Parental permission (lack of)

[sleah]

Bit of a long shot and something I also need to ask on a professional video forum.

 

One of my many hats at school is the recording of concerts/plays etc. The issue of not having parental consent to film hasn't cropped up so far, but no reason to think it won't. I understand we have an 'opt-out' policy, but that's not my concern unless I'm asked not to film someone.

 

In the event of not having permission then I see three options.

1. It doesn't get filmed - simple!

2. We avoid catching said child on camera - near impossible and rules out pretty much all wide shots!

3. Blur them out in post-production.

 

1 & 3 being the only realistic options.

 

Has anyone here been in the situation and done number 3? Is it easy to do without hideously expensive professional software or processing hardware?

 

I'm using Adobe Premiere.

[timsabre]

I am in the same situation at our church, and our policy is to always go for option 1 (no filming/photographs) if there is someone present who cannot be filmed.

 

Blurring is possible but extremely time consuming and can cause a lot of angst at the event when the parent in question sees you with a camera. You then need to explain about the proposed blurring and convince them it will be effective. Better not to do it at all in my opinion.

 

Basically you create another track with a copy of the video to which you apply the pixel effect. Then use a mask with a circle in it to overlay the pixel effect only in the desired area. Use keyframes to move the mask around and resize to track the person (I use Vegas but it'll be similar in Premiere). If the person is moving a lot it takes a long time!

[sleah]

Thanks Tim.

 

Whether or not to film isn't my decision, so I'm not worried about making that call!

I may of course be asked if it's possible to blur...

 

Your method was what I also thought - very time consuming!

 

I wonder if there is a plug in that uses facial recognition to partly automate the process?

[kitlane]

If you have access to After Effects then you could get it track the face and create the keyframes for the mask for you. Still a bit of a pain but not as time consuming as manually keyframing.

[Shez]

I've done that in Media Composer; I think it was a BCC effect called "witness protection" which automatically tracks the object and was very quick & easy. The nature of the footage will of course dictate how well or otherwise that automatic tracking works.

I believe Boris works in Premiere and it has loads of other useful plugins too.

(I had a bit of fun with that effect

- all the silliness over specific corporate sponsorship of the Olympics drove me to it...)

[ImagineerTom]

For a whole host of reasons you're probably best off NOT making the recording in the first place. One of our shows does outreach events that get lots of vulnerable persons taking part and many schools want video's of the performances to show in school assemblies etc - as others have pointed out you spend half your time explaining to concerned people that you are going to blur out some of the faces and once you've got the footage you really need to cover your ass by ensuring you have documented (and secure) process's to track the raw footage and delete all copies/versions of it so that the only copy that exists in any format is the blurred one. All the paperwork, all the editing time quickly adds up to a lot of hassle just so that someone has a video they will only play when they're too bored to plan a proper lesson/assembly.

[ninjadingle]

+1 for not filming it.

 

IMO the consent is for their child to be FILMED. By not providing that consent they shouldn't be filmed in the first place, rather than filmed but not shown to anyone by means of editing or otherwise.

 

This is one of those areas where I see it as very black and white, with no grey.....

[Tregilibob]

As a school, we have an opt-out policy, which very few parents have chosen to follow, however, those that are not allowed to be filmed it is just that - not allowed.

As a Guide leader, as a unit we don't take their photos if they have opted out, and on larger events there are specific ways of identifying them not to be filmed - small green ribbon pinned to their top, kept at the back at filmed events so not able to be in focus.

[Owain]

In the event of not having permission then I see three options.

1. It doesn't get filmed - simple!

2. We avoid catching said child on camera - near impossible and rules out pretty much all wide shots!

3. Blur them out in post-production.

 

4. Remove child from the scene or version of the production that is being filmed. If this is only Third Tree on stage or Twenty-Seventh Triangle in the orchestra it shouldn't be a problem. If it's Mary or Joseph or a county music championship etc then irrevocable parental consent should be sought as early as possible in the audition process to prevent unfilmable children being put in irreplaceable positions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Brian]

...as early as possible in the audition process to prevent unfilmable children being put in irreplaceable positions.

 

Surely permission to film a child, or refusal thereof, ought not influence the casting, even subconsciously?

 

And is it not the case that some children simply can't legally be filmed, parental permission or otherwise?

[sleah]

4. Remove child from the scene or version of the production that is being filmed. If this is only Third Tree on stage or Twenty-Seventh Triangle in the orchestra it shouldn't be a problem. If it's Mary or Joseph or a county music championship etc then irrevocable parental consent should be sought as early as possible in the audition process to prevent unfilmable children being put in irreplaceable positions.

With my AV hat on, yes that would be the easy option!

 

However I'm sure no decent educator would exclude or overlook a child just because they can't be filmed.

If a digtal solution isn't acceptable, then the not filming option would be taken rather than push a child to the back who otherwise should be at the front, unless of course there were other reasons more than just filming the event.

BTW, I'm talking events taking in place in the school premises where we have reasonable control over filming/photography.

 

Surely permission to film a child, or refusal thereof, ought not influence the casting, even subconsciously?

 

And is it not the case that some children simply can't legally be filmed, parental permission or otherwise?

Indeed.

 

I've heard of cases of children going through the adoption process not being able to be filmed, I assume it is 'for legal reasons'.

 

 

Just to reiterate what I said before, to film or not to film is not my decision beyond technical or manpower reasons.

I am not involved in such decision processes. That's senior management's job.

I've been told I can film any events/activities unless told otherwise. I'll only 'go public' if asked or I already know it's for public consumption.

I do occasionaly question if something should go public, it's then down to management to say yay or nay.

[Dave m]

If the production involves seated kids, or stood in a choir type bunch, and the camera is on a stable tripod, it isn't too bad.But I have edited research material with hand held cameras and moving kids, only to be told that they now need to pixilate a kid. The more variables the harder it is

Premiere should allow key framing so that rather than '25 individual images a second, you can go for 1/100 or so and the software does the restProblem is if there are zooms and pans it takes time

When "in with the crowd" and a kid who can't be filmed, I try to stay as close to that kid as possible and it is hard to film them If they are in the background it's harder to spot them in shot

[Owain]

If you can film in the first instance, then need to blur out but can't do that in-house, there are companies that do this routinely for CCTV subject access requests.

[Jivemaster]

From the way all sorts of things that shouldn't, actually do end up on youtube (and other places) and .then get cut and copied into other people's vids, -so can never be recalled, I'd have to suggest that before being part of the production formal consent and release is irrevocable given to the establishment. No ifs No buts. No formal consent by a responsible adult then no part in the performance.

 

You also have to consider the more damaging prospect of an audience member (usu parents and siblings) taking "from the stalls" phone vids which never see censorship and will completely devalue any official attempt to blur faces, and are even more likely (to certain) to go to youtube.

[david.elsbury]

That's totally unrealistic. You can't limit participation like that.