Direction in demos
category: general [glöplog]
Hi all,
The latest demo from Still (TheSeeker from the intel compo) generated quite a lot of comments about how good its direction is. We may have been through this again before but,
What exactly is "direction" in a demo ? Is it the pacing of scenes, the colors, the concept, the cameras ? How can you say that X demo has better direction and Y demo, is there something specific you look for ?
As for the Still demo, I just don't get it although I'm a fan of all previous work from Still (their demo from last years intel competition was top notch). But that is, again, my personal take..
The latest demo from Still (TheSeeker from the intel compo) generated quite a lot of comments about how good its direction is. We may have been through this again before but,
What exactly is "direction" in a demo ? Is it the pacing of scenes, the colors, the concept, the cameras ? How can you say that X demo has better direction and Y demo, is there something specific you look for ?
As for the Still demo, I just don't get it although I'm a fan of all previous work from Still (their demo from last years intel competition was top notch). But that is, again, my personal take..
most asd demos are decently directed, so you'll have to know... :)
direction, design.. whatever you want to call it. In my opinion its, well, pretty much everything you mentioned combined into a coherent whole with a sense of purpose and direction.
Taking a few examples from your (ASD's) work i would say that, for example, "lifeforce" is badly directed, but "beyond the walls of eryx" and "metamorphosis" are very fine examples of good direction. This, naturally, is only my own opinion (someone will probably say the exact opposite).
Taking a few examples from your (ASD's) work i would say that, for example, "lifeforce" is badly directed, but "beyond the walls of eryx" and "metamorphosis" are very fine examples of good direction. This, naturally, is only my own opinion (someone will probably say the exact opposite).
mood setting, attention so transitions and details, smart camera placement, lack of unpurposedly mood disruptions, capacity to buildup or unravel in the a clever way, non filler syncs and ideas
Someone that merges code gfx and music, maybe.
and to mention the suspense curve.
A rythm.
Seeing as I commented on how good the direction was on the still demo... For me, I guess it's a mixture of planning and the way it's put together at the end.
Unplanned stuff ends up as a random collection of scenes and effects, which is still good in its own way. The still demo felt very well planned - there's a clear story, a sense of progression, and the effects are introduced in a way that's "natural" - i.e. they form a part of the story, rather than just being there because. I think getting the music to closely fit the visuals is super important too, and still managed that nicely.
The 'putting together' part is a mix of good 'movie style' direction (good camera work, keeping the scene interesting, and making sure that the flow is right and it doesn't get boring or too fast paced) and general polish. For the still demo I'd say the camera work is good, the flow is excellent, but it could do with a little more polish perhaps.
For comparison - the average ASD demo has pretty good planning, with an overall theme and progression, but broken up sometimes by scenes that don't quite fit or go off on a slight tangent and sometimes effects seem to be there for no real reason, and the colour scheme varies a lot. The camera work is good (actually sometimes excellent, but with the occasional miss), the flow is excellent, and the level of polish is super high.
My own opinions of course :)
Unplanned stuff ends up as a random collection of scenes and effects, which is still good in its own way. The still demo felt very well planned - there's a clear story, a sense of progression, and the effects are introduced in a way that's "natural" - i.e. they form a part of the story, rather than just being there because. I think getting the music to closely fit the visuals is super important too, and still managed that nicely.
The 'putting together' part is a mix of good 'movie style' direction (good camera work, keeping the scene interesting, and making sure that the flow is right and it doesn't get boring or too fast paced) and general polish. For the still demo I'd say the camera work is good, the flow is excellent, but it could do with a little more polish perhaps.
For comparison - the average ASD demo has pretty good planning, with an overall theme and progression, but broken up sometimes by scenes that don't quite fit or go off on a slight tangent and sometimes effects seem to be there for no real reason, and the colour scheme varies a lot. The camera work is good (actually sometimes excellent, but with the occasional miss), the flow is excellent, and the level of polish is super high.
My own opinions of course :)
Oh, also notice that the still demo is done in a single camera shot - no breaks or transitions. I think that really helps with the flow.
I'd say it's when the demo passes the Turing test - when there's evidence of some insight or purpose or meaning or emotion. A very boring program (or person) could put object-rotation scenes and tunnels together, it takes more than that to make something -human-.
The whole thing?
By looking at an online dictionary I underlined the following defenition on direction, with special emphasis on the example:
And that actually makes sense, in a way... "THIS NEEDS MORE BASS.", "MORE HYPNOGLOW!", "CODER COLORS!", "REPEAT THAT LOOP FOR 5 MINUTES!"
That's probably the closest to a defenition that you'll find: the guy that mixes everything together, or everything is mixed together (code+gfx+music), or even achieving a close to perfect synesthesia of visuals and sound (and invisible code).
Quote:
instruction or guidance for making, using, etc.: directions for baking a cake.
And that actually makes sense, in a way... "THIS NEEDS MORE BASS.", "MORE HYPNOGLOW!", "CODER COLORS!", "REPEAT THAT LOOP FOR 5 MINUTES!"
That's probably the closest to a defenition that you'll find: the guy that mixes everything together, or everything is mixed together (code+gfx+music), or even achieving a close to perfect synesthesia of visuals and sound (and invisible code).
direction=the finishing touch on a demo ;)
Just a little off-topic, but might makes some sense anyway:
The definition of a film director from wikipedia:
"A film director is responsible for overseeing every creative aspect of a film. They develop a vision for a film, decide how it should look, what tone it should have, and what an audience should gain from the cinematic experience. He/she is in short the storyteller. Film directors are responsible for approving every camera angle, lens effect, lighting, and set design occasionally even taking part in the hiring of key crew members. They coordinate the actors moves, determine camera angles, and may be involved in the writing, financing, and editing of a film. The director works closely with the cast and crew to shape the film and may often take suggestions on pertinent issues. Some like to conduct rigorous rehearsals in preproduction while others do so before each scene. In either case this process is essential as it tells the director as well as other key members of the crew (Director of Photography, Stunt Choreographer, Hair Stylist etc) how the actors are going to play the scene, which enables them to make any necessary adjustments. The Director also plays a key role in post-production. The Director oversees the editing of the scenes with the editor to ensure that the emotions of the scene and the close ups, mid shots and wide shots appropriately reflect who (the character) is driving the scene. The Director also inputs into the (color) grading of the final images adding warmth or frigidity to the composition of the scenes to reflect the emotional subtext of the character or environment. The Director also participates in the sound mix and musical composition of the film."
The definition of a film director from wikipedia:
"A film director is responsible for overseeing every creative aspect of a film. They develop a vision for a film, decide how it should look, what tone it should have, and what an audience should gain from the cinematic experience. He/she is in short the storyteller. Film directors are responsible for approving every camera angle, lens effect, lighting, and set design occasionally even taking part in the hiring of key crew members. They coordinate the actors moves, determine camera angles, and may be involved in the writing, financing, and editing of a film. The director works closely with the cast and crew to shape the film and may often take suggestions on pertinent issues. Some like to conduct rigorous rehearsals in preproduction while others do so before each scene. In either case this process is essential as it tells the director as well as other key members of the crew (Director of Photography, Stunt Choreographer, Hair Stylist etc) how the actors are going to play the scene, which enables them to make any necessary adjustments. The Director also plays a key role in post-production. The Director oversees the editing of the scenes with the editor to ensure that the emotions of the scene and the close ups, mid shots and wide shots appropriately reflect who (the character) is driving the scene. The Director also inputs into the (color) grading of the final images adding warmth or frigidity to the composition of the scenes to reflect the emotional subtext of the character or environment. The Director also participates in the sound mix and musical composition of the film."
ive ran into the same issue many times. :)
i believe a lot of (scene) people consider direction to be "camera movements" (and a bit of sync). oh, and on that subject, "consistency" (another key quality apparently) is "the entire demo is basically one long part". :)
i personally consider direction to be about the ideas themselves and your communication of them.
its easy to be consistent when your entire demo consists of some glowing flat shaded boxes or ribbons. its easy to handle the camera well when all you have to do is point the camera down a tunnel and move it. and its easy to sync by kicking the effect or the camera on each glitch in the music. if you do this well its perhaps not "good direction", it's "efficient direction" (or rather, "not fucking up the direction"). if the ideas are not good in the first place, then you dont have anything to communicate thats worth communicating, and the direction won't ever be good.
when i think of a demo that has good direction i think more of something like ix by moppi. full of fnteresting ideas, well communicated. and those ideas are a lot harder to communicate well too imo.
in summary, for me direction is like all those qualities - camera movement, framing, sync, pacing and so on - divided by how interesting the ideas and content is in the first place. :)
i believe a lot of (scene) people consider direction to be "camera movements" (and a bit of sync). oh, and on that subject, "consistency" (another key quality apparently) is "the entire demo is basically one long part". :)
i personally consider direction to be about the ideas themselves and your communication of them.
its easy to be consistent when your entire demo consists of some glowing flat shaded boxes or ribbons. its easy to handle the camera well when all you have to do is point the camera down a tunnel and move it. and its easy to sync by kicking the effect or the camera on each glitch in the music. if you do this well its perhaps not "good direction", it's "efficient direction" (or rather, "not fucking up the direction"). if the ideas are not good in the first place, then you dont have anything to communicate thats worth communicating, and the direction won't ever be good.
when i think of a demo that has good direction i think more of something like ix by moppi. full of fnteresting ideas, well communicated. and those ideas are a lot harder to communicate well too imo.
in summary, for me direction is like all those qualities - camera movement, framing, sync, pacing and so on - divided by how interesting the ideas and content is in the first place. :)
Direction is often neglected in demos from what I can see and it really does make all the difference. To be honest, I don't think I've ever seen direction that comes close to the quality of ASD demos - the way each scene blends seamlessly into the next to create one whole.
However, taking almost the opposite direction are the classic Polka Bros demos which place emphasis on each different scene, with the music leading the transitions and direction. And yet I'd still consider those demos well directed too.
I'd say "direction" is exactly what the word implies. It's the method you use to direct people from scene to scene throughout your demo and good direction is that which maintains the viewers' attention from beginning to the end with no interruptions, breaks or diversions.
Aspects such as consistent design and colour, transitions, appropriate and well timed music, sometimes even plot, all contribute to that smooth ride from A to B.
However, taking almost the opposite direction are the classic Polka Bros demos which place emphasis on each different scene, with the music leading the transitions and direction. And yet I'd still consider those demos well directed too.
I'd say "direction" is exactly what the word implies. It's the method you use to direct people from scene to scene throughout your demo and good direction is that which maintains the viewers' attention from beginning to the end with no interruptions, breaks or diversions.
Aspects such as consistent design and colour, transitions, appropriate and well timed music, sometimes even plot, all contribute to that smooth ride from A to B.
Quote:
Taking a few examples from your (ASD's) work i would say that, for example, "lifeforce" is badly directed,
I think the exact opposite! :) I'd actually say Lifeforce has the best direction I've seen in a demo!
metamorphosis has, I agree with uncle-x, the better hand for me :)
i don't think this whole direction thing can be very concrete. i don't like this idea of "forced detail" and "required considerations for professional-looking direction".
i just don't know, lets keep it at that :)
i don't think this whole direction thing can be very concrete. i don't like this idea of "forced detail" and "required considerations for professional-looking direction".
i just don't know, lets keep it at that :)
It's what makes or breaks the demo. It's the invisible way of showing things and known what to show and when.
makes it sound so hard.
EVERYTHING
navis: i'd say it's the implementation of visual techniques (camera movement, framing, etc) to produce a deliberate personal style. Unconsciously, I think many groups today and in the past use many of these techniques already. But I see many opportunities missed in demos simply because people are not aware of the toolkit available to them.
anyone interested in the "tools" available should read the bible on the topic called "Film Directing, Shot by Shot" by Steve d. katz
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Film-Directing-Shot-Visualizing-Productions/dp/0941188108/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1215101261&sr=8-1
anyone interested in the "tools" available should read the bible on the topic called "Film Directing, Shot by Shot" by Steve d. katz
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Film-Directing-Shot-Visualizing-Productions/dp/0941188108/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1215101261&sr=8-1
I was thinking about all that and:
Who wants to bet that the next demo featuring debris-like "shakey handheld camera" will be praised for its "direction" regardless of contect/story/flow/narrative ? :-)
Who wants to bet that the next demo featuring debris-like "shakey handheld camera" will be praised for its "direction" regardless of contect/story/flow/narrative ? :-)
If you will make it, I am pretty sure it will :)
![[self-ban]](https://content.pouet.net/avatars/intro.gif)
http://www.zeldman.com/daily/0403b.shtml#ma0103
Quote:
... to create an arresting visual statement. That is art direction.