Film-Making Goes Digital. The transformation of the artefact and the consequent impact in the production and consumption processes

8/4/2019 Film-Making Goes Digital. The transformation of the artefact and the consequent impact in the production and cons

1/14

Film-makinggoesDigital

KaterinaGnafaki

Abstract

Thisarticlefocusesonthetransformationofthetraditionalculturalartifactof

filmandtheconsequentimpactintheproductionandconsumptionprocesses.

The emergence of the Web 2.0 infrastructure and online networks enables

activeparticipationintheproductionandconsumptionprocesses,whichoftenresults in the formation of hybrid spaces where the role of producer and

consumer is increasingly blurring.Theaimofthispaperistoshowhowthetransformation of the artifact invites participatory culture and how it has

affectedtheproductionofspace(collaborationbetweenfilm -makers)aswell

astheconsumptionofspace(digitaldistributionthroughtheInternet).


2/14

Introduction

Therapidgrowthoftechnologyinfilm -makinghaslead toamorecollaborativeanddynamicformofexpression.Throughoutthehistoryof film themedium

hasexperienced remarkable changes, developing into amore advanced and

easy to use tool for film production. These constant improvements on the

medium brought about an overwhelming embrace by film-makers, already

shapedbytherapidurbanizingworldinthelatenineteenthcentury(Charney

and Schwartz 1995), thus inviting active participation between them.

Additionally, there seems to be a shift from individual expression to

communityinvolvement(Jenkins2006,7)thatenablesfreshactionstooccur

and where among them some serve production, others consumption

(Lefebvre1991,73).Alongwiththechangesinproduction,theconsumptionof

spacealters,too. Unlikethetraditionaldistributioninmovietheaters,filmscannowbedistributedin innumerableplaces onlineandoffline. Spectators can

now watch films at their own impulse without having to go to the movie

theaters. Consequently, they are positioning themselves as active and

interactivecomposersof a cinematic and televisual discourse (Naficy2010,

12). Additionally,web2.0 applications bring peoplewith thesame interests

together and facilitate collaborative artistic practices (Christodoulou and

Styliaras 2008). Interestingly, film-making in an online networked

environmentcreatesthepotentialoftransformingtheactionintoamorejoint

endeavor which breaks the boundaries between producers and consumers

thuspermittingparticipantsatdifferentstagesofonlineculturalproduction

toactasusersandproducers(Bruns2007,2).

Social ProductionandConsumptionofspace inpre-new

mediafilm-making

In1931thephilosopherandsociologistWalterBenjamininTheWorkofArtin

theAgeofMechanicalReproduction tracesthehistoryofartandexplorestheearly artifact consumerism brought by mechanical reproduction. With the

adventofmechanical reproductionBenjaminrealizes that thisuniqueaura

emerging fromauthentic works of art suddenly depreciates. The initial cult

valueoftheartifactisreplacedtothatoftheexhibitionvalue;thus,itbecamea

productforthemassesratherthanacultobject.


3/14

On the threshold of mechanical reproduction and consequently the

transformationof theartifacttoaproduct, consumerismpenetratedpeopleslivesleadingtoaconsumersocietyofwhichmassculturewastobecomeboth

agent and object (Hansen, 1983 pp.154). The proliferation of new

commodities consumer goods and fashion, characterized the 19th century

Westernmodernity.Thisperiodinvolvedawholerangeofculturalandartistic

practicesthattransformedtheconditionsunderwhichartwasproducedand

consumed(CharneyandSchwartz1995).

Filmwas along thesetransformations.Forcenturies,evenbeforemechanical

reproduction took place, people were trying to develop film artifacts for

realisticallyreproducingmovingimages.Theconstantstruggletoimprovethemedium ofthe film inorder tomake itsmaller, simplerand simultaneously

more advanced, led to a series of technical inventions. New technologies

emergedalongwiththerequiredentrepreneurialskillstospeedupandbring

downthecostofproduction,andultimatelylowerthepriceofprocessedgoods

andconsumeritems.Consequently,newmoviesstartedtoariseandalongwith

them,manydistributioncompaniesentered themarketforreleasing films in

movie theaters such as Fox Film Corporation, Warner Bros. Pictures or

ParamountPicturesCorporation.Inparallel,theoutburstofconsumerismand

modernlifeinurbansettingsproducedtheconsumerdesireandquestforeven

morecommodities,resultingintheformationofasocialspacewherecertain

objects are produced and consumed. Henri Lefebvre (1991), in The

ProductionofSpaceobservesthatsuchobjectsarenotonlythingsbutalsoaset of relations that intervene in production and consumption itself. For

Lefebvre, social space subsumes things produced, and encompasses their

interrelationshipsintheircoexistenceand simultaneity(idem,73).

Inthecaseoffilm-making,therecurringimprovementsoftheartifactinvites

peopletouseitandperformcertainactionsthusproducing,reproducingand

consuming social space (Lefebvre 1991). In 1994, Gottdeimer states thatspatialrelationsaresocialrelationsthatarereplacedbyparticipation.Theact

ofparticipationcanbeseenasbringingspacestolifeaswellascarvingout

newspacesand creatingnewsocialforms (Cornwall2002,2). Interestingly,

filmhasalwaysbeenacollaborativemedium;acombinationoftheeffortsofproducers,directors, scriptwriters, setdesigners, editors, cameramen, actors


4/14

andothersbutaswelldirectorsthemselves(Fabe2004,140;Monaco1981).

Inthelattercase,throughoutfilmhistorywehavenoticedmanycollaborative

filmprojectsbetweendirectors,aneffortmainlyreferredtoasanthologyfilm

(Deshpande2010).Specifically,accordingtoDeshpande,asanthologyfilmwe

labela collectionofmultiple short films, eachofthemusually directedbya

different director while surrounded by a central theme, premise or event

(2010). Similarly, anotherinterestingdimensionof collaborativefilm-making

is the re-emergence of multi-productions with multiple national partners,

which have increased among European and Asian countries in particular

(Nacify2010,16).Collaborationin film-makingrequiresthatmultiplepeople

worktogether,buteachindividualservestheneedsofthegreaterprojectand

theemotionalimpactofitsstoryline(Cornwall2009).

In short, film as a medium proliferated widely after the outburst of

consumerism,invitingmoreandmorepeopletouseitaswellasparticipatein

jointactions.Areasonforitswideproliferationwasitscontinualadaptability,

not only in remaining relevant for its time but also by facilitating the

emergenceofothermediaandartsandofmodernityinitstransformationinto

latemodernityandbeyond(Nacify2010,12).Asthephilosopherandscholar

MarshallMcLuhanargues,themediumoffilmasmanyothermedia,survived

bybecomingthecontentsofnewermedia(1964).ThescholarJayDavidBolter

callsitremediationmeaningthateverytimeanewermediumreplacesanold

onewhileatthesametimeregeneratesitsculturalspace (1991).Thisisaverysignificantobservation,judgingbythegreattransformationofthemediumof

filmfromitsinventiontotodayandthechangeinmethodsofproductionand

consumption.


5/14

Howthenewartifactinvitesparticipation

ProfessionalFilm-makersgodigital

IstartedworkinginDVformyWebsite,andI fellin lovewiththemedium.It's

unbelievable,thefreedomandtheincredibledifferentpossibilitiesitaffords,in

shootingandinpost-production.Forme,there'snowaybacktofilm.I'mdone

withit.

DavidLynch2005onVariety

It was with the introduction of HDCAM recorders in 1998 that digital

cinematography began to arise1. Soon, more and more companies offered

various high-definition video cameras. Since the price of the digital video

cameras has rapidly fallen, an outburst of digital films has taken place.

Professional film-makersandhome-enthusiasts found, in this newimproved

artifact,newwaystoshowcasetheirfilmsastheyachievebetterqualityimage

andrequirelesseffortinpostproduction2.Film-makerswerefinallygiventhe

opportunitytofreetheircreativepotentialandachievebetterperformancesby

taking multiple camera shoots. Therefore, this new digital environment

changed the traditional artifact and, alongwith it, it remediated its cultural

space(Bolter1991).In2006,theculturaltheoristHenryJenkinsobservesthis

kind of shift in the way media content is produced and circulated3 . He

distinguishes that people empowered by new technologies demand active

participationthereforeproducinganewsocialspace.

Professional film-makers grabbed the potential of this new medium,

participating in collaborative digital film productions and delivering award-

winning films on lower budgets. For instance, Cities of Love is a series ofcollective motion pictures surrounding the notion of love in various cities

aroundtheglobe.Eachmovieofthiscollectioniscreatedbytheparticipation

ofoutstandingdirectorswhoaregivenaspecifictimelinetoportraytheirview

onthesubject.Sofar,twomotionpictureshavebeenreleased,Paris,jetaime in2006, andNewYork, I LoveYou in2009.Accordingto the InternetMovieDatabase(imdb.com),moreepisodesaretofollowinShanghai,RiodeJaneiro

1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_cinematography2http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/4565771.stm

3Derived from: Schfer, M. T. (2008)


6/14

and Jerusalem4. Similarly, All the Invisible Children is a 2005 collaborativemovie project regarding childhood and exploitation. Seven directors were

invitedtopresenttheirownperspectiveaboutthethemeintheirpartofthe

world5.

Theserecentomnibusandcollectivefeaturefilmspresenta nddemonstratethe

affordance and accessibility that the new digital artifact provides and the

participationthatisenabledviaitswideuse.DavidLynchsstatementinhis

interview in2005 onVarietymagazine,manifests themajor transformation

that film-making has been subjected to with the emergence of new digital

technologies.

BeyondtheStill-onlinecollaborativefilmcontestUnliketraditionalmedia,theNetisnotjustaspectacleforpassiveconsumption

butalsoaparticipatoryactivity(RichardBarbrook1997).

Film-makersallovertheworldengageinonlinecollaborationfacilitatedbythe

Web. A usual example of such collaboration entails the exchange of rawfootagebackandforthbetween the creativeparties involveduntilthemedia

contenthasreacheditscompletion.Eventhoughthisprocesscouldalsotake

placeoffline,thetransferofthemediumfromanalogu etodigitalhasenabled

theWebtobecome its naturalmechanismformedia transferandcollective

production.Thiscollectiveprocesshasbeenamatterofdiscussioninacademic

literature.Forexample,SchferobservesthatWeb2.0hasdrawnourattentio n

tocollaborationandcollectiveactionviatheeasy-to-useinterfaceinpopular

applications facilitatinguser-createdor user-providedmediacontent(2008).

The World Wide Web and especially Web 2.0 infrastructures provide an

environmentwhere film-makerscansharetheircreativeoutput.Videousers

canplacetheirmediacontentonaserverwhereotheruserscandownloadit,

edit itanduploaditback, contributing toa recurring,andcyclicalprocessof

mediatransfer.

TheStoryBeyondtheStillconstitutesarepresentativeexampleofhowtheWebfacilitatescollectiveartisticpractices.Theideaofthiscollectiveshortfilmwas

4 http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1440846/(From producers Emmanuel Benbihy page)5

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_the_Invisible_Children


7/14

perceivedin2009,whentheacclaimedphotographerandfilm -makerVincent

Laforet teamed up with Canon and Vimeo to encourage photographers toparticipate ina socialexperimentin storytelling6.UsingaCanon7D,hewas

assignedtomakeathree-minutelongprologuevideoendingonastillimage.

Then the participants,by pickingup where VincentLaforet left off, tried to

continuethestorybyaddingtheirownstandpointsintothedevelopingscript.

Each chapter endedwith an indicative still frame inorder toencourage the

beginning of next chapter and the evolving action entailed. The final result

compriseseight chapters, sixofwhichwhere createdby the luckywinning-participantsunderthedirectionofVincentLaforet7.

On the whole,Story Beyond the Still

represents one of the many examples

wheretheartifactinvitesaconjoinedinteractionofapluralityofindividuals

facilitatedbytheWeb(Schfer2008).

Fromprofessionaltoamateur

Formethegreathopeisnowthat8mmvideorecordersarecomingout,people

whonormallywouldn'tmakemoviesaregoingtobemakingthem.Andthatone

dayalittlefatgirlinOhioisgoingbethenewMozartandmakeabeautifulfilm

withherfather'scamcorder.Foroncetheso -calledprofessionalismaboutmovies

willbedestroyedanditwillreallybecomeanartform.

FrancisFordCoppola

Literature to date on participation has identified that consumers are

increasinglygettinginvolvedwiththeapparatusofproductionbyestablishing

anamateurcultureonaglobalscale(Schfer2008,41).Theavailabilityof

low-cost camcorders and digital cameras has encouraged more and more

peopletoembarkonfilm-making.However,apartfromtheimportantrolethat

themassproductionofconsumergoodsplayed,theWebwasalsobehindthis

emerging culture. The Web has transformed from a static medium to an

interactive one, namely known as Web 2.0, where people engage in thegenerationandpresentation ofmedia contentto large audiences. Insteadof

beingpassiveconsumerstheaudiencesarenowturnedintoactiveproducers

creatingnewsocialspacesforgrassrootsculturalproductions(Jenkins2003).

6 http://fstoppers.com/vincent-laforets-the-story-beyond-the-still/7

http://www.openculture.com/2011/01/beyond_the_still_.html


8/14

Interestingly, as Francis FordCoppolacomments, the fact that everyonecan

become a part of the production process, establishes the ground to

amateurisminthecreativepracticesincontrasttothestrictprofessionalismof

the20thCentury.

Thisarisingpopularculturehasopenedthewayforcreativeexpressionand

collaboration.Amateurfilm -makerscannowproduceeditanddistributetheir

filmsandradicallychangetraditionalwaysofproduction.Budgetisnolongera

barrierforcreativity;filmproductionsnolongeremanatefromtheelitefew.

Whetheroneisshootingashortfilmorafriendsgathering,thenewartifact

has now become soeasily accessible thataspiring amateur film-makers are

enthusiasticallyparticipatingintheproductionprocess.

WhilenavigatingtheWeb,onecanfindvariousexamplesofamateurcollective

films.Forinstance,the2008participatoryfilmManwithamoviecamera,for

theproductionofwhichmanypeoplearoundtheworldsharedtheircreativity.

This collective production is inspired by 1929 Dziga Vertovs silent

documentaryfilmwiththeaimtointerprettheoriginalfilm8.Thewebsitethat

hoststhisparticipatoryendeavorincludesalistof everyshotinVertovsfilm

along with a brief summary ofwhat each shot entails. The purpose of the

websiteistoinspireandguidetheparticipantsonthecollectiveprocess.Each

of the participants can contribute from an entire scene to a short shot or

multipleshotsfromdifferentscenes.Accordingtothewebsite ,everydayanew

version is constructed adding different perspectives and interpretations so

that each contribution becomes part of the global remake and screened in

tandem with the original. Interestingly, the software that empowers this

collaborative effort leaves theparticipantwith theentire freedomto choose

where to place their shotwhile the software synchronizes and streams the

mediacontentsasalinearfilm9.

Similarly, Life in a day, the most elaborate crowd-sourced art project in

history 10 , is the result of an idea conceived between award winning

documentarian KevinMacdonald and theproducer RidleyScottwho invited

8 http://dziga.perrybard.net/9

http://tiff.net/filmsandschedules/tiff/2010/manwithamoviecamerat#filmnote10according to WiredMagazine http://www.wired.com/underwire/2011/01/life-in-a-day-

review/


9/14

people fromall over the world to visualize how a normal day of their lives

could be as long as it was captured on July 24th, 2010. The enormous

participation and enthusiasm from film-makers all over theworld, led to a

media contentsourceof 80,000videos that addedup to4,500hours ofraw

footage.AllthesubmissionswerethenhandedovertoeditorJoeWalkerwho,

along with t he director, eventually limited the footage to 90 minutes,

encompassing different motivations, perspectives, stories and experiences

surrounding that particular day. For this collaborative achievement, users

aroundtheworlduploadedinYouTubefootagecreatedoncellphones,cheap

consumercameras,orhighdefinitionones.Whateverthecamerasusethough,

high definition, or low definition, expensive or cheap, the segments

consolidationshowcasesathrillingmontagepicturingasingledayonearth11

.

Altogether,ManwithaMovieCameraandLifeinaDayrepresentfineexamplesofhowglobalcollaborationcanbeachievedbyencouragingculturallydiverse

participation enabledbytheartifact andfacilitated through theWorldWide

Web.

Produsage:TheCaseofStroome

Recenttheorizinginfilm-makinghasidentifiedcasesofconvergencebetween

the production and consumption processes. New hybrid terms such as

produserorprosumerhavebeenappliedinordertodescribeanewmode

of cultural production in which participants can act as both producers and

consumersoftendubbed as produsage.Thenewmedia scholarAxelBruns

remarks, that theconceptofprodusage creates a heterogeneousandhybrid

space and emphasizes the role of software in facilitating these collective

processes(2008).

11 http://blog.moviefone.com/2011/01/27/life-in-a-day-review-sundance/


10/14

SoftwarehasdrawnattentionbothfromAxelBruns(2008)andthesociologist

and anthropologist Bruno Latour (1992, 2005) in an effort to describe the

agency of digitally created artifacts enabled by the software. As Shferemphasizes,defining participationmerely as an activity performedbyusers

neglects the agency of the software design that channels these activities

(2008, 122). For example, in the case of Stroome12, an online collaborative

videoeditingcommunity,whereuserscanuploadmediacontent,shareitwith

othermembersofcommunityandcollaborativelyeditituntilitispublished.

Video editing inStroomeoffers film-makers thepotential totransformpost-production processes into a less solitary and more communal endeavor. In

addition, the Stroome platform affords produsage by allowing users (bothproducers and consumers) to mix it up and mash it out

as the website

suggests,meaningthattheycansimplyuploadvideos,directlyeditorremixthemandeventuallypublishthem.Thesoftwaredesignedforthisprocess,the

dashboard,helpsusersuploadandremixtheirvideos,watchthemostrecently

updatedvideoswiththecustomizedrecommendationsystem,keepup-to-date

withtheirfriendsprojects,tag,commentandrate.Additionally,thedashboard

of Stroome facilitates dissemination processes by providing embeddedapplications such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, MySpace and BlogSpot. AsBrunsobserves,softwareaffordancesopenupnewhorizonsforcreativityout-

distancingtraditionalmediaprocessesandromanticnotionsoftheartistbeing

the primary auteur13 (2008). In general, Stroome constitutes an onlineparadigm of the growing blur between the spaces of production and

consumption.

DigitalDistributionthroughtheInternet

Both professional and amateur film-makers, can benefit from the Web,

showcase their creativeoutput and get greater visibility. Since theweb has

become a common contentdistributionmediumwith low barriers to entry,

almostanyonescreativeactivitieshavethepotentialtothrive.Anincreasing

numberof film-makershave recently started todistribute their filmswithin

online media networks paving the way to other creative people who enjoysharingtheirmediaoutput. YouTube forinstance,isanonlinevideonetwork

12 http://www.stroome.com13In film criticism, auteur theory argues that a director's film reflects the director's personal

creative vision, as if he or she were the primary "auteur" (the French word for "author")


11/14

thatallowsuserstodiscoveroriginally -createdvideosormash-upvideos,as

wellasuploadanddistributetheirownones.

The featuresofYouTubearedesigned tofacilitatecollaborativeprocessesbyprescribingskillsandcompetencestotheusers.Bydoingso,aslongasusers

have a broadband Internet connection they can access a great amount of

cultural products, connect with other people, and collaborate and circulate

media content. The outstanding potential behind such participatory video

portalslaysinthefactthatalmostanyonewhoownsthetechnologicalmeans

torecordanduploadavideoclipcanshareitonline.Thesimpleandeasy-to-

use interfaceofYouTubeallows theuserstomakethemostoftheirYouTubeexperience

14byidentifyingtheirdesireinoneofthefeaturessuggested:

watch,

discover, share,personalize, and upload. Byembedding their videos tosocial

networkingcommunities,aswellasuploadanddirectlyedittheirvideos,users

canperformvarious activities, fromwatchingmedia content in3Dandhigh

definitiontosubscribingtochannelstheyareinterestingin.

Conclusion

Technologicaladvanceshaveradicallychangedthewaymoviesareproduced

and consumed. The advent of the Internet and Web 2.0 has empowered

consumerstobecomeactiveintheproductionprocess,thusestablishingthe

ground for the amateur culture to thrive. In the case of Stroome, the low

technological barriers to entry and the easy to use interface results in the

creation of hybrid spaces where producers and consumers converge. In

addition,thedesignofStroomesplatformencouragesuserstocollaboratively

generateanddistribute theirfilmsto largeaudiences;activitieswhichwould

traditionally take place remotely or across a distance. Online collaborative

videonetworks such usStroome, have provided access to media tools to a

broadsegmentofusersfosteringgrassrootscreativity.

In2009,theauthorandnewmediascholarLevManovichquestionswhether

art is still possible after Web 2.0 as he claims that mass production and

consumptionmakeprofessionalproductions irrelevant.Muchof thecurrent

debatehasfocusedonwhatthefutureholdsforfilm-makingbutthepasthas

14 http://www.youtube.com


12/14

shown that in every emerging technology there is always a utopian and

dystopian controversy. Walter Benjamins manifesto still seems pertinent.

However, what one can certainly observe is that art can no longer [be] a

pursuitforafew(Manovich2009,329).


13/14

Literature

Benjamin,Walter.1969.TheWorkofArtintheAgeofMechanical

Reproduction.Illuminations,ed.HannahArendt.NewYork:SchochenBooks.

Bolter,J.David.1991.WritingSpace:TheComputer,Hypertext,andtheHistoryofWriting.Hillsdale,NewJersey:LawrenceErlbaum.

Bruns,Axel.2007.Produsage:TowardsaBroaderFrameworkforUser-led

ContentCreation.PaperpresentedatCreativity andCognition6,1315June,

URL(consultedJune2007):http://snurb.info/files/.

Charney,Leo.andSchwartz,V.R.(eds)1995.CinemaandtheInventionof

ModernLife.UniversityofBerkeleyCaliforniaPress.

Christodoulou,S.P.and,GergiosD.Styliaras2008.Digitalart2.0:artmeetsweb2.0trend.DIMEA.Proceedingsofthe3rdinternationalconferenceonDigitalInteractiveMediainEntertainmentandArts .NewYork,NY,USA:ACM,

158165.

Cornwall,Anrea.2002.Makingspaces,changingplaces:situatingparticipation

indevelopment.InstituteofDevelopmentStudies.

Cornwall,Natalia.2009.CollaborationandFilmmaking. nataliacornwall.phantomself.org.

Deshpande,Shekhar.2010.AnthologyFilm.TheFutureIsNow:FilmProducer

AsCreativeDirector.WideScreen 2no2.NorthAmerica

Fabe,Marilyn.2004.CloselyWatchedFilms:AnIntroductiontotheArtofNarrativeFilmTechnique.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress

GottdeinerMark.1994.TheSocialProductionofUrbanSpace .Austin:Univ.

TexasPress

Hansen,Miriam.1983.EarlySilentCinema:WhosePublicSphere?NewGermanCritique.29:147-84.

Jenkins,Henry..2003.QuentinTarantinosStarWars?DigitalCinema,Media

Convergence,andParticipatoryCulture.DavidThorburn&HenryJenkins(Eds .),

RethinkingMediaChange:TheAestheticsofTransition .Boston:MITPress.281 -

315.

Jenkins,Henry.2006a.ConvergenceCulture:WhereOldandNewMediaCollide .

NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress.


14/14

Jenkins,Henry.2006.ConfrontingtheChallengesofParticipatoryCulture:

MediaEducationforthe21stCentury.BuildingtheFieldforDigitalMediaandLearning.Chicago:MacArthur.

Latour,Bruno.1992.WherearetheMissingMasses?SociologyofaDoor .

ShapingTechnology/BuildingSociety.StudiesinSociotechnicalChange ,ed.

WiebeBijkerandJohnLaw,Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress,225-259.

Latour,Bruno.2005.ReassemblingtheSocial:IntroductiontotheActor-Network

Theory.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Lefebvre,Henri.1991.TheProductionofSpace.Oxford:BlackwellPublishers.

Manovich,Lev.2009.ThePracticeofEveryday(Media)Life:FromMass

ConsumptiontoMassCulturalProduction?CriticalInquiry35.2.319-331.

Monaco,James.1981.HowtoReadaFilm .ed.NewYork:OxfordUniversity

Press.

Naficy,Hamid.2010.Multiplicityandmultiplexingintodayscinemas:Diasporic

cinema,artcinema,andmainstreamcinema .JournalofMediaPractice11:1,

1120.

Schfer,Mirko.T.2008.BastardCulture!:Userparticipationandtheextensionof

culturalindustries.Utrecht:UtrechtUniversity.PhD.

Documents

Film-Making Goes Digital. The transformation of the artefact and the consequent impact in the production and consumption processes