After two days of pouring over the entire online manual and editing with Final Cut Pro X I have to say there are things I love about it that I’ve always wished Final Cut Pro had (performance, integrated metadata support, background processing), and things that are deep disappointments (lack of XML import/export, lack of multitrack audio editing, splitting tracks, exporting stems). Final Cut Pro X is like a precocious teenager that still has some growing up to do before they are ready for the adult world, but they have prospects, and we simply have to take a wait and see attitude. I can’t depend on it for mission critical work, however, I will use it for editing and see what it can do, and over time, and as it evolves, it might become part of my professional workflow.

I like the product and I think Apple did more things right than wrong. We have to take a moment to pause and reflect this is a version 1.0 product, not 10.0 like the splash screen states. But the things that are missing are not consistent with the hype, and there lies the rub. It’s possible that the way this product was released at the same time support for the current version was dropped may have done huge damage to the brand among professionals, but on the other hand Final Cut Pro X bring excitement and sizzle to the majority of people editing everything besides professional productions that require complex workflows and resource sharing. This much larger group is the future. Sophisticated editing has become democratized. Apple is betting on the new generation. When it comes to shareholder value and market share, there is no room for nostalgia or catering to the old ways. Leave the pros in the dust, their days are numbered, at least that’s the message I hear through Apple’s actions. Apple can say they support professionals, but their actions say otherwise, and as Aristotle reminds us in The Poetics, character is revealed through action. It’s clear that the future lies in tens of millions of individual editors, not in tens of thousands of professional editors. I’m sure many of the missing pro features will be added.

Here are three interesting threads I’ve been following this week:

Larry Jordan: Ain’t Nothing Like It In the World

My response to Larry’s blog post:

Larry, this post has been very useful and thought provoking. While Final Cut Pro X has a slick interface and provides sizzling performance, I can’t imagine using it in a professional environment. Without the ability to place audio in individual tracks for exporting to a sound editing and mixing application, without multi-cam, without the ability to import legacy Final Cut Pro projects, without EDL or XML export for transferring work I can’t take it seriously in a professional environment. This resets the clock back to version 1.0 and it’s a travesty. [PAUSE] sip on Apple Kool-Aid [PAUSE] Final Cut Pro X is revolutionary, it’s awesome, it’s what we’ve all been waiting for! 64 bit performance, background rendering, new interface, none of this could have been done in an evolutionary way the way Adobe does with their applications, Apple is about revolution and what Apple tells us we’re going to like, we’re going to like, and two or three versions later, we’re all going to say, why did we not do it like this all along?

Philip Hodgetts: What are the Answers to the Unanswered Questions about Final Cut Pro X?

My response to Philips’s blog post:

At the end of the day, I think much of the anger and frustration is ultimately about the gap between what works today (Final Cut Pro 7) and what is promised (some future version of Final Cut Pro that supports a professional workflow). In this interim many of us will have to continue using Final Cut Pro 7 with no idea how long this gap is going to be with our work, our livelihood now depends on an unsupported product. Imagine the outcry if Avid did the same thing to their users? But Avid would never do this, their editing applications are their livelihood, on the other hand, Final Cut Pro is a tiny sliver of Apple’s business, and so given this fact we have plenty of justification in being concerned, it’s hard not to feel as a professional and educator that the rug has been pulled from under me and there is no soft landing in sight.

DVinfo.net: FCP X Now available to buy and download from App Store.

One of my contributions to the discussion thread:

Goes to show that in the wake of all the hype, reality is now setting in. This is becoming a fascinating case study in expectations, and the meaning of the “Final Cut Pro” brand. It’s a risky strategy to kill off an old product, replace it with a completely different one, and call the new version “awesome” as if it was the second coming. As “iMovie Pro 1.0″ FCP X is brilliant. As the next version in the Final Cut Pro line? It’s ludicrous. It’s going to take the hyperspace edition of the reality distortion field to fix this situation…

In some ways this break between the old ways of Final Cut Pro and what would have better been called iMovie Pro 1.0 gives us all a chance to re-evaluate our choices of editing tools. I started on Avid, perhaps it’s time to take a look at where they are at, I stopped using Avid with the introduction of Final Cut Pro 4.5 in what now seems like ancient times. This might also a good time to see if Premiere Pro is worthy of this role, since Adobe has a good track record of evolving applications and not leaving their professional users out in the cold as they evolve their products (I’ve been using Adobe Photoshop since version 1.0).

The time has come to look around and play the field, for no matter what happens in the future, one thing is for certain, Final Cut Pro as we know it has come to the end of the line, it is a dead product with no support. We have to consider the tradeoffs of jumping over the chasm between where we are with Final Cut Pro 7 and the promises that Final Cut Pro X will grow up fast enough to meet out needs and fulfill our desires. For now I will continue editing my mission critical work with Final Cut Pro 7 and experiment on short projects with other tools and see what happens. The day Final Cut Pro 7 stops working due to an OS X update or new hardware incompatibility will force a change, but for now, it’s still smooth sailing with a lot of underlying anxiety that comes with editing on a dead platform.

Video from Abattoir Rising, a work-in-progress documentary by Audrey Kali

I encourage you to support your local independent bookstore or museum shop, however, if those are not easily accessible, you can order from amazon.com and help support this web site.

On Sunday, before returning to Boston, I went to MoMA to see “Marina Abramovic: The Artist Is Present,” a retrospective of four decades of her performance art presenting a fascinating mix of documentary films, objects on display, interviews with the artist running in a four-hour loop, live re-staged performances of some of her works including “Nude with Skeleton,” “Luminosity,” and “Imponderabilia,” and the centerpiece of the exhibition, “The Artist is Present.” In the vast MoMA atrium, we find Abramovic live and in person dressed in a minimalist flowing blue gown. Visitors can sit across from her at a table and lock gazes with her in silence, surrounded by museum goers, bathed in intense white light coming from four directions (provided by eight 1,200 Watt HMI lighting instruments blasting through four large silks placed in the corners of the space, the lighting geek in me could not help but notice how the performance was lit).

It’s quite a challenge to document and/or preserve performance art, which is such an ephemeral medium, and the live re-creations in a museum setting not only offers us a glimpse of her work, but also offers a meditation on the role of live performance in our completely media-saturated culture, elevating this exhibition way beyond what a documentary film or the run-of-the mill documentation-oriented show can accomplish. I think there is a real hunger for liveness in our culture, a response to the overly commercialized mass media experience, with so many of our interactions mediated, even when they are personal. One of the pieces is four hours of interviews with Abramovic and it was quite fascinating to take a break from the tumultuous exhibition, put in the headphones, and listen to her words for a while.

You can’t really document performance art, but in terms of degrees, “Marina Abramovic: The Artist Is Present” comes about as close as one can expect and is a show worth spending lots of time walking through, perhaps even a second time (as I did after listening to her interviews for a while). I’ve become interested in the challenge of documenting the ephemeral, and to see how her work was documented in a museum context both live and mediated was fascinating to me. If you live anywhere near New York, you should make the trek to this exhibition and allow yourself plenty of time to take it all in.

Related:

• Marina Abramovic: The Artist Is Present, MoMA exhibition page, show runs March 14th trough May 31, 2010
• “Performance Art Preserved, in the Flesh,” exhibition review by Holland Cotter, New York Times, March 11, 2010
• “Who’s Afraid of Marina?” by Randy Kennedy, New York Times, March 19, 2010
• “The Anxiety of Influence,” by Tatiana Berg, BOMB Blog, March 29, 2010
• “Fragments from The Conversation 2010 (March 27, New York),” previous blog post

After doing some shopping around, I’ve come to the conclusion that the Sennheiser Evolution Series provides a nice middle ground between the less expensive systems (e.g. Azden) popular among wedding videographers and the more expensive wireless systems used by location sound professionals (e.g. Lectrosonics). I’ve used the Lectrosonics on a number of professional shoots and the performance of their “Digital Hybrid” system is spectacular, but it’s a little more than I have budget for, so the Sennheiser Evolution G3 it will be it.

There are two configurations of the Sennheiser Evolution G3 100 Series to consider for documentary work:

Camera Mount Wireless Microphone System, kit number EW 112P G3-{A/B/G}, estimated price: $600 (US), this kit includes:

• SK100 G3 Bodypack Transmitter
• ME2 Lavalier Mic
• EK100 G3 Portable Receiver
• Cold-shoe adapter for Receiver
• Interconnection cables (1/8″ and XLR) for connecting Receiver to camera
• Excellent, clearly written owners manual

Wireless Microphone ENG Combo, kit number EW 100 ENG G3-{A/B/G}, estimated price: $800 (US), this kit includes all of the items in the Camera Mount Wireless Microphone System, plus:

• SKP100 G3 Plug-In Transmitter

Compared to less expensive VHF wireless systems, a UHF system provides longer range and you’ll experience fewer drop-outs and interference during use. I’ve had really good luck using the Sennheiser Evolution wireless system over the past year, and have been very pleased with its performance both in terms of sound quality and overall robustness and have not run into too many interference issues. Being able to tune the devices to one of 1,680 tunable frequencies makes it easy to find quiet spots in a electromagnetically noisy area like the Boston metropolitan area in which I live.

The EK100 receiver is designed to be attached to a camera via a cold-shoe adapter, it has a 1/8″ unbalanced TRS mini out which can be connection to camcorders with either a 1/8″ or XLR input (Sennheiser provides both 1/8″ or XLR interconnect cables in their kits). The receiver has 4 preset memory locations that can be reassigned to any of the 1,680 available frequencies, within the 42 MHz tuning range. This is handy because you can determine the frequencies least likely to have interference in your area and program these into the four presents, making it easier to pull these out and get them working quickly in documentary situations. The G3 features a new “adaptive diversity” design, it’s not “true diversity” but it does offer slightly better performance compared to the previous G2 series. There are also adjustments for audio level output and a squelch adjustment. It’s critical to set the audio level output to match your camera, otherwise you’ll get some over-modulation, which is sometimes hard to detect in the field unless you’re listening really carefully with good headphones (which you should always be doing, right?).

The system is available in two transmitter configurations: the SK100 body pack transmitter and the SKP100 plug-on transmitter, which attaches to any self-powered metal body microphone with an XLR connector (e.g. Electro-Voice RE50 reporters microphone) to be used wirelessly. The SK100 G3 body-pack transmitter has a 1/8″ locking-mini input for compatible lavalier microphones and it comes with an ME2 omnidirectional lavalier microphone. The transmitters support adjustments for audio input gain, and it’s important to adjust this properly. You want to avoid peaks (there’s an LED peak indicator in addition to an audio level on the LCD) but also not set the levels too low so you’re lost in the noise floor. In terms of functionality, the plug-in transmitter is very similar to the body-pack transmitter.

The EK100 receiver, SK100 G3 body-pack transmitter, and SKP100 G3 plug-in transmitter are each powered by two AA batteries and each sports an LCD display which makes it easy to configure and make adjustments via a logically organized menu system. When not in menu mode the LCD shows you channels and frequency information, battery status, audio level, and signal status. All three devices have metal bodies, which allegedly makes them more robust that cheaper plastic units, but I’ve never dropped any of these devices in order to find out how rugged they really are. I’m not tempted to try.

In the United States, the Evolution G3 is a UHF wireless microphone system available in three frequency ranges, A: 516 – 558MHz, B: 626 – 668MHz, or G: 566 – 608MHz, providing 1680 tunable frequencies and 12 frequency presets. Which range to get? The idea is to find a range that has the largest number of “dead spots” which all depends on your region. Sennheiser has a great calculator on their web site in which you can see all the licensed transmitters in your area in order to determine where the open slots are in the spectrum. You can use this to decide whether A, B, or G frequency ranges are best for you. It’s also handy for setting up presets that are likely to be free and clear, so there’s less fussing around in the field. The B frequency group seems to be the best option for the Boston area based on conversations with some sound people I know.

In some situations I like using the plug-in transmitter with my Electro-Voice RE-50 reporters microphone, I like having the mobility without the wire, therefore the EW 100 ENG G3-B kit is my preference. If you never see yourself using the plug-on transmitter with a hand-held or boom microphone (by the way, it has to be a metal body mic and self powered, since the SKP100 G3 Plug-In Transmitter does not provide phantom power), you can save money and get the EW 122P G3-B kit instead of the EW 100 ENG G3-B kit. Basically you’re paying an additional $200. (US) for the plug-on transmitter.

A future option to consider is upgrading the Sennheiser ME2 to a TRAM-50 (my favorite lavalier, available cabled for the EW transmitters for about $220 (US)). You many also consider adding a Sennheiser ME4 cardioid mic to your kit for use in high-noise environments (but I would not go with this as your only mic due to more critical placement issues).

You will also want to add a Rycote Lavaliere Windjammer (or equivalent) if you’re going to be working outdoors, these are available in white, grey, or black for about $25. (US) each. A windjammer is essential when using a lavalier mic outdoors when there is wind. Here’s an important pointer: use the windjammer over a foam windscreen on the lavalier, since the windjammer needs air space around the mic itself to work properly. I keep several of them in my sound kit at all times.

There is really only one down-side I’ve experienced using the Sennheiser Evolution G2 wireless microphone system (and this goes for the new G3 as well): since the receiver is designed to mount on a camera, it’s really awkward to use in a situation where you have a couple of receivers and a mixer in a shoulder-mounted pouch. The LCD display is simply in the wrong place. I really wish Sennheiser would have placed the LCD display on the top of the device (like the Lectrosonics receivers), but for mounting on a camera, I can see why the designers placed the LCD on top, and given that Sennheiser has brought these units into the marketplace at such an attractive price-point, this is but a minor inconvenience.

In the Boston area you can purchase these kits from Talamas Broadcast Systems, Rule Broadcast Systems, or The Camera Company. Online you can purchase them from B&H Photo-Video.

This post was inspired by Monika Fimpel, thanks for asking the question, and thanks to Bill Shamlian for his insights on wireless systems and frequency selections.

Note: This post was revised on February 22, 2010 to reflect that Rule Broadcast Systems is also a Sennheiser dealer. I also fixed an error in which I specified the EW 122P G3 kit (which includes ME4 microphone (cardioid) mic) instead of the EW 112P G3 kit that I intended to list that comes with the more versatile ME2 (omnidirectional) microphone. While the ME4 is better in high-noise environments, its added directionality and proximity effect make it less versatile for general use. If you’re only going to have one microphone for your wireless system, the ME2 is a more versatile choice, and if you find you need the more directional ME4 in some situations, it (or another cardioid lav) can be purchased separately.

Update:I actually went ahead and purchased two kits, one w/ an additional plug-on transmitter. I’ve been using these since April of 2010 and I’m very pleased with the kit (April 19, 2010).

I recently finished reading The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative by H. Porter Abbott (Cambridge University Press, 2nd. edition, 2008). This book is by far the best introduction to narrative currently available, encompassing the range of narrative forms including literature, cinema, and new media. Abbott emphasizes that narrative is not just in found in literature, cinema, and theater, but throughout the ordinary course of our lives.

The book is informed by recent scholarship in the field, but avoids the more esoteric arguments in order to present a clear and concise introduction to the most important topics in narrative studies. The book covers the definition of narrative, the rhetoric of narrative, closure, the process of narration, interpretation of narratives, adaptation across media forms, character and self in narrative, truth and narrative, narrative worlds, and more. Abbott provides a excellent starting point for both students and specialists in a wide range of fields from literature to media studies, and each chapter ends with recommendations of both secondary and primary texts for further study.

Abbott begins the book with several definitions of narrative, but states that if we had to choose one answer above all others, it should be that “narrative is the principal way in which our species organizes its understanding of time,” he continues in the introduction of the book,

[...] wherever we look in this world, we seek to grasp what we see not just in space but in time as well. Narrative gives us this understanding; it gives us what could be called shapes of time. Accordingly, our narrative perception stands ready to be activated in order to give us a frame or context for even the most static and uneventful scenes. And without understanding the narrative, we often feel we don’t understand what we see. We cannot find the meaning. Meaning and narrative understanding are very closely connected [...] the connections between narrative and meaning are many (p. 10)

The origins of the word narrative are ancient, rooted in our process of knowing the world:

Hayden White pointed out in his book The Content of the Form that the word “narrative” goes back to the ancient Sanskrit “gna,” a root term that means “know,” and that it comes down to us through Latin words for both “knowing” (“gnarus”) and “telling” (“narro”). This etymology catches the two sides of narrative. It is a universal tool for knowing as well as telling, for absorbing knowledge as well as expressing it. This knowledge, moreover, is not necessarily static. Narrative can be, and often is, an instrument that provokes active thinking and helps us work through problems, even as we tell about them or hear them being told. But, finally, it is also important to note that narrative can be used to deliver false information; it can be used to keep us in darkness and even encourage us to do things we should not do. This too must be kept in mind. (pp. 10-12)

If you read only one theoretical book on the topic of narrative, this one is a good candidate. While theoretical in perspective, it’s written in a manner that will appeal to anyone involved in telling stories.

In my original review I wrote, “Transcriva transforms the process of transcribing interviews from a tedious chore into a graceful process with an efficient chat-like interface using keyboard shortcuts that is especially powerful when transcribing an interview with multiple speakers.” And that is still true. Bartas’ tag line for Transcriva is “Manual transcription with automatic transmission” and I’d say that’s a better way to put it. The program offers user-configurable keyboard shortcuts so your hands never need to leave the keyboard. You can control playback speed to match your typing speed. After a pause, when you restart the media it automatically jumps back a user-settable number of seconds to make it easier to take up where you left off. It even works with a Foot Pedal (via software interface) if you’re set up with one. The program has a Follow-Along feature that will highlighting the related sections of the transcription as the media file plays back. Clicking on the transcription text jumps to the related point in the video or audio file. Transcriva can handle just about any type of audio or video you can play with QuickTime. When you’re done transcribing, you can export the text as a plain text (.txt), RTF (.rtf) or Microsoft Word (.doc) file.

This new version, in addition to adding video support, offers other significant improvements over the first version: media files are no longer read into the applications own document, saving both transfer time and disk space, and transcriptions are nicely organized in folders on the left hand side of the interface and you can choose where the root folder lives. It’s Mac-like interface continues to be a fine feature of the program. Another cool feature in this version is that it can use a live audio and/or video recording as the source media, so while you record a live meeting you can type notes that will be attached to the media being recorded at the time you wrote the notes.

There are two features I’d like to see in a future version of Transcriva: First, the ability to set a time code offset in a file. Right now all transcriptions start at zero and the time code is the time since the start of the audio file or video clip. It would be nice in some situations to match the actual time code of the media file being transcribed. While this is not a serious issue on my current project using P2 media (in a file-based world referring to clip name and time from start of clip works well most of the time), however, when working on videotape based interviews it would be nice to be able to create transcripts that match the time code of the original media. Second, I’d like to see the program extending the shortcuts beyond media control, navigation, and options to include words and phrases that come up often during an interview. Perhaps it could be modeled on the word completion feature in BBEdit and programming environments like Flex.

Transcriva has made my work easier and I’m pleased with it. My experience with Bartas Technologies has been very good, with quick responses to questions and bug reports. If you need to transcribe interviews, and you’ve not yet found the right tool, Transcriva 2 might be it. Give their free trial a spin and see for yourself how much easier it can be to transcribe interviews with this simple and powerful program designed specifically for the Macintosh. For filmmakers transcribing interviews or preparing subtitles, Transcriva 2 is probably a good candidate for the job.

Over the past couple of years I’ve had a chance to use or take a close look at various LED lighting instruments available in the marketplace. Today you will find lots of inexpensive lights suitable for on-camera use available for anywhere from $50 to $500 from a variety of vendors. And while these little lights are certainly interesting, they are usually not bright enough nor versatile enough for demanding professional users.

Enter the next tier of professional LED lighting in the $500 to $1,000 range. This particular horse race has heated up with the addition of new lights from Sony and Lowel which join Zylight and Litepanels who have been around for a while. Things are sure to get even more interesting as LED price/performance continues to improve and designers incorporate new generations of LED technology into new and updated instrument design.

Based on my experiences shooting run & gun with the LitePanels MiniPlus at the North American International Auto Show last year as well as using it on my previous documentary project, using the Zylight Z90 during a lighting workshop I taught at the Pro Video Show and carrying it with me for several weeks on my current documentary production, messing around with the Sony HVL-LBP at Boston Media Makers, and taking a development prototype of the Lowel Blender out for a spin on a couple of interviews, I’ve come to some conclusions on the strengths and weaknesses of each design. Below is a comparison of the four units I’ve has a chance to work with along with my brief editorial on each. What is most appealing about LED lighting is being able to light using batteries as your power source for run & gun shooting with simplified battery management (using the same batteries for camcorder and light via sleds or D-taps) and the ability to dial in the color you need (using one of the more sophisticated designs) without fumbling with gels.

I will be following up this post with detailed reviews of the Zylight Z90 and Lowel Blender, which are the two units that stand out from the pack at this time. Stay tuned.

Manufacturer	Zylight	LitePanels	Sony	Lowel
Model	Z90	MiniPlus	HVL-LBP	Blender
Editorial	My favorite among the four lights. A versatile creative tool with unique special features. Offers a bright source, creative color control, and a smooth, wide, even beam that can be controlled with barn doors. Excellent build quality, state-of-the art color-changing HD-LED technology from Color Kinetics. One downside is the edge of the beam exhibits color fringing. The ability to set to any color (in addition to daylight and tungsten) and save user presets for instant recall make this a versatile performer and creative tool. The key question: is it worth the cost? From my experience it is, especially when you compare it side by side with the other three lights.	A solid performer, but not my favorite, , trails behind other contenders in terms of versatility. The MiniPlus was among the first on-camera LED lights to gain traction in the marketplace, and it helped prove the viability of LED technology in run-and gun shooting scenarios, however, it’s starting to look pretty long in the tooth compared to the Zylight and Blender lights, both of which run circles around the Litepanels in terms of versatility and build quality. Awkward design in terms of how the battery pack attaches to the back of the light, the way gels attach, and the lack of a locking power connector when using outboard power contribute to a lower rating compared to the Blender and Zylight.	My least favorite of these four lights, trails far behind other contenders in terms of versatility. Designed as a companion for Sony camcorder owners that use L-Series batteries. Typical Sony move to make a product that is designed to work only with their proprietary batteries. It’s a limited product in many respects. On the other hand, Sony owners who want "Sony Style" will like how it integrates into their existing Sony camcorder infrastructure. With the introduction of the Blender, there is no compelling reason to purchase the HVL-LBP. Look to the Blender or Zylight for a better LED light with more versatile powering options.	A close-runner up favorite among the four lights. A versatile and cost effective creative tool. The ability to dial in any balance of daylight and tungsten light on the fly makes this a strong contender for a camera light or versatile problem solving light you can always carry with your camera kit. If you don’t need the flexibility of generating the full spectrum of color, this might be the perfect light for you. Good build quality. Soon to be released and worth the wait. A well thought out design that comes directly out of designer Tom Robotham’s experience as a cinematographer. Information supplied is based on use of a prototype unit, features and specifications may vary from the final production units.
Overall rating
Beam quality	Smooth and even beam with gradual fall-off at the edges. Slight color fringing on the edge of a cut.	Daylight models available in spot or flood, tungsten models flood only. Relatively even spread, but not completely	Very spotty, but a diffuser and spot filter is included	Spotty, but comes with interchangeable diffusers that provides a choice of beams. Cracked ice looks nice.
Beam shape	Round and very even.	Rectangular, available in either Flood or Spot models (daylight) or Flood (tungsten). Diffuson gels available to smooth out beam.	Round, built-in condenser filter intensifies beam for spot use, built-in diffuser smooths out the bean.	Slightly rectangular, somewhat irregular. A set of diffuson materials are available to smooth out or break up the beam.
Cutability(how smooth is the edge when you "cut" the light with a barn door or other solid?)	Clean cut, barn doors work very well with this light (you can attach optional Arri 150W Fresnel barn doors via optional 3" Accessory Adapter)	Barn doors (if you fashion them) don’t work well, I would not bother trying to barndoor this light.	The side barn doors are not very effective.	Barn doors (if you fashion them) work somewhat better than the MiniPlus but I would not bother barndooring this light.
Dimmable	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Color	Three color modes: 1: white (3200K or 5600K); 2: color (can be set to any color and saturation); 3: gel (adjustable along tungsten-daylight and/or green-magenta dimensions)	Available in either 5600K (flood or spot) or 3200K (flood) models (gels must be attached to change color)	5500K (gels must be attached to change color)	5600K, or 3200K, or a variable mix of the two (via dials)
Mounting options	1/4"-20 thread on top and bottom (a variety of mounting accessories are available)	1/4"-20 thread on bottom (a variety of mounting accessories are available)	Aattaches to cold shoe, 1/4"-20 thread on bottom of shoe	1/4"-20 thread on bottom, production unit will probably come with a 5/8" baby reciever (a variety of mounting accessories are available)
Special features	Can be set to produce any color without gels, easy to match other sources Wireless control: optional Zylink controller can control up to ten units or groups of units Barndoors actually work, easily fited with 3" accessory adapter	Optional remote dimming module	Indicator with remaining battery strength.	Daylight/tungsten color changes without gels, easy to match other sources with a turn of a dial.
Power options	Can accept DC power from an external battery, D-Tap (Anton Bauer Style), or AC adapter. Threaded power connector for secure attachment of ourboard power connector.	Snap-on NiMH battery or power via optional snap-on battery sled that holds two camcorder batteries. Can accept DC power from an external battery, D-Tap (Anton Bauer Style), or AC adapter. Power connector for attachment of outboard power is not threaded.	Designed to work only with Sony’s L-series Lithium-Ion batteries (NP-F770, F970, can’t use NP-F500/300 batteries or third-party batteries) Battery attaches directly to unit or can be stored outboard using the included battery adapter cable.	Can accept DC power from an external battery, D-Tap (Anton Bauer Style), or AC adapter. Threaded power connector for secure attachment of outboard power connector.
Power consumption	30W (2-1/2A @ 12VDC); works with 9-24VDC	8.4W (0.7amps @ 12V); works with 10-30VDC	16W (2.23A @ 7.2 VDC)	13W (1.8A @ 7.2VDC); works with 7.2 to 15VDC
Photometrics(as stated by vendors) See note below on footcandles required for proper exposure. 1 footcandle = 10.76 lux	53fc @ 3.3ft. 13fc @ 6.6ft.	97fc @ 2ft. 24fc @ 4ft. 9.2fc @ 6ft. (flood)	55fc @ 3 ft. 6fc @ 9 ft. (with lens)	45fc @ 3.3ft. (single array) 90fc @ 3.3ft. (both daylight and tungsten arrays)
Lighting accessories	Optional accessory adapter allows you to attach standard 3-inch [76mm] softbox or barn doors (which are actually useful on this instrument)	Holder for gels, other accesories are difficult to mount (but really not needed since barn doors don’t do much with this design)	A diffuser and spot filter is included and attaches to the light.	Slide in diffusers, gels can be slid in along with diffuser if color correction is needed that can’t be handled in the daylight-tungsten dimension.
Size	5.3" x 3.0" x 2.0" [135mm x 76mm x 51mm]	6.83" x 2.30" x 1.18" [173mm x 60mm x 30mm]	4 3/8" x 6" x 5-1/8" [108mm x 129mm x 150mm]	4" x 3" x 3" [102mm x 76mm x 76mm]
Weight(without cables or power source)	16 oz. [454g]	9.6oz [360g]	14.9oz [420g]	14 oz. [397g]
Availability	Now	Now	Now	Fall, 2009 (estimated)
Street price(single unit, without power options)	$985	$640	$540	$650 (includes AC adapter)
Kit prices	Kits range from$1,180 (ENG kit with mounting hardware and battery tap) to $1,550 (with NP battery power option) (add $50 for barn doors, add $475 for Zylink wireless controller)	Kits range from $750 (camera mounting harware and battery sled) to $1,150 (kit with mounting hardware, gels, and snap-on NiMH battery)	$640 with NP-F970 Lithium-Ion battery	$740 for kit with battery sled (Sony or Panasonic or Canon), three front diffusers, handle & stud (estimated)
Product page links	Zylight Z90	LitePanels MiniPlus	Sony HVL-LBP	Lowel Blender

How much light do we need? All these photometric specifications are great, but in order to make sense of them, we need to know how much light we need for a decent exposure with our particular camera. You can determine this for your camera using a light meter and a white card as a 95 IRE reference or an 18% grey card as a 50 IRE refenence. Based on my own testing, you need about 40 footcandles for an exposure at f/2.8 without gain using a Panasonic HPX170 camcorder. (Note: if your light meter does not provide direct reading of lux or footcandles, you can convert it’s reading to foot candles using the technique described here). This is based on doing a conservative flat-disk light meter reading and setting the exposure so a white card is at 90 IRE (not at 100, you always want a little bit of headroom in the highlights). It’s easy to do these kinds of tests using the Zebra in most video cameras or the spot meter in some of the Pansonic cameras. Of course, if you’re willing to crank the gain, you will need far less footcandles for a good exposure, at the cost of added video noise.

What about cost of LED lighting? One of the issues that constantly comes up in discussons of LED lighting for video production, is it worth the cost? Certainly you can put 40fc on a subject using a 60W soft white household bulb (or a close to daylight GE Reveal bulb) in a white reflector fixture several feet away. This would cost a hell of a lot less than the equivalent LED light. So LED lighting is not about cost. It’s about versatility, control, smaller footprint, and lower power consumption. A professional on-camera LED light is going to use half to one fourth the power of a comparable incandescent lamp, thus providing longer running times when working off a battery. It’s a tradeoff between versatility, form-factor, cool operation, and consumption. In the middle of the mix you will also find flourescent fixtures that have their own unique set of advantages. Another thing to consider is only purchase what you need to use today, as LED production increases and new designs are introduced, you can expect the brightness to go up and the cost to drop over time, since LED technology follows the semiconductor technology curve and increasing demand for LED technology is driving down costs and driving innovation.

Putting the light output, cost, and size in perspective. So how does the output of these LED lights compare to other lights you are using? A Kino Flo Diva-Lite 200 provides daylight or tungsten light with an intensity of 120fc at 3.3′ or 32fc at 6.6′. A tungsten Rifa eX55 (with an EHC 500W bulb) provides a respectable 72fc at 5′ so it provides more than enough light for interviews. This is why a Rifa or Diva lights makes such a good key in a compact inteview kit, you can place either of them at a comfortable distance away from a subject and have plenty of light for a good solid exposure. And because the Diva is fluorescent, it runs cool, however, the Rifa is more compact due to the use of a small tungsten lamp and collapsible umbrella. The Diva is about the same price as the LED lights listed here, the Rifa is somewhat less. On the other hand, these more traditional key lights are much larger, heavier, and they require access to mains power, and they do not fit into your camera bag the way a Z90 or Blender does.

Each technology provides different affordances. Each technology has it’s strengths and weaknesses. When I want the quality of crisp sunlight, I’d use an incandescent Arri Fresnel, when I want something small and versatile for run & gun shooting, I’d use an LED light like the Z90 or Blender, when I want gorgeous soft light, I’d use something along the lines of a Lowel Rifa light or Kino-Flo Diva-Lite, of course, when the subject, location, and my favorite gaffer (mother nature) are all cooperative and in alignment, there’s nothing more beautiful than using skylight though a window as the key light. And in this situation, a little LED light can add that perfect twinkle in someone’s eyes. So an LED light in your camera bag can be there to help solve problems on the spot, with mininal fuss. A versatile LED light like th Z90 or Blender is a lights you will want to have in your bag of tricks in order to pull out when there’s no time to light and to carry with you when there is no space to carry lighting gear.

Did you find anything inaccurate in this comparison chart? Is there something I should include that’s not here? Please contact me and I’ll probably correct it. The information in this table is as accurate as I could determine at the time of writing. Some of the information was provided by vendors rather than determined empirically. The opinions in this table are my own and do not necessarily resemble reality. Your mileage may vary.

Donath developed this installation with students Alex Dragulescu, Yannick Assogba, Aaron Zinman and other collaborators. They describe their piece as an installation about “living in a world overflowing with information and non-stop communication.” After spending some time walking through the piece, one thought that came to mind was Jean Baudrillard’s The Ecstasy of Communication meets the Ambivalence of Information. In The Ecstasy of Communication Baudrillard goes beyond his earlier discussions of “simulacrum” and takes on our state of pervasive digital technology, which he describes as an orgy of pure communication. He takes Marshall McLuhan’s mystical ideas to their logical conclusion: just as the medium is the message, communication is what is communicated. We are floating in a sea of information without grounding, and thus, we have constructed an environment that leads to an ambivalence of information.

When you first walk into the piece you are surrounded by a sea of rectangular shapes, perhaps a virtual city. On these objects are projected changing patterns of information, you can recognize words, names, numbers. The soundtrack is etherial, sounds could very well be from the same space at another point in time, mixed with computer generated voices reading what might be random pieces of information, even some personal data. From where does this data come from? As you wander through the space you come across three flat screen displays, each showing a different view of an information landscape. You are literally transported into an ether, a medium, along with its anesthetic effects. The sounds and visual imagery incorporate live and recorded data ranging from personal updates and private information, some of which apparently are from a search engine that invites you to type in your name or the name of someone you know. It comes back with all the characterizations of the person it can find on the net and then draws a spectrogram-like display showing various colored bands with labels like books, sports, management, family, committees, education, domestic, illegal, music, legal, social, religious, art, design, etc. A curious way to map an identity. Visitors who spend time immersed in the piece may eventually realize their data has become part of the exhibit, their images captured by surveillance cameras, their names entered into databases, their voices recorded and played back by in the echoing soundtrack.

Metropath(ologies) provides a perfect companion to the writings of McLuhan, Baudrillard, and their ilk, for it brings the ideas of a world overflowing with information and non-stop communication into the realm of experience right in front of you, and all around you. It places our post-modern information ecology right in front of your eyes, like helping a fish better understand water. We swim in media every day, we take it for granted, much like I imagine fish take water for granted. Can we imaging a world without constant news, mobile phones, information devices, our lives a constant broadcast and reception of text messages, tweets, emails, information. All of this we’ve begun to take for granted and Donath and her students present us with a new perspective from which we can reflect. The search piece in the installation allows you to type someone’s name and it comes back and shows how that person is characterized based on information available online. The data is easily misunderstood or misconstrued. When I typed in my own name it said I was all sorts of things that I might have been in the past, but I’m no longer those things today. It shows us as a sum total of net-accessible information, rather than the ephemeral pattern we, our friends, our family, imagine us to be. This search engine had no personal context, no input from the wetware, it only knows what data is out in the net, the matrix perhaps. Lots of old stale jobs were front and center. Nothing about my current life and work. Information about information without personal context, without filtering by rapidly becoming obsolete carbon based life units. Another visitor typed in his name. He was disappointed, having a common name, the search engine came back with a composite of people, but not him. He was lost in the sea of information. He had no way to specify his unique id/entity.

Among the abstracted city of information columns in the installations, I felt a constant information flow, without consciousness, without a life as I know it, but pulsing with another form of life, bringing to the forefront the challenge and impossibility of controlling the information about ourselves, as machines, agents, bots, databases, etc. take on a life of their own, making their own conclusions, or perhaps occlusions. Data patterns collected by software agents become a new form of truth. There is a fascinating ambiguity in the piece, the mapping of the data and the space is not clear, how is the information mediated? Is there such a thing as computational understanding? As the search engine is given names, it make sense of that “name” but not the “person,” later I learned that the name is sent to the soundtrack, part of music like, some from the news, computer generated voices read key words. The most fascinating component was the appearance of “data ghosts” in the central monitor in the space, which at first looks like an ordinary surveillance camera view, you see yourself and other visitors on this monitor, but then the screen is occupied by data ghosts, are these real people or data? What is floating in space? Metropath(ologies) is a garden of pure information, de-contextualized, re-contextualized, So what’s missing in our contemporary communication landscape that leads to ambivalence of information? What is the ecstasy of communication? Is it anything akin to Werner Herzog’s wonderful phrase, the ecstasy of truth? Perhaps it is the narratives that ground us in specific human experiences, a synthesis that resembles our lived experience. And that’s the story we seek to find. It may be that the way out of ambivalence lies in ecstasy, but one of human truths, not just communication.

Notes
1. This post was originally posted on the MassArt Design Seminar II Blog, Spring 2009. It is re-printed here with minor editorial changes.
2. Clicking on images will take you to the image photo page on Flickr

This book will help you think about new business models, how to build an audience around you work, and challenge the old notion that independent media makers should think of themselves as auteurs waiting to be discovered by the record, movie, or television industries or a forward thinking curator. The mainstream is interested in commercial product, the lowest common denominator, the latest fad. Once upon a time you had no other way to find an audience, the gatekeepers ran the show. Today you can find your audience using your own unique voice, rather than trying to fit someone else’s mold. It’s a brave new world and Scott’s timely book provides practical insights into carving your own path towards nurturing fans, making friends, and building your own following. We may always have mainstream media, however, today, as both audiences and media makers, the internet has opened up an alternative channel of distribution full of possibilities, most of which we have yet to see, which I hope will bring us a viable alternative to industrial media product, and instead, hand-crafted, authentic stories, unique messages with new points of view, and personal media to enrich the soul of a new generation. What do you want to express? You have the answer deep inside of you. What can you do to get your expression out to an audience? Scott’s book provides an introduction to how people have been doing that.

Purchasing the book through the links on this page provides Kino-Eye.com with a much appreciated commission, thank you.

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 the 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 available for purchase from Amazon.com. 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.

Note: A 20th anniversary edition of the film was released April 20, 2010 on DVD. This post was updated on July 9, 2011 with new links to the Maria’s Story web site and the Maria’s Story page on Amazon.com. The original edition of the film is no longer available from the original distributor, Filmmaker’s Library.

This is one of those films that started out as one project and ended up a completely different one, because the filmmaker was able to continue working with their subject as the context around their work changed dramatically, which makes it all the more delicious. The project started when David Schisgall, a friend of Nina Davenport from college, directed a piece for MTV, “True Life: I’m Living in Iraq,” about young people living in Iraq. The piece focused mostly on American soldiers, however, it also featured seven minutes about Muthana Mohmed, a young Iraqi film student who was desperate to go to Hollywood. Actor and director Liev Schreiber saw the piece and was moved. He contacted Schisgall with the idea that he’d like to give Muthana an opportunity to come to work with him as an intern on “Everything is Illuminated,” a film Schreiber was going to direct in the Czech Republic.

Nina Davenport and Muthana Mohmed

Schisgall thought that Muthana’s experience might make for an interesting documentary, so he hired Davenport to make a film about Muthana working on the set of the film. This might have been an ordinary behind-the-scenes movie worthy of a DVD extra, however, when Davenport arrived on the set of “Everything is Illumniated” she quickly realized that this was not going to be a straightforward piece about an intern working on a Hollywood movie. Director Liev Schreiber and producer Peter Saraf had all sorts of expectations of what Muthana would accomplish on the set of “Everything is Illumniated,” which in the end were unrealistic; at the same time Muthana was not much different than the average middle-class kid unsure of what they want while being caught in a very unfamiliar situation. I don’t want to give too much away about the story itself, because I had a chance to see the film only knowing this setup, and I really enjoyed the journey not having any idea how the story was going to end. It’s really delightful to be able to see the movie that way, the film unfolds like life itself.

Nina Davenport, who was Ross McElwee’s student at Harvard, follows her teacher in the tradition of personal documentary filmmaking, and it really works in this film. What starts out as a straightforward behind-the-scenes piece, ends up becoming a personal film for Davenport. Her camera is at once gentle and probing, talking us along the ups and downs of the relationship between subject and filmmaker. In an era in which so many people are making films about themselves without an observer providing perspective, Operation: Filmmaker demonstrates once again why we benefit from seeing a dialog between subject and filmmaker. What makes the film so interesting is seeing a life honestly portrayed from the perspective of a third party who at the same time is closely involved in the life of the subject, and yet a different person who in the end can only observe, capturing both the things that make the subject attractive to us, as well as the things that we may not like about the subject. In the end, Muthana comes across as very human, and whatever we may not like about his character, we must recognize as characteristics about ourselves. As Anais Nin once wrote, “we don’t see people as they are, we see people as we are.” This film provides an eloquent visual manifestation of Nin’s oft quoted phrase.

This richly observed and well edited film goes beyond the events unfolding in front of the camera to tell a larger story about ourselves and relationships with others. Part of what makes this such an interesting film to watch is that Davenport reveals her struggle to make the film, during the Q&A session after the screening she said, “I felt I was in an abusive relationship, but it was not the man, it was the movie.” And while some will see this film as an allegory for our involvement in Iraq, in the end it’s a more universal story about expectations of others and what happens when those expectations don’t meet up with reality.

A list of upcoming screenings is available on the films website.

This weekend at the Newburyport Documentary Film Festival I has the pleasure of seeing Shadow of the House, an intimate documentary by Allie Humenuk that presents a portrait of photographer Abelardo Morell. The film shows his process and daily life behind the work without interpreting it for you, presenting no experts telling you about the importance of Morell’s work, instead, you see that for yourself, as if you had walked into a beautifully mounted exhibition without placards or a program.

The narrative unfolds as a conversation between subject and filmmaker organically without a heavy hand, beautifully lensed, intimate in perspective, as the subject confront his identity and relationship with Cuba where he was born, yet he’s lived as an American since he came to this country at the age of fourteen in 1962. There are very few films made in which the filmmaker spends enough time with their subject over the course of years in order to develop depth and perspective, in Humenuk’s case she spent almost seven years making this film. In a medium that is crowded with self-indulgent personal documentaries, sensationalist polemics, and formulaic assemblages, Shadow of The House stands out as a rare and beautiful gem.

Do whatever you can to see this film in a theater, on the big screen, with an audience. This is one of the best films I’ve seen dealing with an artist, his process, and the life behind the work. The film won the award for Best New England Film at the festival, however, the film deserves much more than regional recognition, for me it was the best documentary at the festival, while I do concur with the Audience Award going to Beyond Belief, a beautifully crafted and important film.