GetAmbITion

Get AmbITion! Communicate, collaborate, create and celebrate getting digital in the arts.

  1. Traverse Theatre simultaneously broadcasts live rehearsed readings

    In a great Edinburgh Fringe Festival experiment on 23.08.10, a compendium of new plays, realised as rehearsed readings, were simultaneously transmitted to UK Picturehouse film theatres, including Edinburgh’s Cameo. Despite over-demand for tickets to the live show at the Traverse, Traverse Live! remained a one-off live performance for a small audience, but the show increased its scale, reach impact and accessibility through simultaneous broadcast.

    Cameras setting up

    As part of the small audience in the theatre, there was palapable excitement as we were directed to our seats, being warned by the camera operators from Hibrow Productions dressed in black not to trip over their kit and the wires! On stage, 1 camera was on a tripod with wheels, 2 were on static tripods, 1 camera was hand-held but could be rested on a tripod which was positioned in a row of audience seating. Another roving camera was in the wings and moved up to the projection box to provide aerial and wide context shots.

    As the theatre is a small black box, we were obviously going to be very aware of the camera operators’ presence, but they were all linked in to a floor manager/director communicating with them and the broadcasters by headphones. In fact, once the action began, they didn’t distract from the action, although I was intrigued by seeing the close-up shots of the actors in the view-finder of the camera operator nearest me.

    Dominic Hill introduces the evening

    Dominic Hill, the Artistic Director of The Traverse welcomed us and explained that there would be breaks in the running order as at our end the stage and cameras were reset for the next play, and as the cinema audiences were shown previously recorded interviews and rehearsal videos (this considered more interesting than making them watch the changeover!). He also explaned that the camera crew would be moving around us, so we knew to expect that they might come and sit next to us, or shove an elbow in our faces as they searched for a better shot! Dominic also then did another introduction direct to camera for the cinema audience, so that they also knew exactly what to expect. He set the context, and gave us an idea of what the experience was going to be like so that we all felt comfortable.

    There was usually about five minutes between the plays. In the theatre, we chatted whilst the VT played (video tape – a now somewhat out of date reference to pre-recorded material) and the floor manager shouted countdowns, to warn actors, stage crew, camera crew, and us audience of when we’d be going live again. It felt like Brechtian theatre – we were being shown all the mechanics, but also I felt like an engaged participant, a part of the show: as audience members in the same space, we were on camera as shots panned round to capture our reactions. We had a unique experience, but then so did audience members in the 30 cinemas around the country: the experience was distributed and increased audience numbers for the work at least 20-fold [Traverse to confirm exact numbers].

    Actors were mic-ed up for the broadcast, but there was no amplified feedback in the auditorium (not needed). Apparently one mic failed in one of the plays, but the live audience didn’t notice this. The beginning of the broadcast had to be restarted due to some technical failure, but again, this was clearly communicated by the floor manager, we were “re-set”, and off we went again. Friends of mine who were at Edinburgh’s Cameo Cinema watching said this did not matter. Obviously the audience at Edinburgh’s Cameo Cinema was fairly small due to the majority of us being at the live show, but there were Traverse Theatre marketing staff present, receiving phone calls reporting that “Brixton was full!” and “I can’t believe I’m watching a Traverse fringe show in Malvern”! This is the important significance of distributed, live theatre. Audiences who would never have otherwise seen the work saw it at locations convenient to them; and at an acceptable price point. The work did not have massively high production values – it was a rehearsed reading, so more about giving new work air and audience time.

    For cinema audience members that I talked to directly, the format of rehearsed readings worked and translated well on the big screen – they’re minimally staged and blocked and so work with the close-up demands of a camera. This cinema audience member commented on Andrew Dixon’s Guardian review of the show:

    “I saw the show from a local cinema last night and really enjoyed it. Yes, there were technical glitches, some a bit irritating – the first piece was marred by one character’s voice being mic’d so low – but mostly I thought it added to the raw energy of the evening. Some really good performances from the cast. A very different experience from the live performances screened from the National Theatre which were very polished. But then this is the Traverse, not the NT. They’re not the same thing at all. I hope this is the start of many more such performances. On a purely mercenary note, I’m very happy to exchange the 90+ minute drive to the NT and a high ticket price for a 20 minute drive to the cinema and a seat that costs under £10. It won’t replace theatre but it’s not TV either. Well done, Traverse.”

    And so to the techie bit – how did the Traverse and Hibrow Productions do it?
    Simultaneous broadcast is not the same as simulcast. (Simulcast uses military-strength satellite broadband to transmit shows to cinemas internationally.) Simultaneous broadcast is the transmission of a live broadcast using the live broadcast spectrum and network, via satellite. It does not transmit internationally (different segment of the broadcast spectrum are used for different purposes in other countries, so may not be on the same frequency) and special kit is required: receiving cinemas needed receiver dishes and decoders. (Sky Sports for example distribute live UK football matches to anywhere in the UK with a Sky receiver dish and decoder.)

    In the theatre, a live vision mixing editor worked with a computer loaded with editing software, all the prerecorded material, a sound feed, and feeds from the five cameras. The editor generated a live mix (this had been rehearsed), which was then sent from the computer as a single stream to be broadcast.

    Inside the OB van

    An outside broadcast van sat on the street outside the Traverse’s main doors, receiving the high definition live mix from the theatre, and sending it out to the live broadcast spectrum and network of receivers and transmitters via satellite. Fibre optic cable and a back-up copper cable carried the signal, and ran directly from the theatre to the OB van (we traced it running down the stairs and through the foyer!).

    OB van outside the Traverse

    Sir Richard Eyre says in the Hibrow Productions cinema trailer – “its not film, its not cinema – its something new and unique”. I completely agree, and for theatre audiences to be increased in number, diversity and demographic, this distributed live experience is an essential part of the mix.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    *

    You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

    filter
    box
  2. Festivals Edinburgh Innovation Lab launches!

    Festivals Edinburgh Innovation Lab launched yesterday! The Edinburgh Festivals Innovation Lab (@festivalslab) will run alongside Creative Scotland’s Amb:IT:ion Scotland programme, run by us – Rudman Consulting & Culture Sparks, which currently supports Scottish arts organisations to build their digital capacity and enhance their effectiveness using new technologies. In line with the aims of Amb:IT:ion Scotland, the Innovation Lab will provide organisational capacity, resources and access to expertise, to take advantage of opportunities in digital innovation, technology and culture in order to provide public benefit. Read all about the Lab launch.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    *

    You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

    filter
    box
  3. It pays to count: freemium and tracking impact

    So it seems that social media is coming of age: the ning platform (AmbITion Scotland’s network is run on it) has announced that they are changing from their freemium business model, and ning will now have to be paid for. Read The Guardian‘s report. Facebook have said that they’re thinking of moving to the freemium business model, and beginning to charge some users. What is the freemium model, and why and when is it considered suitable?

    The term freemium is coined using two powerful words ‘Free’ and ‘Premium’. The freemium model is easy to understand. Freemium is giving away a quality product for free in order to sell complimentary products to a small percentage. Some basic, entry level of a digital service is available free, and this encourages people to join-up fast and en masse, and guarantees that the platform doesn’t become obscure (anyone heard of Facebook? Just 400m users at the last count…). However, about 10% of the user base will become superusers of the platform, strongly manipulating its services and utilities, highly valuing its content and usability highly. The users are the premium users, and will buy a premium service if its offered, once the value of the free service has become established in their minds and lifestyles. So the freemium business model is this mix of free and premium services for different audiences. It takes time before you can implement freemium, because the offer needs to be valuable in people’s minds, but freemium essentially generates revenue because of the freely distributed content. How? Because large numbers of eyeballs on free content is usually ad supported.

    Freemium hasn’t worked for ning. Why? The advertising revenue stream they’re showing the eyeballs (that’s network memners – like you and I) is targetted Google ads. Ning is essentially the middleware for Google to advertise on behalf of their clients to targetted networks. Ning makes the middleperson’s share of the revenue. Facebook on the other hand is the ad server – owning the advertising channel and charging the clients, and owning the customers too. Freemium will work very well for them, I suspect, and can work well for cultural organisations too – if enough consideration is given to what actually is premium, and if enough sensitivity and targetting is applied to the ad revenue strategy around the free content.

    What I suspect will happen with ning is that organisations who have networks that they value (and we value our AmbITion network) will pay to continue using the platform, and other networks that don’t see many members or updates will shut down and move to another platform that remains free. Its a good reminder that no free online service is guaranteed to remain free, or even to survive. Its possible that in the long term, at least 90% might disappear. So back-up member data and content in other places. This applies to data that you place in free cloud computing services – it needs to be backed up elsewhere.

    So with less free services around, we may see some networks needing to consolidate, challenging organisations with the need to think about whose network might enhance/benefit their, creating a stronger sum of their individual parts. In fact digital consolidation across the cultural and heritage sector is something that I think we’ll see more widely as funds for digital become scarcer.

    Apparently, the Heritage Lottery Fund are currently out to consultation to find out whether they should continue investing funds into digitisation and digital availability of resources – the kind that can be found on any heritage organisation’s website. I think yes of course they should: it increases the reach, scale, access and impact of their work. It helps them sustain their work. But presumably, HLF are finding the investment hard to justify. This might be because they don’t measure the impact of digital, and therefore can’t see a clear return on their investment. Or it might be that they don’t require benificiaries of their funds for digital to measure useful impacts and report them back.

    Historically, our venues have been requested by funders to post annual footfall numbers, and the digital version of this has been website hits, or unique visitor numbers. However, we all know that setting foot inside a cultural venue does not necessarily mean we’ll be having a cultural activity. We might just be wanting a cuppa – or the loo, for that matter! Likewise, levels of hits or unique visitors doesn’t give us a useful insight into whether or not our customers are participating and engaging at a deeper level with culture. If you want to know what to track to guage how your customers are engaging with you through digital channels, watch this AmbITion Scotland Masterclass on Tracking Impact.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    *

    You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

    filter
    box
  4. Webinar 3: Tracking Impact

    AmbITion Scotland Getting Digital Webinar 3: Tracking Impact was a great success, attracting our best numbers of attendees and online viewers.

    David Sim from Open Brolly talked to us about tracking and measuring the impact that our digital presence is achieving. Watch the live video of the Webinar below or view his presentation slides on the network!


    The
    Getting Digital Roadshow East in Dundee on 6th May coming up and Getting Digital Roadshow Central in Stirling on 27th May has just opened registration. See the events page for the full live and online events programme and get yourself signed up!

    Previous presentations are available here in the Videos section in the left-hand column; slides are also available on the network here under Rich Media > Slides.

    Are you a writer? Do you know about Intellectual Property? Here is a really useful guide just published by one of our content partners, Own-it: I’m a writer – what do I need to know about IP?

    Finally, just a reminder of this great resource, if you’re still looking for more Digital Development learning materials, Creative Choices’ “Digital Culture“.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    *

    You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

    filter
    box
  5. Nielsen’s latest survey: most online content should be free, but some should be valued (case in point: NT Live!)

    With the San Francisco Chronicle’s online offering today reporting on Nielsen’s new survey that 85% of internet users want online content to be free, cultural organisations could begin to panic about what the business model is for digitising their product…

    However, as ever, I’m not panicing, and am quietly confident :-)

    Nic Covey, Nielsen’s director of cross platform insights, wrote in a blog post about the report, “Changing Models: A Global Perspective on Paying for Content Online.while there were no clear-cut categories of content that will successfully sell online, there was a “definite maybe,”

    “When asked to focus on specific types of content, survey participants are more willing to at least consider paying for particular categories, especially if they have done so before,” Covey wrote. In four categories – theatrical movies, music, games and professionally produced videos – 50 percent or more said they would consider paying or have already paid for online content. At the other end, less than 30 percent said they would consider paying for social networks, podcasts, news-talk radio, consumer-generated video and blogs.

    The idea that quality content – whether that quality resides in the value of the content or the aesthetic – concurs with the new report from NESTA on the Royal National Theatre‘s NT Live! productions. “Beyond Live: digital innovation in the performing arts” proves that not only did NT Live! productions sell out; they also sold to a different demographic (and so created new audiences for the work); and audiences valued the shared experience of seeing something live and with other people – going against the perception that on-demand entertainment is preferred for digital delivery.

    This is excellent news for the RNT, and great news for the rest of the cultural sector. The new work appears to be sustainable in that a new, wider audience is being reached without impacting the environment by requiring them to travel to a London-based venue. Although NT Live! is a hybrid between a live performance and online experience, the lessons are universally applicable to culture. What we can aim to create digitally is special, unique, contextualised experiences, that new and existing audiences will pay for. They will pay for what is scarce online: meaningful experiences (content and context) and relationships based on something real and trusted (curation and community).

    The artistic/cultural product has become more than just the product. Its become a service! Discuss :-) .

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    *

    You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

    filter
    box
Creative Scotland Lottery Fund Culture Sparks Rudman Consulting Arts Council England