimes when you show up with the camera and the crew and the cast, it still seems off balance. Instead of making steadfast storyboards, try to make storyboards with reminders.

While sitting down with your script and thinking about the screen, you have to remember that most people watch web television on a screen within a screen. Most people never hit the full screen button on the video (and sometimes you don’t want them to if you have brand awareness or ads). This means:

1. Most computer screens are smaller than your average television.
2. Most videos that play on the web are less than 1/2 the size of the monitor.
3. There are a LOT of distractions around your screen where your content is playing.

In television school, the one concept that is drummed into the students minds is to remember depth when shooting. This is known as the Z-Axis. The screen is 2-dimensional (the X and Y axis) and the goal of the producer and camera person is the make the image seem like it has a third dimension. This third dimension keeps the viewers’ eyes on the screen.

What you can do with your storyboards is to remember to draw angles in every shot. Even though this seems like something you can memorize, it becomes extra mental burden when shooting. Drawing Z-axis vectors on your storyboard becomes a very strong aspect to shooting. Here’s an example of shooting with vectors from “We Need Girlfriends” episode 5:

What to pay attention to, specifically at the 2:49 minute mark, is the usage of vectors in consecutive shots. Using depth going in, then out, then in, is one way of keeping eyes on the screen.

No matter what television production or film production book you pick up, knowledge of the Z-axis will be the most prominent aspect. On your storyboards, you should draw vector lines of depth. The people you draw in the shot can be drawn crudely, as can the the objects, but the lines on your storyboard are good reminders to use depth.

Another aspect of web production that could come in handy in production that could be made in pre-production are camera “maps”. These maps can help the process along for shooting. I asked the guys of Sans Pants Productions how they felt about storyboards and they said they use them, but find the maps equally as useful. The maps are basically charts for blocking, camera, and a visual checklist for your shot sheet. I would recommend these to a more advanced producer of web television.

Note the color coding and blocking:

After seeing the maps from above, it’s easier for the entire crew to understand how you plan on going about the days shoot. Mike Api of Sans Pants says that camera maps are “VITAL in making our shoots efficient; shoots we didn’t map ran long.” The following is the sketch “The Elevator” that goes with those camera maps.

The options in pre-production for a smooth production are abundant and the more fore-thought you put into pre-production, the better your shoot will be. In our ever-accesible world of resources, there are some places to go on the web where you can find storyboard templates and forms and production items. One of my favorite is at Zadie.com. Paul Zadie is a motion picture artist that has been gracious enough to share his resources with the world. At his Free Stuff link, you can find dozens of useful items including a 16×9 template for storyboards.

Along with that, he also has contracts and forms that are very useful for your pre-production needs. Also, something that comes in handy for me as well as my students is the Moleskine Storyboard Journal. I found mine at Barnes and Noble but I’m sure they’re available wherever Moleskine’s are sold.

So what are we missing? Well there’s a few things to also keep in mind while doing your pre-production.

While you may have written your script, you have to keep in mind that others may not be able to visualize the script the way you do. The more pre-production you do with storyboards, maps and photographs of locations, the better. In order to run smoothly during the production process, having everyone on the same page is very important.

Another thing to keep in mind is the possible guerrilla aspect of web production. Most web projects are done in your free time – but free time is a misnomer! Time is never free and the most common errors in production come from rushing the shoot or being rushed through your shoot. That’s why a shot list with visual storyboards are so important. Staying calm with your visuals is the best way to bring forth a great product.

As writers, many fear the words “content creator” because it takes away from the importance of the act of writing. While I agree with this, the more a writer (or anyone wishing to produce content for the web) knows about production, the higher the quality the production will be. Don’t go overboard when creating for the web. Odds are, James Cameron will not be your competition, people just like you will be. And as long as screen are two dimensional and watched without special glasses on, thought should be put on your production breakdown to make sure people watch your work and don’t click away.

With a bit of extra time in pre-production, they viewers’ eyes will be admiring your hard work!

Over the course of the last ten years, television has been through major changes. In 1999, many executives and advertisers were well aware of the changes yet to come. None at the time could have predicted the success of YouTube and online television distribution, but all were certain that television would evolve.

Emily Nussbaum, along with the rest of the NYMag team write an incredible series of articles about this past season’s television shows and how they are creating a better art of television. Following up Emily Nussbaum’s excellent summation of television during the aughts, this series of articles explains how television is conforming to the new standard of the audience who is everyone.

Televisionaries: An extraordinary TV season, and the rules that shaped it.

The article that is co-authored by Dr. Gershon and myself is on Page 50 of this Journal. It’s called “Teaching Television Production in the Age of YouTube.”

I am ready for my panel. Notes are done and I am ready to present year two of Teaching Television Production in the Age of YouTube.