possible follow up

As the feedback of the Interactive Workshop of Europe was so positiv, we would like to go on. So there are two new ideas to elaborate - together with you!

* YOUTH INITATIVE on Open Space
[regular meetings in different european cities / during the year 2010 / to learn more about Open Space technology and to get in touch with project working with this method connected to urban space questions (social inclusion/urban development/community building/street art etc) / to work on our own 'professionalisation' and this network of young professionals]

* TRAINING on images / photography
[two stage training on images using Open Space technology / two weeks, summer 2010/ South France / at least 4 countries] / preparation in winter 2010 and funding application for february, 1st]

Are you interested? We are looking forward to get in touch with you!

For further information please contact:
info(a)workshop-of-europe.eu

documentation is online!

Hi everybody

Please check our website to get to the documentation of the Workshop of Europe.

www.workshop-of-europe.eu/methods.html

It is work in progress, so within the next weeks we will put all informations, videos, files online. The photos are already done, so have a look!

let's start using our blog... all together...

welcome to our blog!

We hope you will add some new documents, ideas, videos and so on! Do not forget to have a look on our website (www.workshop-of-europe.eu) to think a little bit how to use it in future, which documents we could put there and so on!
Actually, I'm waiting for Alice first note because she just sent an SMS explaining all her ideas of future project in 156 characters (did she get influenced by twitter?!?...). So some explanations and further informations would be great! Up to you!!! :-)

Rosetta Part II:The Sounding Spoons

Hi,
I didnt want the sound part of the Rosetta Story to be missing here, so I just made a movie with black picture out of the Audiofile. dont ask how - enjoy! :-)
greetings - jonas

Audio Examples of microphone types

Hi all, I recently watched this movie "STEAL THIS FILM Pt.II" (which I must recommend for everyone who has become more interested in the topic of copyright control, http://www.stealthisfilm.com/Part2/) and I saw/listened to the different types of audio in it. I excerpted one little part for you to demonstrate what different microphones do to the quality of sound: PLEASE LISTEN WITH HEADPHONES
The sequence consists of four speakers:
1) is a normal-size room and probably a regular cardioid directional or even a highly directional microphone. You can assume this because you hear the room in the sound, probably this was chosen because there is some machine noise in the non-visible background...
2) is an outside set with probably a lot of street noise. The microphone might be a "tie-clip microphone" because you hear the wind distortions in the low frequencies. also tie-clip mics have the advantage of reducing environmental noise.
3) is a normal-size room with little furniture and acoustically very "hard" walls/surfaces. A lot of reflections are audible. The microphone is probably only an omni-directional one on top of the camera because you can hear a lot of the room reflections. thats why directional microphones are better in case you DO NOT want to hear the room where the sound was recorded.
4) is very quiet and small environment inbetween two book shelves. The microphone is probably also a small "tie-clip microphone" because you can hear so much bass frequencies of his voice. that happens when you position the small microphone directly at the jacket on his chest. It gets a lot of bass freqs from the chest directly.

and here is a last example of how a higly directional microphone sounds. you should use such types outside with a lot of street noise but as you can hear if you listen closely it kind of narrows down the frequency range of the voice. there is not as much bass as normally and it sounds a bit compressed.


That was a small demo of listening to sound. hope you enjoyed. greetings to everyone.
jonas

Advanced evaluation part 2

The second group is evaluating the advanced module.

The Chocolate Chips

A very special video that was created by Alice and Lena during the Video workshop of the Basic module.

Rosetta part 1 - Discovering the universal translator

It´s really very great. I´m very impressed. Beautiful videos and excellent actors! Sina, are you in this video! Wow, it´s increadible!

Evaluation advanced module part 1

At the end of the advanced module, the participants talked about how they experienced the New Media workshop.

Moritz Farewell

A little video made during the advanced module to thank Moritz for his support

Rosetta, part 3: photography

Foto work by Alice, Pjotr, Giulia

Intro video

This is the first version of Marc's and Sina's introductory Video, created during the second Video Workshop in Hohensolms.

PERSONAL EXPERIENCES with media

PERSONAL EXPERIENCES with media

 

-         role of media as a tool for group and community building

à technical equipment as a tool to make the group responsible

à forum online as a way of gathering people

à participants’ sense of honour and pride

à creation of self-confidence within the group

à feeling of unity and ownership deriving from the cooperation

à empowering the subject of the project

à favouring the participation

à giving autonomy (video making)

 

-         providing new perspectives of the reality

à use of pine hole camera (different techniques, different conception of time, what is true? / what is false?)

à photo album as a way to remember good moments (memory)

à documentary about women as a way to go beyond stereotypes and pre-fixed concepts

à cd as a feedback for the project’s participants

à soundscape record as a way to perceive reality by sense of hearing

 

-         communication

à movie production as a way to go beyond linguistic barriers

à online forum as a tool to facilitate the communication among participants

à skype as a means of communication (cheap, easy, essential, accessible)

à gmail as saving time tool (e.g. more people can work together at the same time on the same document)

à documentary as a chance to open up a dialogue

à documentary as a tool to give a direct voice to participants’ opinion /experience

à supporting self-expression

à documentary as a possibility to communicate with an outside audience

 

STRENGHTS

-         image of professionalism à easier access to the participants

 

 

LIMITATIONS

-         need of expertise

-         time consuming (website)

-         involvement of a lot of work (dvd documentation, post-production cd)

-         expensive equipment

-         uncomfortability in front of the technologies

-         use of expensive material in contrast with the aims of the project (e.g. 2000 euros for a camera vs. food?!)

-         difficult access to the participants

-         high expectations for the product (compared to other projects of a high quality)

 

web 2.0

web 2.0

 - what is it?

 

//Consumers as Producers ("Prosumers")

//Community

Everybody adds Something

Wikipedia

StudiVZ, Facebook, YouTube, Myspace,

Blogs, Flickr/Photobucket, Red Bubble

Delicous.com

//Participation

Online RPG (Role Play Games), 2nd Life etc.

Evolution of the Internet

High Accessibility

Ubiquitous computing

Communication & Dialogue

Socialising

Links/References

TAGs

//Re-Use & Sharing

GOOGLE (documents, calendar, mail,...)

doodle.ch

twitter

//real/false, multiple identities

//privacy??

// personalising experiences

 

 

"2.0" refers to a Version Number. comes from the jargon of software programming, Version 2 - e.g. as the more participative one

problems:

> "memory" of the web or of the big providers (facebook, StudiVZ).

once something is online = public you can't entirely take it back/erase the record.

> "copying" from the social platforms...

providers didn't design this option. Videos are meant for online use, not to download

> "low quality" of media...(technical parameters)

up to now it depends on the technical standards of servers/providers. this is always rising.

> "low quality" of content!?

discussable. Wikipedia vs. Encarta/Brockhaus...

> "privacy" questions, total transparency, multiple identities, what they see/what you want them to see

> "data-mining", artifical biographies

 

Summing Up:

community: no boundaries, linking people quickly/easily,

 Re-Use & Sharing: share data/media with people, to exchange, re-mix & recycle data,

example: amazon books ("you recently bought/have looked at that...")

 personalising experiences, somehow the "Web2.0 ideal": all is prepared for you, information pre-selected etc., simplifying the search

real/false, multiple identities:

privacy??...

Participation: most important point, instead of only consuming, taking more active roles in (communicaton) processes

feel sense of ownership, feel as a part of

slashdot.com, plain hierarchies, equal level

in the end: a lot of useful tools

 

Gathering experiences of MEDIA-Use in/with social/youth groups

 

       recurring topics:

documenting - to save for/look at later, archive, long-lasting, personalized experiences

>> problems: total accessibility and long-lasting quality makes it infact less used (its always there, i can watch/listen tommorrow), somehow the importance of the product depends on the group and the goals of the media-use/recording, also the content and/or the quality of the recording, as soon as others non-involved people find it interesting it raises the value...

//discussion point: is the PROCESS or the PRODUCT more important??

proudness of being in the media product, having a voice & seeing it/oneself

influence on group dynamics, activating by raising enthusiasm, motivation in the process post-production, discovering the possibilites of media-use, participants are often highly committed

time consuming processes, "a lot of work"

grabbing attention via the (amateur or professional) looks/website or through a way of perception(e.g. only listening to sound of a place)

language, media/-products as a way of reflection, look at things/life in a different way, point of view

raises questions on how to work, how to record, recording needs a certain kind of discipline

media-technologies is harder to access if not familiar to users

a useful tool: "professional" looks/product give access to money, help communicate a certain statement to the public

direct access to communication/skype: practical, cheep, time-saving, distance does not matter

different types of perception/"access" to world. using media to capture the environment, activate all senses, explore space and environment, build new tools/instruments/synthesizers on base of recordings,

tangible products that you can share with others/family

the producing needs certain amount of people and/or "experts"

principle of total equality of participants is different in either making a long-lasting product (CD, DVD) or instead just rehearsing a performance ??

difference in behaviour in front of camera (un-authentic), "uncomfortability through technology"

"translation potential" between different cultures/communities, empowerement of protagonists (a successful product being such which empowers the authors/protagonists of it)

new media (chat, internet contacts) needs different attitudes, ways of behaving (identities), needs discussion on responsability and autonomy

 

Summary:

Reflection/feedback- individually, in groups, looking back, critically, deconstructing the language of media/pictures, questioning whats "around us" in terms, higher consciousness about oneself/environment

 

Document(ation)/record of was done - to take along, for memory/archive, for evaluation, giving to funders, very useful/practical document

 

Opening new Perspectives, Access to life/View on the world, Bridging communication difficulties of languages, Opening up a dialogue (e.g. in conflict resolution)

 

Relationship-building: giving "professional" image, Opening ways to People, grabbing attention

 

Self-Esteem building: Proudness of Product, Autonomy, Responsability, Ownership, 'Aneignung', Strengthening/Empowering Community, proposing identities, giving acces: participation, getting engaged/involved, expressing opinions, more social cohesion

 

Useful Tools: time-saving, structuring processes, easing communication/'translation work' (beyond languages), multiplying possibilities: small amount of instruction can be enough to give Autonomy to students/new media producers, fast&easy publishing, access to a huge public online

 

Time-taking/Technology needs Expertise - how technics change the way of things/performance/behaviour ('unsocializing effects'), specialized skills are needed, can overshadow generation/quality of content, slows down processes, distracting, needs discipline

 

Cost of Production, Media is the most expensive of all the arts! Difficult to justify the Expenses for Media-Use in comparison to anything else in a project

 

Comparison to "professional" Products/Standards produces Hesitation/Paranoia to act/start working with Media, needs work to get people out of this position

 

Watch out for good balance between value of means and wealth of participants (=may be much poorer), choosing the means of production (which devices, technologies) depending on the group you work with

have a look on...

...our first video...

Look!

Our Photos
are online

media workshop 2

media workshop

...soon there will be our nice first videos...

First Post

Hello!

This is the documentation blog from the workshop for Europe.

http://www.workshop-of-europe.eu