Posts Tagged: digital cinema

Week 5: Amateurization

Quentin Tarantino’s Star Wars
– Henry Jenkins

For the longest time fans of media (whether it be music, video, print, digital, or whatever) were solely on the receiving end of whatever the producers gave their audiences.  Now the fans have the opportunity to take the content they love and manipulate it.  But should we consider this a welcome opportunity?  Copyright is always one of those scary topics that people think they understand.  Where do we draw the line on borrowed content?  Thanks to the digital age, there is a growing tension between receivers and producers.  But which side should be upset?  Should we have access to what others have created and fashion those ideas into something new?  Or should the producers have the sole right to limit how their content is used and intervene in the sharing process?

In “Quentin Tarantino’s Star Wars”, Henry Jenkins explains that the interactive model of mass media is more symbiotic than the old model to which we have become accustomed.  He argues that culture is the result of fans interacting with the content they love.  We are no longer parasites that simply feed off whatever is handed to us. We respond and remix.  We reshape and create new ideas.  But somehow copyright always gets in the way.  Yet, it seems that the knowledge and severity of a judge in a copyright case would have a significant impact.  The laws still seem fuzzy to me, and I’m sure others feel the same.  Why else do we have groups trying to find loop holes in the system.  Something isn’t clear.  Jenkins stresses the need for regulations to be normalized.

Jenkin’s whole purpose for his article was to suggest that this is the way things should be.  He doesn’t see content as making society dumber, it’s how we handle the content.  What we do with it in the end has more meaning than the content itself.  So why take away that opportunity to respond?  According to Jenkis the world is more diverse through participatory means.  And I agree.  The reason we have expanded out ideas at light speed is because of sharing.  We share and build and grow.  Not only have the tools to share media become easier and cheaper, the tools to produce what we see at the movies or on TV is also dropping in cost.

This leads me to one of my framing questions for the week: At the end of the article, Jenkins asks what we can expect for the future of digital cinema.  Do amateur filmmakers have a chance at becoming the majority and will big movie producers go by the wayside? Although it seems hard to believe amateur individuals can step up to the big guys in any field, I wouldn’t want to say this couldn’t happen in the future of media.  Media has become collaborative and it has pulled talented people into the mix that may not have normally had the financial means to join in.  Personal computers are becoming people’s at-home-studios.  Most things that used to require a crew and special equipment can all be accounted for simply through a digital program.  One person can orchestrate the production of a film using tools sold at the consumer level.  I think we are well on our way to seeing more amateur films.  Because the internet has made it easy to share ideas and content and costs have come down in regards to production equipment, the next big producer could be Joe Shmoe working out of his one room apartment on his laptop.

Week 5: Amateurization

You Are Not A Gadget
– Jaron Lanier

1. Lanier introduces his book by referring to “open culture.”  He explains that web 2.0 promotes freedoms people have never experienced through technology until the twenty-first century.  But who is this freedom benefiting most?  Humans or machines?

2.  According to “You are not a Gadget,” the most important thing about a technology is how it changes people and society.  It seems that every 5 years we are learning to use new technologies that we never knew we needed or would make such a large difference in our lives.  But is all this new technology being developed too quickly and negatively changing people?  Is the pace causing these new gadgets to hurt us in the end?

3.  Of all our outlets, advertising has been able to hold strong during the digital transition.  What type of power will advertising hold in the digital future?

4.  We have become accustomed to free access for most Internet information.  Lanier asks if it’s too late to go back and write new rules.  Once society knows they are at an advantage they will not accept change that seems like a step back.  Did we goof up during the development of the web by allowing free access or is this exactly what the web is designed to do (otherwise we would be going against the logical model)?

Quentin Tarantino’s Star Wars
– Henry Jenkins

1. As I was skimming the article, I began to wonder if some of the media listed (books, cable, film, magazines, etc) would eventually be completely wiped out.  Do you think society will come to a point in the future when everything will be digital?  Radio, newspapers, television have all had to settle into new niches over time as new mediums became available.  Would it be easier to scrap all the old and promote one platform that includes everything?

2. At the end of the article, Jenkins asks what we can expect for the future of digital cinema.  Do amateur filmmakers have a chance at becoming the majority and will big movie producers go by the wayside?