UWOL#35 - "Flight of a Phantom" by Geir Inge B. Brekke

[Geir Inge]

First plan was to make a video where I show different ways of moving.
I filmed saltwater snails, waders, various insects (spiders). Creatures on two legs, four legs and more.
It was all consuming and I did not feel I made progress in the work.
Many thoughts buzzing around in my head. How will this end?
So I thought myself away from the animal world and started to think about how we humans moves.
One of the definitions is that we travel. Sure, we walk, run and climb as well.
Still, I ended up with the idea "to travel" and many questions emerged.
How should I deal with the concept?
Where should I go?
What should I shoot?
Should it be patchy, or a kind of common thread?
Generally I've done videos with commentary, continue with it?
Locomotion is about different forms of movement, and what I thought the first round was easily seemed suddenly very hard.
Then I decided to cut comment, filming exclusively with my new DJI Phantom 3 drone and find suitable music to add on.
I have traveled around the district where I live. Deep valleys, high mountains, in the city, the countryside and the islands on the coast.
It has become a video where the image is constantly in motion. A nice mix I hope?
It is often like that up in the air. Turbulence and wind can be challenging, as with rain.
Tilt and pan can also be demanding exercises, especially as an amateur.
The main thing is that I am happy with the result.
The video shows traffic, different types of roads. Sea and land, hand in hand with city life and pure wilderness.
Hope you do not get dizzy and that you like the video.
Feel free to comment.

Flight of a Phantom on Vimeo

[Marj Atkins]

This is very well done Geir - beautiful scenery and well-synced to the music. Your skill at controlling the Phantom is improving every time you submit an entry. The shots are very steady.

Story-wise it is a bit lean with just a series of aerial views but enjoyable to watch nonetheless.

In my opinion, your film is not on theme. While I understand that you have interpreted the topic ‘locomotion’ as ‘travel’ the remote-control of an inanimate object is not really in the spirit of the theme.

What I think would have made this film and made you win hands-down is if you had used this footage to discuss bird flight very briefly. You could have filmed birds taking off and flying and used your beautiful footage to illustrate how they see the world. Some of your shots were low so you could easily have used different species mixed in with the aerial shots.

Thanks for sharing this Geir.

[Kevin Railsback]

Geir,

Love the Phantom shots!
I'll be starting a fundraising campaign soon for a documentary on tallgrass prairies and the Phantom 3 is on my wish list.

I think you are very much on theme by many definitions of the word locomotion.

Several definitions of locomotion are:
1. The act of moving from place to place.
2. The ability to move from place to place.

Your film works for both definitions.

The idea I had was kind of along the same lines with the rotation of the earth, the flow of water, wind etc.

You have some incredible scenery there my friend!

[Trond Saetre]

Originally Posted by Kevin Railsback

Several definitions of locomotion are:
1. The act of moving from place to place.
2. The ability to move from place to place.

Your film works for both definitions.

Originally Posted by Trond Saetre

LOCOMOTION

Anything that walks, hops, runs, jumps, crawls, swims, slithers, scurries, shuffles and/or flies – however they get around whether in leaps and bounds or a slow as a snail – here’s your chance to explore the wonderful world of locomotion.

The description of the theme did not limit the the flying objects to living creatures, and the way I see it, the quadcopter is used as a camera platform to show movement from a bird's perspective.
This video is therefore within the theme.

[Marj Atkins]

Thank you for clarifying that for everyone Trond and that is how it will stand – this movie is considered to be on theme and I WILL RESPECT that decision.

I must, however, state that I strongly disagree:
Going on this premise means I could have been driven around in a car (platform for the camera) and filmed beautiful scenery to give a Zebra’s eye view of the world or stuck my camera on a skateboard and given a worm’s eye view but what would that have had to do with the topic of locomotion?

UWOL has always been about filming nature and wildlife (fauna and flora) on a specific topic. This particular film is about the locomotion of a man-made remote controlled inanimate object that does not have the ability to act or move on its own (referencing the definitions quoted by Kevin). No mention was made of a bird’s eye view in this film or in its name.

My apologies Geir. You submitted a great entry and I do not want to detract from that at all – besides I would any day rather see your beautiful movie, even if I personally feel it’s not on theme, than nothing at all which is fast becoming the norm around here . . . unfortunately.

The reason I am making a fuss about this is that lately there has been a lot of theme twisting (as opposed to acceptable unique interpretations of the theme) and complaints about the limitations imposed by having a pre-amble to the topic. The theme is the theme – that’s the challenge. Start shifting the goal posts and you might as well not have a topic at all.

[Mick Jenner]

Hi Geir, lovely clips, pleased to see you are getting on well with the phantom, you have got the hang of Ariel composure well. Have to agree with Marge though in that its mainly a composition of clips without any story to link to the theme. Although you you have used locomotion to film plus mood music its lacking either visually or verbally a connection early on to illustrate that link.

I find it very hard to comment constructively as like most of on here in the past I have submitted entries that have been adapted to fit what you have manage to film, not what we would have like to have filmed, so consequently don't always turn out as we wish. I have long felt our comments should reflect that fact.

To summarise Geir your footage was really good, just needed a story to link it together and draw you to and hi-lite the locomotion element.

Hope that makes sense

Mick

[Geir Inge]

First I want to thank everyone who commented on my video. I greatly appreciate the feedback, tips and advice. That's how it should be in a forum like this, and that it happens in a proper and constructive manner. I think that at all times we have been good at just that, in this forum. It is one of the reasons why I like it so much.

I understand that there is some disagreement about whether my video is in line with the theme or not. Well, dear friends. Given we operate with a theme, it is clear that it should be the subject of criticism.
As it says in Rule No. 9: "Videos should be judged 50% on the best use of theme and 50% on overall production value."
So I think it's great that topic being discussed and that different perspective emerges. It should, after all, count 50% when voting.
One may then disagree whether one has struck theme or not. Nevertheless, it makes sense to discuss this, and definitions as well. As surely many know, a topic can have multiple definitions. A single term can mean several things and have different meanings in different settings and in different countries. The answer is not at all times given and it is the individual that applies.
"Locomotion" is a term with multiple definitions.

Here are three (short version):

1) In physics, motion is a change in position of an object with respect to time. Motion is typically described in terms of displacement, distance (scalar), velocity, acceleration, time and speed.[1]

2) Animal locomotion, in ethology, is any of a variety of movements that results in progression from one place to another. Some modes of locomotion are (initially) self-propelled, e.g. running, swimming, jumping, flying, soaring and gliding. There are also many animal species that depend on their environment for transportation, a type of mobility called passive locomotion, e.g. sailing (some jellyfish), kiting (spiders) and rolling (some beetles and spiders).

3) Travel is the movement of people between relatively distant geographical locations, and can involve travel by foot, bicycle, automobile, train, boat, airplane, or other means, with or without luggage, and can be one way or round trip. Travel can also include relatively short stays between successive movements.

As I see it, my video is well within theme.

The reason I will explain as follows:
At the beginning of the movie, I give in the form of text, a brief description of the site/area you are about to see. At the end of the film I give, even in text form, from reliable names of all the places you have "visited". If some think it has been an easy video to make, I emphasize that it has not been easy.
Every single site is carefully picked out and I have had several hiking to reach base for filming. I also made numerous recordings which have been rejected due to turbulence, wind and unfavorable / bad angles.
Opening clip where I stand and gaze at the valley, it takes me two hours to drive there one way.
It is in the same area I have filmed the road with curves. Clip starting 0:35 it takes me one hour to go up, with equipment on my back. I've been on this mountain three times, just to get just the blue sky and the sun in the mountains.
It is not "just" to start the drone and start filming wildly. It's part of planning that is required, and that the circumstances and conditions have to be on my side.
If my camera is on a tripod, or floating in the air, it is nevertheless dependent on my control and my skills as a filmmaker. It is not the technology itself.

I agree that one should not pulverize the importance of sticking to the theme. But at the same time I think it's important to have an open mind about these things.
Nevertheless, I consider my video to be a pictorial travelogue. A journey in which I take the viewer to places you might not get to visit. Or conversely, put some on the idea of taking journey itself.
We must not forget that the film is fiction. We serve a slice of reality. Then we experience that the viewer takes it further and make it to their own dream or reality.
The way the film is made, or what recording equipment we use is in this context irrelevant.
As I have mentioned, I have worked hard to put together the various cliffs and it was not easy. I am also pleased with the result.
So we get, good friends, just agree to disagree.

I will watch your movies this weekend and give my feedback.
It concerns me that only 4-5 participate in each round, but perhaps best to discuss in another thread.

[Mick Jenner]

Hi Geir, love the the robust defence of your film. As you have you have taken time to explain your thinking etc and the efforts you have made to obtain the the footage, incidentally footage that I think is superb, I will try and explain my comments re the story line in greater depth.

When I view an entry I do not read the attached explanations until after I have watched the film.I have always been told the film tells the story. With your film I was left wondering all the way through where are we going with this, what is the purpose of all these lovely ariels. It was not until the end when we saw you operating the drone. Without narration you needed to somehow at the start create some drama to illustrate the locomotive journey we are about to embark on that would draw you in and take you on that journey. Maybe film the a take off from the ground and then a cut away to the drone looking at you, panning round to the valley, then speeding off along it. That way you have set the scene for an ariel journey, similarly filming the drone landing at the end with maybe you picking up and walking out of frame. Captions as we changed location would have driven the journey along rather than have them list at the end.

Hope this is a better explanation than on my original post. Mick

[Paul Wood]

Well said Mick,

Without getting into the whole issue of the theme discussion (which is for personal interpretation), I enjoyed your film, Geir Inge, but was left wondering why I was seeing this footage - especially with the pans - If you had started with a shot of a Falcon (insert bird/drone of choice), and then the footage would have made more sense, as you would have known where you were ( from the camera´s point of view).

An excellent choice of shot and music, and very enjoyable - for me, it just lacked a ¨hook¨to get me into why I was seeing it - If I didn't know what a Phantom was from the title.

[Kevin Railsback]

Geir,

I think you're soon on with the theme just with the definition of "The ability to move from place to place."
Doesn't say anywhere that it has to be capable of doing it on it's own.

As soon as I had my idea I messaged Trond because my idea had nothing to do with animals or things that on their own could move.
The fact that they could move from one place to another fit the description I found in the dictionary so until they update it to say under it's own control then your theme and my idea are both valid.

I do like my idea enough that I will finish the film but I'm thinking it will take a year at least to do in order to get all the shots needed for it.

Do you have limitations on flying a drone in Norway? Here the FAA says we can only go up to 400 feet.
I know some places people are taking their Phantom 3's up over 5000 feet! Crazy stuff!

I hear the new guidelines the FAA is coming out with next year may allow us to go to 500 feet. I hope so!!

[Geir Inge]

Kevin: Previously you had to apply for permission from the Civil Aviation Authority, to fly drones. This is revoked, and now we have a trial that provides free access for drones. Some restrictions are still, as at airports, military sites and bird sanctuary etc.
Since 2011 there have been 15 accidents and 23 incidents where drones are involved.
It is estimated there are around 20,000 drones in Norway today and just this year it's been reported 18 accidents and incidents where drones are involved. The discussion is now about how to regulate and regulations will certainly come shortly.
When this round of Uwol is over, I was going to show clips from my recordings.
Among other things, I had an accident during the filming of the curved road. Just before landing, about 1 m above the road surface, there came a gust of wind and blew drone straight into the front of a parked car. Car owner, who was from Estonia, was very nice and was more interested in the drone than in the scratch on the car. Lucky me.

Marj, Mick and Paul (since you have comparable comments): Thank you for your feedback. I'm not defending my video, I just emphasizes that it is in line with the definition of locomotion. Whether someone gets something meaningful out of the video, is an entirely different matter. Whether there is a lack of history, comments, the red thread, editing etc. I am grateful for all the good advice and tips. At least you say you enjoyed it, it's something I really appreciate.
Norway has a strong tradition to go hiking in the mountains and being outdoors.
Alone, with friends or with family.
One does not go out to tell a story, or experience a special angled history, although there may be individual reasons for the trip. Most people go out just to enjoy nature as it is and feel free.
Getting air into the head, which I tend to call it.
You just take in what you experience there and then.
Normally, I work with disabled people.
Many of those who have disability will never experience nature because they are unable to get out in nature. I think a movie that shows nature as it is, may be nice to look at for those who never get the chance to get out in the mountains.
Mostly all my Uwol videos have had comments, a story to tell and some kind of wild creatures contributing. This time I chose differently and the choice was proven.
Finally, I am very pleased that my little video brings out discussion. I think that's healthy.

[Steve Siegel]

Geir,
Theme-wise your video may not have been what some of us expected, but skill-wise it it is simply remarkable. Your control is so good, especially where you rotated a few degrees at a time. I wouldn't have been surprised if you flew that thing through a hoop!

[Andrew Hood]

Well Geir, nobody can argue with that scenery. Stunning - makes me want to go places I've never been and explore them. The biggest thing I felt was missing was your normal format, going on an adventure where you tell a story. I still enjoyed the video, but I always look forward to your latest adventure where you tell us about some part of Norway and we get a real narrative as the film unfolds.

It's good the Phantom survived, and in the end Rule #11 prevails. Me, I just went skiing - it was fun first and story later. Thanks for sharing.