1. Broadcast Network => Group Forming Network

We’re seeing a gradual decline in television audiences while people are spending more time on social networks and this is wreaking havoc on business models. A traditional broadcast network grows in value along a linear scale, therefore the community value can be calculated based on the number of viewers. The value of social networks (a.k.a. group forming networks) grows along a very different curve as dictated by Reed’s Law. The significance of Reed’s law is that eventually the network effect of potential group membership can dominate the overall economics of the system. David Reed discovered that the community value of large networks–particularly social networks–scales exponentially with the size of the network. The number of possible sub-groups of network participants is 2 to the power of n, where n is the number of participants. This explains the phenomenal growth in the value of social networks. Adding an additional 100,000 viewers to a television audience of 1 million is no big deal, but adding 100,000 network participants to a 1 million participant social network has a significant effect of the value of participation in the network. Networking pioneer J.C.R. Licklider wrote in 1968, “we form communities of common interest, not common location.” David Reed explains these concepts in the article “Weapon of Math Destruction: A simple formula explains why the Internet is wreaking havoc on business models” (Context Magazine, Spring 1999, link) along with “That Sneaky Exponential—Beyond Metcalfe’s Law to the Power of Community Building,” a companion article originally published as an online suppliment to the “Weapon of Math Destruction,” article.

2. Institutional Funding => Crowd Funding

The internet and a growing number of people paricipating in a variety of online communites is making it possible to raise money for creative projects online. Two services that stand out inlcude: IndieGoGo and
Kickstarter. These services differ in siginifiant ways in terms of how they operate. Kickstarter is a community limited to fundraising projects that meet their curatorial goals, and projects don’t receive any money unless the fundraising goal is reached. This is good in terms of providing funders confidence their money will go to a project that will be completed. On the other hand, IndieGoGo is an open community allowing anyone raise money for their creative project. If you don’t make your goal, you can still keep the money you raised to put towards your project, however, a lot of funders might not like they’ve given money to a project that does not have the funds needed to be completed. To some people this seems to give Kickstarter the edge with their all or nothing approach. At this time, Kickstarter is only available for projects made in the United States and you must have a U.S. bank account and a U.S. place of residence in order to use the service (even though contributions can come from anywhere in the world). In favor of IndieGoGo is that it’s open to any project (not just creative, and no gatekeeper) and they have a more global perspective with campaigns in almost every country. This year (so far) fourteen films have made it to top festivals after crowdfunding on IndieGoGo, see: “IndieGoGo Films Showcased at World-Class Festivals in 2011” (Adam Chapnick, Tribeca Future of Film, September 30, 2011). There’s a rapid rise in the number of creative professionals leveraging crowd funding to support their work. One of the most impressive examples to date is Jennifer Fox’s Kickstater campaign for My Reincarnation in which she raised over $150,000 in order to get her film into distribution, she shares what she learned doing in her guest post, “How MY REINCARNATION Broke All Kickstarter Records & Raised $150,000” on Ted Hope’s blog.

3. Independence => Interdependence

In our connected world, filmmakers are moving away from the paradigm of “independent” filmmaking and embracing the notion of “interdependent” filmmaking. Unlike many industries, we’re not in competition with each other and we can benefit more from cooperation. This idea is being championed by Tiffany Shlain, Her film Connected is about the impact of the Internet on our lives and a call for to embrace a new philosophy of interdependence, for more details see see: 10 Big Ideas for the Future of Film by Tiffany Shlain (Mediashift/PBS.org, April 20, 2011) and The Power Of One: Food For Thought 2011 by Sawn Parr (Fast Company, Jun 1, 2011).

4. Oligopoly => Constellation of Gatekeepers

Once upon a time talented filmmakers and/or promising projects would be discovered and/or packaged by the Hollywood studios. With high barriers to entry (e.g. specialized knowledge, scarce resources, a lock on distribution, etc.) the major studios has a tight control on the industry and operated like an oligopoly. With access to inexpensive digital technology for production and postproduction–along with social media making it possible to establish a connection with an audience–filmmakers with the talent and drive to make it have the ability to take themselves from a state of being unknown talent to becoming popular with an audience through a process of lots of hard work developing an audience on their own. It used to take an influential executive at the studio to give you a green light for a project, now you can take your work directly to an audience an see if what you’re doing resonates with them. It may still take lots of money to make a film, but the ecosystem is growing into a constellation gatekeepers working a variety of levels, for example, film production is not within reach of many organizations who may choose to fund films that promote their agendas. One example that stands out is Paranormal Activity (Oren Peli, 2007) a supernatural horror film. It was originally produced as an independent feature with a home movie camera, but was later acquired by Paramount Pictures after a representative saw the film and was impressed. It has become a very profitable film along with a very effective social media marketing campaign, see “Paranormal Activity Rides the Social Web to Millions at the Box Office” by Christina Warren (Mashable, October 13, 2009). Realistically, cases like Paranormal Activity are the rare exception to the rule, it’s still as hard as ever to find an audience, but it you have a film that resonates with an audience, there are less factors in your way, as the oligopoly has given way to a constellation of gatekeepers that are more attuned to enabling rather than limiting your potential. Scott Kirsner’s book, Fans, Friends And Followers provides a good survey of how various people have developed their audience in the new media landscape.

5. Auteurs => Collaborations

Normal Hollyn, an editor, teacher, and author of The Film Editing Room Handbook (now it a 4th edition) wrote a delightful blog post titled, “Collaboration and Why The Auteur Theory Is Bull,” in which he argues that, “it’s impossible to make a film by yourself.” He points out that not every idea the director is going to have is good, and not all good ideas are going to come from the director. Film is a highly collaborative art form. Hollyn suggests the ideal way to work with any creative person is to, “come to the table with an idea (the ‘thesis’), let that person come up with a different idea (the ‘antithesis’) and then to let those two opposing notions contribute to a third, usually better, idea (the ’synthesis’).” Hollyn argues that directors who think they are the, “sole auteurs of their work, and are too afraid or guarded to open up to other ideas, will generally miss out on those ‘third, usually better’ ideas, and their work will suffer.” Today it is easier than ever with email, Twitter, Facebook, DropBox, etc. to share and communicate and keep an open dialog as a project develops over time. But these just facilitators. The important trend is a change in mind-set in terms of what it means to be an “auteur” vs. “visionary” director. A visionary director can articulate a clear vision while orchestrating the process of synthesis that Hollyn discusses in his essay, which leads to the best work. Even Orson Welles, perhaps one of the greatest “auteurs” in Hollywood history, surrounded himself with amazing collaborators who made significant contributions to his films. He had so much respect for Greg Toland’s cinematography that he shared a title card with him. Behind the most successful “genius,” whether it be an Orson Welles or a Steve Jobs, is not an auteur in the classic sense of the term, but a visionary who collaborates effectively with creative people. There’s a huge difference between the two, and the difference boils down to creating an environment that supports synthesis.

6. Media Objects => Media Fabric

I believe Blu-Ray disks are the last physical media distribution format consumers will ever see. Everything is moving to the cloud. I love the convenience of Netflix streaming and I find it annoying I still have to wait for many movies to arrive as DVDs. Why can’t they all simply be streamed to my Mac or iPad? While licensing deals will keep a lot of media tied up in knots for a while, eventually it will all end up on the cloud. See “Apple, Hollywood Close To Streaming Movie Deal?” by Thomas Claburn, Information Week, October 13, 2011) and “Movies in the Clouds” by By Michelle Kung (Wall Street Journal, October 11, 2011). But the concept of Media Fabric (which I borrow from Glorianna Davenport) goes way beyond the notion of media living on the cloud. Davenport’s idea is that of, “a semi-intelligent organism where, lines of communication, threads of meaning, chains of causality, and streams of consciousness converge and intertwine to form a rich tapestry of creative story potentials, meaningful real-time dialogues, social interactions, and personal or communal art- and story-making.” The idea is that media is becoming something integrated into our everyday lives, connecting us in new ways that we are shaping through the very process of our interaction with each other. See “Media fabric — a process-oriented approach to media creation and exchange” by Glorianna Davenport, et. al.

7. Specialized Competence => Media Literacy

Media was was once the domain of specialized individuals working in specialized organizations. Today, the trend is towards media production and dissemination becoming a core competency of every organization, as well as every individual. Many of us shoot a lot of casual video to share with friends, which helps us develop a sense for working with a camera. Increasingly we are purchasing smart phones equipped with spectacular cameras. Small videocameras like the Canon VIXIA provide high-quality high-definition images in the form-factor of a small camcorder. Things like smart-auto focus with face recognition makes it easy to produce good, sharp, point-and-shoot video. The ubiquity of video cameras has made it easy for anyone to pick up a camera and try their hand at media production. In the late 1990s it was essential for everyone to have a web site. Today it has become essential to enhance that web site with video. With video sharing sites like Vimeo and YouTube, we have at our fingertips an easy way to share video with others. With all the traditional barriers gone, writing with a camera is poised to become almost as ubiquitous as writing with a word processor. See my blog post, “Cinema will eventually become a flexible means of writing.”

For additional perspectives on these trends, see my companion post, “Researching Seven Macro Trends,” which provides a survey of the background research I did while preparing for this presentation. It includes micro-interviews with: Patricia Aufderheide, Perry Bard, Philip Hodgetts, Brian Lucid, Caroline Blair, Charles Papert, Steve Garfield, Chuck Green, Geo Geller, Jon Goldman, Julie Mallozzi, Kathryn Dietz, Kevin Brooks, Lee Morgenroth, Nathan Felde, Philippe Lejune, Ryan Evans, Slava Rubin, Zak Ray, Anne Marie Stein, Audrey Kali, and Brian Henderson.

This post was revised on October 17, 2011 to fix some typos and links.

View slides (on Slideshare): Cinematic Language PC3

Download slides as a PDF document (from SlideShare): Cinematic-Language-PC3.pdf

Detailed session descriptions follow:

Web Video 2.0: Delivering Your Video Online
Friday, March 07, 1:00PM – 3:00PM, $25.00
Video on the web is hotter than ever and the excitement is moving beyond YouTube and into corporate web video, web-based episodics, delivery of films directly to viewers, and new applications of video never before possible. Through examples, demonstrations, and discussion, you will learn how you can make web video work for you. A practical how-to approach will provide you with an understanding of delivery options (e.g. progressive download vs. streaming), compression and format tips (codec and player choices), video sharing and streaming services, and monitization strategies. This session will be of interest to producers, directors, videographers, editors, and site designers who want to deliver video online and/or integrate video into their web site. Back by popular demand, this follow-up to last-years sold-out session has been updated with new material and examples to reflect the latest tools, techniques, and trends.

Art of the Interview: Strategies and Techniques for Better Video Interviews
Saturday, March 08, 9:00AM – 11:00AM, $25.00
The interview is a fundamental element of most documentary films, many video blogs, and event coverage. Through video examples and interactive discussion this session will provide you with practical strategies and techniques you can apply to your work and includes coverage of how and why to use interviews. You will learn how to: choose the right interview style (e.g. walk-and-talk vs. formal sit-down), choose a form of address (e.g. first-person vs. third person), prepare for an interview, put your subjects at ease, conduct an interview, and more. A discussion of how technical components (camera, sound, lighting, environment) influence the results is included. Designed for both beginning and intermediate documentary filmmakers, videobloggers, and event videographers. For an in-depth exploration of lighting for interviews, consider attending the “Interview Lighting” session that follows later in the day.

Interview Lighting: Professional Results On A Tight Budget
Saturday, March 08, 1:00PM – 3:00PM, $25.00
A demonstration and discussion of several approaches to lighting interviews ranging from low-budget existing light and one light techniques to classic three-point lighting using professional fixtures. Session covers: review of lighting fundamentals, survey of popular lighting fixtures and kits, screening and discussion of practical examples covering aesthetic issues and technical trade-offs, and suggestions for putting together a kit based on your specific needs. This session provides an excellent follow-on to “The Art of the Interview” earlier in the day. Prior attendance to “Art of the Interview” is helpful but not required.

I hope to see you there.

PodCamp Boston 2 takes place on Friday through Sunday, October 26-28, 2007 at the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center before VON Boston. Download the excellent Guide to Podcamp Boston 2 which contains everything you need to know including the schedule and session descriptions. Some of the amazing things about Podcamp Boston 2 include the depth and bredth of the sessions, the networking opportunities, and the fact that except for a small fee for the Saturday night party, it’s all free. Come learn, share, network, and enjoy the weekend.

Here’s a list of sessions I think will be of interest to filmmakers:

Saturday:

• New media crash course for traditional filmmakers (Beth Kanter & David Tames)
• Go HD today. Here’s Why and How (Matthew Snodgrass)
• How to Market with New Media 101 (Christopher Penn)
• What is it like to produce a video podcast? (Eric Gunnar Rochow)
• Web 2.0 Tools That Are Actually Useful (Scott Monty)
• Champagne Production Values on a Beer Budget (David Tames)
• Videoblogging in 5 Minutes (Steve Garfield)
• Intellectual property for the Creative Class (Sarah Salter)
• Tools Of The Social Media Trade (C.C. Chapman)
• How to Make Google Care About You (Julien Smith & Christopher Penn)
• Creative Briefs in Brief (J.C. Bouvier)

Sunday:

• Let the People Speak: How Users Are Changing the Web (Steve Mulder)
• The Arts 2.0 (Len Edgerly)
• Why are we calling it Internet TV, or Is it time for Internet Storytelling? (Kfir Pravda)
• Social Media for Business (Isabel Hilborn)
• Art and Technique of Double System Sound (David Tames)
• Social Networks 101 (Christopher Penn)
• How to Avoid Facebook F$#kups and the Google Gestapo, Reputation Management for Digital Natives (Mike Denton, Christin Eubanks and Paull Young)
• Crappy Web 2.0 Marketing. Don’t do it like this! (Panel, Isabel Hilborn moderates)
• Business Models (open discussion w/ David Cutler)
• The Art of Successful Interviews (Larry Lawfer)

Here are the details on the sessions I’m presenting:

New Media Crash Course for Traditional Filmmakers (Satuday 9:30 A.M. Room 204A): Social media expert Beth Kanter and I will present a crash course on what filmmakers need to know about “new media” and provide some starting points for further study and exploration. Appropriate for people who have been making traditional films or corporate videos who want to explore the potential of new media including blogging, podcasting, video blogging, and social networking.

Champagne Production Values on a Beer Budget (Satuday 10:30 A.M. Room 204A): a survey of the most important things media makers need to know to get better results when doing video and audio production in the field. Appropriate for beginner to intermediate media makers who want to improve their production values. A reprise of the popular “Video and audio production fundamentals.”

Art and technique of double system sound (Sunday 11:00 A.M. Room 204A): Double system sound (recording audio separate from video) is one of the easiest ways to improve the production values of video shot with tiny digital cameras. A step-by step tutorial including microphone selection and placement, survey of small digital recorders, recording tips and tricks, and demo using Final Cut Pro, however, the technique is easily translated to other editing systems.

Hope to see you there!

I promised to make my slides available, here they are: Rio2006-NewTech-v2.pdf (PDF, 10.2 MB)

The presentation is based in part on a work-in-progress article: Macro-Trends-v2.pdf (PDF, 164 KB)