Disappointed and betrayed in 72 hours

Disappointed and betrayed. That’s how I feel about the results of the 72-hour challenge.

It’s not because our group was misunderstood or didn’t win. Actually, we won a small prize for ‘best section’ – the scene where colourful balloons fall over the camera. But that’s not my point.

Misunderstanding, miscommunication and disinformation were the 3 words that could describe the whole 72-hour experience.

Althought I think most groups did a better job than ours, there were certain things we needed to do and some things we needed to avoid in this challenge. Our group, as well as one or two other groups, were trying to comply with them, so we had to make compromises with our ideas, which, I think, is part of working with a brief – you need to stick to it:

  • We were expected to not use copyrighted music without permission – so that’s why ours and most groups either used unsigned music, asked independent musicians for permission, or paid a small amount of money for the rights to use a certain track. So it was a big surprise for me when group C’s video won – they used a popular Evenescence track, and I doubt they’ve had the permission to do it. Although, that aside, their video is just great, they have done a wonderful job filming and directing it, people acted really well and if it wasn’t for the music, I would also vote for them undoubtfully. But, when it says in your brief that you shouldn’t do certain things, it usually means you shouldn’t. And it confuses people when exactly this project wins a prize. If we were allowed to use popular music, everyone would have made a great lipdub with music everyone knows and can sing along to.
  • We were forbidden to edit the footage – one cut, that’s all. Tutors emphasised on this a lot. I had the idea to stop recording when looking at the sky, change the scene and continue recording from the sky again, and I was told: ‘No, that’s cheating!’. So I abandoned the idea. And I was more than surprised when I found out group B got an award (which award wasn’t introduced in the assignment) EXACTLY for using this technique – as ‘being creative’. I know it is creative, and they’ve done a very good job with it, but there is a very serious contradiction here – how can you reward someone for a technique that you first stated you would punish??

Since the beginning of the academic year tutors have been constantly repeating that we’re here to become professionals. Professional means, amongst all, to have a clear brief that applies to everyone and everyone follows it. This ‘challenge’, although we could learn a lot from it, was very far from the definition of ‘professional’.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Disappointed and betrayed in 72 hours

  1. If we talk about the ‘winning’ lipdub – the prize was probably based on people’s votes – so we can’t really blame the tutors for the choice of winner. I spoke with Spencer, and his reaction to the 72-hour challenge was that he liked the ones that weren’t exactly ‘lipdubs’ – group A’s and group E’s videos. He said, they tried to challenge the brief in a creative way so that’s why he liked it. The problem is though, the tutors were pretty explicit when saying we need to follow the brief. So there is a contradiction – are we expected to be ‘professional’ and make something creative WHILE following the brief, or did we only have the brief for a starting point to then CHALLENGE in a creative way. Anyway, I think everyone learned a lot from the 72-hour challenge, and since we’re all still talking about it, it’s obvious it had a good overall effect on us – made us more analytical and critical, which can’t be a bad thing πŸ™‚

    Like

  2. Hey..I read your post, I agree with some of the points, but you know the thing you said with the copyright music…see, Pete, our seminar leader explained to us that is we have a YouTube account we can use the YouTube Audio Swap were we can find a lot of well-known tracks and the one we used (btw I am from group C) ‘Bring me to life’ was actually on the list. First I was confused when I heard about this, but then I also saw a post on key concepts related to this aspect where it said that any sort of problem we may have regarding music we should look for it in two different places and we could also e-mail Pete. The point is, it wasn’t that unfair as you may say and yes I do believe your lip dub was really good and should have won more than it actually did. Bye, hope you don’t get this as a bad intentioned reply, on the contrary.

    Like

  3. Hey Edina, thank you for joining the discussion πŸ™‚ I didn’t realise that was the case with ‘Bring me to life’ – now I get it.
    Thumbs up for your whole video, I think it was very very well made, certainly a big challenge!
    My main point in this post was not about the groups – the only real problem for me was that it wasn’t clear if the brief was to be strictly followed or just a starting point, and then the criteria for assessment. Anyway, I think the tutors realised there was a big confusion around the brief.

    It was interesting to read my post again. I was very frustrated back then, but when I think about it now, I realise I learned so much from the whole 72-hour project… About briefs, working in groups, what ‘professional’ means, and the best one – which is obvious from the comments here – how good it is to have a ‘competition’ where everybody is open to the others’ opinions, try to give positive and constructive feedback, acknoledge strengths and weaknesses in each video… It’s new for me, and it is truly a beautiful thing πŸ™‚

    Like

Any thoughts?

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s