Cool old footage, and the ambient music by Smolik really makes the thing tick. Loved the footage of Kennedy's caravan preceding the assassination interspersed with footage of a solar flair--that energizing snap of focus could have been exercised more, given the double-jointedness of the tools they were using.
I am prepared to find the camp moving, but am worried that it will be camp for camp's sake. Slate has a long running, occasionally very interesting investigation of camp, and I believe they've brought it up several times as well: Camp is a valuable inroad to sincerity, but it often isn't used that way.
Interesting intersection of Digital Storytelling and religious values in the academic sphere. One of the earliest MA degrees in digital storytelling that I've seen, although there are many, many more on the way.
"In my opinion, AR is the ability to overlay portray subjective narratives directly over “objective” reality. When we view the world through AR we are not only consuming information in addition to what is already there, we are consuming the author of that information’s worldview. When we, for instance, view the world through Yelp’s AR program, we are viewing a qualitatively analyzed and scored perspective which is utterly different from the non-augmented experience."
More to come on this article, which says enough interesting and new things about AR and the nature of our relationship with media to merit far more than I'll put here.
Bolter, Engberg and MacIntyre push for the adoption of a new concept, polyaesthetic, to be applied to AR because the experiene of AR necessarily merges several separate aesthetics and sensations. This could be easily brought to bear on new media in general, as it seems to be characterized to large extent by the continuous fission of traditionally separate mediums.
What excited debate in my office and my up-and-coming article was their argument that AR is not a suitable medium for storytelling becausie it is a polyaesthetic medium. As one of my colleagues said it: There's proprioception and maneuvering our body in real space, and then we hop into a constructed world, and then we hop back out again to see where we are--that's not how the human brain works.
I don't know either way, but I am returning to this subject in an article.
"Haunting Melissa" wants to challenge the boundaries of filmmaking by putting a ghost in your (iOS) machine.
I like the idea behind this app; it reminds me of the visceral reactions, recently televised, of fans to the Red Wedding episode of Game of Thrones, of my own experience reading that section of the third book, and of George R.R. Martin's admission that he finished the entire rest of the novel before he could return to finish that scene. The thing is, when we are faced with horror, we can put the book down and walk away...and the book doesn't then follow us around.
The repulsion-attraction phenomena of horror is sublime, but we are usually in complete control of our experiencing it. This slight tweak on that power-game is...potentially very interesting.
What, exactly, is genius? In their latest project, Italian visualization wizard Giorgia Lupi and her team at Accurat — who have previously given us a timeline of the future based on famous fiction, a visual history of the Nobel Prize, and a visualization of global brain drain inspired by Mondrian — explore the anatomy of genius, based on Genius: A Mosaic of One Hundred Exemplary Creative Minds by literary titan Harold Bloom.
From Shakespeare to Stendhal to Lewis Carroll to Ralph Ellison, the visualization depicts the geographic origin, time period, and field of each “genius,” correlated with visits to the respective Wikipedia page and connection to related historical figures.
Gianluca Fiorelli: "Every brand has a story to tell, and the way users consume stories is changing faster than ever. How will you tell your brand's story across multiple media outlets and platforms, while still giving users an active role in the expansion process?"
"Defiance" sets up plenty of interesting possibilities as it stakes out a diverting territory somewhere between the grittiness of "Battlestar Galactica" and "The Walking Dead" and the tidiness of "Star Trek: The Next Generation" and "Revolution."...
Reviews of the show and of the game, individually, are high; but we expect that the complement of one to the other is going to be more complicated than each piece shining on its own. Perhaps this will be the best, first test of transmedia as an effective medium, because both could have succeeded on their own, but tied together...might this new creature not float at all?
It is clear that in 2013, the emergence of smart glasses is having a dramatic impact on the digital storytelling experience.
I appreciate Brian Ballard's isolation of the technical hurdles to full smart glasses integration into socity. I have to say I don't think about those challenges--heat, human-computer-interface--as much as I do the psycho-social challenges, which are much more interesting. They're much more interesting because they're more difficult to predict. Exactly what role with smart glasses play in our lives fifteen years from now? Will they even catch on? Thankfully Moore's law, which makes these discussions of what will be technologically possible so boring, doesn't apply to the mercurial evolution of human taste, which is so very interesting.
Not that I'm knocking this. Exciting hypotheticals. Read it. Just saying: The most compelling challenge to user-adoption of smart glasses isn't technological.
You know the caption contests that the New Yorker puts on? This reminds me of that, except in story form. Writers respond to pre-rendered artwork, ordering it, putting words to it, and making stories. I really respect this idea, and I'm interested to see if the traffic of artists (who provide the artwork) and writers feeds off one another enough to get this project going.
Published stories are embeddable, and shareable via a multitude of social networking programs. Very easy to use and pretty.
IFTN news- The latest news for the Irish Film and Television industry. Productions, film festival, Irish films, locations ,features, sports, crew, actors and much more
Recently had a discussion at work about the challenges facing multimodal producations like this one: How to keep the experience immersive when traversing between separate media; see this excellent article on Augmented Reality.
The elasticity of the word "immersive" is problematic, because I think there is a distinction to be made between the experience of a singularly enveloping (thrown out the baby with the bath water) modality, like a novel, which doesn't usually require the reader to put the book down to complete the designed experience (usually a bad sign), and the experience of a permeant, poly-aesthetic medium like AR or transmedia projects such as "Brand New-U," in which such exits and entrances are part of the play.
One is not better than the other, we all agree. Or at least we agree not to know. The difference between a film and something like this is in dimensions, and language is better at differentiating proportions.
I'm curious: What are the metrics for success, of a project like this one?
Interactive video storytelling tool that is relatively easy to use! If you've used Flixmaster, this will look somewhat familiar. Unlike Flixmaster, branches aren't created with overlay "buttons," but rather "nodes" which are invisble hotspots (limited, it seems, to rectangular shapes; woe beta) which designers may position and size over certain points in an image.