The theme of my project is “random” and the way I’ve used text to connect the different sketch videos are heavily influenced by my fascination towards round objects and occasionally food. I’ve always went out of my way to try to incorporate circles or round objects into my weekly videos. Hence, there’s no surprised when I say the words “round” and “food” are the most used tags for my video sketches. As for the text captioned below each video, I basically just written down random but obvious titles. The thing is, my videos have similar elements that link them with one another, but at the same time, if I were to group them strictly, they can be poles apart in terms of their category. Take for instance, I have a video featuring an orange and a ball. While the orange and the ball are alike in terms of their configuration, when it comes to allocating them into objective categories, the orange would most likely go under the “food” category, whereas the ball under the “outside” category. However these videos, when put liberally, get too interconnected and lose their structure. In other words, they are widely ranged. So, the main idea is to tag the videos approximately without going over the limit of the predetermined categories – these categories are in sync with the criteria of all five constrained tasks.
With regard to the structure of my project, I envisioned it to be random yet structured, messy but organized; it’s paradoxical. To illustrate my point, say I have a total of five videos. The first video features an orange, the second video about a ball, the third a box, the fourth some shoes and the fifth a cup. If we were to look at them point-blank, they have absolutely nothing in common – this is the messy part. But if we take analyze them further, we might be able to find a correlation – this is the part that’s organized. Essentially, the plan, as mentioned above, is to label everything generally but do it so that it has, or does not lose its, direction. This is what forms the basis of my project structure.
On the subject of the successfulness of my work, generally I think I’ve done well, but because it didn’t work out exactly the way I hoped it would so I think I could have done better. I came across a few minor problems upon studying my published work. For starters, the video quality declined dramatically in terms of its resolution. Secondly, the thumbnails featured in the small preview screens often loads sluggishly. Most of the time they only pop up after the video on the main preview screen has been played. Thirdly, there seems to be a problem with the thumbnail sizes in the small preview screens. A handful of them appear smaller compared to the others. As mentioned above, these are all just minor issues that have been nitpicked on. Altogether, I think it kept to the main idea or structure of the project rather well and at the end of the day that’s the what matters the most.
I think I’ve learnt quite a few things over the past six weeks. To name a few, I’ve learnt to generate and publish media pieces online, I’ve learnt to critique more constructively, and I’ve learnt to think out of the box and be more abstract when it comes to composition. But the most important thing I think I’ve taken from this task is that you don’t need a narrative to produce quality media. Media, in itself, is the story.
Here’s the link to my k-film.