Feb
3
Sue Johnson asked to for help in building an online learning module about field blogging for the Online News Association. She’s been interviewing us off and on for a couple of weeks now, and we did an email Q about audio slideshows……
When did you think a story warranted this approach? (as opposed to video or stills with captions)
Audio slideshows and video are obviously very similar mediums and in large part are actually functionally interchangeable in terms of the storytelling. The choice between the two frankly has as much to do with time and the multimedia producer’s comfort level as it does with storytelling. I’m faster producing video than I am audio slideshows, Jim Seida (another one of the media producers) is the opposite. Sometimes that makes the difference. It shouldn’t, but in dealing with reality on the ground, sometimes it does.That said, they do have different strengths in terms of what they bring to the storytelling. For me video has more of a verite quality. That was the feel I was looking for when I accompanied Huey Mhire back to his home for the first time in Cameron Parish, La. (see it here).
He was seeing the damage for the first time, and I wanted the viewer to have that same experience. I wanted a raw, live feel (though there was actually a lot of editing involved) and the sense that you were really experiencing the environment.
Our audio slideshows tend to be more visual and lyrical (for a lack of a better word) than your typical video. A user can spend time exploring an image, pulling out more detail before you move on to the next idea. By stopping moments and focusing on visual details, the storytelling is more reflective and often more poignant. Jim Seida did a wonderful sequence here that illustrates it better than I can say it.
Still image slideshows obviously rely entirely on the images to convey the storytelling. Every once in a while I would come across a situation that I felt was so strong visually that I decided to forgo audio. You’re able to include any image that’s strong, which is very liberating. Also, since the user navigates at his/her own pace, so you’re able to include even richer and more detailed images than you might in an audio-driven slideshow.
You were one person recording audio and taking pictures. What’s your method? Do you interview first then photograph? Or vice versa?
The method depends largely on the situation, and (again) on the individual producer. I tend to shoot for a little bit to gather the obvious and strongest visuals, then interview (focusing my questions to drive the visual scene) then shoot again to pick up visuals to match the most interesting points uncovered in the audio interview. It doesn’t always work like that, but the two are ideally intertwined.
You also try to record as much natural sound as you can, again to provide more texture and play off of the visual content.
In production, the process is a little bit reversed– I always start by editing the audio to completion. Then I’ll lay the visuals in on top of that. The audio interview is the stortytelling spine, so you’ve got to get that right first. Strong visuals are equally important, but if you’ve done you’re job your strongest audio plays directly to your strongest visuals.
Are you trying to match up the photos with the audio? How much can you do that in this situation?
Yes. Because the media producer is actually doing the interview, you can do a lot to intertwine the visuals with the audio by asking the right questions. You ask visual questions, or ask questions that relate to things I can represent visually. In that way it’s very similar to producing news video– much more so than producing for print or even radio.
How often are you unable to use good audio clips or good photos because they don’t match the other?
It happens, but not too often. If you’re setting out to produce an audio slideshow and your visuals don’t match your audio, you’ve screwed up, plain and simple. Shooting a still image is like running to the store for a loaf of bread. Gathering material for an audio slideshow (or video) is like going to Home Depot to get lumber, nails, etc to build a house. If you need 50 2×4’s but you only got 30, you’re in trouble.
Sometimes the subject just isn’t suited for audio-driven media. However, one of the most wonderful things about this blog format is that you have complete freedom in the mediums you chose. If you’ve got just a good bit of audio- throw it up there; just a still and a caption, that’s fine too. It happily accepts anything, and you’re not forced to make those kinds of choices if you don’t want to.
Do you think this is more effective than video? Or stills with captions?
Audio slideshows can be more effective storytelling in some situations than either video or still images alone, especially in today’s online medium where image quality in streaming video is still not great. There’s an intimacy and clarity to the storytelling that’s a little bit harder to accomplish in other mediums we use.
However, I have to say MSNBC.com’s signature ’style’ (if we have one) has less to do with the medium we chose and a lot more to do with fact that we rely almost entirely on our subjects to narrate their own stories. In doing our Katrina coverage, we found our audience really responded to that style of storytelling. It was wonderful to see so many comments directed at the subject of the story rather than us.
How do you keep your production to a minimum? I assume you have a Flash template ready to go. Do you package the piece or do they do it at HQ?
The production process is dictated in large part by the gathering process. If you do a good job of getting the elements you need (without much waste) production goes a lot faster, and the edit tends to fall into place.
Production is always really labor-intensive, whether done out in the field or in the office. We do have templates and tools, which helps, but the mental/creative process is always the hard part, and it gets harder and harder to do the longer you’re in the field.
Our teams often started out producing on the ground, but handing off back to the office later in the trip as they got tired. They would send back a wide selection of still images and raw audio, and multimedia producers back here would craft the audio slideshows.
Video, on the other hand, largely has to be edited on the spot. It’s not really technically feasible to send back large chunks of raw video over lightweight sat or cell phones, at least not yet.
What equipment do you use?
Equipment like technique is a pretty individual thing. Personally I use Canon 10D digital still cameras, primarily with 16-35mm and 50mm lenses. For video we use Sony DVCam camcorders (either a PD-100 or 150).
Everyone does audio a little bit differently. I tend to just record my audio on my video camera since I’m already carrying it. I pop the microphone off the top of the camera and roll tape. Other producers prefer to use dedicated audio recorders– Sony and Sharp minidiscs, as well as Marantz and M-Audio fully digital recorders. Mics are individual preference, too, but most of us use Beyer M58s and Sennheiser ME65 and 66 shotguns.
You end up carrying a huge load of gear, and we’re in a never-ending quest to reduce weight, consolidate, etc. One example of that is wireless audio equipment. We used to use wireless lavs a lot, but over time we’ve learned techniques to get spontaneous, natural sound without them. It’s one less thing to carry, and I personally use them pretty infrequently now.
Comments
Leave a Reply
