skip to main content
10.1145/2466627.2466628acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesc-n-cConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Facilitating TV production using StoryCrate

Published:17 June 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

StoryCrate [2] is a collaborative editing tool developed to drive creative workflow within a location based television production environment. The system was deployed in a real-world context, using professional production staff to produce a short film. In this paper we present an exploration into this deployment using interviews, observations and accounts from the crew. We provide an in-depth analysis of the study and the impact of StoryCrate on the crew's workflow. By providing a narrative of the deployment we describe how it was appropriated in-the-wild, and discuss considerations for designing tools to aid creative professionals in similarly hierarchical domains.

References

  1. Baer, J. The case for domain specificity of creativity. Creativity Research Journal 11, 2 (1998), 173--177.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Bartindale, T., Hook, J., and Olivier, P. Media Crate: tangible live media production interface. Proc. TEI '09, ACM Press (2009), 255--262. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Tom Bartindale, Alia Sheikh, Nick Taylor, Peter Wright, and Patrick Olivier. 2012. StoryCrate: tabletop storyboarding for live film production. Proc. CHI '12. ACM, 169--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Birks, M., Chapman, Y., and Francis, K. Memoing in qualitative research: Probing data and processes. Journal of Research in Nursing 13, 1 (2008), 68--75.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Braun, V. and Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, 2 (2006), 77--101.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Broth, M. The Production of a live TV-interview through mediated interaction. Proc. Logic and Methodology, (2004).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen, J., Withgott, M., and Piernot, P. Logjam. Proc. CHI '99, ACM Press (1999), 128--135. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Engstrom, A., Esbjornsson, M., Juhlin, O., and Perry, M. Producing collaborative video. Proc. uxtv '08, ACM Press (2008), 115. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Firestien, R. and McCowan, R. Creative problem solving and communication behavior in small groups. Creativity Research Journal 1, 1 (1988), 106--114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Goldman, D. B., Curless, B., Salesin, D., and Seitz, S. M. Schematic storyboarding for video visualization and editing. ACM Transactions on Graphics 25, 3 (2006), 862. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Gutwin, C. and Greenberg, S. Design for individuals, design for groups. CSCW '98, ACM Press (1998), 207--216. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Hall, A. L. and Rist, R. C. Integrating multiple qualitative research methods (or avoiding the precariousness of a one-legged stool). Psychology and Marketing 16, 4 (1999), 291--304.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Harada, K., Tanaka, E., Ogawa, R., and Hara, Y. Anecdote: a multimedia storyboarding system with seamless authoring support. Proc. MULTIMEDIA '96, ACM Press (1996), 341--351. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Harrison, J. Terrestrial TV News in Britain: the culture of production. Manchester University Press, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Iversen, G. R. Contextual Analysis, Issue 7, Part 81. SAGE, 1991.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Johnson, R. and Rogers, Y. Being in the thick of in-the-wild studies: the challenges and insights of researcher participation. CHI '12, (2012), 1135. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Jordan, B. and Henderson, A. Interaction Analysis: Foundations and Practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences 4, 1 (1995), 39--103.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Martin, R. and Holtzman, H. Newstream. EuroITV - 10, ACM Press (2010), 83.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Millen, D. R. Rapid ethnography. DIS '00, ACM Press (2000), 280--286. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Nakakoji, K., Yamamoto, Y., Akaishi, M., and Hori, K. Interaction design for scholarly writing: Hypertext representations as a means for creative knowledge work. New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia 11, 1 (2005), 39--67. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Orr, J. E. Narratives at work. CSCW '86, ACM Press (1986), 62.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Perry, M., Juhlin, O., Esbjörnsson, M., and Engström, A. Lean collaboration through video gestures. Proc. CHI '09, ACM Press (2009), 2279. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Polaine, A. The flow principle in interactivity. (2005), 151--158. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Randall, D. and Rouncefield, M. Fieldwork for Design: Theory and Practice. (2010). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Rogers, Y.; Ellis, J. Distributed Cognition: an alternative framework for analysing and explaining collaborative working. Journal of information technology 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Smith, J. A. Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods {Paperback}. Sage Publications Ltd; Second Edition edition, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Gunnar Stevens and Volker Wulf. 2009. Computer-supported access control. ACM Trans. CHI. 16, 3, Article 12 (Sept. 2009) Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Tripathi, P. and Burleson, W. Predicting creativity in the wild. Proc.CSCW '12, ACM Press (2012), 1203. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Tumminello, W. Exploring storyboarding. Cengage Learning, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Michael B. Twidale, X. Christine Wang, and D. Michelle Hinn. In Proc. CSCL '05. p687--696. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Ullmer, B. and Ishii, H. mediaBlocks. CHI '99, ACM Press (1999), 31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Verna, T. Live TV: An Inside Look at Directing and Producing. Focal Pr, 1987.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Warr, A. and O'Neill, E. Tool support for creativity using externalizations. Creativity & Cognition, ACM Press (2007), 127. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Wickens, C. D., Lee, J., Liu, Y. D., and Gordon-Becker, S. Introduction to Human Factors Engineering: International Edition. Pearson, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Zigelbaum, J., Horn, M. S., Shaer, O., and Jacob, R. J. K. The tangible video editor. Proc. TEI '07, ACM Press (2007), 43. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Facilitating TV production using StoryCrate

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      C&C '13: Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Creativity & Cognition
      June 2013
      433 pages
      ISBN:9781450321501
      DOI:10.1145/2466627

      Copyright © 2013 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 17 June 2013

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      C&C '13 Paper Acceptance Rate28of88submissions,32%Overall Acceptance Rate108of371submissions,29%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader