Crit Feedback

The feedback I have received for my crit presentation was to rephrase my aim slightly and replace the term "design constraints" with "design conventions". This implies that certain aesthetics are the norm but are not necessarily applied at all times. That supports my argument that within the same design convention like a certain type of genre the colour themes might be repeated across entertainment media but can still change depending on cultural differences, distribution platforms or other criteria.

Another piece of advice was not to over complicate my research. I could be researching this subject forever. It is now time to settle down and focus on my final piece. One idea mentioned was to create showreel that would be my final piece, showing my development progress and understanding of all the different visual styles and production values of title sequences, instead of having three title sequences on their own. This raises the question if that would clash with my aim, which investigates the contrast between distribution formats. The showreel might display a variety and research into several approaches but wouldn't show that contrast within defined criteria.

For that reason I have decided to pick a design convention. I will first create one title sequence for one of the formats and then adapt that title sequence to the criteria that I have identified for the other two formats. This will show how one design concept can change depending on the cultural and platform distribution based differences.
I would like to use the mystery genre and US broadcast as my gravitation point for this approach. I am frustrated with the amount of logo reveals that exist in US broadcast media for this genre. I am convinced that it doesn't always serve its purpose and the title sequence could be treated differently. From this onwards I will create adaptations for UK broadcast and online media appropriate to the production values of those two formats.

I am uncertain if picking a genre at random is the right approach but I don't see how else I can make the next step towards starting my final piece.

Next steps:

• mystery genre
• re-interpret a logo reveal of US broadcast media
• adapt design concept to criteria of UK broadcast media production values
• adapt design concept to criteria of online media production values

• potentially start LinkedIn discussion

Crit 2012 Supervision

As I wasn't able to attend the pitch session for the second semester due to an illness at the time, I can't comment on the progress the students have made but it is evident that most of them put a lot of thought and effort into their work.

The first years have a good basis of research, but need to start work on their final projects. They also tend to jump into the practical work too early before enough pre-production and concept work has been done, which I pointed out to them. As they only had two practical modules to show us, there was little more feedback we could give them.

Apart from one second year in the group, the concepts were very well developed and a lot of thought has gone into their projects. A much better pipeline was in place here and all steps, from concept to storyboarding to production, were being followed. A few students were struggling with certain modules they didn't feel were their forte and overly focused on others they preferred more. I suggested to link modules and use work produced for one module for another project. This way they could transform the projects they weren't too keen on and make it theirs, step outside of the box.

The third years both had very strong ideas and detailed animatics/storyboards but not enough research and concept development went into the designs. They were also behind on production, also focusing more on their personal project than the other projects. We tried to make this aware to them and remind them the time was coming to a close.

Many students were still under the impression that the more they produced the better. We made them aware that quality comes before quantity and if they feel they can't finish their projects to the standard they planned them to, they should think about scaling it down and polishing a small part instead. This especially applies to personal projects.

Crit Presentation

Showreel I created with all the media tests from my honours project so far:

Pitch Presentation

Crit Presentation

"The TV title sequence is a branding endeavor and a legitimate art form. It is the sole, consistent, and iconic moment that carries through a show’s lifespan and beyond. It’s what you remember most."
~ Digital Kitchen

Recap

Research

Mind Map

Aim and Objectives

Project Map (Methods and Tasks)

Glossary:

Production Value - "how is it put together"

• combined technical qualities of the methods, materials and stagecraft skills used in the production of a film, video or live performance (lighting, sound, scenery, props)

Design Constraints - "why is it put together that way"

• limitations within which a production is designed under (theme/genre, target audience, story)

Format - "where is it going to be seen"

• a plan for the organisation and arrangement of a specific production, general appearance

Honours Project:

• Produce Title Sequence
• Motion Graphics Design
• 1 Genre, 1 Target Audience, 3 Formats
• Supernatural Thriller/Drama
• 16-34
• Online, Broadcast UK, Broadcast US
• Black Box TV, Misfits, Supernatural

Media Tests:

Trailer/Title Sequence/Intro:

Title Design:

Production Company Indent:



Crit Week Supervision

At this weeks crit the students showed a lot of progress, which I tried to get across to them as much as possible because I know how often people giving feedback forget to do that and only critique things that need improvement.

I did notice however that my appeal to them last pitch of keeping a blog did not catch on. Only one person actually had a blog, but this was only filled with development for one module. One other person mentioned she was going to post everything on the blog after she had finished all her sketches and concepts. This is again not the way to go, I think. Personally, I think a blog is a great thing and very important to keep your thoughts in one place but as I tried to make that clear to the students last pitch I didn't make a point of saying it again.

Especially as this time there was something else lacking and that was preparation. A lot of the students had done great work and had lots to show (in their sketchbooks) but some had either forgotten to make a note of their ideas, or had more in another sketchbook they had forgotten and so on. I felt the need to remind them that this was the time to ask for feedback, to learn from other students and fourth years and gain invaluable perspective they would otherwise not be able to receive. Yes it's annoying if the person who's holding a presentation isn't well prepared but in this case they should be more fussed about getting feedback than us getting a nice presentation. It's a shame they're not aware of that enough, so I tried and make them understand that pitch and crit is mainly for them to learn and less about us saying "well done, good presentation".

It also seemed that a few of the students spent quite some time researching and making concepts, instead of diving into the development stage. Me and Dmitrijs made sure that they are aware of the time frame and that they should start developing their ideas instead of doing more research.

All in all, I think I gave good feedback, made the students aware of what's important and what to look out for. I also mentioned that you don't have to start a new project for every module and every year but (depending on the lecturer and the module) you can use concept work from one semester to develop the project further in the next or use a 3D model for another project. That's what I did for a few of my projects over the years and it worked out really well. That way you don't end up with a lot of scattered ideas but a few solid portfolio pieces, that were developed over more than just one semester

Pitch Review

In review of my pitch presentation today I was told to simplify my subject area. Originally I wanted to look at media convergence, especially the merge of TV and online content and how audience attraction is achieved in both traditional and new areas, which methods have been taken over from the traditional TV model and which have developed specifically for web distribution. In the frame of this, I also wanted to look at branding of a show, especially through intro sequences using motion graphics and how that impacts on audience attraction and building of a community.

As I am most interested in Motion Graphics as a career, it was suggested to me to look at show branding through motion graphics and leave audience and community out of the equation. This sounds sensible to me, as the original idea might be too laborious to do by myself. I started thinking about what I could do with just motion graphics as a subject in the wider context of the branding of a tv show through an intro sequence. Most shows have an intro sequence, if it's a million dollar US production, a low budget UK production or a YouTube Channel/Web-Series. I could look at popular/successful/independant shows on TV and online and try and undertsand what intro sequences they have. Why are they made a certain way? What is the connection between the content and theme of the show and the intro? Compare and contrast live action/CG mixed intros and pure motion graphics intros. Why was motion grahpics used and not live-action and vice versa?

Some of the shows I'd like to look ar are US TV shows that have started airing their new seasons this autumn and their intro sequences. The ones that have been announced to air this year are the ones that have received the green light for production from the networks because of their popularity and success, whereas less successful shows from the previous year would have been dropped. I would also like to look at UK Channel 4/E4 and BBC productions as well as web-series' and YouTube Channels.

An idea that came to mind after the presentation was to create 3 intro sequences fitting each category listed above:

• US TV
• UK TV
• Online

On a trip to visit some London Post-Production studios I went to recently we were told, that if we wanted to apply for a job or runner position at the company one of the things we could do is to look at the projects the company is involved in or something they have produced recently and try and recreate that, to show that you have the same level of skill as them.

1. I could look at some US TV show intros and try and recreate their intro sequence to show my level of skill
2. I could design a TV show in the style of a UK TV show and produce an intro sequence for this pretend show (that I will not be producing)
3. I could contact an web-series producer or YouTuber to create an intro for their show

With these three approaches I would be covering a lot of the areas that I would have liked to cover in my original idea. 1. I can show my skill on a professional level by reproducing a high end product, 2. desigining a potential show and producing an original piece of work and 3. creating an inro for a different platform for a client.

Pitch Presentation

Pitch Week Supervision

Pitch week has gone down well, I think. My group was joined with Dmitrijs group as both were missing a few students and were therefore a bit small. We mainly had second years and two third years. The ideas and sketchbook developments were generally good. Some were outstanding for the time they had for developing them, some were quite basic with just a few mind maps and written notes. In the latter cases Dmitrijs and me tried to encourage them to find images or develop sketches and character designs to visualise their ideas as even though they might know exactly what the project was going to look like, someone else might not be able to follow that thought process through notes only.

Some students still hadn't picked the blogging idea up, which I reminded them to do. It's such a convenient way to keep track of your thoughts and for others to look over them too. I made sure it was on everybody's mind to keep an up to date blog and make a note of every thought process and research material.

I found it easy to follow what the students were saying and to give them appropriate feedback. Judging by their reactions I had pointed some of them in directions they hadn't thought about or reaffirmed their development, which they seemed to appreciate.

I was wary of the time throughout the pitch, so when the feedback for one person would start dragging into unrelated conversation I would try and move it along to the next person. I don't think I cut anyone off so that they didn't get all the information they needed but we did finish half an hour early. Everyone seemed happy with the feedback they got, so I don't think it was too bad that we finished early.

Although I liked the fact there was another 4th year to help lead the pitch, I didn't like that there was a supervisor actively participating as well. I was supposed to be by myself leading the group, which I was initially looking forward to and realised later on that having another 4th year there was beneficial. However, having a third person who was supposed to "overlook" the process participating felt patronising to me. I felt the control was taken away from me. I would have liked to share my experiences of previous years along with the feedback I gave the students but I didn't have a chance to do that as there were 3 people trying to give advice.

For Crit week I could probably relax about the time a bit more as I know now that I don't have to rush things along. All in all, I think it went rather well and there wasn't much I would have done differently I don't think.