SIBLINGS: INITIAL INSTALLATION PLANS AND TECHNOLOGY

I spent a lot of time considering the installation of the piece for my MA. I chose the location as it is where the studio shoots are to take place so the setting of the shoot footage and room will match. It is also the right size as I want the 3 screens as large as I can and After much consideration research and mini experimentation the following are all needed for testing the installation in the TV Studio at Suffolk New College.

• 3 Projectors ideally the same and with similar picture quality.
• 3 ways to play the video content. Possibly laptops OR buy some media players.
• 3 VGA leads to connect the laptops or media players to.
• 3 Speakers or sets of speakers. Ideally with own built in amplification. To run from above.
• Leads (phono OR mini jack) about 3-4 metres long to connect speakers to media playing devices.
• 3 plinths OR a table with a black blanket etc to cover to mount projectors on.
• 3 16:9 screens to project onto. Size a maximum of 1.6m by 0.9m to allow for set up.
• Cord, fishing line or string to hang projection screens from the lighting rig.

As far as the screens go the options are finding them in college, buying some floor standing ones old or new or making bespoke options using frames and canvas or paper.

VIDEO INSTALLATIONS: CONTEXTUAL

Since visiting London back in November I have been keeping notes on installation artists I like and have spent some time looking at and reflecting on their work for inspiration. I have always been a little reticent to look at too many as I do not want to be too affected by them and also as I still have a love/hate relationship with the medium. However as I progress forward I have realised I do need to look at more for inspiration, themes, technique and to unpick the screening, installation and technology of them.


Please visit my pinterest board for lots more inspirations HERE.



Contextually and historically as well as those previously mentioned I have also drawn upon the works of a variety of installation artists especially multi-screen work and large scale work. Influences here include the formal triptych and quadrich work of Bill Viola especially Martyrs (2014) and Nantes (1992) that in his own words create “total environments that envelop the viewer in image and sound.” (Bill Viola, 2015)

I have also been greatly inspired by Nam June Paik and his multi screen almost sculptural approach to his work. I also love his playful nature and the humour he injects into his work. From reading about and interviews with him he does not seem to take himself or his work too seriously and that shows.

 



Also viewing work in-situ as an audience member I loved the immersive qualities of the large format multiple screen interdependent installations Chantel Ackerman especially Now (2015) and it’s overwhelming combination of sound and screens.

Jane and Louise Wilson have also been an inspiration especially their impressive 13 screen, A Free and Anonymous moment (2003). This I did not see in the flesh but have seen video of it and people interacting with it. The scale and the emmersive qualities on it I find amazing. I also love the weay that the screens do play off of each other and create narratives rather than be stand alonse screens.

SIBLINGS: INTERVIEW TECHNIQUES RESEARCH

Interviewing is a real art. Choosing the right interviewees, the right questions, the right questions, interview structure and interview style are all hugely important. In order to get this right I went over the interviewing basics again to fully refresh myself and to apply these to my own interviews. What follows is a skinny on all of the important questions and planning to do before conducting interviews and then how I have applied this to my own work.


For all of my interviewees and participants the research process was quite in depth and comprised of a mix of primary interviews, fact sheets and comments, informal discussions to get a feel for their comments. Some of these were written down some recorded but all formed the basis of seeing what comments I could expect to get from whom. Although not an ordinary interview in that I only needed the participants comments written down so the boys could bee them and then be lip-synced by the contributors. This actual use of the contributors own voices as lip-sych still has no absolute resolution as I am considering using their thouhts and comments and getting them voiced by someone else.



WHY DO INTERVIEWS EXIST?
RESEARCH: Help audience understand
INFORMATIONAL: Present information
INTERPRETIVE: Express, explain, justify or be accountable for an opinion
EMOTIONAL: Allowing audience insight into a situation or often character.
For my Siblings piece it is a mixture of the above. Some of the participants and their questions


QUESTION TYPES?
OPEN: Can be expansive questions.
CLOSED: Yes of no questions
SINGLE: One question asked singularly.
MULTIPLE: A question with many questions or facets within it.
DIRECT: Very forthright
SUGGESTIVE: Possibly leading questions suggesting an answer.


Using the above areas as a starting point I feel it will be best to keep the statements and interview comments to a minimum. Single questions, generally open and with the boys possibly a little suggestive. I have tried some of these techniques out with them and whilst not being led they will have discussed the questions with me beforehand. I will have their answers at hand so if a little suggestion is needed to what they have though previously it can be provided.



INTERVIEWER APPRACHES THE IV?
HARD NEWS: Newsnight
ENTERTAINMENT: Jonathan Ross
COMBATIVE: Jeremy Paxman
INVESTIGATIVE: Panorama
PROMOTIONAL: Advertorials
LIGHT HEARTED: Alan Carr


For Siblings from the above selection the areas I will be using are investigative to provide insight into the thoughts of the participants with a little bit of entertainment from the boys as light relief.

TYPICAL IV STRUCTURE BELOW
INTRODUCTION: Set the IV up. introduce themselves
DEVELOPMENTAL: A bit of background
CONFIDENCE BUILDING: Ease them in with some easier questions
KEY QUESTIONS: The big questions f the interview. personal, emotional etc.
SOUND BITES: Re-cap key answers aiming for the succinct sound-bite.
SUMMARY: Overview of questions and topics.
WIND UP: Any other things they want to add.


This interview structure worked well during the primary interviews and acted well also when getting the interviewees comments about the boys. However during the recording for a lot of what the boys are saying they will just be delivering the prepared comments from the other participants.


They key to the structure in the studio set up is to use the boys energy early on. They flag a little at prolonged interview work and so to catch the boys and their personality best I will start with the questions all about them and each other which will rely on them bouncing off each other and really get their personalities across on screen whilst delivering their answers.


For the questions they will be asking each other about themselves I aim to not talk about them too much and to try and get their initial responses recorded as naturally as possible. These can be quite personal but the boys interplay on screen is what should inject some energy, entertainment and fun into the piece. the off the cuff comments and relationships displayed honestly on-screen.


I will however get them to introduce themselves at the start to establish who is who and where they are in the sibling order. I will also have an end summary, wind up or sign off to tie a nice bow round the whole piece and offer some conclusions and insight.




INTERACTION WITH THE INTERVIEWEE?
SETTING UP INTERVIEW SPACE
BUILDING RAPPORT
ACTIVE LISTENING
BODY LANGUAGE
OBTAINING COMMENTS


All of the above factors will have to be considered and will help create the right environment of the interviews with the boys and others. These go especially for the boys. I would like to think that rapport already exists BUT from doing some tests with them they do react differently to Dad behind the camera so I will need to factor this in.
The interview space is tricky it will be in the TV studio a very unnatural environment for the boys but dad and mum on hand should keep them feeling secure and it will be closed set. What may need considering is when to interview all there of the boys at once and when to interview them one at a time. Whilst I do want the interaction between them the answers may be less honest in front of their brothers saying what they want their brothers to hear is their answer rather than the truth. This will need much more thought and consideration and will possibly involve am ix of 1-1 and group interviews.
Listening will be a given and may unearth other areas and topics that had not been thought of. Body language will need to be encouraging and noddies and it will well be worth opening up comments to the boys own thoughts at the end.

SIBLINGS: INTERVIEWS AND PARTICIPANTS 2 (REPRESENTATION)

Having decided who were going to be the contributors to the piece I feel the need to explain why they are being included and what I feel they will hopefully add to the piece. I will be looking into all of them with the following topics in mind. I have also gone into detail drawing form my tests screenings and reflections what I see the filmic language being.

• What they will add to the piece.
• What purpose they will serve.
• Representation of them on screen through the audio.
• Topics they will be able to discuss.

THE BOYS


My sons Isaac, Jacob and Noah are the catalyst of the piece and the very core and centre of it. The piece is all about them as they obviously have to be all over it. Which they are they are. They are in every single frame as not only being themselves but they are acting as the vessels for the comments
of others about them. This adds a whole different dimension to the piece and a real sense of the uncanny. Their role is to be at the centre but also the canvas for the thoughts of the other contributors.


Their primary role though is to be themselves and to be as natural as they can in front of the camera. To interact and interplay with their brothers when speaking about themselves and to interject their personality and physicality into the piece be this laughter, hurt or tears. They will serve as the basis point and if you like the placebo. Who really cares what everyone else thinks and tries to read onto or make them conform to they are just what they are and if you like the innocents of the piece. They serve as a counterbalance at times to the thoughts of others at times agreeing with them though. they will also add some light relief as they can be very entertaining both in terms of spoken words and physicality as the camera is allowed to just watch them.


Their representation is to be as honest as possible. As with all of the contributors it will be just the boys on screen either as themselves or voicing the thoughts of others. I aim to have the same lighting set up for all of the boys or as similar as I can get in the TV studio. This will be 3 point lighting backlight, fill light and key light. My aim is to not going to make the boys look any different whatever role they have in the piece. The backgrounds will be plain back so again nothing can be read into their screen appearances from the background. Similarly the absence of clothing and being naked physically (although only from the waist up!) and metaphorically in front of the camera. The shot will be a loose MCU or between a MCU and a MS. This is the most typical documentary shot size for talking heads. the boys will subvert this though by being allowed that most privileged of gazes that back at the camera breaking the fourth wall. This will allow a direct communication with the audience as though they are addressing them. No music will be used on the piece to again draw all the focus to the boys and their answers or the comments from others coming from their mouths. Their voices will simply theirs.


The one bit of representation they will be allowed is as I have mentioned earlier their performances in front of the camera. The thoughts of others they will voice through lip-sync will be delivered and from trials they tend to deliver these really flat unless deciding to do otherwise. They do perform a little for the camera and each other but this is THEIR thoughts on themselves and THEIR world and they will be allowed the freedom of it. In my opinion everyone else is a commenting on the boys, the boys are the "truth" even if it is a forced representation of them through filming it and what a camera on a subject creates.

PARENTS


This whole project stemmed from discussions about them and their characters, personality traits, physicality, educational abilities, gifts, talents etc that all parents discuss about their children. I always found it fascinating also to hear the viewpoints of others though I love parents evenings and to see if their teachers have got the measure of them and what they are all about or if I feel they are not describing my sons. Outside the of themselves the parents have the second most privileged view into the world of the boys. from birth we have nurtured, fed, taught and helped them find their way in the world. The parents obviously have a history and spend possibly the most concentrated time with the boys throughout their lives and know and love them intimately for different reasons. They will hopefully add a warmth to the piece.


Their representation on screen when the boys say their thoughts and statements visually will be the same as the boys themselves. Exactly the same shot size, lights, background, state of nakedness etc. All of which have been mentioned above. I did toy with the idea of different lighting, backgrounds, even hair cuts and even shot sizes and camera angles in early tests but then the representation would be too contrived and I wanted to try and remain as representationally "honest" as I thought I could so None of these techniques sat easily with me.


What will be different is their performance and the audio. The performance because it is not their own words and they are simply delivering the thoughts of others is generally dead-pan and perfunctionary. I did try to get them to perform the words and statements a little but it seemed too forced and laboured so I decided to let them just say them as they felt appropriate with minimal intervention. There have been instances where they have become a little more animated if interested but not many.


The voice also is a key difference between the boys own sections. Whilst my wife and I do not agree on anything we do tend to agree on the boys and what they are all about most of the time of at least agree to meet in the middle. This could be because we discuss them a lot so one of us accepts the views of the other or compromises but it is also because we both know them so well that what we see is often the truth and their true nature and personalities. It could also be that we see them as multi faceted and often lots of versions and emotions and traits that ebb and flow. I have tried myself and my wife recording different bits of audio but I have always returned to us saying the lip-sync together. This is primarily due to the fact that when we discussed the boys and wrote down our thought they were very, very similar and identical on the statements I chose to include. It simply made sense to say these in unison and also really plays with the sense of the uncanny and 2 voices from one person. I have also experimented with inflection and mood and tone of the parents voices and tried to add  warmth to it. This is to create a representation of the familiarity and love we have for the boys and also as this is how we would address the boys at home.

THE PSYCHOLOGISTS


The psychologists serve the role of the authoritarian, the academic, the expert and the "voice of god" that most documentaries have. Initially I envisaged the piece being more to simply point out that you cannot pigeon-hole people and things are not black and white. However the more research I did into this their simple statements did prove to have a lot of sound footing as far as sibling birth order went but in my opinion were never always right and a bit of a blunt instrument. So the role they will serve is both the "expert" and the scientific. Their thoughts are created from loads and loads of research into birth order, papers, publications, web-sites etc and the statements the boys will be reading/speaking are an amalgamation of these and the strong themes that run though all of the research.


As mentioned on the parents outlines visually the psychologists thoughts as voiced by the boys will be exactly the same. The performance will be the same as the parents representation visually and the boys are likely to be a little flat and generally unanimated as they are simply speaking the words of others. As with the parents representation I toyed with costumes, lighting changes even considering colour grading and early on they were B/W, pixelated and with a robotic voice but this was too clunky.


As with the parents audio this is where the representation can be a little more playful as it is the only real way to create representations of the psychologists. I did consider trying to track down a psychologist. However as with a lot of exposition documentaries that use the "voice of god" to fill in the details and exposition and be the voice of fact I did not see much point as they often use celebrities and/or non experts for the voice overs. The words were based on psychologists research so they were the truth so does it really matter who says them as no-one will no. I have looked for images of psychologists on line and they are generally male, however search for child psychologists and the images are mostly female. I am not too hung up on a male or female voice although if pushed the authority of a male voice stereotype may make the message clearer. As I thought that this would be OK I will approach whoever I feel have the voice, command and authority to record the lip synch and create a representation of a psychologist.

TEACHERS
The teachers do not only oversee the academic side of my boys education but they also see them at play, forging friendships, doing group work in a non-home environment. Next to their parents they are the adults who spend the most time with them, even if it is in the company of 29 others rather than lots of 1-1 contact time. For all of the above reasons I see their inclusion as really important as not only do they know the boys but they offer an insight into where they fit in with a group academic environment and can often reveal sides to the boys personalities that we do not see at home especially with academic work.


Visual representations as with the aforementioned parents and psychologists will be the same for all of the same reasons. Again I did play around and consider different visual representations corduroy jackets and sensible shoes etc but this was far too clumsy and not needed.


Aurally they are represented by ideally the teachers themselves doing the voice over as this is the closest to a true representation as I can get. I have spoken to them all for some primary research and they are by and large willing to help out but a couple were a little reticent. Ideally they come across as they are a young female NQT teacher, a middle aged established female teacher and a very upfront and forthright male teacher in his late 30's. I want them to be as natural as possible but ideally with a familiar, comforting but no-nonsense tone and to use their teacher voice. However as with the psychologists if there are issues as their own words that they gave me are being used I could possibly get others to voice their words.

SIBLINGS: PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVIEWEES 1

From the start of the project I have been developing who to include in the Siblings piece. The crux of the ideology behind the piece remember was to try and see how science, the boys themselves and other people who knew them well and spent time with them corroborate, conflict and subvert each other. From the start I was 100% behind using the boys themselves and standard psychological research into sibling order as the two central pillars to investigate as I found them often right but on occasions absolutely not.


I want to get across the point that the boys are individuals and labels, statements and pigeon holing can be a blunt instrument and wrong as well as right but that individually they fail to give an overall representation and picture of the boys. The boys mood swings, environments, circumstances, happenings, who they are with and even the weather can make them act differently and there is never black and white only shades of grey. By looking at a multitude of opinions from those closest to or who spend the most time with them you will get an overall view. I remember Shaun Camp showing us early on in our first research module the 6 blind men and an elephant illustration. Each explored a different part of the elephant and came back saying it was like a snake, it was spear-like or like a tree trunk. All were of course right to a degree but it was not until they all got together and all of their thoughts heard that a truer more well rounded picture of an elephant could be realised. I see my potential commentators as all helping to provide insight into the boys and overall we will get a fuller picture of them.

In the first test it was just the boys themselves, parents and psychologists. In the second it was all there of these again with the added addition of teachers. These were early plans but I feel they need re-considering and mention made as to what I feel they will bring to the project.


The aim of the piece was to find people who knew the boys, spent time with and around them for a while and could provide insight into the boys personality, traits and to see if birth order really does impact upon these and to what degree. A long list at the start was put together to consider who might provide such insight.

• Parents
• Teachers
• Aunts and Uncles
• Grandparents
• Friends
• Clubs and hobbies coaches
• Neighbours
• Close family friends

I held discussions (mini interviews) with all of these about the project and the boys and got their immediate thoughts analyse what each of them could bring to the project and if they could earn their keep. Lots of them gave similar points such as "Isaac like to be in charge", "Jacob is cheeky" and "Noah is a right little performer". All of this was useful but the scale of including them all in the project would be too huge.


What I did then was to try and enforce more of a selection criteria based on who really knows them to make informed decisions..

• Who spends a lot of time with the boys.
• Who knows them really well.
• Who knows the boys under different situations. Work, rest and play.

From this a short list was formed using the above criteria.

Parents

Teachers

The two above were chosen simply on the basis of the criteria and the being the people who spent the most time with the boys, knew them well and could comment on them in work, rest or play. Close friends was a really close call as they could provide real insight into the side of the boys the other contributors. However getting permissions and working with extra kids (working with my own 3 was hard enough) was a step too far.


A compromise was to consider getting the boys to comment not just on themselves but each other. They are already commenting on themselves and how their personality traits BUT I thought they could also comment on each other as obviously they know each other really well. This would add even further insight not only as to how they are viewed by their peers but it would also give insight into their group dynamic and relationships, roles and identity in this pecking order.