Location, location, location makes 360 video better
In 360 video, the viewer has control over what they can see. They can look around and see everything that encircles the camera. They also expect to see something interesting or surprising.
Viewers engage most with either very new environments and have not been seen before or are places where the general public can’t get access. For instance, a view from the launch tower at the Kennedy Space Center, where the space shuttles launched, is compelling. The office where the launch director worked is not.
This engagement is so strong that you have to consider the environment as another character in the narrative, which doesn’t have dialogue. As such, you need to carefully “cast” this character:
Does the environment add to the story? Can the viewer understand more or gain a strong sense of place by seeing the environment?
Is the scene worth looking at from all angles? When scouting a location, look around to see if you can compose three separate scenes in the circle of the 360 field-of-view.
The scene needs to be interesting but not so interesting as to be distracting. Think of a theater stage where the set adds to the story but still allows the actors to be front and center.
The 360 video interview is different from linear video. For that, videographers carefully frame the scene with just a section of the background environment, often rendered in soft focus. Multiple cameras give different angles that facilitate editing, and professional lighting helps define the image. This is more difficult with 360 video since you will have multiple backgrounds and if you want to hide any technical gear used in the production.
What if the environments aren’t ideal?
One easy and valid decision is to make a 180. And by that, I don’t mean to change course completely but instead to capture and present the video with only a 180-degree view. Various camera systems offer this option, and there are some designed just for this use.
If you do this, the interviewer, lights and more can be hidden on the dark side of the 180. You can also have that backside pointed at blank walls in a room of other scenes that aren’t engaging. As a bonus, some viewers are more comfortable with a 180 video because they can see the entire scene by just moving their head side-to-side rather than turning completely around as with 360 video.
Other times, the story demands an environment where the videographer does not have access. This could be a location that is inaccessible because of limitations such as security restrictions.
Or the story is set in the past, and the original location doesn’t exist anymore. Or, the people interviewed are in different places at different times, and the video producer wants to bring them together in one environment in the 360 video.
In these cases, producers turn to computer-generated imaging to create a virtual reality environment. The people in the story are recorded on a green screen set, using traditional video cameras, and that footage is digitally blended with new environments in post-production editing.
A compelling example is “Grenfell: Our Home,” produced by Channel 4, a public-service channel based in London. The 15-minute documentary interviews former residents of Grenfell Tower, a 24-story apartment building that caught fire in 2017, resulting in massive damage and killing 72 people.
For the 360 video, former residents were interviewed about their homes, recorded as they sat in chairs. Those videos were combined with 360-degree animations of how their apartments looked before the fire. The animations are artistic, looking like paintings rather than hyper-realistic renderings. The animated environments visualize the stories, adding a nostalgic atmosphere that compliments the residents’ recollections.
The FRONTLINE 360 video “After Solitary” is another groundbreaking video that used virtual environments. Produced by Emblematic Group, the story focuses on Kenny Moore, who served time in long-term solitary confinement in Maine State Prison.
The video producers created two interactive, 360-degree photorealistic environments: one of Moore’s home bedroom and another of a solitary confinement cell. These scenes were combined with holograms of Moore’s interviews created with photogrammetry, a sophisticated technology that uses multiple cameras to create detailed and exacting 3D images. Both of the created environments are immersive viewing experiences. The sensation of being in a prison cell is especially evocative.
Creating virtual environments with photogrammetry takes time and requires cutting-edge technology and creative staff with highly specialized skills. The Emblematic Group was especially well-equipped for the project, being the team that made the landmark 360 video documentary, “Project Syria.”
If immersive media demands engaging visuals, then it has something in common with fashion design. “Fashion the Future with British Icons” was created for British Fashion Council to promote the group’s annual awards and inspire the next generation of fashion designers.
The 360 video builds around interviews with four fashion icons; Naomi Campbell, Anya Hindmarch, Edward Enninful and Joan Burstein. Each was recorded on green screen backgrounds, and that footage was blended with computer-generated backgrounds featuring each person’s fashion work.
The viewer looks around the environment to discover each person as they take turns speaking. The effect is one of sitting in the middle of a black box theater with the four speakers, encircling the viewer.
The video’s director said he was going for the feel of an art installation. The council wanted the project to reflect their idea of UK fashion as creativity, innovation, and ripping up the rule book. The immersive video and the digitally created environments achieve both goals.
CAMERA AS CHARACTER
In immersive video, the viewer can feel as if they are actually in the place. And if the environment is a character, the camera can define its personality.
First, camera placement is critical. The real estate motto of “location, location, location” applies here. You have to find places where there are interesting, storytelling things to see. But then, a difference of just a couple of feet in the camera placement and height produces very different results.
This effect is because the cameras used for 360 video are designed with extreme wide-angle lenses to capture multiple views that are digitally stitched together. With the distortions inherent in wide-angle lenses, objects and people very close to the camera distort, and conversely, those farther away become diminished.
Each camera system is different, so experimentation is recommended before working on a project. And, the experience for the viewer is different between desktop, mobile devices and head-mounted devices (HMDs). As a starting point, I’ve found that anything closer than two feet to the camera is too close. And once something is 8-10 feet away, it visually becomes a part of the background.
The camera placement can also define the viewer’s engagement with the video. If the camera is placed to the side of the action, the viewer has the experience of a bystander. If the camera is in the middle of the action, perhaps being held by a person in the crowd, the viewer is a participant. In pre-production planning, decide if the camera’s “character” will be a bystander or participant, and this helps in deciding camera placement.
In either approach, the viewer of a 360 video will experience a point of view created by the camera’s height during recording. For instance, if the camera is set at five feet, then the viewing perspective is that of someone a bit taller than five feet. The camera height is the perceived eye level of the view.
You can decide to set the camera lower for a view as if someone is seated. High camera placement creates the sensation of looking down on the scene. Very low angles create the sensation of lying on the ground.
For interviews in both linear and 360 videos, cameras are usually placed at eye level as the person interviewed. That person’s eye line—where they are looking—is also at that level. If the camera is higher or lower, it can be distracting, and it makes the viewer feel less connected to the person speaking.
Where that person looks will also be a choice. In linear videos, the person being interviewed is often looking slightly away from the camera, interacting with the off-camera interviewer. This can happen in 360 video, especially if it’s decided to include that person in the video. In this case, the viewer is a spectator to the conversation.
But if the environment is engaging and the viewer experiences an immersive effect, there will people around them and if the viewer is virtually there, do those people notice them? Do the people in the video recognize the viewer and talk directly to them and look them in the eye?
For linear video, this is called “breaking the fourth wall.” It is a convention of the theater stage where actors are contained within the scene, and they don’t acknowledge the audience or the existence of a production crew. That imaginary barrier is the fourth wall, and if an actor turns to the audience to talk to them or smile at them, the illusion of the performance is “broken.”
Interestingly, in 360 videos breaking the fourth wall can increase the illusion of reality. If a person in the scene talks directly to the camera, it can be startling at first because of how real the interaction feels. But the viewer feels more like they are also in the scene, and they are more engaged with the story.
Journalism and documentary projects have rarely recorded people looking into the camera during interviews. The only people recorded that way are the journalists or narrators who are controlling the story narrative. Because the viewer in 360 video can look anywhere in the scene, the added connection of eye contact is very effective in directing attention to the person speaking. Non-fiction storytellers should experiment with this direct, eye-contact approach to interviewing to increase both the engagement and the immersion of their videos.
댓글