Perhaps these threads might be useful / related (?):

The Pros and Cons of Anonymity

Online Anonymity at the Expense of Blog Credibility?

Assignment: Free Speech & Assasination Politics

Nice start. There are many creative ways to play with identity. Shoot the walls, shoot hands drawing and writing, lots of closeups and tight shots that give the feeling of enclosed space and entrapment, heavy reggaeton yes yes, my neighborhood is famous for it.

Most of the energy of a person can be shown in their hands alone. They may want to show you special tattoos too, just enough to let themselves be known without feeling completely revealed.

cool evonne - i was thinking about hands too. my idea so far was to make the whole set up a 'wrestling match' - and arm wrestling match so there'd be a reason to shoot some muscle with maybe voice over of the youth who's wrestling... maybe could even tie in masks, but not sure...

i was thinking about tatoos also evonne - and i don't think we'd want those shown either you know? the kids will risk retaliation for 'speaking out,' and you know tatoos are like communication...!

nmw, my question is oriented toward the practicalities of video/television production and less to the theories of speech and identity on the Internet. hope that helps clarify my need.

Well, it doesn't clarify it for me -- but maybe I just don't understand what you're talking about well enough (I don't see what significant difference there is).

in a nutshell nmw, how do you record a compelling story about an individual using the camera lens without revealing enough about them so that someone can identify who they are and whack them?

is that clear enough? as far as i can tell you pointed me to articles in which identity is managed entirely differently, through things like IP addresses and handles, which as far as i can tell is not information revealed about a person during a camera session.

we're talking faces, unique physical attributes that serve as visual markers which, for the safety of the interviewee, need to be obscured or simply not revealed through camera techniques.

a simple, cheesey example is strong backlighting of a subjecy so that their facial features are in such strong shadow as to be impossible to discern.

I hope that helps you understand the situation better.

OK, so the question is not "whether to anonymize" but rather "how to anonymize" -- and/or the kinds of issues a person like Malcolm X (or a similar "public" figure) might deal with / have dealt with on a daily basis.

I think the validity of any statement made is on a stronger foundation without anonymity -- and I think such issues were addressed in the threads I linked to.

It seems like a "have your cake and eat it too" scenario -- anonymization will have to make it less real and/or less personal.

So I guess you're saying anonymization is a must -- and the question is how to simply maximize "reality" and "personalization" given that it must be anonymous.

Is that right?

lars what about focussing on scars ?

i am always so intrigued by them. they can be very subtile and hidden away (mostly unlike tatoos), they are often very small and don't look like nothing much, until the story comes up. Scars are so personal, and the story can be very emotional...or funny...or..

scars have a rough beauty! maybe like them in prison.. (if you believe in the inner beauty of every human being!)

I could imagine that scars might be so personal that they might disclose the person's identity (?)

nmw wrote:

So I guess you're saying anonymization is a must -- and the question is how to simply maximize "reality" and "personalization" given that it must be anonymous.

Exactly! Sorry to not have been more clear :)

Frerieke, interesting idea. Knowing guys, they've probably showed them off before, and thus - like a tattoo, and as nmw is saying - could very much be an identifier. its a neat angle that tells a story though. i'll see what the producers think.

(thanks for the invite :)

So this is a real thing (documentary) -- and a high profile celebrity comes to a prison, and interviews teen inmates?

Why not do a Ken burns thing where you slowly pan over images of some of the heavy things that happened, intermixed with their music -- let's say this is about gang violence -- you might have images of victims, crime photos, photos of victims when they were innocent looking children -- with the narration from the prisonsers -- transcripts -- read by someone matching the same ethnic and cultural demographic, but not the same person's voice (for their protection).

You can then intersperse this with really quick, dramatically lit shawdows of the person. Jump-cuts almost too fast to see. and, of course, where the shadows fall presents another set of possibilities.

It would be helpful to have more information -- more of an outline of what's going on.

For example: are the prisoners who are to be interviewed going to be the main characters in this "story"?

I have no formal training in film, but I have discovered a few things on my own by deconstructing what I have seen.

It seems to me that even most documentaries, are constructed as conventional "stories".

And some stories begin at the beginning, and others begin at the end (like Citizen Kane, or the interesting documentary "How to Draw a Bunny" -- where the story begins with the main character's death, and then the rest of the story is constructed as a odyssey of discovery -- where you look for the "WHY?" things happened (because we already know what happened) -- and then, when you reach the end -- you are back at the beginning -- and often with a better, but still incomplete understanding of what happened :)

So in your particular case, I'd be curious if the interviewed people would form the main characters that would be followed throughout the film.

In situations like that, just like in the movie "Mystery Train" or even in a typical Seinfeld episode -- you have a few main characters -- related by an overarching circumstance, yet each with their own narrative. In the case of Seinfeld, there might be a Jerry/George sub-story, an Elaine sub-plot, and a Kramer sub-story -- that are then loosely woven together, and then all come together in the end.

In your case, you might have this overarching circumstance that you are trying to get a handle on -- let's say that it's gang violence.

You then might pick 3-4 of the most interesting characters that you interview (some more sympathetic than others) -- that you are going to follow along this narrative path.

If I were going to do this -- I would try to develop a set of subtle visual and auditory styles (like a HTML style sheet :) -- which would -- for each character ( a basic color scheme, the rhythm, tempo, style of the soundtrack music, even the tempo of how certain edits are done.

(i.e. how many seconds long is the average shot? In action films, it's seldom more than a few seconds -- and sometimes a lot shorter. Whereas Woody Allen might hold the same frame for quite a bit longer -- just by doing this you can create a feeling of tension -- which can be tailored to particular personality types -- or like in the Matrix, they used a slight green tint to distinguish the dream-world from the real world -- little things like that :)

If you were willing to do a bit of simple "special effects", there are a lot more things that you can do --- for instance there is a version of Gimp that will work on individual frames of video, to apply special effects :)

I think that the trick is to minimize actual shots of the subject you are trying to protect, let him mostly provide the narrative to other images (like Ken Burns does) perhaps focus on hands , feet, a cigarette, over the shoulder shots (where you shoot your celebrity interviewer, from behind the back of the person you he is interviewing and you just see a blurred out portion of his head and shoulder, in the lower corner of the frame) -- shoot dramatically lit shadows of the subject. And use more than one camera (using one for getting these detail shots of hands etc..)

Are you free to tell us more about this?

cool harry - thanks! yeah, so its a little more mundane too: big reggaetone star is basically launching the first initiative of his foundation, which is going to provide education to improve life prospects of young violent offenders. the story is hype: a press the flesh situation where he gets to boost his credibility and draw attention to something he cares about. if it were a documentary, that could be cool. for now its a publicity cum awareness-raising effort.

"26 reporters, 6 countries, 5 cameras. a lot of exposure. I need something good." That's what I was given... Arm wrestling; biceps; muscles. That's all I got right now. Was also thinking hoodies; wrists tied; bright lights from on top. Or the celeb could go lotec loco and rub some vaseline on the lenses :P

So what are you asked to deliver? Just an idea or the actual final product?

do you have examples of this star's music videos?

Lars Hasselblad Torres said:

cool harry - thanks! yeah, so its a little more mundane too: big reggaetone star is basically launching the first initiative of his foundation, which is going to provide education to improve life prospects of young violent offenders. the story is hype: a press the flesh situation where he gets to boost his credibility and draw attention to something he cares about. if it were a documentary, that could be cool. for now its a publicity cum awareness-raising effort.

"26 reporters, 6 countries, 5 cameras. a lot of exposure. I need something good." That's what I was given... Arm wrestling; biceps; muscles. That's all I got right now. Was also thinking hoodies; wrists tied; bright lights from on top. Or the celeb could go lotec loco and rub some vaseline on the lenses :P

If I understood the "why" and "where" - as in where will this be viewed - , I'd have a better sense of how far to push anonymity. So going a little blind ... and drawing on discussions around City Within ...

Differentiate by performers/subjects strengths eg rhythm = fingers, sound = ears, lyrics = chin/throat. So "The Throat" talks about the power of lyric, etc ...

Honour the art. Honour the expression.

Two things Lars:

1. If I ask a question that, for whatever reason, you don't feel comfortable in answering -- just say so :) I understand how these things can work -- I just want to free myself from forever prefacing my questions with "If I may ask..." :)
2. The best way to guarantee anonymity -- is to simply never show the person at all, and certainly never use an actual voice. Anything other than that -- scars, tattoos, etc... will put you at risk. And if you are going to abstract it to a point where you think that anonymity is preserved (i.e. you have factored out all identifying features -- or at least think you did :) -- why not just use actors, and semi-generic tattoos? And keep it honest by securing honest transcripts.
3. is this a produced video -- or a live event ?

I also thought: hey, why not shoot scenes in everyday life of behavior (of other, "innocent" people) that is similar, that is built on a similar template, etc. -- but that are deemed OK?

I still don't get it, really. Someone is "standing up" for something -- who? If this is not revealed, then why?

harry, you can check out daddy yankees site and see his work. i was just asked by a friend to help her with some ideas. i thought i'd share the challenge here.

again, this is a celebrity who is launching a new philanthropic/education initiative and as part of it, needs to demonstrate the "need." this will involve some young people "speaking out" at a press event.

"speaking out" can out one at risk.

the challenge is to make this seem as "real" ie down to earth and valued by the inmates as possible, while establishing that DY is the right person to be doing this to the public - as far as i know.

nmw, don't lose any sleep over it ;)

I see.

Not a fan of the celebrity spokesmodel schtick. Suggest DY continue using his popularity to get "the word out" without exploiting (intended meaning) youth at risk.

BTW - good suggestions on the is thread

A Brazilian documentary I saw recently about immigration issues came up against the same issue and I think their solution was quite elegant--a combination of voice-alteration, silhouettes and use of animation to accentuate the issues involved.

www.brazilianimmigrant.com

Best from Dubrovnik!

david, great link thanks - i'll pass it along as a reference with a link back to your work.

[aside: is there somewhere you are writing about your experiences in dubrovnik? cheers!]

Animation is often used to simulate people talking, such as in This Film is Not Yet Rated.

Love the vaseline! ;-)

guess they went with a mask concept - we'll see! thanks for all the input. peter, i've been puzzling on the "at risk" reference. these youths are in jail - i'd say they are post-risk.

Lars said:

peter, i've been puzzling on the "at risk" reference. these youths are in jail - i'd say they are post-risk.

I realise they're in prison. Which makes them "at risk" - of prison being a cycle/career ...

That's an interesting use of the term - haven't heard it used that way - thanks!

Lars, I like people's suggestions above, but I'd actually try to get one, two or more of the young people to give permission to be photographed... it is hard to beat seeing people's faces and eyes. You'd be surprised at who might give permission. If that doesn't work, I'd suggest shooting the best you can to avoid faces (but don't avoid it unnaturally) and then deal with it in post production (e.g. blurring faces). That's my two cents.

Thanks Tony. I would not be surprised if getting permission to shoot young people was the main concern. I think its about protecting them, whether or not they feel in danger, know what I mean? Anyway, the team in Puerto Rico decided to use some masks - if I get pix I'll post here. Thanks for showin' up!