Friday, August 29, 2014
Chris Knight's Photography Stuff Article
First, hats off to Chris Knight for writing in two fairly easy to read articles about a bunch of concepts I've been struggling to grasp for something like three years of college in an easy to digest way. Takes skill to right about all this in an articulate way that isn't dizzying to read.
He started off strong by making it clear that these are NOT rules. I mean, yes, they are, but they don't determine what makes an image resonate. Photos have to have a core to them that is worth building upon for any of these guides and tricks to mean anything. I can compose a perfectly lit pile of dog poop that abides by every single one of these rules, even some fancy use of negative space, and it would still just be dog poop. That is the most important thing to take away from this article. We're all in an institution of learning. Going in, we assume that whatever we're taking away from all this is what we'll live by day in day out. These rules MUST be binding and exact, telling, if we're paying $50,000 a year for them. This is what leads a young 20 something coming out of film school to hate Spider-Man 2 because "they didn't like the lighting." It's a real corrosive and limiting mindset and I'm glad that Chris immediately did away with it before diving deep into the article.
On the actual principles themselves? Man this was fantastic. Aside from a few instances (He just defined the golden ratio and then gave no explanation at all of how to use it, what it means or how not using it could be powerful and that was infuuuuriating. He was similarly withholding on Sinister and Baroque lines.), Chris both teaches what and how. WHAT Chiaroscuro is and why it's evocative, HOW to use complementary colors and why it can be meaningful, WHY symmetrical compositions can be both empowering and damaging to a shot. If he went a bit deeper on a few of these I would have been happy but overall he handled all these very well.
Perhaps the principle that interests me most of the lot is negative space. Just the way the mind works in that regard, where the focus of the shot isn't really the point of the shot and yet at the same time without it it would not be nearly as powerful, is really interesting. I just want to figure out the variety of ways I could use this to find some differing understandings of a scene. The idea of symmetry also interests me. What makes a good shot of symmetry stand out and what makes a bad one bore you to your iPhone. These subtle little nuances are the kind of tool I want ready at disposal in my brain to bring life to whatever I'm working on. Not the sort of thing I remember I can use but that I know on instinct to do. I suppose that'll only come from constantly employing them but reading stuff like this is the first step.
He started off strong by making it clear that these are NOT rules. I mean, yes, they are, but they don't determine what makes an image resonate. Photos have to have a core to them that is worth building upon for any of these guides and tricks to mean anything. I can compose a perfectly lit pile of dog poop that abides by every single one of these rules, even some fancy use of negative space, and it would still just be dog poop. That is the most important thing to take away from this article. We're all in an institution of learning. Going in, we assume that whatever we're taking away from all this is what we'll live by day in day out. These rules MUST be binding and exact, telling, if we're paying $50,000 a year for them. This is what leads a young 20 something coming out of film school to hate Spider-Man 2 because "they didn't like the lighting." It's a real corrosive and limiting mindset and I'm glad that Chris immediately did away with it before diving deep into the article.
On the actual principles themselves? Man this was fantastic. Aside from a few instances (He just defined the golden ratio and then gave no explanation at all of how to use it, what it means or how not using it could be powerful and that was infuuuuriating. He was similarly withholding on Sinister and Baroque lines.), Chris both teaches what and how. WHAT Chiaroscuro is and why it's evocative, HOW to use complementary colors and why it can be meaningful, WHY symmetrical compositions can be both empowering and damaging to a shot. If he went a bit deeper on a few of these I would have been happy but overall he handled all these very well.
Perhaps the principle that interests me most of the lot is negative space. Just the way the mind works in that regard, where the focus of the shot isn't really the point of the shot and yet at the same time without it it would not be nearly as powerful, is really interesting. I just want to figure out the variety of ways I could use this to find some differing understandings of a scene. The idea of symmetry also interests me. What makes a good shot of symmetry stand out and what makes a bad one bore you to your iPhone. These subtle little nuances are the kind of tool I want ready at disposal in my brain to bring life to whatever I'm working on. Not the sort of thing I remember I can use but that I know on instinct to do. I suppose that'll only come from constantly employing them but reading stuff like this is the first step.
Thursday, August 28, 2014
"The Ultimate Guide to Composition"
Chris Knight's "Ultimate Guide to Composition" covers the five types of compositions: center, the rule of thirds, golden triangles, diagonals, and the golden ratio/golden rectangles/golden spiral.
Center composition puts the subject in the center of the frame. If it's done well, the symmetry and intricate detail makes it aesthetically pleasing. I really enjoy this composition, but it is very hard to create a center composition that is very visually appealing and memorable. For inspiration, here are some of my favorite Wes Anderson's shots that use the center composition:
The rule of thirds divides the image into nine equal parts. Using the rule of thirds makes it easier to create an interesting image, as the off-center subject creates more tension in the shot.
The golden triangles divide the image into three or four triangles with a strong diagonal line, called the "major line," and another diagonal line that goes from one corner to the major line, connecting perpendicularly. That line is called the "reciprocal line." This creates a more dynamic photograph, as seen below. Just look at that bridge and its diagonal line. Powerful stuff.
The golden ratio is all about geometry and proportions. The largest shape is divided by a perfect square, and the remaining portion is the same proportions as the first shape. Then that shape is divided by a perfect square, and so on and so forth. It creates somewhat of a spiral on the frame:
Center composition puts the subject in the center of the frame. If it's done well, the symmetry and intricate detail makes it aesthetically pleasing. I really enjoy this composition, but it is very hard to create a center composition that is very visually appealing and memorable. For inspiration, here are some of my favorite Wes Anderson's shots that use the center composition:
The rule of thirds divides the image into nine equal parts. Using the rule of thirds makes it easier to create an interesting image, as the off-center subject creates more tension in the shot.
The golden triangles divide the image into three or four triangles with a strong diagonal line, called the "major line," and another diagonal line that goes from one corner to the major line, connecting perpendicularly. That line is called the "reciprocal line." This creates a more dynamic photograph, as seen below. Just look at that bridge and its diagonal line. Powerful stuff.
The two types of diagonals are Baroque and Sinister. Baroque are read from left to right and Sinister are read from right to left.
Baroque:
Sinister:
The golden ratio is all about geometry and proportions. The largest shape is divided by a perfect square, and the remaining portion is the same proportions as the first shape. Then that shape is divided by a perfect square, and so on and so forth. It creates somewhat of a spiral on the frame:
This ratio also works on other shapes and is seen in the Great Pyramids, Stonehenge, the Parthenon, on the human body, seashells, and hurricanes.
Knight also focuses on other important concepts and theories that help make photographs more dynamic, such as a frame within a frame and the Gestalt Principles.
A frame within a frame is an extremely important theory that uses objects to frame the main subject. It's good to have a foreground frame that is darker than the background because our eyes go to the brightest parts of the image.
Some of the Gestalt Principles are figure/ground, proximity and grouping, symmetry and balance, similarity, continuity, and closure.
Figure/ground means the subject and everything surrounding it is very contrasting. Using either chiaroscuro, strong contrasts between light and dark, and/or negative space, it enhances the illusion of depth.
When elements are placed together, they become a group. When similar objects are placed together, it becomes a whole. And elements with similar characteristics can be viewed as a group or pattern and can be very nice to look at.
Symmetry creates an equilibrium. As long as you make the center composition purposeful and dynamic, the symmetry is strong and appealing. Also, balance does not always mean perfect symmetry.
Continuity deals with leading lines. They can be straight or curved, but they're not alway obvious. They guide the viewer's eye to continue through the object.
Last, but not least, is closure. The subject is not fully seen, but the image gives your brain enough to form the rest. It "leaves a little to the imagination."
For me, learning the five main compositions was very helpful. I've learned the rule of thirds before, but learning and seeing the other compositions in use will help me frame my own shots and understand why certain photographs are more aesthetically pleasing than others.
First Reading Assignment Response
Chris Knight explains that composition is "Perhaps one of the most important parts of photography." Composition is how a photographer or filmmaker sees what he or she will be using for their project. If you can understand what good composition is, you'll know how to produce great photos or films. Knight explains that there are multiple aspects of Composition including, Center Composition, The Rule of 3rd's, Golden Triangles, Diagonals, and Golden Ratios.
Center composition was as easy as it could get when it came to understanding the concept. Whatever object is in the center of your frame, that will be exactly where the viewer's eye will go. Thanks to the imaginary lines drawn in the Wes Anderson highlight reel, you are automatically drawn into the center of the frame more than you normally would. When done properly, center composition can give a photo or film perfect symmetry, which for most of us is very, very aesthetically pleasing to the eye. "Symmetry creates equilibrium in an image."
The rule of thirds is another easy concept Knight explained very well. I think that the rule of thirds is the most important rule to composition. Without it, I don't think that you can properly frame an image. The rule of thirds has become so essential, you can't pick up a camera without seeing the rule of thirds lines on the viewfinder. Much like center composition, it makes images aesthetically pleasing to the eye.
Different from center composition and the rule of thirds, gold triangles allow photographers and cinematographers to make images seem off. Knight explains that where the lines intersect are where the viewer's eye are supposed to be drawn to. However, in the Eiffel Tower photo the photo is off centered. So could this mean that the lines could intersect somewhere else on the photo? Who's to say everyone will draw the same lines that will intersect in the exact same spot?
Diagonals I thought of as a tool to help viewers find the center of the composition. However, Knight's explanation was a little off when he said that the viewer's eye will directly go to the ballerina dancer facing us. I understand that because she is facing us we as viewers might see her first but, isn't there a possibility that the viewers eye might be drawn to somewhere else. Perhaps the viewer might be looking at the center pillar first, or another dancer?
Lastly, golden ratios I found to be the most interesting of the composition aspect. Using mathematics to frame an image I found to be fascinating. Now if I wasn't a Park School student, I might be better at math and could potentially be a better photographer.
Aside from Knight's explanation of the aspects of composition there were some things he said that really stuck with me after reading these two articles. Knight said, "One of the best things a photographer can do is study painting and art history. Studying great painters is key to expert composition." What better way to understand the aspects of composition than to learn it from the people who first used proper composition in their work?
Another thing Knight wrote about that really stuck with me was his section about framing. Knight said, "Frame can add context, meaning or depth to a photo." Framing has such an important impact on an image. What a photographer or cinematographer decides to do with the frame can drastically change what a viewer might see or think about an image.
-Patrick Ring
Center composition was as easy as it could get when it came to understanding the concept. Whatever object is in the center of your frame, that will be exactly where the viewer's eye will go. Thanks to the imaginary lines drawn in the Wes Anderson highlight reel, you are automatically drawn into the center of the frame more than you normally would. When done properly, center composition can give a photo or film perfect symmetry, which for most of us is very, very aesthetically pleasing to the eye. "Symmetry creates equilibrium in an image."
The rule of thirds is another easy concept Knight explained very well. I think that the rule of thirds is the most important rule to composition. Without it, I don't think that you can properly frame an image. The rule of thirds has become so essential, you can't pick up a camera without seeing the rule of thirds lines on the viewfinder. Much like center composition, it makes images aesthetically pleasing to the eye.
Different from center composition and the rule of thirds, gold triangles allow photographers and cinematographers to make images seem off. Knight explains that where the lines intersect are where the viewer's eye are supposed to be drawn to. However, in the Eiffel Tower photo the photo is off centered. So could this mean that the lines could intersect somewhere else on the photo? Who's to say everyone will draw the same lines that will intersect in the exact same spot?
Diagonals I thought of as a tool to help viewers find the center of the composition. However, Knight's explanation was a little off when he said that the viewer's eye will directly go to the ballerina dancer facing us. I understand that because she is facing us we as viewers might see her first but, isn't there a possibility that the viewers eye might be drawn to somewhere else. Perhaps the viewer might be looking at the center pillar first, or another dancer?
Lastly, golden ratios I found to be the most interesting of the composition aspect. Using mathematics to frame an image I found to be fascinating. Now if I wasn't a Park School student, I might be better at math and could potentially be a better photographer.
Aside from Knight's explanation of the aspects of composition there were some things he said that really stuck with me after reading these two articles. Knight said, "One of the best things a photographer can do is study painting and art history. Studying great painters is key to expert composition." What better way to understand the aspects of composition than to learn it from the people who first used proper composition in their work?
Another thing Knight wrote about that really stuck with me was his section about framing. Knight said, "Frame can add context, meaning or depth to a photo." Framing has such an important impact on an image. What a photographer or cinematographer decides to do with the frame can drastically change what a viewer might see or think about an image.
-Patrick Ring
First Assignment: Understanding the basics of good composition
According to Chris Knight, the writer of The Ultimate Guide to Composition, there are 5 main 'guidelines' to follow in order to achieve at least half-decent composition in a photograph (or a film shot). These guidelines include the following techniques: center composition, the rule of thirds, golden triangles, the diagonals, and the golden ratio/rectangles/spiral. It's been brought to my attention by this composition guru that you pretty much need one of these 5 framing techniques in order to have a shot that even has a chance of being a pleasant one. Well, here's my opinion on these 5 composition guidelines as laid out by Mr. Knight. I'm sorry in advance.
Center composition, put simply, places the most important objects in an image in the center. When done correctly (as displayed in the image to the right), this type of composition can work very effectively in creating a certain feel to a shot. What is that person doing all the way out there? Are they lost? Reminiscent? Suicidal? I have no idea. The shot certainly makes you wonder, though, doesn't it? Not only does it evoke some sort of emotion, but it's also extremely aesthetically pleasing. The person is placed exactly in the vertical center of the frame along with the horizon in the horizontal center. Knight did a decent job explaining this.
Next we have the rule of thirds. Now, if you've ever attended a Park class, picked up a camera, or have lived in the modern world, you've heard about the rule of thirds. It's not a particularly hard concept to grasp. You basically just imagine (or many cameras will even show you on the viewfinder) four evenly spaced lines that divide the shot into nine sections. You then place the important objects in the shot on these lines, and you place the absolute most important objects on the intersections, like the subject's eyes. Knight explains that this kind of off-center composition adds more visual interest and tension for viewers. I mean, he's right. I don't know why there needed to be such a detailed explanation of the topic, but what the hell. Power to you, Guru Knight.
This third composition technique is completely beyond my understanding. The golden triangles is basically when the photographer divides the frame into three or four triangles, with the 'major line' dividing the image diagonally, and with one or two 'reciprocal lines' perpendicularly intersecting the major line from the corners of the frame. Just look at the image of the Eiffel Tower. It'll save you a whole lot of grief rather than trying to understand my explanation. Now, I'm not sure if I'm just not grasping the concept, or if Knight's explanation is simply terrible. Probably the first one, but hear me out. When looking at the Eiffel Tower, nothing particularly important is on the lines' intersection. Yeah, it's the center of the tower, but I feel that the shot would look exactly the same if the photographer had just aligned the tower with the major line. Am I wrong? I don't think so. If there's something obvious that I'm missing, comment on the post. I'd love to better understand this concept. Please and thank you.
I usually like to think of myself as a reasonably intelligent guy, but in this case, unfortunately, I don't quite understand the composition technique of the diagonals either. You win some, you lose some. Am I right? Anyway, Knight explains the concept of diagonals as splitting an image from corner to corner with either a Baroque Diagonal (read left to right) or a Sinister Diagonal (read right to left). I have two things to say about Knight's explanation of the ballerina image. He says the diagonal used in the composition is a Sinister Diagonal (read right to left). He says the ballerina's eyes line up with the ballerina's pointed toe on the right. First of all, wouldn't a person looking at the photograph immediately look at the ballerina facing us, forcing the viewer to start at the left of the image? Second, the ballerina isn't looking anywhere near the pointed toe. She's looking off to the right, not down. How was the pointed toe chosen as the second object to decide which way the diagonal would lean? Either this photograph is a very poor example of the use of diagonals for composition, or I'm missing something very important here. I usually like to assume I'm not the wrong one.
Last but not least, we have our famous golden ratio/rectangles/spiral concept. This is probably the most useful composition technique out there. It's not only used in photography, but can even be found in architecture and music. For its high level of universality, the golden ratio is an unbelievably simple concept. I'm not going to go into specifics (you can find those here), but all it takes is a little math, really. Knight doesn't do a terrible job of explaining the technique, either. Even I understood it. Kind of. The golden ratio is a fascinating concept. I strongly recommend you look more into it. You'd be absolutely amazed at all of its applications.
All in all, Composition Guru Knight did a quasi decent job of explaining the five main composition techniques all photographers should take into consideration when framing a shot. For all of you folks out there with a camera, take note.
Center composition, put simply, places the most important objects in an image in the center. When done correctly (as displayed in the image to the right), this type of composition can work very effectively in creating a certain feel to a shot. What is that person doing all the way out there? Are they lost? Reminiscent? Suicidal? I have no idea. The shot certainly makes you wonder, though, doesn't it? Not only does it evoke some sort of emotion, but it's also extremely aesthetically pleasing. The person is placed exactly in the vertical center of the frame along with the horizon in the horizontal center. Knight did a decent job explaining this.Next we have the rule of thirds. Now, if you've ever attended a Park class, picked up a camera, or have lived in the modern world, you've heard about the rule of thirds. It's not a particularly hard concept to grasp. You basically just imagine (or many cameras will even show you on the viewfinder) four evenly spaced lines that divide the shot into nine sections. You then place the important objects in the shot on these lines, and you place the absolute most important objects on the intersections, like the subject's eyes. Knight explains that this kind of off-center composition adds more visual interest and tension for viewers. I mean, he's right. I don't know why there needed to be such a detailed explanation of the topic, but what the hell. Power to you, Guru Knight.This third composition technique is completely beyond my understanding. The golden triangles is basically when the photographer divides the frame into three or four triangles, with the 'major line' dividing the image diagonally, and with one or two 'reciprocal lines' perpendicularly intersecting the major line from the corners of the frame. Just look at the image of the Eiffel Tower. It'll save you a whole lot of grief rather than trying to understand my explanation. Now, I'm not sure if I'm just not grasping the concept, or if Knight's explanation is simply terrible. Probably the first one, but hear me out. When looking at the Eiffel Tower, nothing particularly important is on the lines' intersection. Yeah, it's the center of the tower, but I feel that the shot would look exactly the same if the photographer had just aligned the tower with the major line. Am I wrong? I don't think so. If there's something obvious that I'm missing, comment on the post. I'd love to better understand this concept. Please and thank you.I usually like to think of myself as a reasonably intelligent guy, but in this case, unfortunately, I don't quite understand the composition technique of the diagonals either. You win some, you lose some. Am I right? Anyway, Knight explains the concept of diagonals as splitting an image from corner to corner with either a Baroque Diagonal (read left to right) or a Sinister Diagonal (read right to left). I have two things to say about Knight's explanation of the ballerina image. He says the diagonal used in the composition is a Sinister Diagonal (read right to left). He says the ballerina's eyes line up with the ballerina's pointed toe on the right. First of all, wouldn't a person looking at the photograph immediately look at the ballerina facing us, forcing the viewer to start at the left of the image? Second, the ballerina isn't looking anywhere near the pointed toe. She's looking off to the right, not down. How was the pointed toe chosen as the second object to decide which way the diagonal would lean? Either this photograph is a very poor example of the use of diagonals for composition, or I'm missing something very important here. I usually like to assume I'm not the wrong one.All in all, Composition Guru Knight did a quasi decent job of explaining the five main composition techniques all photographers should take into consideration when framing a shot. For all of you folks out there with a camera, take note.
Wednesday, August 27, 2014
Bokeh and Shallow Depth of Field
Normally, I'd be the last person to talk about composition, f-stops, and even cameras in general - mostly because I know next to nothing about them and don't particularly have any interest in them - and yet here I am, writing my first blog post of the year on blurry backgrounds and why they may or may not suck. Thanks Arturo.
So Chris Knight, the author of the two part article about composition, really seems to hate bokeh. Or Boke, however you want to spell it. He goes so far as to say that a focus on bokeh (pun entirely intended) can make for lazy composition and can ultimately make your photography flat-out bad. So what exactly is bokeh, and is it as bad as Knight says it is? Short answer: no.
Bokeh, in terms that even I can understand, is the "aesthetic quality of the blur produced in the out-of-focus parts of an image made by a lens." Here it is in this pretty picture of a bench. See all those lights in the background? Bokeh.
As far as I can tell, there are a few reasons why a photographer would choose to use such a shallow depth of field to create the softly blurred background images that result in bokeh. One such reason is that you may wish to isolate the subject of your photo - in this case, that lovely bench - by separating it from the background. Here, even though the lines of light are forming something that looks just like one of Knight's "golden triangles," the focus of the picture is clearly on the bench. If the lights in the background were sharper and more in focus, the bench would not seem as isolated.
Another reason for bokeh could be to give the illusion of motion in pictures. If I'm correct, by combining a shallow depth of field (in this second picture's case, only bits of the windowpane are in focus) with a longer exposure time, you will get a slightly elongated bokeh, which gives these cars the appearance that they're actually moving. I think it's pretty cool, and when you take a few of the things that Knight said about composition into effect, I think that they're actually both pretty good pictures, bokeh and all.
To be fair, I can see where Knight would have an issue with having an "obsession" with bokeh. Too much of a good thing is, well, never a good thing. Bokeh is pretty, and people like pretty things, so I can see how the technique could quickly and easily get out of hand. When used correctly though, and when also taking composition into consideration, I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with bokeh. It's also really fun to say. Try it. Bokeh.
So Chris Knight, the author of the two part article about composition, really seems to hate bokeh. Or Boke, however you want to spell it. He goes so far as to say that a focus on bokeh (pun entirely intended) can make for lazy composition and can ultimately make your photography flat-out bad. So what exactly is bokeh, and is it as bad as Knight says it is? Short answer: no.
Bokeh, in terms that even I can understand, is the "aesthetic quality of the blur produced in the out-of-focus parts of an image made by a lens." Here it is in this pretty picture of a bench. See all those lights in the background? Bokeh.As far as I can tell, there are a few reasons why a photographer would choose to use such a shallow depth of field to create the softly blurred background images that result in bokeh. One such reason is that you may wish to isolate the subject of your photo - in this case, that lovely bench - by separating it from the background. Here, even though the lines of light are forming something that looks just like one of Knight's "golden triangles," the focus of the picture is clearly on the bench. If the lights in the background were sharper and more in focus, the bench would not seem as isolated.
Another reason for bokeh could be to give the illusion of motion in pictures. If I'm correct, by combining a shallow depth of field (in this second picture's case, only bits of the windowpane are in focus) with a longer exposure time, you will get a slightly elongated bokeh, which gives these cars the appearance that they're actually moving. I think it's pretty cool, and when you take a few of the things that Knight said about composition into effect, I think that they're actually both pretty good pictures, bokeh and all.To be fair, I can see where Knight would have an issue with having an "obsession" with bokeh. Too much of a good thing is, well, never a good thing. Bokeh is pretty, and people like pretty things, so I can see how the technique could quickly and easily get out of hand. When used correctly though, and when also taking composition into consideration, I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with bokeh. It's also really fun to say. Try it. Bokeh.
Sunday, December 15, 2013
On To The Next One
We are finally done. This whole semester has been a whirlwind of stress, sleeplessness, and getting equipment from PPECS. However, it has been the best semester of my life. Fiction Field 1 was a completely different world compared to Intro to Field. I went from making 1-3 minute videos to making 20 minute short films in a years time. I learned so much about everything film and media involved this semester and I am so happy for it.
I have always been one to learn from my mistakes and Arturo will definitely make sure you know if you have made a mistake. While during class you are stressing out, waiting for him to call out the next error that will increase the number butterflies flapping in your stomach, afterwards you realize "hey, that was really stupid of me but, I will never make that mistake again, and I'm a better filmmaker because of it."
My editing skills have had the most progression out of all my skills, after major critiques from lots of people I have really started to settle into my editing niche. I just started editing the Fall Semester of my Freshmen year and I have really found a love for it. Actually compiling the story that you captured is a very rewarding experience. I also believe being a good editor will help me down the road with directing films because thinking about post during production is better then fixing something in post.
As a director I really wished I had been more forward with the actors then I had been. I believe this would have solved some problems with not liking the delivery of certain lines, and ending up with a take that was acceptable but not the most desired take. I let the actors interpret their character too much rather then really breakdown the character individually with them.
I look forward to continuing in this amazing industry. The key is just to keep shooting and I believe if I do this I will really find my style of cinematography. I loved being on set, and I loved hearing all of Arturos crazy stories, and ingenious methods of problem solving. This was my favorite class and I learned so much as well as got an awesome starter film for my demo reel.
I have always been one to learn from my mistakes and Arturo will definitely make sure you know if you have made a mistake. While during class you are stressing out, waiting for him to call out the next error that will increase the number butterflies flapping in your stomach, afterwards you realize "hey, that was really stupid of me but, I will never make that mistake again, and I'm a better filmmaker because of it."
My editing skills have had the most progression out of all my skills, after major critiques from lots of people I have really started to settle into my editing niche. I just started editing the Fall Semester of my Freshmen year and I have really found a love for it. Actually compiling the story that you captured is a very rewarding experience. I also believe being a good editor will help me down the road with directing films because thinking about post during production is better then fixing something in post.
As a director I really wished I had been more forward with the actors then I had been. I believe this would have solved some problems with not liking the delivery of certain lines, and ending up with a take that was acceptable but not the most desired take. I let the actors interpret their character too much rather then really breakdown the character individually with them.
I look forward to continuing in this amazing industry. The key is just to keep shooting and I believe if I do this I will really find my style of cinematography. I loved being on set, and I loved hearing all of Arturos crazy stories, and ingenious methods of problem solving. This was my favorite class and I learned so much as well as got an awesome starter film for my demo reel.
Friday, December 13, 2013
"Strange, isn't it? Each man's life touches so many other lives."
After a stress-filled but exciting semester, we are done with Falling High. I knew it would feel good, but not this good. Creating this project has taught me more than any other class so far. It was extremely hard and stressful, but I enjoyed it. My group cooperated really well, thankfully, and I am proud of what we made. I still don't know exactly what I want to do with my life, but who ever actually figures that out? However, I can say that I have a better understanding of the industry and different positions that I could possibly be in the future.
As cheesy as it sounds, the most important thing I will take away from making a short film is that cooperation, preparation, and dedication is extremely vital for the whole production process. It really helps when you get along with your group members. And you can never be too prepared. Do everything you can beforehand, that way the shoots go smoothly. Also, just being emotionally invested into your film is huge. If you're passionate about what you're doing, the end product will come out so much better. It's very time consuming, but in the end, it's extremely rewarding.
I'd just like to thank everyone in the class for making the class special. In light of the Christmas season, I'll leave you all with my favorite scene from one of my favorite movies, It's a Wonderful Life, directed by Frank Capra.
As cheesy as it sounds, the most important thing I will take away from making a short film is that cooperation, preparation, and dedication is extremely vital for the whole production process. It really helps when you get along with your group members. And you can never be too prepared. Do everything you can beforehand, that way the shoots go smoothly. Also, just being emotionally invested into your film is huge. If you're passionate about what you're doing, the end product will come out so much better. It's very time consuming, but in the end, it's extremely rewarding.
I'd just like to thank everyone in the class for making the class special. In light of the Christmas season, I'll leave you all with my favorite scene from one of my favorite movies, It's a Wonderful Life, directed by Frank Capra.
Monday, December 9, 2013
And to all a Goodnight
Wow to think this is my last post, how time flies. First off I wanted to say it was a pleasure to work with all of you throughout the semester. Additionally this class has been one of the most unique experiences in both college and life in general (especially due to the interesting stories and objective of the class). While some days there might have been stormy seas it is nice to know we will all be sailing into the sunset on calm waters after our screening this Saturday. In all seriousness this class allowed me to gain a true appreciation for the industry and taking myself serious as a filmmaker, I mean how can one not learn from such a seasoned veteran like Arturo. Lastly I wish you all the best in the future as you pursue your careers, good luck on your finals and have a safe break!
Now that I got all the sappy shit out of the way I would like to share my favorite holiday animated special, A Charlie Brown Christmas. This was actually the first prime-time animated TV special. The animated TV special is based on the comic strip, Peanuts created by Charles Schulz. For any of you that aren't familiar with Schulz or his work he was an American cartoonist that dedicated 50 years to his most notable work, Peanuts. A Charlie Brown Christmas was first debuted on CBS in 1965 and was switched to ABC in 2001 where it is currently aired on multiple occasions leading up to the Christmas. The animated TV special has received much recognition throughout the years and has won an Emmy and Peabody Award. The last reason this is one of my favorite of all time is the soundtrack and how it works in unison with the animation throughout the entire special. Additionally the music simply spells Christmas as it provides a magical feeling we have all felt at one point or another during the holiday season. Without further adieu here is the classic opening to A Charlie Brown Christmas...
Now that I got all the sappy shit out of the way I would like to share my favorite holiday animated special, A Charlie Brown Christmas. This was actually the first prime-time animated TV special. The animated TV special is based on the comic strip, Peanuts created by Charles Schulz. For any of you that aren't familiar with Schulz or his work he was an American cartoonist that dedicated 50 years to his most notable work, Peanuts. A Charlie Brown Christmas was first debuted on CBS in 1965 and was switched to ABC in 2001 where it is currently aired on multiple occasions leading up to the Christmas. The animated TV special has received much recognition throughout the years and has won an Emmy and Peabody Award. The last reason this is one of my favorite of all time is the soundtrack and how it works in unison with the animation throughout the entire special. Additionally the music simply spells Christmas as it provides a magical feeling we have all felt at one point or another during the holiday season. Without further adieu here is the classic opening to A Charlie Brown Christmas...
Sunday, December 8, 2013
The Painted Veil
The Painted Veil
The Painted Veil is one of my favorite movies due to its beautiful cinematography, directing, acting and dialogue.The Painted Veil is a love story set in the 1920s that tells the story of a young English couple, Walter, a middle class doctor and Kitty, an upper-class woman, who get married for the wrong reasons and relocate to Shanghai, where she falls in love with someone else. When he uncovers her infidelity, in an act of vengeance, he accepts a job in a remote village in China ravaged by a deadly epidemic, and takes her along. Their journey brings meaning to their relationship and gives them purpose in one of the most remote and beautiful places on earth.
This film was going to be hard to film, as the production crew wanted the film to look distinctly Chinese. They had many barriers when it came to finding a place in China to shoot. As one author quoted from the director of the film, John Curran, "Location scouts covered nearly 5,000 miles all over China in about ten days looking for an area that had an ancient town in close proximity to a river and mountains. The location also had to be near modern facilities that could house cast and crew and support a production office. The scouts looked around Hunan, but settled on Guangxi Province in Southern China. “The production was centered in Gui Lin, a city in Guangxi, because we felt the area and its mountains created the right mood,” says Curran. Gui Lin, one of China’s most picturesque cities, sits along the Li River and is surrounded by majestic, verdant hills."
This film is one of my favorites and it has such an enticing story line that is unique and inspiring. The musical score in this movie is outstanding and very beautiful. It is haunting and evokes emotion from the viewer. This movie deals with a cholera outbreak in China and it is devastating to see the people of this poor town die such a horrible death. These scenes were difficult to watch, but they were tastefully done.
I would definitely recommend seeing this film due to the jaw dropping cinematography and the high value of production.
Here is the trailer:
Friday, December 6, 2013
Curb Your Enthusiasm
I have recently rekindled my love for HBO’s “Curb Your
Enthusiasm”. First airing in 2000, “Curb Your Enthusiasm” follows the life of
Larry David, the creator of “Seinfeld.” Much like Seinfeld, most of the humor
in this show is derived from Larry’s social faux pas and general disregard for
others. The style of the show is very similar to cinéma vérité in that it
utilizes the camera to expose the crude reality of certain character.
Additionally, although the plots are scripted, most of the dialogue is improvised.
What I particularly enjoy about this show is, that although
it is fictional, it is rooted in reality. In interviews, Larry David has stated
that most of the situations in the show are based off of his own experiences.
Additionally, the show often features guest stars that often play fictionalized
versions of themselves. Also, because most of the dialogue is improvised, it
comes across as natural and realistic. Unlike some comedies, “Curb Your
Enthusiasm” doesn’t try to be outlandish or over the top. Instead it creates
situations that, although most people have not experienced, come across as
plausible and thus funny.
An additional feature I enjoy about “Curb Your Enthusiasm”
is its use of recurrent gags. Some of these gags include Larry’s mention of his
Groat’s Disease, which is entirely fictional, and his anxiety over tripping.
Similarly, this show often gives nods to earlier episodes as its season’s
progress. An example of this can be seen in the video above, in which Larry
chastises a handicapped man. By including these things, “Curb Your Enthusiasm”
rewards its viewers for watching all of the episodes.
Kazaam & Kazaamukkah
Back in 1996 people apparently thought basketball stars could act. We saw the release of two films of such topic. Space Jam featured Michael Jordan and Kazaam featured Shaq. The latter received very negative reviews and is considered one of the worst films ever made. From December 1st through December 8th my roommate and I decided to watch Kazaam every day/night. 8 days, 8 viewings of Kazaam. This is Kazaamukkah.
As I type this I am currently in the middle of viewing 6 and I still have two more viewings to go. I feel like I have a pretty good grasp on the film so here it goes. The story follows Max, a white boy with a metrosexual haircut and one missing parent that all 90's films seemed to have. Max is chases by bullies into a abandon building where Max falls on a Boombox which releases rapping genie names Kazaam, played by Shaq. Shaq is as good an actor as one might expect, that is, terrible. Shaq informs Max that he mas 3 wishes and Max realizes that until Shaq grants his wishes he is his slave. From there they go on an adventure that includes Pirated CD's, a villain who is introduced 45 minutes into the movie and two raps songs. The story is terribly put together, makes no sense. Yes it is highly enjoyable even 6 times. No excuse me I need to finish my viewing.
The Super Not So Secret Gathering of the Technologically Savvy: The National Association of Broadcasters' Convention
Recently, my dad invited me to go to the annual National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) show in Las Vegas this April. Every year, the NAB (Not to be confused with the NBA), holds a convention dedicated to introducing new technology, techniques, and ideas related to the field of broadcast media.
< < < < National Association of Broadcasters (NAB)
National Basketball Association (NBA) > > > >
Every year, over 100,000 industry professionals flock to Las Vegas to participate in the interactive exhibits, on-floor education sessions, and hundreds of product introductions. Apparently, the participation is so great that the size of the show floor is equivalent to that of 19 American football fields.
Here's the "sizzle reel" to get you pumped up about the convention:
Last year, attendees of the 2013 NAB Show got a behind the scenes look at the production of both "Oblivion (2013 film)" and "Oz the Great and Powerful." The Television Luncheon, hosted byNancy O'Dell, featured the induction of American Idol into the Television Hall of Fame with an appearance by Randy Jackson and a live performance by Chris Daughtry. Furthermore, there was a sneak peak presentation of Adobe's (then not yet released) Premiere Pro CS6 editing software and so much more.
The NAB convention not only was the first place to successfully hold a HDTV broadcast, it was also where the Red Digital Cinema Camera was first presented. Representatives from companies worldwide gather in Los Vegas to learn about the newest technologies. Some of the most famous companies with booths include:
Although from the photos below of the event, you can see that these are just a few of the hundreds of companies packed into the convention center.
Gordon H. Smith is the current CEO of the NAB as well as a former Oregon Senator. I just want everyone to see how nice and handsome he looks in this picture.
Gordon H. Smith CEO of the NAB
All in all, I'm pretty excited to get a chance to take a look at all the latest industry gadgets as well as do my fair share of networking. I might even get myself a suit.
Editing
For our film since I am an editor I've faced a lot of difficulties going through this process. Before college I had only edited one short ski video that I made with a crappy JVC camcorder I had gotten for my birthday. It had an amazing zoom so that was the sole reason I bought it. That movie was cut on I-movie and I thought I was the best in the world. Little did I know what I had in store when I came to Ithaca college. I started editing on Avid Media Composer last year in Intro to Field Production. I picked up very quickly but I am still learning a lot tricks of the trade and workflow technique.
This semester I started to use Final Cut Pro for an ICTV show "Life and Death" and Adobe Premiere CC for Fiction Field Production. Last year in Intro we always recorded audio right onto the camera so there was no worries about syncing up audio. This year for Falling High syncing audio up was somewhat of a challenge sometimes the camera audio was turned off and I had to go off of the way the actors mouth was moving and other times we had no slate. In the editing software, I learned to use the wave lengths to sync the audio up and this seemed to speed the process up. The labeling process of clips was also a very frustrating thing when the shot didn't start with the slate or there was no slate at all however I learned to work around these obstacles eventually.
This semester I started to use Final Cut Pro for an ICTV show "Life and Death" and Adobe Premiere CC for Fiction Field Production. Last year in Intro we always recorded audio right onto the camera so there was no worries about syncing up audio. This year for Falling High syncing audio up was somewhat of a challenge sometimes the camera audio was turned off and I had to go off of the way the actors mouth was moving and other times we had no slate. In the editing software, I learned to use the wave lengths to sync the audio up and this seemed to speed the process up. The labeling process of clips was also a very frustrating thing when the shot didn't start with the slate or there was no slate at all however I learned to work around these obstacles eventually.
This is my editing set up in premiere. For the most part I used the arrow tool and drag the clips to their desired lengths and used the blade to cut off the access fat. In the top corner you can see my project tab and numerous sequences. Every time I opened and started to edit again I would create a new sequence so that if a mistake was made I could go back to a clean slate without any trouble. This was a useful technique to use and it took a load off of my back stress wise. I hope to start learning more shortcuts on the keyboard so that the editing process happens with a bit more ease.
There are still hundreds of things I need to learn in the realm of editing but this project really helped me hone in on some skills that will help me in the future. I hope to use Avid more next semester for my Non-Fiction project since Avid is the media standard for now I will continue to use the easy program of Premiere.
2013: A Golden Age For Women in Media?
This past Tuesday, The Representation Project posted a video titled "How The Media Failed Women In 2013." It quickly went viral and was posted on many blogs and journalism websites, including the popular sites Buzzfeed and Huffington Post. The video accumulated over two million views in its first few days and has finally gotten people talking.
From politicians to the most popular musical acts, we see the negative representation of women strewn all over the media. But I want to be positive and focus on the first 30 seconds of the video and the successes of women in media in the past year.
Hollywood movies are dominated by men. Hollywood thinks that films with male characters, about men, made by men, will do better at the box office. This past thanksgiving, The Hunger Games sequel broke box office records for its opening week, and Gravity, fueled by lead actress Sandra Bullock, tops box offices at $500 million worldwide. Cinemas in Sweden have employed a new rating to highlight gender bias in film based on the Bechdel test. If the movie passes the Bechdel test, it receives an A rating, which means it must have at least two names lead female characters who talk to each other about something other than a man. Such films that have received an A rating, passing the Bechdel test, are the Hunger Games, The Iron Lady, and Savages.
In the TV world, Orange Is The New Black, featuring an all female ensemble cast, becomes Netflix's most successful original series with excellent ratings, however Netflix refuses to release any viewership data. This year, there was a record number of women nominated for directing at the Emmy's. Of the ten nominees, five were women. Gail Mancuso won for best comedy directing for her episode of Modern Family, the first female win in this category since 1993. Tina Fey and Tracey Wigfield also won for best comedy writing, which means that women are dominating the comedy category for the first time in Emmy history. And there's just the success of Tina Fey in general. And let's not forget about the success and popularity of Lena Dunham and her HBO show "Girls." Additionally, Kerry Washington was also the first black woman to receive a nomination for lead actress in almost 20 years.
The Representation Project also lists that 2013 saw the first female anchor team on Newshour, Katie Couric is hired as Yahoo's first female global news anhor, Goldieblox ads go viral, and Malala is featured on the cover of Times 100 Most Influential People issue.
chor,
Some other successful and highly influential women in media are the executive editor of the NY Times, media mogul Oprah Winfrey, Arianna Huffington, among a few others. However, the difference in numbers between influential men and influential women is still incredibly way too vast, and while male politicians are still dictating what constitutes rape and whether abortion should be illegal, and that women should pay higher health insurance while receiving less salary than men, something has got to change.
The Representation Project is a "movement that uses film and media content to expose injustices created by gender stereotypes and to shift people's consciousness towards change." In 2011, they released "Miss Representation," a documentary about the representation of women in media and power that was an official selection at Sundance Film Festival, as well as seven other film festivals.
From politicians to the most popular musical acts, we see the negative representation of women strewn all over the media. But I want to be positive and focus on the first 30 seconds of the video and the successes of women in media in the past year.
Hollywood movies are dominated by men. Hollywood thinks that films with male characters, about men, made by men, will do better at the box office. This past thanksgiving, The Hunger Games sequel broke box office records for its opening week, and Gravity, fueled by lead actress Sandra Bullock, tops box offices at $500 million worldwide. Cinemas in Sweden have employed a new rating to highlight gender bias in film based on the Bechdel test. If the movie passes the Bechdel test, it receives an A rating, which means it must have at least two names lead female characters who talk to each other about something other than a man. Such films that have received an A rating, passing the Bechdel test, are the Hunger Games, The Iron Lady, and Savages.
In the TV world, Orange Is The New Black, featuring an all female ensemble cast, becomes Netflix's most successful original series with excellent ratings, however Netflix refuses to release any viewership data. This year, there was a record number of women nominated for directing at the Emmy's. Of the ten nominees, five were women. Gail Mancuso won for best comedy directing for her episode of Modern Family, the first female win in this category since 1993. Tina Fey and Tracey Wigfield also won for best comedy writing, which means that women are dominating the comedy category for the first time in Emmy history. And there's just the success of Tina Fey in general. And let's not forget about the success and popularity of Lena Dunham and her HBO show "Girls." Additionally, Kerry Washington was also the first black woman to receive a nomination for lead actress in almost 20 years.
The Representation Project also lists that 2013 saw the first female anchor team on Newshour, Katie Couric is hired as Yahoo's first female global news anhor, Goldieblox ads go viral, and Malala is featured on the cover of Times 100 Most Influential People issue. chor,
Some other successful and highly influential women in media are the executive editor of the NY Times, media mogul Oprah Winfrey, Arianna Huffington, among a few others. However, the difference in numbers between influential men and influential women is still incredibly way too vast, and while male politicians are still dictating what constitutes rape and whether abortion should be illegal, and that women should pay higher health insurance while receiving less salary than men, something has got to change.
The Representation Project is a "movement that uses film and media content to expose injustices created by gender stereotypes and to shift people's consciousness towards change." In 2011, they released "Miss Representation," a documentary about the representation of women in media and power that was an official selection at Sundance Film Festival, as well as seven other film festivals.
Dive into the bargain bin
So, you're walking through the grocery store, wal-mart, or anywhere fine cheap movies are sold. You look into the bin of cheap DVDs, and spot something familiar. You wonder to yourself, is that [insert big name animated movie here]? Upon closer inspection, you see that it is an impostor.
Enter the world, of Video Brinquedo, a company in Brazil that specializes in making rip-off animated movies. To put it bluntly, Video Brinquedo movies are terrible. The animation is bad, the character models are bad, the movies as a whole are bad.
Click the picture to experience Ratatoing. (Or at least the trailer)
All the Video Brinquedo movies re-use assets like there's no tomorrow. The rats in this movie? Get ready to see them in the other Brinquedo movies, along with all the other past models and characters.
Thing is, Video Brinquedo makes money from these. Enough that other studios are following their example.
Kiara the Brave isn't even a rip-off movie though. It's actually an original animated film from India.
Click the picture to see the trailer.
Having watched Kiara the Brave or "Super K" as it's actually called. I can say that it isn't very good, but it isn't a shameless Video Brinquedo-ter rip-off. The animation isn't nearly as bad either.
It's a shame that smaller studios have to rely on tricking people into seeing their movie. Hiding behind the guise of an established movie is downright pathetic. Cheapo animated movies aren't going anywhere soon though. So strap in, grab the popcorn, and get ready for The Last Flight of the Champion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)