To IMAG or Not To IMAG

[Randman]

We recently had an accident during a service, and placed a video image of our pastor on the screen above the stage. He liked it, and now wants us to start doing IMAG. His feeling is that it will help draw the congregation in.

I am really against this, because our sanctuary is not that deep. The back rows still have a very good view of the pastor, and can see every expression on his face. I believe that it will be a distraction during the service, and is not necessary. My worship leader (my boss) says that he doesn't want a stationary image on the screen any more during the sermon. Again, I think anything else would be a distraction during the sermon.

My view is that IMAG should be used only when it is a necessity, and not because it is neat or cool.

What is everyone else's opinion?

[kac4him]

We were just talking about that at church a while back and the possibility's of the future and we all agreed that it was not necessary in our church. We have a similar situation all can see the pastor fine and though at the back rows it could be a benefit but the pastor felt that facial expressions was not something he used or relied on very much in the sermon

However a few hmm's were heard when the ideal of using imag for infant baptism confirmation and new members when the alter rail tends to get crowded and everyone wants to see the babies and faces of the new people ((we are going to wait for the new media-shout to come out and see how the live video works for that since we don't want to have to invest in imag equipment just to add a name and some basic info on a person)

I have plans to write a article on this very subject. I think you guys know how I feel about it. You can ask your pastor why you would want to waste screen time on a giant picture of him when you could be using it to amplify and support his message. Don't do IMAG if 1) you don't need it and 2) if you can't do it right. That means 3 or more broadcast quality cameras, pro tripods, proper lighting, all the necessary equipment (switchers, TBCs, and gadgets of all kinds, etc.). And you need very good people running the equipment. There is no room for error in IMAG.

Yeah, I feel like IMAG is just a big heavy burden. Unless you're just a huge church and really need it, or you are broadcasting (another article to write), you should put your efforts into better graphics, in-house video, and other media elements to support the service and tell the story. The screen is like a big paint canvas. Use your brushes wisely.

Good points, Tim. I have seen some bad IMAG before, and it really can take away from what's going on.

The same is also true for graphical support of a message or even song. I remember a sermon in a large auditorium once and when making a particular point he had the point flashing in bold yellow type behind him, and it continued to flash for 3-4 minutes. There is some places, I believe, where the screen needs to be black and let the power of the message take over.

Just an aside, bdaily. I know most Canadian code-freak designers who only want to work on Macs and blog a lot generally don't understand me, but you really should read my book. Just ask Doy! You'll find I'm a pretty balanced guy with a lot of good ideas . Doy was pleasantly surprised at the philosophies in my book...

LOL

No doubt Tim. And us code-freak Georgia ex-patriot Canadian machead bloggers stumble upon an acorn every once and a while as well

I hope I don't come off as difficult in here, I just like trying to stretch the way we think so we're always evolving what we do in order to do the best job possible. Anywho, love the community, keep it up and I will pick up the book soon (where's the PDF version ) < / aside >

BTW nice going with the XHTML 1.0 Trans DTD....very bleeding edge Only a code freak notices those things!

Oh, I'm just yanking your chain. I like to mess with guys like you. What made me think of it was the "blank screen" comment. I'm one of the few Church Media leaders that thinks it's okay to not use the screen all the time. Get the book -- you'll see we have more in common than you think.

[revbilly]

I want to reaffirm what tim has to say about IMAG and quality images related to the central theme, visual parable or metaphor (whatever your worhsip team calls it) of the worship service. IMAG, in my humble opinion, takes away the whole digital engagement of the congregation and focuses once again on the spoken word and the speaker.

This may not be bad in a huge sanctuary or auditorium but for most of us, it's just not needed the congregation can see the worship team and pastor jsut fine.

What IS needed is quality visual interpretation of the theme, visual parable or metaphor that helps draw the congregation into the presence of God. And engages them on a visual level. That, by the way, can't really be done with yellow flashing letters. We've got to move away from the business board room model of boring us with bullet points and outlines. What the business board room model is is simply a directed handout where they read us the mail.

We need to move into thinking of the visuals of this digital culture as tools to proclaim the message of Jesus. The saying "a picture is worth a thousand words" is so true. Let me give you an example. I was preaching on the seven deadly sins and was trying to find an image that adequately made one think of anger wihtout have an angry face. I dind't want the visiuals of any one person in particular. I wanted to identify the emotion and feeling.

I found a photo of the shadow of a passenger plane over the top of a piney forest. nearly everyone immediately thought of 9/11. It drew them into their own still unresolved anger over the terrorist attack. If I had simply flashed the word "anger" on the screen, it wouldn't have been as effective and we wouldn't have gone as deep in dealing with the emotion.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents. I would avoid IMAG unless you can do it production quality and really have a need.

[Randman]

I'm one of the few Church Media leaders that thinks it's okay to not use the screen all the time.

Count me in, also. I discussed with my worship leader that there was one particularly interesting Sunday where the Powerpoint person had used a very dark background for the slide, and they blended into the black curtain behind the screen. When the words came up, they looked like they were floating, and then they were gone, and the focus went back to the pastor. I thought that looked great, as opposed to the normal slide background.

We are currently doing a two camera shoot of the services, and have the equipment to put up IMAG. I'm just not sure we have the expertise to make it look good. It dawned on me one Sunday that shooting IMAG is totally different than shooting for broadcast. If we dont' do it right, it will be a distraction.

Just mirroring some of the comments from above and agreeing with everyone else.

On a somewhat aggresive/mean note, if your preaching minister feels that he's not "drawing people in", I think that can only be solved with him changing his sermon style/structure.

Good preaching is good preaching and having great graphics, IMAG, or whatever won't make an "average" sermon "great". Sure, they can do a very good job of supporting the message, but they can't replace a solid sermon.

Remember we're supposed to be a part of worship not the main attraction OR distraction.

Imag unless done well will be very distracting. You don't need lots of gear or 6 cameras to do it well.

I fall into the camp of just because you can, doesn't mean you have to.

We ran an overflosw for 2 years before we started doing Imag on Sundays.

I directed for broadcast for almost 10 years and I had to re-learn how to direct.

I sat in an empty Worship Center and viewed a tape of a service on our screens and I made myself sea-sick with all of the camera changes and so on. I ended up cutting down on the quantity of shots used during the message by almost 3/4 and we started getting complements on how good it looked.

[sempei13]

How about more information? When you say, "fairly shallow" what size is that? How many people do you have in your largest service?

If you see people shifting in their seats to see what's on stage, I'd say you might NEED to do Imag. I do agree that "cool" is not a good reason. My church just started full service Imag this past sunday. With a new church record of 850 people on Sunday (split between two services), it's quickly becoming necessary. We'll soon need another service or a "riff raff room" like Ellen has on "Ellen". Just kidding. Although a video cafe may not be a bad idea.

I offer a little more grace w/Imag b/c the people are there. I will say that the cams serve to draw attention, so our drama was funnier b/c I put up a reaction from the actor who couldn't believe the silly situation he was in.

Paul