On Sunday April 5th, it should have been the CEMRIAC Spring Movie Festival at Derby, but as with everything else, it was cancelled - almost! Instead, it moved online, being available to any of us with internet access capability and the ‘ZOOM’ app. installed on our computers. On Friday 3rd, we were able to check out that everything would work with our computers and laptops etc, and whether sound and vision were working correctly. Several Nuneaton members logged in, and I saw several friends from other clubs too. All that remained now was for us to experience the broadcast of three 40-minute sessions of films during Sunday the 5th, with judging conducted by Paul Kittel. We received on Saturday by email, the programme of the films due to be shown during the three sessions of the day. I only saw the second of the three sessions of the day, - the one that contained my entry, ‘The Unexpected Trust’. The ones I did see were of very good picture quality...no problems there. My only problem was accessing the main programme of films from the ‘Zoom’ screen (Zoom being the ‘app’ upon which the whole experience hinges). I might never had problems had the ‘links’ been sent to individuals by email, from where they could have been ‘cut and pasted’ as normal, rather than from that main screen. Ah well, I’ll know next time - perhaps. Others had problems too ...
Jim Huckfield wrote:
“I feel that it was a great idea. It was good to get on to the site and see a few of NM members looking out at me.
Unfortunately just as the First Session was getting underway I had a FaceTime call from my granddaughter, this of course took priority. When I eventually got back to the vidconf. I could only see the attendees and not the video etc. I ‘posted” Michael to see whether he could help or advise. It was only afterwards that I realised that there was a lockdown at the beginning of each session. As it was coming to the end of the first session, Paul Kittel came on my screen giving his excellent critique of the films. When the next session started I could see the faces of the audience - but not any of the Films. Again, at the end, Paul Kittel came back on. When the final session started the same happened until the 5.50pm judging, feed back and the awards. Even though I did not get to see any of the Films etc, it was interesting, as I was still able to see the viewers relaxing and enjoying the conference at a distance. Perhaps NM could organise a similar event, for members, in the future?
From Gordon:- At my house the CEMRIAC Zoom event worked okay. About sixty odd people viewed the videos. Unfortunately the camera on my computer has stopped working. God knows why, but he won't say. Simon Sumner and Paul Kittel did a good job of organising the event and this type of 'Zooming' is a useful tool. If I had judged the films I would have been a bit more harsh on the criticisms of some of the films but from my past observations at filming events, too much 'harshness (?)' isn't always appreciated by some audience members.
I liked the film about the barn owls but think that it could have been shortened quite a lot. There are lots of similar shots of the owls flying around.
A more experienced person doing the voice-over would have improved the film a lot. I liked Howard Smith's 'Good girl ' but felt a bit cheated with the ending. I thought that the mother would have realised that the girl was a liar. Overall Jill and I enjoyed the filming event. It would be good to hear other NM members’ opinions.
From Patrick:- CEMRIAC ON LINE was undoubtedly a success. It would not have happened if the country had not been in lockdown. I counted at one time, 74 subscribers, far more than would have attended the real live event in Derby. From a technical point of view I thought it went very well. I am familiar with ‘ZOOM’ and have used it elsewhere for conference calls. It has to be remembered that the system being operated is baseline in a new technology. That is to say, if you pay more and upgrade your service you will get better results. This needs to be borne in mind when ‘downsides’ are being aired. I was viewing the stream on a four year old iMac with a 15” screen, the latest version of IOS and the latest version of Zoom. Some of the issues which were evident were audio during the conference sessions. I was using the remote ethernet connection which is better than WIFI and the internal microphone. So far, there is no provision to use a better external microphone in the Zoom software. Other systems do have provision for this. Some of the whistles and interference was caused by some subscribers not muting their microphones. I personally did not have any issues, if there are any elsewhere, it will be probably at the receiver end. The web stream was external to the ZOOM programme and if set to 720p it resolved very well. I didn’t have any issues here. I have high speed fibre optic broadband. It may have proved a little fiddly to some opening an external browser. Other systems are available and can broadcast within the service which is less fiddly. However with this it is not a ‘conference’ service. Links are sent out and parties just open the broadcast. This trial was quite a leap forward.
I prefer ‘Live’ screening, but how many now are prepared to go to them? Perhaps an online ‘short’ festival could be introduced. On-line viewing, I believe, will be the only means of contact for the foreseeable future.
From Alan- For those who don't know, we had to make a last-minute cancellation of this year's CEMRIAC Spring Festival, due to the Covid-19 virus. All the films had already been judged, so it was decided that the only solution was to show them online. Obviously, an on-line showing is not the same as being in a theatre, with a live audience, but I thought that it was a very worthy substitute. Perhaps we could have dubbed-in rapturous applause at the end if each film (just kidding). We must thank both Simon Sumner and Paul Kittel for all their work to make it happen. It was a good year for films (there were 20), with several outstanding entries. Inevitably, not everyone agreed with the awards, but that just goes to show how much we all differ in our preferences. Sadly, none of the Nuneaton films gained any awards, but this does not surprise me, in view of the excellent competition. There were about 67 on-line participants, not just from CEMRIAC, but across the country. There was even someone from, I think, Malaysia. This can lead to some difficulties, however, during the judge's comments and discussion sessions; some people left their microphones on, and the slightest sound from their room was enough to switch to their webcam. A gentle cough or putting a cup down on the table was all it took, and it was rather distracting. Hopefully we will not need to do this again (or, at least, only in addition to live shows), but that rather depends on how soon we get over the current epidemic.
The only comments I have to hand from the judge, Paul Kittel, are the ones re my own film, ‘The Unexpected Trust’ Here’s what he said: “I am a member of the National Trust and enjoy thumbing through the handbook to see which places I should visit. However, what I really want is a film like this, that gives brief summaries of the properties with a few memorable visuals, details and facts.
I like that you have focused on the unusual aspects of the properties, emphasising the ‘more quirky features and viewpoints’.
The simplicity of this film is its strength. The National Trust is full of wonderful places and the nicely composed photography in this film shows them off in their best light. The commentary, read by Denise Haffner, is clear and is enough to give a National Trust member the necessary information they need to make an informed choice about a visit. Having said that, there are areas where this production can be improved. The film is rather ‘one-paced’ and would benefit from a few innovations to make it a little more dynamic than a basic list. I have a couple of thoughts about this how this may be achieved. Firstly, the audio mix. The Audio Networks tracks are well chosen and quite stirring. However, they are all played at the same level. There are moments when there are pauses in the commentary and the music is begging for a crescendo. This would not only make those moments more emotional, but they would give the film greater texture. My other thought regards scripting. Although very clear, it is rather encyclopaedic and would benefit from a lighter touch. You could also have some more fun. For example, in your sequence about Packwood House, the voice-over refers to the sound of light cutting machinery. This is a good line because it could potentially involve the audience as they guess what the sound is and where it might be coming from. However, the line is delivered over shots that give the game away; the gardeners trimming the trees. The same could be said of the restorers working on the clavichord. Had we heard these sounds clearly before revealing where they came from, the effect would have been more intriguing. This may seem like a trivial point, but the job of a filmmaker is to involve the audience and keep it thinking. Simply explaining what can easily be seen doesn’t keep the audience on its toes. Usually, when watching a film like this, I would say that there should be a few more people on screen; perhaps interviews or shots of people enjoying the properties. However, I think this film is the exception as this isn’t a conventional documentary. Instead it is a glossary that someone may use before deciding which stately home to visit. And very engaging it is too.”