{"id":54,"date":"2006-12-30T18:25:16","date_gmt":"2006-12-30T18:25:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/deptfordtv.wordpress.com\/2006\/12\/30\/docagora-dynebolic-stable\/"},"modified":"2006-12-30T18:25:16","modified_gmt":"2006-12-30T18:25:16","slug":"docagora-dynebolic-stable","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dorothea.tv\/?p=54","title":{"rendered":"DocAgora & Dyne:Bolic stable"},"content":{"rendered":"

Amsterdam, 1st, December, 2006, Jaromil presented a script with with the GRUB loader can be automatically installed on a memory stick. Dyne:Bolic 2 is out in a stable version, working from a memory stick, making us ready to test Cinelerra from virtually any PC with broadband connection!<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

During the same week the DocAgora conference took place in Amsterdam. A follow up conference will take place on http:\/\/www.d-word.com in the week of the 19th of February 2007.<\/span><\/p>\n

DOCAGORA NOTES 30\/11\/2006<\/p>\n

General Intro by moderator Peter Broderick:
\nPeople talk about the coming transformation of documentary filmmaking
\nand distribution under the influence of new web-based media. I say the
\ntransformation is already upon us. Yochai Benkler (sp?) writes in the
\n?Weatlh of Networks? that there is a shift in economic systems from
\nhierarchies to networks, and this has far-reaching repercussions for
\ndoc film distribution. First in the late ?90s there was the changes
\nengendered by digital film production, now we see changes as a result
\nof digital distribution.<\/p>\n

It leads first to reconceptualising the idea of the Audience:
\nfilmmakers who have been successful in digital distribution have
\nusually found a loyal niche target audience first, and only reached a
\nwider audience later. Filmmakers should now think about a distribution
\nstrategy from day one of the project.<\/p>\n

Working relationships with the distributors will take a more hibrid
\ncharacter. Filmmakers will work more as partners rather than
\nsupplicants and will allways keep a slice of the rights. In case of
\npolitical and social documentaries filmmakers can do public
\nscreenings, networking events. This way filmmakers turn consumers into
\npotential patrons and mentors and I believe that filmmakers will have
\ngreater control then ever before. The challenges for distributors and
\nfunding bodies are going to be greater, especially for distributors
\nwho will loose their role as gate keepers to the audience and will
\nhave to work more as partners and mediators. Funding bodies are also
\nhave to be more flexible to allow hibrid funding models.<\/p>\n

Panel One<\/p>\n

Introduction of moderator frank boyd who is ex BBC and is a producer
\nwith unexpected media. Frank boyd shows a graph of two waves of
\ntechnological innovation, the first wave in which digital and analogue
\ntechnologies co-exist and digital technology is used to enhance
\nanaogue content. Many big media companies have been successful in
\nusing this technologies. But in the second interface in which both the
\nmedia and the interface are digital entirely new plattforms are being
\ncreated.<\/p>\n

Some statistics:
\n25% was the audience share of bbc 1 in july 2006, this was at the time
\nof the world cup and I believe this will be the last time one
\nbroadcaster will have such a share.
\n62% of media consumed by people under 26 is made by people they know
\npersonally.
\n0.03% of content on tech blogs is sourced from mainstream media<\/p>\n

so what are established media doing in this situation? According to
\nRoger Graef, TV is retreating, increasingly playing it safe. What
\nabout VPRO?<\/p>\n

Stan van Engelen (VPRO): the space and resources for docs are on the
\nway down in public TV. VPRO started ?Holland Doc? two years ago to
\nfind other audiences for films. It started as a digital TV channel and
\nstill runs as a linear channel on the web.<\/p>\n

FB: how is Fourdocs different from YouTube?
\nEmily Renshaw-Smith (FourDocs, UK): Channel4 recognized that as a
\npublic broadcaster we?d have to recognize there?s new platforms and
\nthat we have to engage with them. Fourdocs is a curated space, unlike
\nYouTube ? anyone can upload films but they are rated by us and by the
\nviewers, and we insist on legal compliance, which only helps the
\nfilmmakers in the long run.
\nWe get about 30 new films per month and 60% of our audience is outside
\nthe UK.
\nWe don?t pay for films, but neither do we claim rights; the filmmakers
\ncan always sell the films on.
\nFor Channel 4 it is a way for talentspotting new directors ? in two
\ncases it has lead to commissions on the main channel, but we?ve done
\nsome research and the majority of our contributors are hobbyists who
\nare not interested in using it for career development.
\nFB: does it provide opportunities for professional filmmakers?
\nFilmmakers have used it to upload trailers to look for further
\nfinancing.<\/p>\n

Huub Roelvink ? CinemaNet
\nWe are now busy with a new project which is called Cinema
\nDelicatessen, which is a follow-up of DocuZone. CinemaNet helps to
\ncreate technical access to digital cinema by helping cinemas to
\nacquire digital cinema equipment and then screen digitally ditributed
\ncontent. Our threshold, like in any cinema distribution, is quite
\nhigh, so I guess I am a kind of a gatekeeper.<\/p>\n

FB: so far the models have been ?updates? of existing distribution
\nmodels ? what about other ways of using digital distribution
\naltogether?
\nGillan Caldwell ? director of ?Witness?:
\nWitness has always used AV media to create political change, and to
\nexpose human rights abuses. We use the term ?video advocacy? and do
\nnot produce for broadcast, although some productions have made it to
\nbroadcast. One important aspect of our work is to create targeted
\nscreenings for decision makers, and in many cases we have seen a
\ndirect effect in the form of a policy change soon after such a
\nscreening.
\nWe are now working on the next level of using digital distribution by
\nmaking a human rights video hub, where activists can post and exchange
\naudiovisual material, even raw footage. It will come with downloadable
\n?tactical media toolkits? to help activists in production.
\nWitness also uses YouTube and similar sites to further distribute some
\nof our titles, and oru recent report on torture by CIA trained
\nmercenaries is the most downloaded long-form video on YouTube.<\/p>\n

Katherine Cizek ? indie filmmaker
\nI?ve been hugely inspired by the work of Witness: documentary has
\nalways been hitched to the TV wagon, but now we are in a position to
\nexperiment with new forms. This means that the filmmaker?s
\nrealtionship with the audience changes, but also the relationship with
\nthe subject changes: I am a filmmaker-in-residence at an inner city
\nhospital in Toronto, sponsored by the Canadian Film Board: and rather
\nthan produce a long form doc, I?m working with the community to create
\nmedia content for a form of interactive online documentary (demo: this
\nis full screen in Flash!). So people ask if it can still be called
\ndocumentary, but I think documentary is about giving voice to unheard
\nviewpoints, in whatever form, so that?s exactly what I?m doing and I
\ncall it documentary.<\/p>\n

FB: so we come to the question: what makes docs possible? When it is
\nsupported by public funding there is always the connection to idea of
\npublic service. My question to Google is inspired by a quote from Tim
\nBerners-Lee, who said he was concerned by the ease with which lies are
\npropagated in unmoderated space. Does this concern Google?<\/p>\n

Sydney Mock ? Google Benelux: Google has always said it is not a
\ncontent company, it is a technology company, so on the internet\u00a0 it is
\nlike in the real world: you have to check your sources, and ultimately
\nit?s about trust in the source.
\nOne successful example of the use of Google video is Fabchannel.com:
\nmusicians connected to Paradiso webcasting their gigs here to the
\nworld ? they put trailers up on Google Video to promote the webcasts.<\/p>\n

FB: how about revenue ? could filmmakers get revenue via Google?
\nSM: there?s different models how that could be done: one is Adsense,
\nin which publishers can run Google ads on their own websites and share
\nrevenue.<\/p>\n

FB: well I was recently in a conference on interactive TV in the UK
\nand the consensus was that we?re still in the R+D phase.<\/p>\n

Cay Wesnigk (from the audience): the rollback of the revolution is
\nalready underway: the internet haas created new monopolies ? and how
\nmany places will you be able to upload video in a few years? time? Who
\nwill own the portals?<\/p>\n

Heather Croall (from the audience): distributors are now looking at
\nmaking their own ?curated channels? on their own websites.<\/p>\n

Sydney Mock: I don?t agree with the idea of the lock-in effect Cay is
\nreferring to: you don?t have to log in on Google Video, it?s free to
\nuse it or not and in the end it?s about trust in the brand that the
\nuser chooses.<\/p>\n

Huub Roelvink ? CinemaNet
\nCinemaNet can be used directly by filmmakers, so it could serve as an
\nalternative.<\/p>\n

Adnan Hadzi (from the audence); I just want to mention that there is
\nan initiative called ?Google eats itself?, which involves setting up
\ngoogle ads and clicking on them and using the revenue to buy Google
\nshares ? eventually the whole company could belong to the users.<\/p>\n

Q from the audience to FourDocs: what is the benefit of Forudocs to
\nthe filmmakers other than exposure? For instance a not unsimilar
\ninitiative from the Knitting Factory in NYC became a fiasco because
\nthe musicians felt they were strong-armed into participating and felt
\nthey weren?t paid for having their material up on the web.<\/p>\n

Emily Renshaw-Smith (FourDocs, UK): we?re not claiming rights on the
\nmaterial, we see it as a way for filmmakers to develop their career.
\nBut we?re also looking at a couple of shared revenue models that might
\nwork for us, like Revver or the way 3 mobile shares with users hwo
\nupload mobile content.<\/p>\n

FB: another place to look at is BBC Innovation labs. I also want to
\nmention how new consumers expect you to come to them: broadcasters are
\nno longer the centre, but the individual consumer is.<\/p>\n

Witness: we also are interested in giving the users access to content
\nwhenever and wherever.<\/p>\n

FB: I think the Submarine online TV channel is an interesting attempt
\nto create a kind of online broadcasting company. But what do people
\nactually watch? How do you get them to watch something they don?t know
\nabout already in advance ? soemthing they don?t know they want to see?<\/p>\n

Mercury Media (from the audience): we made a film called Loose Change
\nand we tried to sell it to broadcasters, but were rejected. Then we
\nput it up on YouTube and become the most downloaded film ever and now
\nwe have sold it to two broadcasters ? after it proved it had an
\naudience.
\n{The_D-Word.Community.11.792}: Lennaart Van Oldenborgh {lenn} Sat, 02 Dec 2006 19:27:49 EST (221 lines)<\/p>\n

hello here’s the other half of the notes all nicely typed even if at
\ntimes they don’t really make sense to me either… enjoy<\/p>\n

PANEL 2 DOCAGORA, IDFA 30 NOV 2006<\/p>\n

Is moderated by Peter Broderick, focuses more on financing and revenue
\nmodels. PB asks all participants to introduce themselves in under 2
\nminutes.<\/p>\n

Marc Goodchild ? BBC Interactive:
\nI work for the BBC but have been an indie producer and what I do may
\nbe relevant to indie producers in two ways: 1) in their realtoin to
\nthe BBC, and 2) as content owners in their own right.
\nWhat I do at the BBC is to think about opening up and reusing the
\nsubstantial BBC archives in interactive applications. Rather than just
\nmake old programs available, I?m trying to structure the content
\ndifferently in an interactive environment. Here?s an example form our
\nparenting interactive site: all the content is parcelled up into small
\nchanks and given extensive metadata, so if you click through
\n?personality? and ?age group 6-12 months? you get an auto-created
\nassembly of material relevant to that topic, from different sources.
\nIt is a way of seeing the archive not just as films but as content.<\/p>\n

Gerry Flahive ? Canadian Film Board:
\nApart from the usual film projects, we also fund younger web-based
\nfilmmakers, and projects such as Katerina Cizek?s. For examples see
\ncitizenshift.org.ca<\/p>\n

Klara Grunning-Harris ? ITVS
\nSums up the ITVS mission<\/p>\n

Maria Silvia Gatta ? MEDIA distribution EU
\nSums up MEDIA mission and newly approved MEDIA 2007 program
\nAmong others MEDIA supports ?RealPort? online distribution and Midas
\nnetwork of film archives.<\/p>\n

Patrick Crowe of Xinephile Media, Canada
\nIs indie producer in Toronto, working with doc in linear and non-
\nlinear form, engaged with broadcasting model but also interactive
\nprogramming. Example: Beethoven?s Hair: the online part is nota
\n?companion? site to the film but a serious part of the production
\nitself.<\/p>\n

Stefano Portu ? Buongiorno! Italy
\nGives intro on mobile video market ? 3G, or UMTS, is most mature in UK
\nand Italy (in Europe). Buongiorno! Provides ?snackable video? for the
\n?interstitial spaces in our busy schedules?, mainly sports,
\ncelebrities and news.<\/p>\n

James Fabricant ? head of myspace UK+Ireland
\nDescribes Myspace as the new portal based on a social network<\/p>\n

Robert Greenwald gives a prerecorded statement on the financing of
\n?Iraq for Sale?:
\nThree months before production the money still wasn?t there, they
\ndecide to put out an open call on the internet and a ?thermometer?
\nwith the target budget on the website and within three months they
\nraise around 350k dollars from the public.<\/p>\n

PB: can we hear more about the issues that MEDIA is concerned about
\nwhen funding digital distribution?<\/p>\n

MSG: main issues are:
\n– how to secure content? MEDIA exists to stimulate an industry so it
\nis in the interest of MEDIA that the actors in this industry can
\nsurvive. Hence digital rights management is a core issue
\n– differences in the rules between regions in the way they set up
\nlocal funding get in the way of a system that can transcend these
\nboudaries
\n– also: since the web is a global system does it still make sense to
\nstimulate specifically European content?<\/p>\n

JF: MySpace is used for viral marketing of films, we call it ?mass
\nroots marketing? ? example is the ?lovemap? distribution model of the
\nFour Eyed Monsters site.<\/p>\n

KGH ? ITVS:
\nWe support an online film festival: the winners are broadcast on
\n?independent lens? slot<\/p>\n

MG ? BBC: what digital distribution does is create communities of
\ninterest: if we want to speak to these communities we have to be more
\nlike hosts and less like auteurs. Example: joiningthedots.tv
\nAlso: cycling TV is effectively a digital TV channel run on 60k with
\nvery specific content and a very specific audience which allows
\nsmaller companies to advertise in a very targeted way. So we can think
\nabout financing in terms of ?symbiotic revenue splits?.<\/p>\n

SP ? Buongiorno:
\nIn the beginning mobile content was spun off from mainstream content
\nbut this was not very succesful. So now we have two other forms:
\n1. interactive content: you have to get people to do something every
\nfew minutes otherwise people feel stupid string at such a small screen
\n2. user generated content: for example we get football fans to submit
\nlittle clips from the football grounds about the match or to do a song
\nor a stupid joke.<\/p>\n

Q from audience: what about mixed funding?
\nGF: well in canada the networks have no online strategy at all ?
\nthey?ll try anyting for a while so there?s opportunities for
\nfilmmakers.<\/p>\n

Adnan hadzi: two comments:
\n– only some forms of distribution are measured, for instance peer2peer
\nfilesharing is not measured so download figures don?t necessarily
\nrepresent how many people see something
\n– question for the BBC: what about rights, for instance in the case of
\nthe BBC Creative Archives?<\/p>\n

MG:
\nWell I don?t speak for the creative archives that?s another dept., but
\nin general I think we should think more in terms of ?windowing? of
\nrights for the broadcaster, and that after each such window rights
\nrevert to the content maker<\/p>\n

Q from audience:
\nWhat about royalties?<\/p>\n

PB: like I said before, never sign away all digital download rights<\/p>\n

PANEL 3<\/p>\n

Moderator: Peter Wintonick
\nBegins a rant on gadgets, quotes Octavio Paz on technology and quotes
\nPhilip K Dick?s definition of reality: ?that which if you stop
\nbelieving in it doesn?t go away?<\/p>\n

But first Heather Croall?s report on Panel2:
\n– canadian film board and ITVS are traditional funders continuing with
\ntheir existing parctice which is to stimulate underrepresented voices
\n– there IS money for cross-platform funding but only if you live in
\ncanada or australia: in these places TV and ?new media? funding can
\ntrigger eachother, multiplying the cash
\n– what the BBC does is more about ?re-purposing? content
\n– a new EU commission policy paper on digital rights management has
\nrecently been published and can be found via MEDIA website<\/p>\n

so now panel 3 for real which is called a ?brainstorm?<\/p>\n

first: Pat Aufderheide ? centre for social media, school of journalism
\nwhat can we teach our students about tomorrow?s world?
\nExample: rights issues ? we published ?best practice in fair use?,
\nbecause copyright is about liberating tomorrow?s creators ? our slogan
\n?you don?t have to pirate stuff in order to quote it?
\nBroadcasting hasn?t changed all that much ? you get the same kind of
\nnegotiations that you had 20 years ago. But now we have in addition to
\nthat new enterprises that provide new paradigms: according to these
\n– you don?t have audiences but you have partners, networks, contacts
\n– rather than a film director you become a ?strategic designer of a
\nproject? in which film is only part of the project. This is also not
\nentirely new: most filmmakers in IDFA also think of themselves as
\nsocial actors
\nBoth models live side by side at the moment, and I predict that new
\nmediators will arise between the two: not every filmmaker wants to be
\na strategic designer of a project.
\nI would also want to raise the question: what will public media look
\nlike?<\/p>\n

PW: waxes lyrical about Aljazeera
\nFlora Gregory ? Aljazeera London, ex-indie producer
\nAljazeera English is a new channel, started just a few weeks ago.
\nIt?s based on an odd funding model: it?s paid for by the Qatari
\ngovernment, so it?s public service and has no advertising, but it?s
\nvery divers, with a very international labour force, and it wants to
\nencourage different POVs
\nIt is a news channel but has a major doc strand called Witness: a
\ndaily 22 min. slot, which is commissions and acquisitions, and a
\nweekly 43 min. slot which is for now only acquisitions.<\/p>\n

Aljazeera is an odd combination of the old and the new: it?s very much
\nbuilt in the traditional BBC\/ CNN mould: studio hosted, and with
\ntraditional journalistic storytelling.<\/p>\n

Cameron Hickey ? indie producer Pattern Films
\nPresented ?docsite? which is a free tool for creating websites for
\nfilmmakers.<\/p>\n

PW: Sheffield ?meet-market? was an example how half the process of
\nconnecting filmmakers with CEs was conducted online.<\/p>\n

Adnan hadzi introduces Djaromil, creator of dyne.bolic ? see dyne.org
\nDjaromil: you can also think about funding from the other side: to be
\nless dependent on expensive technology ? after all the less you need
\nthe richer you are ont eh same budget. On dyne.org you can find free
\nopen source tools for production and distribution of video.
\nAnother great advantage of open source is in longevity: you are not
\ndependent on formats that are corporate owned and that can be
\ndiscontinued and be left without any software supporting it. Open
\nsource will always be adapted so it gives you long term archiving
\nsecurity.<\/p>\n

Announcement from audience: filmmakers in Sheffield got together and
\nstarted a distribution platform for docs called docutube.com<\/p>\n

Q from audience: what about using archive in films you want to post ?
\ndo you have to own all the rights?
\nA: well we don?t really have an answer but in the end you can always
\nleave black holes where the archive goes with a description and then
\nput it in for broadcasts.<\/p>\n

Emily from Fourdocs: on our site films are on a Creative Commons
\nlicence, so they can be quoted freely.<\/p>\n

Pat Afderheide: we also did a study on agreements about rights called
\n?the new deals?<\/p>\n

Comment from audience: there ARE already models from the music
\nbusiness, which has struggled with these issues a while ago. Also:
\nsome of these supposed ?free platforms? actually claim copyrights on
\nposted material and may be extracting value in the long term so
\nthey?re not as free as they look.<\/p>\n

Q from audience: surely we can?t all finance our films striaght from
\nthe public like Robert Greenwald?
\nPeter Broderick: there?s also models not so similar to Greenwald?s:
\nfor example patrons, small loyal audiences could support sertain work
\nand certain filmmakers. But I believe that overall we are moving to an
\nera where filmmakers can be truly independent.<\/p>\n

End on Peter Wintonick riff.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Amsterdam, 1st, December, 2006, Jaromil presented a script with with the GRUB loader can be automatically installed on a memory stick. Dyne:Bolic 2 is out in a stable version, working from a memory stick, making us ready to test Cinelerra from virtually any PC with broadband connection! During the same week the DocAgora conference took…Read more DocAgora & Dyne:Bolic stable<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12,26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-54","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news","category-tools"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dorothea.tv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dorothea.tv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dorothea.tv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dorothea.tv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dorothea.tv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=54"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/dorothea.tv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dorothea.tv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=54"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dorothea.tv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=54"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dorothea.tv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=54"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}