EMAP Online Capacity Building Conference #1
Dynamic Online Event Formats
Overview of Online Platforms
Veronika Liebl (Ars Electronica)
https://ars.electronica.art/news/de/Technological Side and Conceptual approaches: what technological solutions are out there
to provide contents online and access?

Hybrid Platforms
Arjon Dunnewind (IMPAKT)
https://impakt.nl/
Hybrid content forms mixing live and pre-recorded content.

Ethics, Privacy Concerns, Right issues
Minna Tarka (m-cult)https://www.m-cult.org/
Access (ease of use across devices/platforms), Platform Politics (business models,ecology, etc), Privacy (regulations, anonymity, encryption), and Rights (permissions, copyrights)

Best Case Presentation
Lars Henrik Gass (Short Film Festival Oberhausen)
https://www.kurzfilmtage.de/de/talks about the online edition of their 2020 festival, the technologies used, lessons learned, what worked
well, and what could be improved.

Audience Participation, Moderation and income
Veronika Liebl (Ars Electronica):
Audience participation: how to create online representation of audiences & interactivity &networking.
Agnese Baranova (RIXC):
Moderation and facilitation of the online platforms: content-editor, online events(conferences, symposiums) moderators. Online moderation and off-line moderation.
Agnese Baranova (RIXC):
Charging of the online events – Do we charge people viewing and how? Charging
possibilities for the culture events

Audience, where, when and how to reach them?
Arjon Dunnewind (IMPAKT):
Legacy: archiving and creating sustainability for the content. Can we take components
from live online events to use for online depositories of knowledge and content in web
projects that stay online?

Overview of online Platforms
Veronika Liebl (Ars Electronica):
Technological Side and Conceptual approaches: what technological solutions are out there
to provide contents online and access?
I’ll informally share expertise, give an overview ofwhat’s out there, what is useful from our perspective. There is no one fits all!
Overview communication tools:–––––––––––––––

Streaming > classical way of sharing
Depending on the target groups, different kinds of event characteristics;
In case you want people to pay for the content, need different platforms with other settings;
Austrian example: cooperation with ORF, cooperation with Flimmit
Youtube: advantage: huge outreach, many partners/audience are already there, many features
simplify the embedding
Vimeo: computer animated artists popular platform, in general not as heavily used as youtube
advantage: create links in advance, before you have the content
Twitch: mostly supported by gamers; text messages and chat functions supported
Vod clubMixer
OBS Studio; tool needed when you want to stream content from various sources: real time
audio and video mixing, to create a streaming from multiple sources.
Restream: stream to various platforms, distribute it further, different kinds of platforms
videochat / text chat: GoToMeeting, Zoom, jitsi, MS Teams, Discord
GoTomeeting for jury selections
Discord: gaming sector; virtual tours, live stream, 3d tours

Examples Virtual Tours / Tools– Remote Tourism: Faroe islands virtual tour: tourist advertisement, direct a person on theisland and explore it– Matterport 3D Capture: Mori art museum: 360 guided tour, embedded video content withguided tour, mixture of different kinds of media content– Matterport: software based, everyone can use it; supplied side where you can create your own 3dcontent– Theasys: Artland.com: example from gallery world, combines various galleries andexhibitions on online platform, shares specific pieces that work online– Thyssen-Bornemisza Museo Nacional: rely on single images and steady context
Examples Custom developments– British museum: approach it through archive; data visualization process, zoom in for content)– Städel Museum: exhibitions in VR– CCC - chaos computer clubHybrid Platforms
Arjon Dunnewind (IMPAKT)
Hybrid content forms mixing live and pre-recorded content.
Screening short film: Nite Hotel, theater company North of Holland;–––––––––

Best case practice example: Hybrid content forms mining live and prerecorded content, live things
happen in zoom and youtube
at Nite Hotel they can stage theater plays;
they consider to realise as white label project, so others can also use it;it merges various platforms; like the bar;they learned you have to moderate it; otherwise it can be awkward;
combination of zoom and youtube for the theater play: best quality (zoom), or interacting in thechat (youtube);a Q&A in the end; artistic director interviewing directors;
audience participation with the parties;
can think of using rooms as cinema rooms, or exhibition rooms.

Klynt is a software programme to edit video in non-linear ways; so audience can navigate video content
using their own path. They’re creating a legacy of content in Klynt formats.

Ethics, Privacy Concerns, Right Issues
Minna Tarkka (m-cult):
Access (ease of use across devices/platforms), Platform Politics (business models,ecology, etc), Privacy (regulations, anonymity, encryption), and Rights (permissions,copyrights)
Sophea is a sonic artists; expertise different streaming conditions. In 2005 she did a mobile
broadcast from a Trans Siberian train.
1. Access– not solely about accessibility, but also about equality;– online events reduce the threshold, but also throw up new barriers;– w3 standards or provide supporting services;– often forgotten in technical access are issues about sensory or potential ability or disability,– technical issues: people are locked into platforms, using tools already accustomed to.
2. Platform Politics– EMAP artists address it;– Is it open source of property? How is the business model? Data gathering or subscription based?
– When subscribing to zoom, do you support the censorship decisions in china?
– Implication requiring email address to sign up, how do they handle data?
– Ecological impact, video streaming needs a lot of energy, big co2 footprint
3. Privacy– regulatory environment (GDPR: transparency and consent, not gathering and storing unnecessarydata);– ambience of ease and goodwill if privacy is clearly communicated;– online things happen that never happen offline;– end-to-end encrypted services appropriate, used if possible. Zoom has an end-to-end fiction– after public pressure, but it is not default;– honour participants right to be anonymous; traditional art event you don’t have to sign up

4. Rights: permissions copyright, honorariums– content license requirements and copyright law;
– make recordings of live sessions only if asking attentions first or announcing at beginning ofevent;– sign contracts with participants (especially for recordings) and artists/speakers whose work isstreamed;– follow established practices of field for presenting artistic work in physical spaces.
Remuneration/honorarium; should follow general practice of the real (different from film to visualarts). Often with web residencies it seems that the online is about cheap artists labour, whichshouldn’t be the case. Presentation for online context should have same principles, if you put up
work in online gallery should have the same policy.

Best Case Presentation
Lars Henrik Gass from the Oberhausen Short Film Festival talks about the online edition of their 2020
festival, the technologies used, lessons learned, what worked well, and what could be improved.
- interesting social process- getting accommodated with new tools of communication- setting up a new online version within 2 months- specific new digital solutions for online versions, not to just to replicate it.
Third dimension structural change of film festival in general, to find a solution not referring tospecific place, not limited in time, I will expand on this later.
I advise against dogmatically discussing the use of online festivals, it’s not a question of worldview,
but an answer to social crisis that asks for new solutions. What’s wrong for us might be right forother festivals. What works for the festival in May might prove to be wrong or insufficient inOctober. Our answer would have been different 2 months earlier or later.
Not a question of screening or cinema; what makes sense for us can’t be transferred to others.
> temporary and non-transferable answers!
When considering cancelling our event, 3 questions:– What does cancellation mean to filmmakers?
– What does it mean for freelancers working for the festival?
– What does it mean for the development of the festival itself?
–Answers are individual;– Filmmakers: prefer carrying out finalised work
– Freelancers: we have social responsibility of securing their fees
– Festival: a collective training for ourselves, questioning conventions and self image of festival.
Individual and temporarily answers to create structural change in the festival, what we learn helps
us to better. Not about replacement, but new rhizomatic ideas of the festival. It’s a social and not
only cultural question!
Concrete: the festival consisted of 2 parts:
1. limited streaming platform containing 350 films in 60 programmes, which became visible in timewindows of 48 hours.
2. Online edition included 70 individual video conversations with film makers, online DJ-ing, live
discussions etc.
Internet urgency; festival blog

––in combination with streaming platform it helped us to create more visibility beforehand;own online environment; no-go to ask commercial platform to host us;–––––

festival blog created in 4 weeks time, 130 contributions by mid June;
blog driven by idea that festival can be a space to think about everything, to connect everyone;
contributions from many to many, freely accessible;
hoped for 1000 festival passes, ended up with 2900, a big success!
9,99 euros as fee for actual festival pass > psychological price, wink at price structure ofstreaming portals; not charging more than cinema ticket;
video library free of charge for another 4 weeks–Evolution: we reached half of a completely new audience, real access! Children in schools, people
overseas, people create viewing communities, public viewings. Apart from sold tickets,
we also lost people who didn’t want to watch films online.
All the ticket sales, €2.300, was donated to the social foundation VG Bild kunst, to people whoneed and deserve it.
We failed in creating a strong social energy, how to involve participants and audience, we still haveto develop this. The digital world gets easily sterile, we still have to work on this.
For the future, there will be in Oberhausen traditional local festival concentrate on cinema culture,
the online edition will continue in future focused on the idea of global networking. Even before
COVID-19 questions how to deal with CO2, still have to solve this!
How do you create a social energy? It’s the biggest challenge, screening films and lectures,
how do we create the same social dynamic as informally gathering in a lobby of a cinema?
How to increase the networking qualities? What would you do differently?
> sending newsletter daily to all stakeholders, to inform about video and live conversations> People were not necessarily interested in discussing things in live modus> people apparently preferred the pre-recorded video conversations> lowering the frequency of live conversations> Out of 2900 pass holders, not anyone joined live events> We’ve learned to include it more precisely in programme structure, not as an add-on!
Working in public space, people are anonymous, you do not have to pull them infurther into social participation, as collaborators. There are modalities in being audiences.
How do you deal with the rights, obstacles with presenting artists all over the word? It’s alsopart of the negotiation about the duration, how long a film stays online? Are there any special
measurements or promotion (apart from the regular) tools?
> Regards FIAF, who complained we didn’t offer geo plugin and to limit the actual amount ofVisitors / programme. They want a simple replication of physical world; I think we wouldn’t explore thepotential of the internet. Almost after 50 years our connection with FIAF broke. Interesting pointis that none of the filmmakers ask for geo plugin! They wanted the outreach. In addition, as any
serious festival, we have regulation for physical edition; within short time revise it. Approach every
filmmaker to get approval to attend online version, very simple regulation.
> Audience building: 5000 euro for social media campaign; invested a lot of money to get people onthe online edition; festival blog was very helpful! Invited friends to make contributions, share it.
It was about creating a network, very easy and not expensive to do.

Audience Participation, Moderation and Income
Veronika Liebl (Ars Electronica):
Audience participation: how to create online representation of audiences & interactivity &networking.
Veronica: 4 examples; trickiest part is audience participation, we spend biggest effort on it, how toget people to interact?
The core will be Mozilla Hubs:– Best practice example: XR hub bavaria contest to students;– Hang out, chat, features audio;– open source, which is an huge advantage!;– works on browser, mobile phones, VR;– the more content they contain, the more power you need;– experience is very easy; you click link, create avatar, agree to rights, enter room;– not a blank canvas virtual space; interesting to connect to pre-existing rooms;– of social network spaces; guided tours, bars, sessions with artists, Q&A, a social place for Ars
Electronica are createdCannes XR:– offered registration event; closed for certain number of registrations;– can create one-to-one networking, can host own network space;– app: people can book meetings in between
Burning man:– love that they approached their community; published a form;– where do people come from, what do they expect as activities, what kind of rooms do they want,– what kind of characteristics do they expect from interactive rooms?;– what I like is that they ask what their audiences is (not the exact same ones as physical ones);– afterwards they’ll evaluate if it was successfulCrowdcast: working space– specific features only broadcast;– registration pools for workshops; you can sell workshops;– live polling;– vote up most popular question;– things to use well in webinars and workshops;– completely browser based;– interesting moderation aspects, facilitate easy management of participant and content.
Moderation and facilitation of the online platforms: content-editor, online events(conferences, symposiums) moderators. Online moderation and off-line moderation.
Charging of the online events – Do we charge people viewing and how? Charging
possibilities for the culture eventsWebex– widely used for online conferences, good alternative to zoom;– moderation online hierarchy; host; delegate other to co-host;– good possibility to share documents– summary functions; Q&A, chat possibility;– panelists and hosts have to registers; as attending you don’t have to;– annotate documents; can participate if approved by host;– polling coordinator: prepare poll questionnaire and conducing it;– important: Webex operates on all operating systems and platforms;– e-commerce support by PayPal; good for selling tickets;Zoom– host and co-host;– meeting and webinar; both live-streamed;– many cultural events use several online streaming platforms;
Jitsi
–––
–

open source
up to 200 people for jitsi meetfor various operations systems
jitsi videobridge for conferencing,Tips–––––––

technical equipment, powerful internet connection
human resources;financial resources;
scenography of space;technical tests before stream;
stream organisation scenario;
level 1 platform for the questions during the event