Symmetry yrtemmyS

When learning the basics of composition it seems that above all else we're told to keep our object of interest away from the center of the frame. I've been told by various professors, YouTubers, and film books that these kinds of shots are boring to look at, visually unappealing, and overall can reduce the quality of a film. While in certain circumstances I admit that a symmetrical shot can come across as bland, I strongly believe that when done right these kinds of shot's can ut across a wealth of visual information.

Take for instance the work of Wes Anderson:

Though he may currently be the poster boy for symmetrical shots, I can think of very little instances in which the symmetry of the shot didn't add in some what to the content of the film. These kinds of shots don't take me out of the film, but rather draw me in to it's world and atmosphere. It's very rare that a serious drama would never design a shot that's as cloying twee as some of the examples posted above, but at the same time i don't think a lot of comedy films would benefit from the harsh lighting a lot of drama's benefit from.

It's all a matter of design really. If you feel that a shot would benefit from being arranged in a certain way, I really couldn't care less about what a book or professor might have to say. 

What I loved about Du Levande

After class Monday I couldn't help thinking about how much I enjoyed the brief clip of Du Levande we saw towards the end of the period. As soon as I got home I jumped online to get a better look at it, and perhaps identify what it was about Du Levande that ensnared me so. Take a look at the clip below to refresh your memory.

Now aside from having an incredible set design, I think what really captured my attention was the way the film strayed so fantastically from traditional narrative film. Instead of watching to unattainablely gorgeous people arguing over some fictitious drama, I was watching two obese people arguing on a park bench. What's more is that I related immediately to the characters in frame, I didn't need any sort of backstory explained to me or lengthy origin story behind why the bench woman was so miserable, I just got it. 

I wish that Hollywood would break away from the mold of talking head style films more. That's in part why I'm interested in pursuing a career in the commercial industry, I want to be able to experiment with different idea's without being forced to abide by the traditional Hollywood cinematic tropes.

Directing for Dummies

Welcome to the newest edition of "[insert random film crew position] for Dummies!" I'm you're host, Mike, and today we shall be delving into the world of the director. *Oooo ahhh* Now, I know what you're all thinking: "Duh! A director is the guy/girl that directs people!" You know what? You'd be correct in saying that. Go figure!

I'm sure you all know the basics of a director's job. I'm here today, though, to try to teach you a little something that you may not have already known. Let's start from the beginning. Now, after a director is hired by producers for a project, the director must then work side-by-side with the producers to cast actors for the film. This can be an extremely long and tedious process, but it's one that simply must be done. Clearly. Without quality actors, you can't possibly dream to have a quality film. Well, I guess you could, but that's all it would be: a dream.

Next up on the list of things to do, the director has to organize and select shooting locations. Of course, the director has location scouts working for him to truly find the best locations for shooting, but he has creative control and authority as to which locations will appear in the film. At the same time, the director interprets--and sometimes even writes or selects--the script for the film. The director rarely ever writes the script himself, but if he's not hired by a production house to direct the film, the director will often go out and find a script he'd like to work with. The location selections are hugely dependent on the script and the way the director interprets it, so the two steps are pretty much synonymous.

The director's next job is the last step before filming can begin. He must approve the sets, costumes, choreography (not present in most films), and music. These aspects of film are usually completely invisible to the untrained eye, or ear, because the only time most people will find them noticeable is when they are done incorrectly. If a film is set on a 1950s Japanese farm, and the actors are wearing tuxedos and sneakers with Kanye vaguely playing in the background, something went wrong...very, very wrong. It's the director's job to make sure mistakes like this never happen.

What else does the director do? Well I'm glad you asked! The rest of the director's work is pretty straight forward and most of you already know all of these things. But guess what! I'm going to tell you about it anyway! The director has a whole lot to do during production. The most obvious task is directing the actors. Whether it's explaining to actors how he wants them to portray their character in a given moment or if it's simply helping actors get into character, the director is the guy doing it. While doing this, the director also keeps the crew on track and makes sure everyone's doing what they need to be doing. Film shoots are generally tightly scheduled, so there's no time for excessive screw-ups and messing around. While doing this, the director also works with the cinematographers on shot composition and makes sure he likes what's in the frame.

Production is quite a daunting time for directors. They're basically the ringleaders for the wildest circuses on the planet. If they crack, the film is doomed to fail. The director must keep his cool so that everyone else does.

So now the film is shot. Yay! The only thing that's left for the director to do is work with the editors on creating first a rough cut and then a final cut of the film. The director gives his input throughout the process on what he thinks looks and feels better. Sometimes, this leads to reshoots of scenes or even cutting entire scenes from the film. But hey, who ever said directing was easy?

The Grand Budapest Hotel

I recently watched Wes Anderson’s film The Grand Budapest Hotel. It tells the advendtures of Gustave, a legendary concierge and Zero Moustafa the lobby boy who becomes his most trusted friend.

I thought it was very interesting and extremely well made. Wes Anderson’s films are known for their distinctive visual and narrative style. After watching this movie I can understand why. Every aspect of the film was planned and executed in a very specific manner. There are some great camera angles and very elaborate sets. I’ve never seen a movie with such precise camera movements. I didn’t really care for the story but the cinematography made the movie, at least for me. The movie could be paused at any point and each frame would look amazing. Every single frame is a mesmerizing and stunning composition of colors and textures. The constant flowing camera movements make you feel like you’re swimming through the hotel.  Basically, I just think it is a brilliant movie and everyone should see it.

A Bit to the Left

Should I move the camera a little bit to the left or a little bit to the right?

You stand back and strike the pose of a renaissance painter about to carve into marble and, while it’s no Venus de Milo, what you’re about to do is equally as delicate. But you’re on a schedule and if you don’t get the shot in the next five minutes, you could easily find yourself scraping your feet as you look for another job. Harsh, but this is serious business.

This is composition.

For those who don’t have the time, the willpower, or the want to read for themselves: composition is basically how things are put together in an image (moving or not). We can look at articles like Chris Knight’s “The Ultimate Guide to Composition,” as a bouncing off point.

Images in their basic simplicity, are made of lines. Lines that form boxes, lines that intersect, and lines that draw the viewers’ eyes to where they need to be. Think of composition as a laser pointer. It's a subtle technique that filmmakers will use to get someone to subconsciously focus in on one aspect of the shot. But just talking about the technical jargon behind a film doesn't necessarily teach us what that means. Why should we use center composition? What's the difference between diagonal and horizontal arrangements? Is composition really that big of a deal?

And my answer is: yes, it is.

But don't just take it from me. Don't just take it from Chris Knight. Take it from a physical product that was successful in its own right, that had this technique honed down to an art. Let's look at Pixar's The Incredibles. Directed by Brad Bird, and released back in 2004, the film is a cult classic (within animation).

Really, it's a movie you either love or hate and I will be the first to say I had been the latter up until a few years ago. Honestly, I could go on forever about why this movie was one of the most well-put together films of its genre (writing and plot issues aside), but today we'll focus on its composition.

For time's sake we'll look at its opening sequence:

Right away you'll notice these shots fall into what we call center composition. It's literally taking your point of focus and forcing it right into the middle of the scene. It's not something that most people recommend doing, and it's certainly not something that can be done well.

But why?

This in part, lies with how our brain takes in information. Yes, we have a certain affinity towards the symmetrical but there is something about focusing ourselves into the middle of an image that throws us off. Objects can be symmetrical, but an image has to have action. And that's the problem with centering your subjects. It immediately erases any depth around them and gets rid of the action in a scene. This is because your image has to literally stop in the middle. It's too abrupt for our senses to take in from a "two-dimensional" point of view. And it's boring.

But this is why it can be such a powerful tool as well. As seen in the above video, centering the shot only works to really set up the feel of the interviews. While candid, they don't do much to give us insight into how these characters works. Yes, yes, we understand how they might feel but for the moment we are the interviewers. The common public that looks at these heroes in quite a two-dimensional way. And that's the problem set up, because these heroes are human. They make mistakes and they certainly aren't gods.

For those who haven't seen it, the core of the movie is the dynamic between those who have superpowers and those who do not. For years, these heroes were idolized and put up on a pedestal. But through a series of events, their powers back-fire on them and they're forced to hang up the masks and gloves. They are forced to fit in. Yes, there's a lot more to the actual movie's plot but stay with me.

The above "interviews" only work because of the composition. The image is scaled down and positioned right smack dab in the middle of the frame. Adding to that, they've made it so every character is also put within the middle of their own shot. This gives us a layered centering of objects. They force us to look at these people as the movie looks at them.

As superheroes they are the center of attention. They own their surroundings in an almost arrogant sort of way. And because we've got nothing to look at but them, we feel uncomfortable. Obviously, this is old. Obviously, something isn't right. But in that moment, we are the public before the storm. All of our attention is focused on these people and we are literally watching their every move. But there's something about giving them all of our attention, that makes us feel uneasy.

Then it transitions to the sequence below:

While it may not be noticeable with how it was uploaded, but the composition changes in many ways. We've just faded out from the interviews and our perspective literally increases (meaning the screen literally gets bigger). It may not be what you consider composition but it is. It's creating invisible lines that expand our view and it adds dimensions.

Before, were were just watching the characters. Now, we are actually getting a glimpse at what they do. Immediately, the movie utilizes everything from golden triangles to the "Rule of Thirds." As the shots are set up, we can see that hardly anyone dominates the space and hardly anyone is centered in the middle anymore. This is a fantastic way to put action and life into the scene. From the skyscrapers in the back (during the car chase) to the sidewalk as the little old lady cries for her cat, the filmmakers are creating subtle lines that pull our attention inward to the points of focus (mostly Mr. Incredible in this case).

By not having him centered anymore, they also start to engage the audience. We are constantly moving our eyes to find the subject of the shot. And for an action-heavy sequence, this works delightfully well in keeping us focused on the movie. The constant movement confuses us just enough to make us want to notice everything. But it also makes us start to root for him. For the superheroes. And coming from those interviews, it feels good. Because we want to, don't we? I mean, they're superheroes.

Even in the last few shots, as she flings herself in to the sunset, we are left wanting more. We've come a long way from just staring at these people as they grin from the center of an interview to rooting for them as they do what they do best. And that's fantastic because it won't last. But by making us have to work to root for these guys, it nicely sets us up to become more emotionally invested as things start to crumble.

And this couldn't be achieved without proper composition. We, as an audience, don't want to just sit there and stare at something head-on. We need movement. We need depth. We need action. We need the characters to move: a little bit to the right, a little bit up, a little bit down, and a little bit to the left.

The Mathematics of Composition

Moderns Film could be considered one of the most advanced forms of media we have today. When done well, films effectively combine the elements of sound, composition, story, talent and more to create one fluid cinematic piece. It takes years of hard work and sheer talent to master all of these elements. Until then, it’s a good idea to focus in on one area of film that interests you more then the others.

Chris Knight, writer of fstoppers.com, has created an ultimate guide that makes learning one such element much easier. Specifically, composition – a defining element of film, and pretty much the defining element of photography.

Wait, You mean that rule of thirds thingy?

Ah yes, but as Knight proves in his article, it goes far beyond that nine-box rule.

With pictures and examples guiding his definitions all the way though, Knight provides a clear guide to the mathematics behind beautiful composition.

After reading his article, and in an effort to beat Arturo to the punch, I’ve decided to review some of my own work to see if it stands up to the test.

Center Composition

The first and most basic type of composition Knight mentions is center composition. For this I used a picture I took while in the middle of nowhere. The road stretched on for miles and the lighting was fantastic. With flat land on both sides of the road, this was a perfect time to use symmetry to my advantage.

It's not mathematically perfect, but still an effective example.

Rule of Thirds

The classic. The 101 of photography. When unsure how to compose a photo it's best to stick with the good 'ol threes. I found this photo of a prairie dog which falls right on the sweet spot. 

Golden Triangles 

When playing with angles, golden triangles are a great way to check composition. Knight uses a picture of the eiffel tower as a great example. 

I found one picture from Santa Monica that again, is not mathematically perfect, but shows how this type of composition can have a compelling effect. 

Frame Within a Frame

Another type of composition he mentions is the frame within a frame effect. 

It's a great way to give an extra layer of depth to the photo while at the same time putting extra focus on the subject. I managed to achieve this once this summer as Erin walked through the main gate at Mount Rushmore. I was lucky enough to capture the moment by chance, but usually you need to plan out shots like this. 

In this picture her figure does not fall right on the rule of thirds line. In fact, she's quite a bit under it. But it slightly dwarfs her and makes Mount Rushmore seem even larger. The point is that in the end, art is art, and mathematics can't always determine its effectiveness. But it's a great starting point for discovering what might look cool. 

Center Composition

Even though center composition is the first topic in the series of articles, I actually read them all, I just found the theme of center composition to be intriguing. Like they said in the article "If one were to hand a camera to an aunt, and ask her to take a picture, she would most likely photograph the subject in the center of the frame." Basically, center composition is one of the most basic forms of framing. But because it is so simple, it is so easy to mess up. Being at a student film school, I see a lot of techniques that turn out extremely well, and some, well, not the best. Even though it is such a simple use of framing, Wes Anderson's work displays that just about any technique, when perfected, can be a staple of any great film, or film-maker. Here is an example of his work in relations to center composition.



Here are some other examples of center composition in movies:

Iron Man (2008) - Director of Photography: Matthew Libatique

Dirty Harry (1971) - Director of Photography: Bruce Surtees

The Shining (1980) - Director of Photography: John Alcott

Almost Famous (2000) - Director of Photography: John Toll

Meloncholia (2011) - Director of Photography: Manuel Alberto Claro


Here is a clip I shot for my FF1 film: "A Shrouded Order" that utilized center composition. I'm not saying its a good example, just an attempt by me. Feel free to criticize.

Composition & Bokeh

The part of these articles that I was drawn to was bokeh. I personally love the aesthetic of bokeh. Knight says “Obsession with bokeh is bad for your photography.” I somewhat agree with this statement. Too much can become repetitive and boring, however, I think if you use it in the right way and for the right photograph it can be amazing. Sometimes it’s better to see all the details and textures throughout the frame and other times those details don’t add anything. It really comes down to personal preference and judgement.

For example, in this photograph I think the bokeh works very well because it would be too busy with every detail in focus. You would get lost in all of the details and wouldn’t be drawn to the intended subject.

Chris Knight did a great job explaining some complicated concepts. Talking about composition rules such as the Baroque Diagonals, the Golden Ratio, the Rule of Thirds can become overwhelming. I like how he stated these are rules but are not rules at the same time. If you follow these rules it will not always lead to a provoking photograph. However, it is obviously important to read about and understand the rules for reference. I loved how well Knight explained what each rule was and how to apply most of them. After reading these articles I am more confident in what they are and how to integrate them. I’m looking forward to incorporating this new information into my future class, personal, and professional projects.