I was energized this week when I was contacted by a school STLP coordinator about a “Cinemania camp” that she is having next week with some of her students. For those who aren’t aware, Cinemania is a yearly STLP competition involving the creation of a three-minute video in a 48-hour time frame. Teams are only provided a list of prompts to use and are turned loose to create a video. If you want to know more, find your way to http://www.kentuckycinemania.org/.
I provided the coordinator with some past prompts that had been used, but I’ve been thinking about the advice that I would offer students as they seek to create a high-quality product. Though I haven’t judged the videos myself, I’ve assisted with the coordination of the competition and have been in the room while the judging takes place. I thought I’d take a moment to put some thoughts down as I look at the criteria that the judges use each year.
COPYRIGHT – I’ve seen this become an issue on one or two occasions. Assume that you’re created a video and, in the background, there’s a popular song playing throughout the video. By posting that online, you’ve provided another avenue for someone to download a copy of that song. Is that a copyright violation? Potentially. One could argue that it happens every day on YouTube, but that doesn’t necessarily make it legal. I’ve heard it argued that “it’s in education, so it’s fair use.” Posting a work online is different from a specific one-time use in the classroom. The concept of “fair use” is an interesting one and is documented here. My advice to teams is to remember that the judges are volunteers and are not copyright attorneys, so avoid creating a product that would even cause someone to question whether or not a copyright infringement has occurred.
CONTENT – The scoring rubric says “script/story is original, creative and coherent.” This is very important. These judges watch quite a few videos and we’re asking them to pick out their top two. In nearly every case, the products that I’ve seen chosen as winners have a really interesting story or script. My advice to teams is to spend a good bit of time on this. I’ve talked to at least one person who admitted that he had his general story or script planned out well in advance of our competition and then did his best to make small adjustments to accommodate the prompts that we provide 48 hours before the product is created. That’s a pretty good strategy. We try to add a few prompts that are tougher to easily add in, but that’s all part of the fun and the challenge of being creative in a compressed time frame.
AESTHETICS – “Visual creativity, cinematography – lighting, music, voice” – Technology changes quickly, which can be a good thing and a bad thing. Fortunately for us, you can get better technology at a lower price than you could even a few years ago. That means, though, that you can tell when someone uses an older smartphone for video. The footage can be grainy. In some schools, you’ll find green screens and lighting specific for video creation. When videos are played one after another, judges tend to notice the poor lighting, excessive shadows and things of that nature.
TECHNICAL EXCELLENCE – “Camera operation, editing, effective use of special effects, effective use of titles” – Some of this could be paired with aesthetics, but elements of technical excellence become apparent when watching several videos back-to-back. Something as simple as ‘volume’ can be a big thing. If a microphone is too close or too far away from a character and that person can barely be heard or is TOO LOUD… you notice that. A year or two ago, I saw a decent video with a good story. On a few occasions, though, the editing was poor and students were caught for an extra second or so after the director had likely “cut” the scene. When an actor says his line and is shown walking away and we then cut to the next scene where he’s back in the original position, that’s an issue with editing. It was all I could think about for the rest of the video. After watching several videos consecutively, judges notice a shaky camera. They’ll notice if you’re filming outside and wind noise is prevalent. When there are 5-6 really good videos, minor things like that can make a big difference.
USE OF ELEMENTS – Over the years, this has become a pretty standard thing. Nearly every team uses most or all of the elements provided. If you do NOT, your video will stick out like a sore thumb. I’ve seen at least one instance where a team used elements from a previous year’s competition. I saw one video where no elements were used and I actually confirmed that the video I received was the correct submission. Fitting the elements into the video is one of the most fun and challenging parts of the competition, so I would expect any high-quality entry to comply in this section.
FINAL PRODUCTION – “Overall impression, enjoyment factor, cohesiveness, audience appeal” – Most of these other areas are factors in the ‘final production’ category. One point I will note here is that we’re in the K-12 environment. We’ve seen a few videos over the years that have perhaps had what I will call “questionable” content. I recall one or two videos with something like “fake” guns or a kidnapping scene where the victim is threatened or struck. I have no doubt that you can find guns and violence at the movies this weekend, but judges will struggle to reward such content in a competition like this no matter how entertaining or compelling the product may be. There’s nothing wrong with dealing with a thoughtful or serious topic, but if your video could potentially scare an elementary school student, it’s probably not going to win this competition.
On a lighter note, I remember one or two videos from last year where a couple of characters wore colored bodysuits (think “Blue Man Group” or something similar). I wasn’t sure WHAT I had just watched… but I liked it. We screen several of the high-scoring videos as a group and when final decisions are made, I’ve asked judges what they think sets a particular video apart. It’s everything we’ve discussed above. “I liked the story”, “the script was really good”, “there was a flow to it”, “it was just really good”. Think about the last movie you watched that you really liked. What was so good about it? It’s really the same things, right?
At any rate, I hope we can use these thoughts in the future as we try to help teams create the best products possible as part of the STLP Cinemania competition. Take care!