When World's Collide - the future of TV and digital, and how we tell stories now
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•320 views
20 minute presentation given at BVE2015.
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to When World's Collide - the future of TV and digital, and how we tell stories now
Similar to When World's Collide - the future of TV and digital, and how we tell stories now (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
When World's Collide - the future of TV and digital, and how we tell stories now
- 1. hello world_
- 2. When Worlds Collide The future of broadcast and digital, and how we tell stories now Ben Lunt
- 3. A confession
- 4. Not so much technology and trends
- 5. Not so much technology and trends as structure and language
- 6. Technology is tangible Trends are observable Technology and trends are alluring
- 7. Technology is tangible Trends are observable Both are subject to change Technology and trends are alluring
- 8. Technology as an enabler Not the thing that’s exciting, but what people can do with it Trends as a reaction or response Not a thing in and of themselves, but a reaction to something, or a pattern to what people are doing with it Technology and trends are illusory
- 9. What it feels like to live in the present Time Humanprogress
- 10. What it feels like to live in the present Time Humanprogress
- 11. Edwin S. Porter 1870 - 1941
- 12. 1903
- 15. 1902
- 16. 1915
- 17. = hunger = lust 1920 = sadness
- 18. 1927
- 19. 1927
- 20. 1927
- 21. 1927
- 23. Cinema as a fusion of old and new Of the very familiar and the recently experimental
- 24. 1941
- 27. We were committed to interactivity where today we embrace the linear and the familiar
- 29. Lowest common denominator formats Video, image, text
- 30. The trade-off User base / audience REACH Functional / format freedom CONTROL
- 31. That was then. This is now. What next?
- 33. The familiarity and fluency of analogue The flexibility and immediacy of digital The future of broadcast and digital as a fusion of old and new
- 34. The familiarity and fluency of analogue The flexibility and immediacy of digital A unique vernacular fit for the 21st century The future of broadcast and digital as a fusion of old and new
- 35. TV is no longer all powerful
- 36. TV is losing its grip
- 37. TV is dead Long live TV
- 38. What we talk about when we talk about TV HARDWARE SOFTWARE CONTENT
- 39. What we talk about when we talk about TV HARDWARE SOFTWARE CONTENT WHAT WE WATCH TV ON WHAT THE TV CAN DO WHAT TYPE OF STUFF WE CAN SEE ON IT + =
- 40. “Second screen” as social amplifier +
- 41. “Second screen” as social amplifier +
- 42. “Second screen” as remote control +
- 43. Connected screens, fluid experiences + + +
- 44. Revolution borne out of the collision itself Not of one screen, but many All screens, all together
- 45. What might it look like?
- 46. The future of broadcast and digital EPISODIC SHORT-FORM LONG STORY ARC BITE SIZED NOURISHING
- 47. The future of broadcast and digital EPISODIC MIXED MEDIA SHORT-FORM LONG STORY ARC BITE SIZED NOURISHING MULTIPLATFORM MULTI-FORMAT SHAREABLE MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVES +
- 48. The future of broadcast and digital EPISODIC MIXED MEDIA (AS FOR) LIVE SHORT-FORM LONG STORY ARC BITE SIZED NOURISHING EVENTISED REAL-TIME IMMEDIATE UNPREDICTABLE MULTIPLATFORM MULTI-FORMAT SHAREABLE MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVES ++
- 49. The future of broadcast and digital EPISODIC MIXED MEDIA (AS FOR) LIVE PARTICIPATOR Y SHORT-FORM LONG STORY ARC BITE SIZED NOURISHING EVENTISED REAL-TIME IMMEDIATE UNPREDICTABLE BEYOND THE TALENT SHOW BEYOND THE EXTRA POROUS BLENDED REALITIES MULTIPLATFORM MULTI-FORMAT SHAREABLE MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVES ++ +
- 50. Not new ideas Ideas whose time has come
- 51. The building blocks are in place Technology is no longer the primary driver Language now defines the pace of change
- 52. A working lifetime 1903 1941
- 53. The glass is half full
- 54. The glass is half full We get to write the rule book
- 55. What will our “Citizen Kane” look like? 1941 2025?
- 56. When Worlds Collide The future of broadcast and digital, and how we tell stories now Ben Lunt blunt@perestroika.tv @blunt_
Editor's Notes
- Thanks to BVE, thanks to you I’m Ben Lunt etc and it seems I’m going to be talking on the subject of …
- When BVE first asked me what I might speak about, I did that thing where… I was probably planning to focus on the bread and butter of events like these… I wanted to take this opportunity to take a step back…
- for all sorts of reasons that I hope to have made clear my the end of my presentation
- for all sorts of reasons that I hope to have made clear my the end of my presentation
- Technology and trends are, of course, very important. And I’m not not going to talk about them. But there’s a reason why they’re bread and butter…
- … As with most things in life. Technology is changing so fast – and trends, by definition, come and go.
- And besides, how solid are they *really*?
- Trying to see into the future is hard, of course. It’s a fool’s errand. No matter how much information we have at our fingertips, I think the present always has, and always will feel a little bit like this >>>
- A great leap of faith into the unknown. And perhaps language is no better a predictor of change than tech and trends… It too is changing all the time. But it changes – at least *the ways* it changes - are I think more predictable What if we looked at how it has changed in the past,… see how things are changing now and in the future… Bear with me a while longer, wind the clock back over 100 years Birth of cinema, now deeply familiar and ingrained, but then unformed
- To this guy, early pioneer of narrative cinema When he’s working, cinema is still heavily indebted to theatre and still photography: very few scenes, wide camera set ups, long unbroken takes The audience views the action as if actors on a stage, so to speak.
- As his narrative ambitions grow, he – and audience – struggle With tricky problems like how to shift perspectives in time and space Let's look at how he goes about solving these problems, in this clip from his 1903 film life of an American fireman.
- Dramatisation of well known fire in C19 Michigan, I think Previously, seen them mustering, rushing thru streets, Damsel in distress etc … But now look at what Porter does – you think you’re gonna see them come out thru the window… … Batshit crazy, barely comprehensible >>>
- We’d be much more comfy with this 1930 re-edit But to an audience in 1903, this parallel cutting bewildering ---- Think about that. It takes 30 years for people to get comfy with what we take for granted A language we understand before we can even talk --- Techniques, language, comes slowly then In the absence of sound… creativity… sustained visual narrative
- Start with Porter, and the Wild escapism and elaborate trickery of Melies
- Griffth invents the close-up, camera gets mobile
- Soviet theorist Kuleshev discovers that you can create meaning by juxtaposing different shots Neutral expression interpreted different ways depending on what shot follows it
- Eisenstein picks up the reins of montage theory and applies it, culminating in…
- That same year, Fritz Lang makes Metropolis
- Abel Gance experiments with the format itself, mixing multiple projectors to create the epic Napoleon
- 1927 as the high water mark of silent cinema And then this happens >>>
- The advent of sound makes movies accessible to mass audiences like never before. But viewed by a great many of the pioneers of early cinema as a major creative setback. No longer having to try quite so hard to find creative visual solutions to sustaining a narrative, films become "traditional”, become once again indebted to the theatre, albeit theatre with close ups. But here’s the thing…
- What we know and love as cinema… film makers find a way to fuse the techniques and visual artistry of silent movies with the narrative fluency and dramatic immediacy offered by synchronised sound.
- Nothing exemplifies this more than Kane Why Citizen Kane resonates Throws every trick in the book, but in the service of story
- So, okay seriously… Well, it seems to me that digital is on a similar trajectory If I think back to the work I was doing 10, even 5, years ago – and routinely… Feels wildly experiemental at times
- Audi A5: BBH … love letter to the cars sinuous bodywork called Rhythm of Lines Where today a piece of online video would have done the job, we created interactive experience create their own unique 3D sculpture using an immersive real-time drawing tool Screensaver / receive unique high quality art print --- Audi R8: rich, tactile interface explore every stage of the incredibly detailed construction process and develop an understanding of the features. --- FT: allowed people to explore this member’s club and learn about them through the readers themselves.
- By contrast, “digital” work today is very traditional, very linear, very video and image-based. And for good reason >>>
- Back then we created destination experiences over which we had full control Now we create content that’s distributed across big, established digital channels like FB, Twitter, YT
- Each with their own very rigid format requirements Based on familiar, well established file formats
- We’ve traded, and rightly so, innovation for reach – the experimental for the familiar. Not making a value judgement. One not intrinsically better than the other.
- The crux of my argument: old peers / young’uns both wrong
- To quote Facebook… don’t believe that we’re done yet. As much as the media landscape is stabilizing, I think we’re still in transition.
- We’re on the cusp of our own moment of synthesis And I think the TV set is a big, big part of that
- Let me try and put some substance behind that claim >>>
- TV, box in the corner, special place in our hearts That’s changing
- TV is losing share of attention year on year, don’t need to dwell Stats can be misleading – digital will always overindex because: work While TV primarily freetime But millennials 18-34 – that means something – 4% > 12% drop Sept-Jan
- But if, by TV, we mean the big screen in our living room, I think reports of its demise are wildly exaggerated.
- Lets unpick what we mean when we say “TV”…
- hardware – the device by which we consume content – software – the functionalities available on each device – and content – the types of stuff we’re able to consume on each device as a result. Whichever way you look at it, the world’s of broadcast and digital on collision course
- Obligatory! “second screen” historically been used as a way in to talk about social TV, and how Twitter can be used to drive viewing figures and engagement Impossible to imagine… --- But the future of the “second screen” debate for me at least is less about commentary, and much more about control. >>>PTO
- If you review the kinds of stats I shared a moment ago, binary debate how digital is (or isn’t) taking over from TV. But it’s not a zero sum game. Smartphones, tablets, computers - whatever – are not replacing TV. But they are, I think, augmenting it, enhancing it, moulding it. >>>>
- If they’re replacing anything, it’s not TV, but the remote control. Things like Chromecast, which let’s me stream what I like, when I like, using my phone or computer as a remote control. From a personal perspective, … We have actually started watching TV on the TV again.
- But not just TV. To go back to my distinction between hardware, software and content – it’s not just TV shows that we’re now enjoying through the TV set – it’s different types of content, from video to image galleries to – hallelujah! – rich interactive experiences streamed directly from my web browser. This is the front line for narrative ambition >>>
- No shame in saying that
- AND THAT – AS WE HAVE SEEN – TAKES TIME ---- It takes creativity. It takes imagination, not just from artists or technicians, but from the audience itself.
- Think about the 40 years it took to get from Life of an American Fireman to Citizen Kane. Think about that timeframe in the context of your professional career. It’s scary, isn’t it?
- … so long as we work together, take risks, and stay focussed.
- By my reckoning, it’s the early 1930s. And that means our Citizen Kane is a scant 10 years away. ---- What will it look like? How will it work? What do we want it to be? And what are we going to do to get there?