Maria’s Story and its role in the technological history of documentary filmmaking

Maria’s Story (1990, Monona Wali & Pamela Cohen, 53 min.) is a documentary portrait of Maria Serrano, a 39-year-old woman who is a peasant, mother, and guerrilla leader who at the time the film was made, had spent over a decade of her life fighting in the hills of El Salvador. Some might condemn the film as agitprop, others would argue it provides an insightful point-of-view of the late-eighties struggle in El Salvador from a highly personal point-of-view. The film is also interesting and important because of the manner in which it was made. More on that later. The film was nominated for the Grand Jury Prize at the 1991 Sundance Film Festival, had a modest theatrical release, and was broadcast by PBS on P.O.V.

I would argue the film is not propaganda due to the fact the filmmakers focused on one woman’s story through which the filmmakers explored the injustice of the situation of El Salvador. Reminds me of the old film school adage, “show don’t tell.” The film was made in conjunction with CISPES (Committee In Solidarity with the People of El Salvador) and was a very effective fundraising tool for them, definitely in part to film’s personal perspective. Viewers might disagree with Maria, her politics, her approach to the problems she faces, but they could not disagree with the reality of her life and the people around her. Not only is there no such thing as objectivity, the duplicitous “objectivity” of the mainstream media stifles real dialog, real debate, real understanding. I like my documentaries with a point-of-view from perspective of real people, and if the filmmaker has an agenda, so be it, as long as they are willing to go to bat for their facts and perspectives and the social reality they are depicting.

But I digress. This post is more about what makes this particular film interesting from the perspective of media technology history: the production of the film was made possible by the use of a new Sony Video8 camcorder that recorded high quality audio and introduced around the time the film started filming. This film was made at a watershed moment in documentary film history. The filmmakers have told the story (ref. Q&A session during a San Francisco screening of the film, circa 1991) of the first time they went down to El Salvador with their 16mm film camera, audio recording gear, and many cans of 16mm film. Maria’s response, in summary, was “with all that gear you can’t move fast, you’re going to get us killed” and the filmmakers returned to San Francisco and had to rethink how they were going to shoot the film.

This was just around the time that Video8 (and soon after Hi8) were being discussed in documentary circles as viable alternatives to 16mm film and Betacam SP for shooting documentary films. There was lots of talk about whether PBS would accept Video8 (and later Hi8) documentaries and the video engineers and film snobs were out in full regalia for this debate. John Knoop, the cinematographer on the project, came up with a solution, using Sony’s new Video8 prosumer camcorder, a small shoulder mounted camera that had high-quality built in audio recording capabilities with real audio meters, and he fashioned some solar panel powered battery chargers for the camera batteries. The prosumer Video8 (and later Hi8) video cameras, were lighter and a tad smaller than most 16mm film cameras like the Aaton LTR popular at the time, but they required more electrical energy than their 16mm counterparts, so a methodology of charging the batteries in the jungle was critical.

With the new smaller gear and a way to charge their batteries far from the power grid, the filmmakers returned to El Salvador and this time Maria allowed them to follow her and her army of children and men as they travel through the hills to their campsites in preparation for what they hope will be their final offensive against the government. With very little resources and a small number of weapons, they are not the revolutionaries we see in movies but this film is about a social reality we often don’t see. Revolutionaries who are also mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, fighting for basic human rights. No stars or effects or steadicam or sweeping crane shots in this film. Just life as the filmmakers observe it day to day living under harsh conditions. The quality of the video image actually works in favor of this film, constantly reminding you this is a mediated experience, not a mimetic virtuality.

The film is also interesting because for the theatrical release the filmmakers had no choice but to produce a film print. This was at the time that a post firm in Los Angeles called Image Transform has perfected a video to film process that was helping filmmakers make film prints that looked good enough to entice some distributors and theaters to program films that had been shot in video. We don’t get hung up on shooting medium these days, but circa 1990 people sure did. The video vs. film as an acquisition medium debate was raging like a California wildfire.

The film is primarily a document of political struggle, but it’s also a turning point technologically because it was among the first films shot in Video8 that presented a compelling and important portrait that could not have been made with the analog photo-chemical film medium. The electronic Video8 format provided for a smaller camera, recording sound and picture in the same camera (16mm required the use of a separate Nagra 1/4″ tape recorder) which further reduced the technological overhead, making this film possible.

The use of a small video camera improves the filmmakers ability to record everyday life in a more intimate fashion. One of the more poignant scenes in the film is when Maria travels back to her home village, devastated by long years of fighting, and talks about the events that transformed her from a young girl into a guerrilla leader, and the story is all the more intense through the unvarnished video image with it’s matter-of-fact starkness, we observe how she’s become a hero to her people, inspiring her troops as they prepare to engage with the government.

There’s another scene I remember in the film when Maria, her soldiers, and the filmmakers are attacked by government troops. The filmmakers dive for cover. The camera, dropped to the ground, continues to record the skirmish, and while the picture from the camera laying on it’s side is not interesting, the soundtrack is about as real as you ca get and brings you there into the moment in a manner that post-production sound effects just can’t do, you know this soundtrack is real, it’s a part of Maria’s life. For this scene, the filmmakers take the actual audio footage of the attack and lay over it images they had shot at a different time. We’re a visual culture and we need images as a frame upon which to experience a film, even though sound carries most of the emotion. Some people complained that it was a re-creation. The documentary purists cried foul. But they did not understand the role of sound in conveying the so-called reality of the moment, and providing authenticity, but that’s a whole other discussion.

At their best, documentary films provide us with points-of-view we could not, or would not (possibly due to ideological bias), ever see on our own. They are extensions of our collective selves that allow us to share social reality with others, and the evolution of cameras from analog film, to analog video, and finally to digital video has made it possible to show so much more, to go places that we could not have gone before. Maria’s Story was made at a very important inflection point in this history, among the first films to show us a social reality we would not have been able to see here in the United States had it not been for the introduction of viable prosumer camcorder with decent image and audio quality from Sony.

I saw the film and heard the filmmakers talk seventeen years ago, so my memory might be sightly inaccurate here and there, but the gist is right. The film is currently distributed by Filmmakers Library and is available on DVD and VHS. A wonderfully effective example of intimate documentary filmmaking and making good use of new technology to produce a story that otherwise could not have been told.

Inventing the Movies

Some of the things I love about summer are weekend trips to the Berkshires, taking time off for a vacation, and all that means more time available to read books. On my summer reading stack this year was an advance copy of Inventing the Movies, a new book by Scott Kirsner that takes you on fascinating romp through the movie industry’s hundred-year love/hate relationship with technology and innovators. The book is an entertaining read with fascinating historical research and fresh insights from interviews with a long list of contemporary luminaries including director Peter Jackson, computer graphics pioneer Ed Catmull, and entrepreneur Mark Cuban.

With a keen attention to multiple perspectives, Kirsner presents the view of industry executives who are reluctant to innovate, and contrasts their views with the innovators who have advanced the many technologies like projection, color, sound, non-linear editing, digital projection, internet distribution, etc. that have transformed the industry over a century of change and revived it over and over again for many generations of audiences. Inventing the Movies is a lively book of interest to innovators in any field, as well as people who love movies and want to take a look at the business and technological machinations behind the many screens in their life: cinema, television, home theater, personal computers, portable media devices, and video-enabled phones.

Last week I did an interview with Scott Kirsner about the book, how the project got started, and what he plans to do next. The interview is currently being edited will be posted on this blog sometime before September rolls around.

The book is now available from Amazon.com. The book is also available as an e-book from LuLu. Scott Kirsners blog post on the book is here.

Sony PMW-EX1 XDCAM EX camcorder: first impressions

A friend recently loaned me his Sony PMW-EX1 XDCAM EX camcorder for a few days so I had a chance to take this fascinating new camera for a spin. In this post I’ll share my first impressions. I’ll be taking the camera out for another spin next week for more shooting, so I’ll get into the details of camera operation and post-production workflow in subsequent posts.

The top seven things that stand out for me and thus make the EX1 the first camera I’ve taken a serious interest in since Panasonic’s introduction of the AG-HVX200 DVCPRO HD camcorder include: 1. solid-state memory recording, 2. true HD (1920 x 1080) imaging using three 1/2-inch CMOS sensors, 3. no-fuss 24P and 30P recording, 4. a spot meter, 5. a flip-out LCD viewfinder that’s quite sharp and bright with an effective peaking circuit for razor sharp focusing, 6. a 5.8mm to 81.2mm, f/1.9 zoom lens with full-manual override, a real aperture ring, and a real focus ring controlling the optics directly, and 7. most of the controls and buttons you use most often are in relatively logical places with reasonable ergonomics. All in all, the EX1 represents an interesting mating between a 1/3″ handicam and a 2/3″ professional camcorder. What you get from this union and what you think of it has a lot to do with where you’re coming from. For a handycam camcorder perspective, this is one big heavy monster that’s unwieldy except on a tripod or using some form of camera support. From a professional camcorder perspective, this is a small and light alternative, much better for hand-holding off the shoulder.

In terms of first impressions shooting with the camera goes, the first thing I noticed is that while the camera is a bit on the heavy side for hand-holding in “handycam” mode, the adjustable handle with the ergonomics of a pro 2/3″ zoom lens handle made it easier to use as a handheld camera. Of course, on a tripod the camera is right at home. A camera’s handholdability is all relative, I’ve grown used to shooting with my HVR-A1 and a friend’s Sony HVR-V1 over the past year, so I find the EX1 to be a big change in terms of weight. But the extra weight is worth it, for the image quality is absolutely spectacular. Goodbye HDV (and good riddance to videotape), hello XDCAM EX!

There’s lots of serious glass in this camera, as the 1/2″ sensor requires a larger lens than 1/3″ chip cameras like the Panasonic AG-HVX200 (still an excellent performer). And while it’s still not providing the 2/3″ image sensor look of a professional camcorder, the 1/2″ sensors are a big improvement over 1/3″ sensors in most prosumer cameras. It’s easier to get separation between the foreground and background. I’d like to see Sony come out with an APS-sized single sensor camera (like a documentary form-factor Red) someday, but I digress. The EX1 is clearly not in the middle of the pro-sumer price range, it straddles between pro-sumer and low-end professional gear in terms of price. While the camera alone sells for $6,500.00, by the time you add a couple of 16G memory cards and extra batteries (which you’ll need), a wide-angle adapter, and a few other gismos, you’re looking at something hovering around a $9,000.00 purchase. That’s a serious chunk of change when you compare it to the HVR-Z1 HDV camcorder, but if you look at it another way, this camera does most of what the Sony PDW-F350 XDCAM HD camcorder does for much less dough. So it’s either a very expensive pro-sumer camera or an amazing price/performance breakthrough in professional level cameras.

Not all things are rosy, however. Audio was clearly a second-thought with this camera, with digital recording there is no reason why Sony can’t support four channels, but it only supports two. One of the features I’ve really enjoyed with the Panasonic HVX200 is recording camera mic audio on channels 3 and 4 while running audio from my mixer into channels 1 and 2. Having the ambient sound is a nice plus, as well as it often makes it easier to hear a director’s questions in an interview. Battery life is short, so you’ll have to buy one or two additional high-capacity batteries with this camera. In addition, for folks who shoot with a 35mm lens adapter, you’ll not be pleased with the camera’s inability to invert the viewfinder image. There is no ability to shoot in standard definition, so for those quick and dirty jobs that require standard definition deliverables, your stuck converting in post. But no camera can be all things to all people, and this camera seems to have most of the bells and whistles most people want.

Since I’m Macintosh and Final Cut Pro user, I found this camera integrated seamlessly with my Final Cut Pro workflow. I have previously worked with XDCAM HD and I found the workflow to be pretty much identical, except there is no need for a camera or deck. If you’ve got a MacBook Pro you’re all set, you simply slide the SxS card into the ExpressBus/34 slot. Otherwise, you can use the camera to transfer media via USB2 to your computer or use an external USB2 SxS card reader available from Sony. For all of this to work, you’ll need to download two pieces of software, the SxS card driver (from here) and the XDCAM Transfer Utility (from here). It was a snap to ingest footage, rename the clips, and bring them into Final Cut Pro. The much fast transfer time of the SxS cards was a welcome change from having to do HDV captures in real-time. And the footage shot in the HQ mode looks spectacular. Ahh, the beauty of real high definition progressive scan images, simply breathtaking. Some sample images and images of the camera can be found in my Sony PMW-EX1 Flickr set. I’ll be adding more images as I do more shooting, as well as links to motion images in a future post.

OLPC 2.0

At Media Fabrics for Media Makers, MIT Media Lab, June 20, 2008, Nicholas Negroponte discussed the status of the OLPC project and was very frank how some corporations have actively tried to sabotage the project. OLPC moves forward undeterred with plenty of cash in the bank, excellent technology, a clear vision, and strong ideas for the next generation. Here he showed a prototype of OLPC 2.0 which is more like a book. The best realization yet of Alan Kay’s vision of the Dynabook is probably OLPC. There are many good reasons why OLPC is a non-profit. If you’ve not seen the documentary, The Corporation, I recommend it, it offers an excellent explanation why a corporation would try to sabotage a humanitarian project. While there’s a lot of talk about corporate social responsibility today, the economic factors are working against it day in and day out.

Media Tech Tonic: monthly demo/seminar series in Boston

Media Tech Tonic is a series of monthly demos/seminars held in Boston on media technology topics for media makers and artists. Meetings are hosted by MassArt Professional and Continuing Education, presented in collaboration with Boston Media Makers and organized by yours truly. Check out the Media Tech Tonic web site for information on upcoming sessions.

The origin of the name (which I believe came from a suggestion by Steve Garfield during a brainstorming conversation we had on the name for this) comes from: Media: 1. plural of medium, 2. the means of communication that reach or influence people widely, 3. pertaining to or concerned with such means, origin: from the latin medius, central; Tech: 1. technical, 2. a technician, 3. technology, origin: shortening of technology, from the greek technologia, systematic treatment; Tonic: 1. a medicine that invigorates or strengthens, 2. anything invigorating physically, mentally, or morally, 3. the first degree of the scale, the keynote (music), 4. quinine water, 5. soda pop (new england), origin: from the greek tonikos, pertaining to stretching or tones; and thus, Media Tech Tonic.

If you would like to present at one of these meetings, contact me about it.