so, well... i'm not sure if we're actually supposed to blog or not this week, but i'm gonna guess we are, and sometimes, rambling to a computer keyboard is kind of nice...
so, i'm kind of getting my ass kicked right now. school is a lot to handle. one of the reasons (but not really, but it's a good excuse) i'm a film major is so i DON'T have to use MLA format and do research papers. well... surprise! welcome to critical studies classes! i guess it's not that bad, but geez... i'd rather be in 8 production classes (and not have time to breathe) than two critical studies classes where i have to write 10 page research papers. or two pages for that matter. i hate that stuff. not my digs...
anyhow, beyond school, life has been crazy in general. my mom is currently in the process of moving (which is no small job, of course) so thats been a lot going on. i myself have moved as well, into a lil one bedroom (yay! finally!) which has been a long time coming. just last thursday was the actual move, and since then (amidst going home to raleigh to help) i'm still living out of boxes, and it feels like my life is in complete disarray. which it is. but hopefully, within the next week, it will all be put up (not magically, of course, with hours of work on my part) and i can feel some semblance of normalcy again. but of course, its cucalorus week, which will be taking up most of my time this weekend, plus, one of my close friends who recently moved in august from wilmington up to nyc has a film in it, and will be coming down, so again, distraction distraction distraction.... but luckily, i think the end of november will bring some peace, and hopefully december will bring the quiet, until january, when it kicks back into gear for my final semester here at uncw. (wa-hoo!)
this class is my favorite this semester, except for my acting class, although they rank together as i couldn't decide between the two. (they are very very different). this class is a lot lot more work, but i love it... the self-portrait was my favorite project i've ever done at uncw. i think mainly because it's pushed be a lot farther than anything else i've tried to do, and really become something much much bigger than just "a project for a class." it really made me think, deeply, about myself, my relation to my world around me (how do i portray the simultaneous craziness and calmness i feel, the rage and the peace, the confusion and the clarity...) so, it was really cool to see how it metamorphosed itself. like i said, without warning (or want, really) it became much more about my fathers death than i had imagined or intended it to be... but i think that was important, because to date, that is the only actually important thing thats ever happened to me.... anyhow, moving on.... the music video was totally fun to shoot. i was bummed that half of our footage came out virtually black (although not fully surprised) but we still have plenty of great material to work with. kind of going for the 'so cheesy it's smart' idea... i'm also super stoked about the installations. can't wait. really can't wait to dress up and babble like pope ondine with a head full of acid. should be a good time... haha. that night will be my 24th birthday. i'm guessing i probably can't bring a keg (or can i....?) but maybe a cake, or something. spend my birthday with a bunch of weird film kids? fantastic...
ok, thats it for now. something great just happened. i called into work and got my shift covered for the night (just like last night, and the night before that, and the night before that.... seriously.) so... the rest of my night will be devoted to organizing my apartment and getting modul8 and the midi keyboard ready for tomorrow. i can't freakin believe that i got so used to having this program and the midi keyboard around, and then friday night it's gonna be yanked back away from me. sad :(
anyhow, looking very forward to this VJ deal, interested to see how it's gonna go down...
see you all tomorrow.
-j
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
thoughts on project 3
so the music video was definitely really fun to shoot. that was my first time actually working with super 8, and i'm excited to see how the footage turns out. working with a group of five, it's very hard to coordinate schedules to meet up to brainstorm, much less shoot... especially when rain becomes a factor (can't shoot super 8 on a cloudy, dark day) and an unnamed person messes up and gives your light meter out to somebody else. but, despite all of this, we worked around it, re-arranged, and got it all done. everybody made themselves available, and showed up ready and excited to work. huge holler out to dylan and jamie for letting us (taylor and joselyn and i) dress them up in the most ridiculous possible costumes ever. but, they did it with grace.
on the organization of the project: while i understand the motives of assigning positions, come time to shoot, it still kind of ends up being a free for all, and you just kind of go with the flow and do what needs to be done. (for instance, our gaffer and our director were also the actors). but it worked out well, because when it comes to covering a car in tinfoil, you need all the help you can get.
on planning: so we had this idea, see... and then, well, ... then it all got screwed up. (rain, time availability, otherwise) but it's totally cool, because come time to shoot (we did two separate shoots, one day, one night) we kind of let the 'story' create itself. so saturday night, we shot what we were capable of, and then come sunday, we kind of created the beginning of the story based on the ending, and it worked out great.
on being a producer: i thought it was pretty cool. i mean, beyond wanting to make movies, i'm really proficient at organizing, so the role kind of fit me. plus, it's not like i wasn't able to have a hand in the creativity at all... so all in all, i liked the job.
on the crew: great great great. joselyn is full of the most insanely great ideas... plus, she's not just theory, theres a good action balance. (i actually couldn't believe it when she showed me the diarama). thoroughly enjoy her excitement for creation. taylor (whom i've worked with... 3 times now?) still all great. hard worker, go with the flow kind of attitude, and ready to tackle whatever is next. her energy is really nice to have around. jamie is a trip. hilarious. and certainly helped come up with some great ideas. and dylan... well... dylan is just one cool motherfucker. always down for whatever, and super chill... i've had a few classes with him before, but never really gotten to know him, so it was good to be able to work with him on a project like this.
so i guess we'll see in two weeks time what we got out of it all, but regardless, it sure was fun...
on the organization of the project: while i understand the motives of assigning positions, come time to shoot, it still kind of ends up being a free for all, and you just kind of go with the flow and do what needs to be done. (for instance, our gaffer and our director were also the actors). but it worked out well, because when it comes to covering a car in tinfoil, you need all the help you can get.
on planning: so we had this idea, see... and then, well, ... then it all got screwed up. (rain, time availability, otherwise) but it's totally cool, because come time to shoot (we did two separate shoots, one day, one night) we kind of let the 'story' create itself. so saturday night, we shot what we were capable of, and then come sunday, we kind of created the beginning of the story based on the ending, and it worked out great.
on being a producer: i thought it was pretty cool. i mean, beyond wanting to make movies, i'm really proficient at organizing, so the role kind of fit me. plus, it's not like i wasn't able to have a hand in the creativity at all... so all in all, i liked the job.
on the crew: great great great. joselyn is full of the most insanely great ideas... plus, she's not just theory, theres a good action balance. (i actually couldn't believe it when she showed me the diarama). thoroughly enjoy her excitement for creation. taylor (whom i've worked with... 3 times now?) still all great. hard worker, go with the flow kind of attitude, and ready to tackle whatever is next. her energy is really nice to have around. jamie is a trip. hilarious. and certainly helped come up with some great ideas. and dylan... well... dylan is just one cool motherfucker. always down for whatever, and super chill... i've had a few classes with him before, but never really gotten to know him, so it was good to be able to work with him on a project like this.
so i guess we'll see in two weeks time what we got out of it all, but regardless, it sure was fun...
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
the microcinema
i thought this article was a great read, and inspiring to say the least. partly because running some sort of small "microcinema" has always been a dream of mine. in all reality, i'm somewhat involved now, showing films every sunday night at the juggling gypsy for the 'subversive film series.' truly the rough theater, we play the movies projected onto a pull down screen, that is full of wrinkles and lines, and never has a straight image. plus the shadow created by the decorated headboard hanging down from the ceiling. although, if you rig it up right, and shove enough books/trivial pursuit cards/tea light candles/anything else you can find up under the projector (also hanging from the ceiling, suspended in a small wooden box) you can get it angled low enough just so the shadow isn't too bothersome. the only real thing that separates our sunday night venture from a true microcinema is the material that we play. keeping tune with the "subversive" aspect, most of the movies we show are left-wing documentaries focused around the failing and corrupted state of our nation's (and world's) government. although last week, we did do it narrative style, and show v for vendetta. perhaps one day in the future we could branch out, and begin to show [non-subversive] other types of movies, but all low-budget true indie work. although i have no idea about how to go about getting those types of things..
i suppose thalian hall is somewhat less like a microcinema and more like an art-house theater, as it pulls in bigger movies, but of course never huge-budget films. the science of sleep, for instance, a critically acclaimed movie and winner of many awards, but not a blockbuster, by any means.
some of the examples in the readings remind me how great things like microcinemas and the rough theater can be (paying for a ticket with muffins, watching a movie on a school bus, etc..) and one day, i do hope to provide a nice little quiet corner where people can come and watch some true art films.
i suppose thalian hall is somewhat less like a microcinema and more like an art-house theater, as it pulls in bigger movies, but of course never huge-budget films. the science of sleep, for instance, a critically acclaimed movie and winner of many awards, but not a blockbuster, by any means.
some of the examples in the readings remind me how great things like microcinemas and the rough theater can be (paying for a ticket with muffins, watching a movie on a school bus, etc..) and one day, i do hope to provide a nice little quiet corner where people can come and watch some true art films.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
role for project 3
for the music video/commercial project, i was assigned to be the producer. which i guess makes me the 1st AD and UPM too...
so, as far as using this blog to talk about my ideas for my role...
well, i'm the producer... soo... i guess i'm gonna produce the damn thing!
thus far, i've collected contact information from the entire group and sent it out to everyone so we were all on the same page as far as being able to get in touch with each other. i've also tried to schedule times to meet in order to brainstorm and start planning out our ideas.
i suppose that i will be the one creating the shooting schedule, tracking our progress and comparing it to our proposed schedule, and making sure that all people involved on set (including crew members and cast - the band, whoever our subject is, etc..) are clear on their purposes and that they are following through with them. keep the peace!
i will also be keeping a detailed camera and sound log on set (although at this point, i'm not exactly clear what it is i'm supposed to log, beyond the takes we do). i will also be the one in charge of making sure that we are clear to film (have permits, etc.) for when and where we are going to shoot, as well as taking care of logistics such as making sure people have transportation, have checked out the necessary equipment, and that everybody knows where to be and when to be there.
anything else?
so, as far as using this blog to talk about my ideas for my role...
well, i'm the producer... soo... i guess i'm gonna produce the damn thing!
thus far, i've collected contact information from the entire group and sent it out to everyone so we were all on the same page as far as being able to get in touch with each other. i've also tried to schedule times to meet in order to brainstorm and start planning out our ideas.
i suppose that i will be the one creating the shooting schedule, tracking our progress and comparing it to our proposed schedule, and making sure that all people involved on set (including crew members and cast - the band, whoever our subject is, etc..) are clear on their purposes and that they are following through with them. keep the peace!
i will also be keeping a detailed camera and sound log on set (although at this point, i'm not exactly clear what it is i'm supposed to log, beyond the takes we do). i will also be the one in charge of making sure that we are clear to film (have permits, etc.) for when and where we are going to shoot, as well as taking care of logistics such as making sure people have transportation, have checked out the necessary equipment, and that everybody knows where to be and when to be there.
anything else?
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
thoughts on project 1d
well this is a tough one, because we aren't actually fully finished yet (and will probably continue to work right up to the deadline) but so far, so good.
brandon smith is great to work with, as he is both very knowledgable and talented. but, true to form, our schedules haven't coincided much and therefore we haven't done that much work together. the initial stages were all done together, in which we essentially got together, picked out the pictures we wanted to use, establishing our theme (isolation as the major), and started laying framework. he wanted to do a lot of work in after effects, which is totally cool with me, but i'm much less capable there than in fcp. not wanting him to have to do most of the work, i decided to take it upon myself to lay the background, thinking that anything he animated could be layered on top.
working solo (and now at my house, thank god, because the lab is too far away and too stifling for me to do good work in. minus the soundscape, i think i pulled that one off pretty well in there...) i started editing the pictures together. first step - pull the pictures i wanted to use that i think portrayed our theme (we had done this together, but i had to start from scratch since i couldn't transfer the project from the lab to the house.) second step - cleared by you, dylan, and jordan, reverse the order of the soundscape. third step - what the hell is it i'm trying to do here?
what i learned when i started putting the pictures together is that this is a "story" of sorts about distortion, about being unsettled, and being haunted, by where you are, where your trying to get to, and where you can't be. the first part (set one, as i named it in my fcp sequence) is a country vs. nature fight concerned solely with physical location, although when its not right inside your head, it's not going to be right no matter where you live. the second part is much more abstract and internalized.
as opposed to making the picures "match" the sound rhythmically (which would have been nearly impossible anyways, as set two has no clear or definable rhythm) i spent alot more time focusing on texture. strange, no? the texture of the picture. and how color plays a part in the story. early on in set one, and without warning, i became compelled to turn everything blue, a color theme that will last throughout the film nearly until the end, when other colors start showing up. but it's this color, or lack of, that is one of the main themes of the film as far as feeling goes. this distance, and isolation, and coldness. i've been playing with lots of different effects, stylization. also, repeatedly been using all three shots of the same subject to create the illusion of motion and/or confusion. i can't tell which.
regardless, it's been a fun (albeit time consuming) project, and i'm excited to see what the final project will look like. after i put the final touches on set two, part two, brandon will get his hands on it all and do his thing, then we're meeting up to finish it all. highly looking forward to tomorrow, and screening all of them.
(sorry for my lapse into sentence fragments. it just felt right)
brandon smith is great to work with, as he is both very knowledgable and talented. but, true to form, our schedules haven't coincided much and therefore we haven't done that much work together. the initial stages were all done together, in which we essentially got together, picked out the pictures we wanted to use, establishing our theme (isolation as the major), and started laying framework. he wanted to do a lot of work in after effects, which is totally cool with me, but i'm much less capable there than in fcp. not wanting him to have to do most of the work, i decided to take it upon myself to lay the background, thinking that anything he animated could be layered on top.
working solo (and now at my house, thank god, because the lab is too far away and too stifling for me to do good work in. minus the soundscape, i think i pulled that one off pretty well in there...) i started editing the pictures together. first step - pull the pictures i wanted to use that i think portrayed our theme (we had done this together, but i had to start from scratch since i couldn't transfer the project from the lab to the house.) second step - cleared by you, dylan, and jordan, reverse the order of the soundscape. third step - what the hell is it i'm trying to do here?
what i learned when i started putting the pictures together is that this is a "story" of sorts about distortion, about being unsettled, and being haunted, by where you are, where your trying to get to, and where you can't be. the first part (set one, as i named it in my fcp sequence) is a country vs. nature fight concerned solely with physical location, although when its not right inside your head, it's not going to be right no matter where you live. the second part is much more abstract and internalized.
as opposed to making the picures "match" the sound rhythmically (which would have been nearly impossible anyways, as set two has no clear or definable rhythm) i spent alot more time focusing on texture. strange, no? the texture of the picture. and how color plays a part in the story. early on in set one, and without warning, i became compelled to turn everything blue, a color theme that will last throughout the film nearly until the end, when other colors start showing up. but it's this color, or lack of, that is one of the main themes of the film as far as feeling goes. this distance, and isolation, and coldness. i've been playing with lots of different effects, stylization. also, repeatedly been using all three shots of the same subject to create the illusion of motion and/or confusion. i can't tell which.
regardless, it's been a fun (albeit time consuming) project, and i'm excited to see what the final project will look like. after i put the final touches on set two, part two, brandon will get his hands on it all and do his thing, then we're meeting up to finish it all. highly looking forward to tomorrow, and screening all of them.
(sorry for my lapse into sentence fragments. it just felt right)
Thursday, October 2, 2008
self-portrait ideas
this is going to be a running list, that i will add to continually, and is, of course, merely an outline and proposed ideas:
all theory, no action
-will be very abstract in form
-montage-esque
-perhaps delve into childhood, but more or less focus on the state of now
-will include sound bites from certain movies
-will include pictures from my past (past speaks for the present?)
-will include video, shot specifically for this project
-will include audio of me reading from selected journals and thoughts that actually made it onto paper
background selection/initial construction
-much like my dreams. or daily reality. (?) abstract, nonsensical, and connective. very strange.
-montage-esque. (again. highly important. all i know.)
-having second thoughts of including audio of myself. i never like how i sound on video, i think that would lead me to be less happy with the final project. maybe instead it'll be a hard copy (to be read by viewer) in conjunction with music?
-will include the major battles i've fought in my life, which have, by far, led me to "me" more than anything else
-essential goal: to splash my brain (and heart) into a timeline in fcp, then cut it up and make it watchable
-------------------------------------------------------
it's turning into something very different. like a puzzle, how it all comes together, when you just let it.
10.16.08 00:00
--------------------------------------------------------
fuck! it just came to me. and thats what its called. not it just came to me. fuck! you'll see it later.
much different than i thought.
12:11
--------------------------------------------------------
ok, so this is beginning to be much different than i had originally, (or secondly) thought... my first idea was ok. my second idea was my favorite. and now, whats its shaping up to become is not exactly what i had in mind... i don't hate it, but i don't love it. due to time constraints, idea two is out of the question. i tried it, but i would have to do another entire shoot, and then start editing... and since the project is due in T-minus 6 days, thats pretty much impossible. (i have had huge problems with both, thus far) i'm not all that far into the editing process, but since i'm supposed to be moving this weekend, theres just no time. plus, tony's equipment request reply said "OK Jordan" and lo and behold, i get there today, and... no mics! i'm not sure why the universe (or tony) doesn't want me to finish this project, but it's getting a bit frustrating... anyhow, like the second ideas theme, i'm kind of having to let this project take its own shape, and go in the direction it wants, while i just act as a moderator. i just hope it ends up ok.
10.31.08 9:04 pm
--------------------------------------------------------
oh shit! ok, so... last night, after i posted that last comment, i made some serious changes. like, to the whole thing. since up to this point, most of my 'action' (referring to the theory/action balance) has been from behind the camera and not yet into FCP, it's not a huge deal. because it's not like i've scrapped tons of hours of editing. part of the reason i haven't started editing yet is because i wasn't fully happy with what i had. so... since my project relies on the audio (meaning i have to get the audio track down before i can really get to the video track, for a few reasons) and i was never happy with what the audio was turning into, i switched it up. i had the right idea last time, but i did the wrong thing. so this time, i figured out what the idea actually was, and did that instead. (sounds simple right? yea, not in my life...) so, now that i'm finally on the right track (and it's already freakin' saturday. geez) i gotta pull this one off quick. so, amidst a rather severe sinus infection (NOT good for my audio recording, very nasal) and a move into a new place, i guess we'll see...
p.s. per your comment, about making it about one idea or one event... i just don't know if i could do that... although maybe, the one idea is actually about how weird i am...
11.01.08 9:22am
--------------------------------------------------------
so, i'm finally starting to put this shit together....after hours and hours of recording, importing, and sifting through everything i just recorded (and when it's about 15 hours of footage, thats tough. plus, i just hit "capture now" and so everything is named the same thing) i'm getting a bit jaded. but finally, starting to build up the landscape. audio first, then video. and i guess we'll see where it goes... right now, it's becoming a bit of a technological vs. natural landscape, centered around my dad's death (what would be my pre- and post- life wars). strange. who knows...
11.03.08 3:40am
all theory, no action
-will be very abstract in form
-montage-esque
-perhaps delve into childhood, but more or less focus on the state of now
-will include sound bites from certain movies
-will include pictures from my past (past speaks for the present?)
-will include video, shot specifically for this project
-will include audio of me reading from selected journals and thoughts that actually made it onto paper
background selection/initial construction
-much like my dreams. or daily reality. (?) abstract, nonsensical, and connective. very strange.
-montage-esque. (again. highly important. all i know.)
-having second thoughts of including audio of myself. i never like how i sound on video, i think that would lead me to be less happy with the final project. maybe instead it'll be a hard copy (to be read by viewer) in conjunction with music?
-will include the major battles i've fought in my life, which have, by far, led me to "me" more than anything else
-essential goal: to splash my brain (and heart) into a timeline in fcp, then cut it up and make it watchable
-------------------------------------------------------
it's turning into something very different. like a puzzle, how it all comes together, when you just let it.
10.16.08 00:00
--------------------------------------------------------
fuck! it just came to me. and thats what its called. not it just came to me. fuck! you'll see it later.
much different than i thought.
12:11
--------------------------------------------------------
ok, so this is beginning to be much different than i had originally, (or secondly) thought... my first idea was ok. my second idea was my favorite. and now, whats its shaping up to become is not exactly what i had in mind... i don't hate it, but i don't love it. due to time constraints, idea two is out of the question. i tried it, but i would have to do another entire shoot, and then start editing... and since the project is due in T-minus 6 days, thats pretty much impossible. (i have had huge problems with both, thus far) i'm not all that far into the editing process, but since i'm supposed to be moving this weekend, theres just no time. plus, tony's equipment request reply said "OK Jordan" and lo and behold, i get there today, and... no mics! i'm not sure why the universe (or tony) doesn't want me to finish this project, but it's getting a bit frustrating... anyhow, like the second ideas theme, i'm kind of having to let this project take its own shape, and go in the direction it wants, while i just act as a moderator. i just hope it ends up ok.
10.31.08 9:04 pm
--------------------------------------------------------
oh shit! ok, so... last night, after i posted that last comment, i made some serious changes. like, to the whole thing. since up to this point, most of my 'action' (referring to the theory/action balance) has been from behind the camera and not yet into FCP, it's not a huge deal. because it's not like i've scrapped tons of hours of editing. part of the reason i haven't started editing yet is because i wasn't fully happy with what i had. so... since my project relies on the audio (meaning i have to get the audio track down before i can really get to the video track, for a few reasons) and i was never happy with what the audio was turning into, i switched it up. i had the right idea last time, but i did the wrong thing. so this time, i figured out what the idea actually was, and did that instead. (sounds simple right? yea, not in my life...) so, now that i'm finally on the right track (and it's already freakin' saturday. geez) i gotta pull this one off quick. so, amidst a rather severe sinus infection (NOT good for my audio recording, very nasal) and a move into a new place, i guess we'll see...
p.s. per your comment, about making it about one idea or one event... i just don't know if i could do that... although maybe, the one idea is actually about how weird i am...
11.01.08 9:22am
--------------------------------------------------------
so, i'm finally starting to put this shit together....after hours and hours of recording, importing, and sifting through everything i just recorded (and when it's about 15 hours of footage, thats tough. plus, i just hit "capture now" and so everything is named the same thing) i'm getting a bit jaded. but finally, starting to build up the landscape. audio first, then video. and i guess we'll see where it goes... right now, it's becoming a bit of a technological vs. natural landscape, centered around my dad's death (what would be my pre- and post- life wars). strange. who knows...
11.03.08 3:40am
Monday, September 29, 2008
thoughts on project 1b
i thought that creating the soundscape was a great project. it's true, i had never before spent so much time focused on sound, as typically the image is the predominant focus of "movie-making." it really put into perspective how important sound is/can become/should be, and the great lengths you can take an idea like that to.
joselyn and i had alot of fun doing it, although due to our crazy schedules, we weren't actually able to work with each other a whole lot. but what was great is that our different styles of work worked out wonderfully with us as partners. the idea of the soundscape kind of scared me at first, because i was thinking "what will i do with an entirely blank slate, and 160 sound effects?" well... joselyn solved that, because she laid most of the foundation. built up to three minutes, but in no way an actual soundscape, she spent alot of that time taking bits and pieces of sound, expanding and condensing them, reversing them and chopping them up, and doing who knows how many other different things. so by the time i got in there, there was already an awesome amount of stuff for me to play around with. so thats what i did... i had the task of picking out the highlights (some of which i'm still not sure how she actually created) and then making into a little bit more of a "story" for your ears, including sound mixing (lots of tweaking of levels, adding fades in and out, etc....) and creating fluidity. and so once we had our basic soundscape, we took turns finessing it into what became our final project.
the creation process was really fun. there were times in the editing lab when i had to leave, but really didn't want to because i was getting so involved in what was starting to happen in the timeline. but, it was an incredibly time consuming project, as i probably spent 10-12 hours in the lab just on my own.
but in the end, it was all worth it. i think our final product was very close to our initial vision (? - translation into auditory sensation: audition?) of what we wanted, and i feel like we certainly achieved the creepy and disturbed feeling of a doll hospital.
can't wait to see how the final projects turn out!!
joselyn and i had alot of fun doing it, although due to our crazy schedules, we weren't actually able to work with each other a whole lot. but what was great is that our different styles of work worked out wonderfully with us as partners. the idea of the soundscape kind of scared me at first, because i was thinking "what will i do with an entirely blank slate, and 160 sound effects?" well... joselyn solved that, because she laid most of the foundation. built up to three minutes, but in no way an actual soundscape, she spent alot of that time taking bits and pieces of sound, expanding and condensing them, reversing them and chopping them up, and doing who knows how many other different things. so by the time i got in there, there was already an awesome amount of stuff for me to play around with. so thats what i did... i had the task of picking out the highlights (some of which i'm still not sure how she actually created) and then making into a little bit more of a "story" for your ears, including sound mixing (lots of tweaking of levels, adding fades in and out, etc....) and creating fluidity. and so once we had our basic soundscape, we took turns finessing it into what became our final project.
the creation process was really fun. there were times in the editing lab when i had to leave, but really didn't want to because i was getting so involved in what was starting to happen in the timeline. but, it was an incredibly time consuming project, as i probably spent 10-12 hours in the lab just on my own.
but in the end, it was all worth it. i think our final product was very close to our initial vision (? - translation into auditory sensation: audition?) of what we wanted, and i feel like we certainly achieved the creepy and disturbed feeling of a doll hospital.
can't wait to see how the final projects turn out!!
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
thoughts on project 1c
great, great, great. this is the first time i've ever actually played with still photography. in a professional manner, at least. (although i have taken over 150 pictures in one night with my digital "cheat" camera. disgusting, isn't it?)
our group decided to shoot at night. we missed our intended shots of super-slow-shutter-speed fire-spinning, but found some interesting material none-the-less up at the juggling gypsy. then we went even further downtown. a lot of our material was typical "everyday" stuff. a rock, a dumpster, a urinal, etc... we didn't shoot the rolls separately, either. instead, we just found what we liked, decided if it would be better as a realism picture or an experimental picture, and went from there. that gave us free range to pick our subjects based on what we liked, and not what we needed.
hands on experience with the camera and the light meter were great, and much needed. there was an ever-present fear in me that nothing would come out (i'm so used to instant gratification with digital cameras!) but luckily, the prints looked great. after the first few pictures, it became very easy to understand, and the process was less about what settings to use, and more about compositing and framing and the like. the only confusion was over the f-stop settings, because when set on a 2.8, for instance, it was only one click down to a 2, but two clicks to get it to where it looked like a 4. but setting the f-stop at a 4, it was one click up to a 5.6, but two clicks down to a 2.8. we ended up just having a set method and sticking to it, so at least it was all done the same.
our group was fun, everybody worked great together (especially considering that we shot from 11pm-2am), and everybody pulled their own weight and contributed equally.
plus, we got to see jamie downtown at the soapbox.
since then, i have asked my sister if she's interested in selling me her SLR camera. it's 35mm. she said she would just give it to me. great news! can't wait :)
our group decided to shoot at night. we missed our intended shots of super-slow-shutter-speed fire-spinning, but found some interesting material none-the-less up at the juggling gypsy. then we went even further downtown. a lot of our material was typical "everyday" stuff. a rock, a dumpster, a urinal, etc... we didn't shoot the rolls separately, either. instead, we just found what we liked, decided if it would be better as a realism picture or an experimental picture, and went from there. that gave us free range to pick our subjects based on what we liked, and not what we needed.
hands on experience with the camera and the light meter were great, and much needed. there was an ever-present fear in me that nothing would come out (i'm so used to instant gratification with digital cameras!) but luckily, the prints looked great. after the first few pictures, it became very easy to understand, and the process was less about what settings to use, and more about compositing and framing and the like. the only confusion was over the f-stop settings, because when set on a 2.8, for instance, it was only one click down to a 2, but two clicks to get it to where it looked like a 4. but setting the f-stop at a 4, it was one click up to a 5.6, but two clicks down to a 2.8. we ended up just having a set method and sticking to it, so at least it was all done the same.
our group was fun, everybody worked great together (especially considering that we shot from 11pm-2am), and everybody pulled their own weight and contributed equally.
plus, we got to see jamie downtown at the soapbox.
since then, i have asked my sister if she's interested in selling me her SLR camera. it's 35mm. she said she would just give it to me. great news! can't wait :)
b&w pictures
realism
ansel adams photography has always been some of my favorite. i thought these pictures were striking. and from what i can tell, there was no manipulation.
i though this picture was amazing. the photography is great, of course. but the expression and the feeling of the child is beyond words. it's contentedness, with a kind of "fuck you" non-chalance. in the words of a child, of course.
experimental
i doubt these trees actually appear like this, although i'm not exactly sure what the artist did here. but it's still a great picture.
this is a picture that one of my best friends took of me. i was standing in my kitchen, and feeling a bit camera shy. i never asked him what he did, but i'm guessing it had something to do with the shutter speed, among other things.
ansel adams photography has always been some of my favorite. i thought these pictures were striking. and from what i can tell, there was no manipulation.
i though this picture was amazing. the photography is great, of course. but the expression and the feeling of the child is beyond words. it's contentedness, with a kind of "fuck you" non-chalance. in the words of a child, of course.
experimental
i doubt these trees actually appear like this, although i'm not exactly sure what the artist did here. but it's still a great picture.
this is a picture that one of my best friends took of me. i was standing in my kitchen, and feeling a bit camera shy. i never asked him what he did, but i'm guessing it had something to do with the shutter speed, among other things.
light
my backyard at twilight
i'm sitting in my backyard. the sun is starting to set, but it's still light outside. it was an overcast day, so the glow of the evening isn't as golden as it is blueish-grey. everything seems kind of dim. the sun is fully out of view, but there is still a bit of sunlight glinting off of the pool. the whole thing takes about 30 minutes, where it goes from being light outside to becoming almost totally dark. crevices and cracks are the first to go, as the details fade out, and the underbrush becomes invisible, and black. the finely tuned details that are so alive in the light, like a single leaf on a limb, become "erased" by the darkness. the grey twilight is a bit of a let down, as i was hoping for some purples and oranges and such, but for now it will do.
the dentist office
i hate the dentists office anyways. the drilling and the scraping and the unnecessary amount of time you have to say "aaaahhhhhhhh." add the lights and its doubly as bad. i'm laying in the office chair. overhead are typical ceiling flourescents. four of them in my room alone, with four bulbs in each. thats already 16 bright blue bulbs burning my pupils. on the far side of the ceiling, opposite the door, there is a row of decorative lighting, with six extensions, each encasing what seems to be normal, 60 watt lightbulbs. behind me overhead are two more built-in-ceiling lights. ? thats twelve lights. in one room. ridiculous. but then, it gets worse. to add insult to injury, they pull that terrible big mobile light down right over my face and turn it on, searing my corneas. i can literally feel my rods and cones going crazy.
the lighting is so heavy and saturated, that there is literally nothing you can't see. it makes me feel overexposed. the sterility of the room is heightened, and normally matte surfaces become reflective. it's so strange.
my room at night
it's 11pm, and i'm sitting in my room. i have one light on, which is a blue, 40 watt bulb in a floor lamp. the light is angled towards the ceiling. my door is cracked, and a little bit of light is coming in, thrown off from the bathroom. there is also a lit candle, flickering slightly, because there is no wind. by far, the most overt source of light is the computer screen i am currently staring at. the blue light is nice. it casts a sort of mellow green glow. the lamp it's screwed into is also home to hanging hats and purses. one hat, with a fuzzy brim, is creating some very interesting and textured patterns on the wall. another hat, a fedora, is making a shadow about twice as big as itself, and i can recognize at least five different "layers" of shadows. since the light is so low, it's effect fades drastically across the room (although my room is only about 9' in width). the light is hitting my lamp shade, and casting an angular (and still blue) shadow onto my bed. i glance at the glass of water next to my computer mouse, and catch a glimpse of the reflection of the candle behind me on the bookshelf. i also take note of the mouse now. it's got a red light coming from the bottom of it, that you can see via the clear bottom of the mouse and the reflection on the old, brown, wooden desk. looking at my mattress, there is one part in the middle, about a foot in length, that is "lit up" with light, but i can't tell what source it's coming from. it must be the cracked door. my carpet is lit up with blue, but fades fast to pure black when it comes to the underside of furniture. i hope there's no monsters under my bed, because now would be perfect timing...
i'm sitting in my backyard. the sun is starting to set, but it's still light outside. it was an overcast day, so the glow of the evening isn't as golden as it is blueish-grey. everything seems kind of dim. the sun is fully out of view, but there is still a bit of sunlight glinting off of the pool. the whole thing takes about 30 minutes, where it goes from being light outside to becoming almost totally dark. crevices and cracks are the first to go, as the details fade out, and the underbrush becomes invisible, and black. the finely tuned details that are so alive in the light, like a single leaf on a limb, become "erased" by the darkness. the grey twilight is a bit of a let down, as i was hoping for some purples and oranges and such, but for now it will do.
the dentist office
i hate the dentists office anyways. the drilling and the scraping and the unnecessary amount of time you have to say "aaaahhhhhhhh." add the lights and its doubly as bad. i'm laying in the office chair. overhead are typical ceiling flourescents. four of them in my room alone, with four bulbs in each. thats already 16 bright blue bulbs burning my pupils. on the far side of the ceiling, opposite the door, there is a row of decorative lighting, with six extensions, each encasing what seems to be normal, 60 watt lightbulbs. behind me overhead are two more built-in-ceiling lights. ? thats twelve lights. in one room. ridiculous. but then, it gets worse. to add insult to injury, they pull that terrible big mobile light down right over my face and turn it on, searing my corneas. i can literally feel my rods and cones going crazy.
the lighting is so heavy and saturated, that there is literally nothing you can't see. it makes me feel overexposed. the sterility of the room is heightened, and normally matte surfaces become reflective. it's so strange.
my room at night
it's 11pm, and i'm sitting in my room. i have one light on, which is a blue, 40 watt bulb in a floor lamp. the light is angled towards the ceiling. my door is cracked, and a little bit of light is coming in, thrown off from the bathroom. there is also a lit candle, flickering slightly, because there is no wind. by far, the most overt source of light is the computer screen i am currently staring at. the blue light is nice. it casts a sort of mellow green glow. the lamp it's screwed into is also home to hanging hats and purses. one hat, with a fuzzy brim, is creating some very interesting and textured patterns on the wall. another hat, a fedora, is making a shadow about twice as big as itself, and i can recognize at least five different "layers" of shadows. since the light is so low, it's effect fades drastically across the room (although my room is only about 9' in width). the light is hitting my lamp shade, and casting an angular (and still blue) shadow onto my bed. i glance at the glass of water next to my computer mouse, and catch a glimpse of the reflection of the candle behind me on the bookshelf. i also take note of the mouse now. it's got a red light coming from the bottom of it, that you can see via the clear bottom of the mouse and the reflection on the old, brown, wooden desk. looking at my mattress, there is one part in the middle, about a foot in length, that is "lit up" with light, but i can't tell what source it's coming from. it must be the cracked door. my carpet is lit up with blue, but fades fast to pure black when it comes to the underside of furniture. i hope there's no monsters under my bed, because now would be perfect timing...Sunday, September 7, 2008
thoughts on project 1a
i thought that this sound effects project was a really great experience. first off, just the idea arising of the importance of sound was good. it is all too often that our senses become dulled from any angle.
also, i had never spent much time playing with a shotgun mic, or taking into account all of the things one must do when attempting to record not just sound, but sound effects (i.e. get the clearest and cleanest recording possible.)
we had a few different "scheduling" issues, so although it wasn't the way we wanted it to be done, we were incredibly pressed for time when it came down to actually recording the sounds. there was about a four hour window on tuesday (the day before it was due) to get the sfx recorded, not to mention post-production (which was virtually inevitable, again, mainly because due to a time crunch, we had to record looser and cut down later.) but... it worked out (we got the camera! yay!) and went to my house straight away to start working on it. we decided that my shed was the quietest and roomiest place to record most of the sounds, although we did use my garage for a few of them. we had lists prepared, and a good bit of props to use (which we did) so once we started actually recording, the process was fairly fun and easy.
at one point, taylor and russ had the camera over my fence, trying to record my neighbors talking and their dog barking as an ambient noise. when you have the headphones on, it's amazing the tiniest little details that the mic picks up. for instance, almost inaudible by me, the sprinkler in my neighbors yard was picked up wonderfully by the mic.
just in case anybody was wondering, the pepper dialogue came from taylor and myself sniffing pepper. we were trying to sneeze. (voice based sounds were the hardest to come up with.) i had been sneezing ALL DAY LONG because of allergies, until, of course, it's time to record something like a sneeze. and so i was trying to waft pepper fumes into my nose to provoke a sneeze, and it didn't do anything except make my nose burn. so then taylor tried, but still to no avail. alot of the pepper dialogue is us joking around (it did get pretty funny), and the actual sneeze sfx recording is a forced one from taylor. so the conclusion: pepper leaves a burning ball of feeling in the back of your throat, but does not actually make you sneeze. we even tried ground pepper. don't do it.
but as a group, we had alot of fun, although i think we all wished we had had some more time to go to a few different places at least. it was a good time to get some hands on experience recording my own sound effects (something i've never done) and an interesting experience, to say the least.
also, i had never spent much time playing with a shotgun mic, or taking into account all of the things one must do when attempting to record not just sound, but sound effects (i.e. get the clearest and cleanest recording possible.)
we had a few different "scheduling" issues, so although it wasn't the way we wanted it to be done, we were incredibly pressed for time when it came down to actually recording the sounds. there was about a four hour window on tuesday (the day before it was due) to get the sfx recorded, not to mention post-production (which was virtually inevitable, again, mainly because due to a time crunch, we had to record looser and cut down later.) but... it worked out (we got the camera! yay!) and went to my house straight away to start working on it. we decided that my shed was the quietest and roomiest place to record most of the sounds, although we did use my garage for a few of them. we had lists prepared, and a good bit of props to use (which we did) so once we started actually recording, the process was fairly fun and easy.
at one point, taylor and russ had the camera over my fence, trying to record my neighbors talking and their dog barking as an ambient noise. when you have the headphones on, it's amazing the tiniest little details that the mic picks up. for instance, almost inaudible by me, the sprinkler in my neighbors yard was picked up wonderfully by the mic.
just in case anybody was wondering, the pepper dialogue came from taylor and myself sniffing pepper. we were trying to sneeze. (voice based sounds were the hardest to come up with.) i had been sneezing ALL DAY LONG because of allergies, until, of course, it's time to record something like a sneeze. and so i was trying to waft pepper fumes into my nose to provoke a sneeze, and it didn't do anything except make my nose burn. so then taylor tried, but still to no avail. alot of the pepper dialogue is us joking around (it did get pretty funny), and the actual sneeze sfx recording is a forced one from taylor. so the conclusion: pepper leaves a burning ball of feeling in the back of your throat, but does not actually make you sneeze. we even tried ground pepper. don't do it.
but as a group, we had alot of fun, although i think we all wished we had had some more time to go to a few different places at least. it was a good time to get some hands on experience recording my own sound effects (something i've never done) and an interesting experience, to say the least.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
sound and silence
my room in the middle of the night:
the most overt sound is the fan. it's not over bearing, or intrusive, but rather the opposite, melodic and rhythmic. this is the medium setting. low gives off no air, and high causes an annoying "clinking" sound of the pull-chain on the light. the sound of the fan is not that of it's motor actually running (or its machine-esque properties, per se), but rather the friction of it's inability to stay still. it is the physical moving of the fan, creaking as it sways in a very patterned, straight-line motion, backwards and forwards, backwards and forwards. it's late at night, so every once in a while, and randomly, the house creaks as it settles into place for sleep. some are bigger and louder than others, almost signifying a yawn. the air conditioning comes on in approximately 15-minute intervals, and stays on for about 5 minutes at a time, humming away in the corner, albeit very noticeably. suddenly, and without reason, my computer will stir, and the RAM starts whirling away, taking care of some internal business. as if provoked by that, my external hard drive kicks into gear, and seemingly tries to emulate a plane preparing for takeoff. after a minute, they are both silent again. suddenly the dog sighs, and i am reminded that it is laying on the floor next to my bed, in virtual silence. this starts a chain reaction from the dog, a licking of lips and general resettling adjustments, trying to get comfortable for sleep.
--and i must have, because i wake up some hours later with my door open and my desk lamp on, homework scattered all over my bed, crushed in dreams...
my backyard in the morning:
i am rarely up at 9am with enough time to sit and enjoy my backyard, but it is sunday, and i've decided to take advantage. the pool pump is obnoxiously cranking away, creating an unnatural sound of rushing (flushing?) water. birds are making noise in the distance (none seem too close), and i can distinguish at least six different types. some are light and airy chirps, other are pointed and direct and loud, most of them in rhythm. directly behind me is a wall of bamboo and other plants, and i can hear bumble bees and other winged creatures fluttering around in the flowers. my neighbor begins moving around and i hear him open the door of his shed. my stomach growls, time for breakfast. cars are going by every once in a while, but softly. the symphony of insects cranks up from all around, almost as if in unison, and the humming of wings comes and goes in about 15 second waves, starting off soft and then growing louder, and then falling silent. new and different bird sounds are popping up everywhere, continuous, and from every angle. a bee just flew dangerously close, and very quickly, by my ear. i hear a new, heavier rustling sound behind me. i make a guesstimate. i turn around, and was right, there is a small green lizard jumping around on the leaves. a car with an old, loud engine drives by and assails my ears. but shortly, the "natural silence" returns. if i listen very closely, i can almost hear the sun rising, waking up all of the creatures and bringing the world back to life. a wispy but potent breeze comes through and rustles up the leaves of the palm tree, and for a good minute or two, i forget that i'm doing homework.
the most overt sound is the fan. it's not over bearing, or intrusive, but rather the opposite, melodic and rhythmic. this is the medium setting. low gives off no air, and high causes an annoying "clinking" sound of the pull-chain on the light. the sound of the fan is not that of it's motor actually running (or its machine-esque properties, per se), but rather the friction of it's inability to stay still. it is the physical moving of the fan, creaking as it sways in a very patterned, straight-line motion, backwards and forwards, backwards and forwards. it's late at night, so every once in a while, and randomly, the house creaks as it settles into place for sleep. some are bigger and louder than others, almost signifying a yawn. the air conditioning comes on in approximately 15-minute intervals, and stays on for about 5 minutes at a time, humming away in the corner, albeit very noticeably. suddenly, and without reason, my computer will stir, and the RAM starts whirling away, taking care of some internal business. as if provoked by that, my external hard drive kicks into gear, and seemingly tries to emulate a plane preparing for takeoff. after a minute, they are both silent again. suddenly the dog sighs, and i am reminded that it is laying on the floor next to my bed, in virtual silence. this starts a chain reaction from the dog, a licking of lips and general resettling adjustments, trying to get comfortable for sleep.
--and i must have, because i wake up some hours later with my door open and my desk lamp on, homework scattered all over my bed, crushed in dreams...
my backyard in the morning:
i am rarely up at 9am with enough time to sit and enjoy my backyard, but it is sunday, and i've decided to take advantage. the pool pump is obnoxiously cranking away, creating an unnatural sound of rushing (flushing?) water. birds are making noise in the distance (none seem too close), and i can distinguish at least six different types. some are light and airy chirps, other are pointed and direct and loud, most of them in rhythm. directly behind me is a wall of bamboo and other plants, and i can hear bumble bees and other winged creatures fluttering around in the flowers. my neighbor begins moving around and i hear him open the door of his shed. my stomach growls, time for breakfast. cars are going by every once in a while, but softly. the symphony of insects cranks up from all around, almost as if in unison, and the humming of wings comes and goes in about 15 second waves, starting off soft and then growing louder, and then falling silent. new and different bird sounds are popping up everywhere, continuous, and from every angle. a bee just flew dangerously close, and very quickly, by my ear. i hear a new, heavier rustling sound behind me. i make a guesstimate. i turn around, and was right, there is a small green lizard jumping around on the leaves. a car with an old, loud engine drives by and assails my ears. but shortly, the "natural silence" returns. if i listen very closely, i can almost hear the sun rising, waking up all of the creatures and bringing the world back to life. a wispy but potent breeze comes through and rustles up the leaves of the palm tree, and for a good minute or two, i forget that i'm doing homework.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
artist manifesto and response x3
so lets see... the mac dashboard dictionary defines manifesto as "a public declaration of policy and aims, esp. one issued before an election by a political party or candidate." well... i could talk about politics (or my preference for lack thereof) for hours, so instead of going into that, i'll just stick to what i want to do. essentially, that would be everything. with film, i mean. although a lot of it does indeed have to do with politics, my aim and vision lies much more in shorter collage/experimental/educational films. thats pretty broad, i know....
for a long time i was into the idea of acting. really that you can create and control this character that is something totally different than yourself, yet always, somehow, remaining essentially you. it's a powerful idea, and one that i haven't totally given up on. if the opportunity provides itself one day in the future, i would certainly take advantage of some acting gigs. (within reason of course. i always set limits for myself. i.e. no commercials/corporate advertising, no soap operas, and no porn. fair enough.)
so when i headed to college i became a theater major, and somewhere, amidst all the things i've seen and done, all the trouble i've run into, the resulting transfer to uncw, and alot of the knowledge i came instilled with, it became apparent that i was supposed to go into film. not as an actor (although to understand any one side of the craft, you must at least slightly understand all the others.) but as a filmmaker. so then i realized, i had to find out what i'm good at. shit...
so... the best way i knew how to begin narrowing it down was to knock off what i like the least. sitting at a computer for hours on end sounds like hell to me. so editing was out. writing has always been a strong point for me, but i've never been that solid at dialogue and screenwriting. i have little to no interest in lighting, etc... grip work isn't my thing... and this went on for a little bit, until the day i realized (now this is where you come in) that filmmaking doesn't have to be anything in particular. actually, it doesn't have to be anything ________ at all. (fill in the blank) it can be anything at all that you can conceive of. great.
so... after effects and 6x1 opened up doors to me that i had never thought of, and that was great. so that, coupled with my exponential awareness of the state of our world (i f*ing hate politics, but you gotta fight your fights), plus a little aaron valdez, gave me a whole new take on the things i could do. so i started looking at myself as more of an independent journalist. one who attempts to uncover and expose the truth, no matter what. and preferably a gonzo journalist, at that.
but theres so much happening that people have no idea about. and it's because they're fed lies and BS through the corporate media (and because they're too lazy to do any investigative research beyond that). so i want to start fixing that problem. and making people care by making them aware. after all, once you know you can never go back.
i'm sure i'll work in the narrative world down the road, but for me its always really been about docs. reality. raw, painful, and uncut. if i ever succeed in making feature documentaries, they're probably all going to be about drug addictions and/or murders.
oh, and i also want to veejay. but i need a lot more money and experience and a teacher for that.
thats all i got for now.
i apologize in advance for my lack of use of capital letters. i've never really seen the point.
now, onto reading responses...
i thought richter made some good points in his article "the film as an original art form," but his writing style and deep-seeded meanings were a bit much for me to handle. i actually got lost in the first paragraph, when he merely talking about the distinctions between to reproduce and to produce. it made a bit more sense when, in his next paragraph, he says "the film is overwhelmingly use for keeping records of creative achievements." his essential conclusion is that documentary and experimental films are much more of an "original art" than narrative, and based on his arguments, i would have to agree, although i tend to view narrative as an original art, on the basis that its components are the art, but the medium (the creation of the camera, film, etc..) also holds credibility as an art form. projecting something onto a blank canvas on a wall is art. as long as it doesn't suck. just kidding... one more thing i appreciated that richter brought up is the re-enacting of scenes, as not being an original art. i'm sure we see those much more than he did back in 1955, and although i watch less than an hour of tv a week (and thats when i'm at work and forced into it), we're subjected to it all the time. even by the credible tv networks: the history channel, national geographic, discovery... i also liked richter's quote, "The spoken word for the stage, the silent image for the film - those are the elements!" it brought to light some things i have never thought of.
scott macdonalds article was modern and easy to read. a nice change from those of my other classes thus far. i enjoyed this article a lot because i can see the potential in it. you could hand it to almost any person in the world, and whether they've seen a million avant-garde films or none at all, they will most likely understand. even the person who has never been exposed will read this, and at the very least, become intrigued by the cinematic experience they have been missing their whole life. the article is very psychology based (i like), laying out the constructs we have ingrained in our head, and how to begin deconstructing those. his historical recap of avant-garde film was interesting too, as i haven't heard much of that, and i really enjoyed the part on muybridge and the techniques he employed, because that concept was very new to me.
i think fred camper had the toughest job. beyond just explaining what avant-garde is, camper attempts to actually define it (and does a pretty damn good job). his first explanation is the best, "if you know exactly what avant-garde film is and how to name it, it probably isn't very 'avant-garde,' right?" that hits the nail on the head. so to start with that, and end with six general "guidelines" of avant-garde film was a gutsy move. but i think it works. number six was my favorite, probably because it holds the most definitive answer to the underlying question of everything, "what is the point?" well the point is to provoke thought, either consciously or not, either noticeably or not, and either understandably or not. but unless you have no pulse, you can't help but watch most avant-garde films without at least fleetingly thinking, "what in the hell were they thinking?"
for a long time i was into the idea of acting. really that you can create and control this character that is something totally different than yourself, yet always, somehow, remaining essentially you. it's a powerful idea, and one that i haven't totally given up on. if the opportunity provides itself one day in the future, i would certainly take advantage of some acting gigs. (within reason of course. i always set limits for myself. i.e. no commercials/corporate advertising, no soap operas, and no porn. fair enough.)
so when i headed to college i became a theater major, and somewhere, amidst all the things i've seen and done, all the trouble i've run into, the resulting transfer to uncw, and alot of the knowledge i came instilled with, it became apparent that i was supposed to go into film. not as an actor (although to understand any one side of the craft, you must at least slightly understand all the others.) but as a filmmaker. so then i realized, i had to find out what i'm good at. shit...
so... the best way i knew how to begin narrowing it down was to knock off what i like the least. sitting at a computer for hours on end sounds like hell to me. so editing was out. writing has always been a strong point for me, but i've never been that solid at dialogue and screenwriting. i have little to no interest in lighting, etc... grip work isn't my thing... and this went on for a little bit, until the day i realized (now this is where you come in) that filmmaking doesn't have to be anything in particular. actually, it doesn't have to be anything ________ at all. (fill in the blank) it can be anything at all that you can conceive of. great.
so... after effects and 6x1 opened up doors to me that i had never thought of, and that was great. so that, coupled with my exponential awareness of the state of our world (i f*ing hate politics, but you gotta fight your fights), plus a little aaron valdez, gave me a whole new take on the things i could do. so i started looking at myself as more of an independent journalist. one who attempts to uncover and expose the truth, no matter what. and preferably a gonzo journalist, at that.
but theres so much happening that people have no idea about. and it's because they're fed lies and BS through the corporate media (and because they're too lazy to do any investigative research beyond that). so i want to start fixing that problem. and making people care by making them aware. after all, once you know you can never go back.
i'm sure i'll work in the narrative world down the road, but for me its always really been about docs. reality. raw, painful, and uncut. if i ever succeed in making feature documentaries, they're probably all going to be about drug addictions and/or murders.
oh, and i also want to veejay. but i need a lot more money and experience and a teacher for that.
thats all i got for now.
i apologize in advance for my lack of use of capital letters. i've never really seen the point.
now, onto reading responses...
i thought richter made some good points in his article "the film as an original art form," but his writing style and deep-seeded meanings were a bit much for me to handle. i actually got lost in the first paragraph, when he merely talking about the distinctions between to reproduce and to produce. it made a bit more sense when, in his next paragraph, he says "the film is overwhelmingly use for keeping records of creative achievements." his essential conclusion is that documentary and experimental films are much more of an "original art" than narrative, and based on his arguments, i would have to agree, although i tend to view narrative as an original art, on the basis that its components are the art, but the medium (the creation of the camera, film, etc..) also holds credibility as an art form. projecting something onto a blank canvas on a wall is art. as long as it doesn't suck. just kidding... one more thing i appreciated that richter brought up is the re-enacting of scenes, as not being an original art. i'm sure we see those much more than he did back in 1955, and although i watch less than an hour of tv a week (and thats when i'm at work and forced into it), we're subjected to it all the time. even by the credible tv networks: the history channel, national geographic, discovery... i also liked richter's quote, "The spoken word for the stage, the silent image for the film - those are the elements!" it brought to light some things i have never thought of.
scott macdonalds article was modern and easy to read. a nice change from those of my other classes thus far. i enjoyed this article a lot because i can see the potential in it. you could hand it to almost any person in the world, and whether they've seen a million avant-garde films or none at all, they will most likely understand. even the person who has never been exposed will read this, and at the very least, become intrigued by the cinematic experience they have been missing their whole life. the article is very psychology based (i like), laying out the constructs we have ingrained in our head, and how to begin deconstructing those. his historical recap of avant-garde film was interesting too, as i haven't heard much of that, and i really enjoyed the part on muybridge and the techniques he employed, because that concept was very new to me.
i think fred camper had the toughest job. beyond just explaining what avant-garde is, camper attempts to actually define it (and does a pretty damn good job). his first explanation is the best, "if you know exactly what avant-garde film is and how to name it, it probably isn't very 'avant-garde,' right?" that hits the nail on the head. so to start with that, and end with six general "guidelines" of avant-garde film was a gutsy move. but i think it works. number six was my favorite, probably because it holds the most definitive answer to the underlying question of everything, "what is the point?" well the point is to provoke thought, either consciously or not, either noticeably or not, and either understandably or not. but unless you have no pulse, you can't help but watch most avant-garde films without at least fleetingly thinking, "what in the hell were they thinking?"
Saturday, May 3, 2008
project 6 evaluation
04.28.08
an interesting project, to say the least... essentially, the possibilities are endless, although not being able to use a videocamera was both a blessing and a curse. the project would have been easier, sure... but much less novel.
as soon as i heard in class that we couldn't use a video camera, my immediate reaction was "webcam" and to somehow simulate a skype conversation between two people using the iSight camera on my iMac. luckily, i had a stationary iMac and a movable macbook at my disposal, so i didn't have to do too much worrying about what the mystery prop was going to be and how i was going to work it in. before we got the mystery prop, i had become fairly set on using the skype conversation as my story line, the iSight as my mode of recording, and a digital camera as a third viewpoint if need be. i was also set on using my two weirdest (and most lovable) friends as the actors. what i wanted to do, essentially, was to make the strangest movie possible. looking back, i think it worked.
on the saturday before class, i asked my two friends to spare me four or so hours on tuesday to be in my movie, and they gladly obliged. so on monday the mystery prop was assigned, and it made it none-the-less easy to decide what type of story i was really going to do (i've never been a real 'narrative' kind of person) but luckily, on tuesday, my friends showed up at my house with costumes, props, and rough outline of what they wanted to say...
the story had alot to do with my friend meredith, and her infatuation with DMX, and her recent hunt downtown to find him upon hearing that he was in town shooting a movie. (which worked by the way. she met him last week, got a picture with him [which unfortunately did not turn out, because it was supposed to be the last shot of my movie, full circle], but for a girl who is never at a loss for words, she really had no idea what to say...) so we kind of took that premise and developed it into what was to become "godbot," or, that egg-shaped green piece of chalk that provides the user with the gift of pure communication.
i set them up in rooms next to each other (my other roommate recently got the boot, so one room was totally empty), and we started decorating. we decided that justin should probably be surrounded by plants and candles, seeing as how he was fairly magical. meredith was set in my room, filled with rocks and minerals and other such magical things. come time to script, we were having a bit of a problem. justin, who is normally the weirdest of the weird, couldn't seem to let it flow... stage fright (camera fright) was taking over... but we developed somewhat of a "script" and just kind of ran with it. we did about 12 take total... some with them actually on skype with each other, while i was filming with the digital camera for B roll, and most of the rest with the iSight filming them as they had conversations in the same room. the last shot only took one take. meredith is on point.
so after about four hours of shooting i set them free, and it was time to edit. only about 40% of the footage that was shot was usable, mainly due to acting performace, talking over each other (unusable dialogue), their dog howling in the background from outside, etc...
but i was able to chop it up, and find fairly usable parts from each section of the "script" that made it a "complete" narrative. since i had so little to work with, that wasn't too hard of a project... i just had to get them all in the right order, do some overlapping of dialogue/action, and i almost had a movie. before taking it into the lab, i decided to add a DMX song underneath it all to play throughout the whole thing (which is where the R rating came from). once i got into the lab to print to video, i realized that the movie was totally flat, so i ended up deleting the DMX track (or at least moving it to the very end) and adding a score, i.e. songs to coincide with each of the characters, justins being a whimsical forest tune, merediths a magical queen song, and a bit of chinese bells in between. that made a world of difference, and the DMX song was brought in at the very end to tie it all together.
and so that was my project... fun, interesting, and very very weird...
an interesting project, to say the least... essentially, the possibilities are endless, although not being able to use a videocamera was both a blessing and a curse. the project would have been easier, sure... but much less novel.
as soon as i heard in class that we couldn't use a video camera, my immediate reaction was "webcam" and to somehow simulate a skype conversation between two people using the iSight camera on my iMac. luckily, i had a stationary iMac and a movable macbook at my disposal, so i didn't have to do too much worrying about what the mystery prop was going to be and how i was going to work it in. before we got the mystery prop, i had become fairly set on using the skype conversation as my story line, the iSight as my mode of recording, and a digital camera as a third viewpoint if need be. i was also set on using my two weirdest (and most lovable) friends as the actors. what i wanted to do, essentially, was to make the strangest movie possible. looking back, i think it worked.
on the saturday before class, i asked my two friends to spare me four or so hours on tuesday to be in my movie, and they gladly obliged. so on monday the mystery prop was assigned, and it made it none-the-less easy to decide what type of story i was really going to do (i've never been a real 'narrative' kind of person) but luckily, on tuesday, my friends showed up at my house with costumes, props, and rough outline of what they wanted to say...
the story had alot to do with my friend meredith, and her infatuation with DMX, and her recent hunt downtown to find him upon hearing that he was in town shooting a movie. (which worked by the way. she met him last week, got a picture with him [which unfortunately did not turn out, because it was supposed to be the last shot of my movie, full circle], but for a girl who is never at a loss for words, she really had no idea what to say...) so we kind of took that premise and developed it into what was to become "godbot," or, that egg-shaped green piece of chalk that provides the user with the gift of pure communication.
i set them up in rooms next to each other (my other roommate recently got the boot, so one room was totally empty), and we started decorating. we decided that justin should probably be surrounded by plants and candles, seeing as how he was fairly magical. meredith was set in my room, filled with rocks and minerals and other such magical things. come time to script, we were having a bit of a problem. justin, who is normally the weirdest of the weird, couldn't seem to let it flow... stage fright (camera fright) was taking over... but we developed somewhat of a "script" and just kind of ran with it. we did about 12 take total... some with them actually on skype with each other, while i was filming with the digital camera for B roll, and most of the rest with the iSight filming them as they had conversations in the same room. the last shot only took one take. meredith is on point.
so after about four hours of shooting i set them free, and it was time to edit. only about 40% of the footage that was shot was usable, mainly due to acting performace, talking over each other (unusable dialogue), their dog howling in the background from outside, etc...
but i was able to chop it up, and find fairly usable parts from each section of the "script" that made it a "complete" narrative. since i had so little to work with, that wasn't too hard of a project... i just had to get them all in the right order, do some overlapping of dialogue/action, and i almost had a movie. before taking it into the lab, i decided to add a DMX song underneath it all to play throughout the whole thing (which is where the R rating came from). once i got into the lab to print to video, i realized that the movie was totally flat, so i ended up deleting the DMX track (or at least moving it to the very end) and adding a score, i.e. songs to coincide with each of the characters, justins being a whimsical forest tune, merediths a magical queen song, and a bit of chinese bells in between. that made a world of difference, and the DMX song was brought in at the very end to tie it all together.
and so that was my project... fun, interesting, and very very weird...
Saturday, April 12, 2008
ways to make film without a camera
04.07.08
hmm, lets see... six ways to make a film without using a camera....
1) my imac with a built-in webcam/microphone
2) digital camera - still shots and/or movie mode
3) video phone
4) scanner (same principle as still shots from a digital camera, but with a totally different feel)
5) using clear leader/stock film, and inking, scratching, magazine transfers, etc...
6) after effects
so how do all these fit into the big picture? or why would you possibly choose to use any of this stuff to create a film (sans option 6, which kind of speaks for itself...) ?
well, my initial idea in class, upon learning that we couldn't use a camera, was to use my imac. my girlfriend has a macbook too, so therefore i could have two different "cameras" to use, and depending on the mystery prop, this will probably be my preferred method. although it will more than likely involve me taking my imac outside (which will be stationary, while the macbook will be able to move around) my first thought was just leaving it inside my room as it is now, and using it a sort of "hidden camera" kind of deal that kind of chronicles someones day... using a digital cameras movie mode would create the same effect, but using still shots and editing them together could create an interesting feel, depending on the kind of story you are going for. you could almost use it to "document" a trip that someone was taking, like being a sightseer downtown, and only seeing through the eye of the lens.... a video phone would work, although i do not (and hope to never) own one of those things. again, depending on your story (like that movie with colin farrell in it, "phone booth") maybe that is the only means of communication of the main character... a scanner would work much the way the still shots with the digital camera would work, and could possibly hold a story of a person who is terrible bored at work, and feeling a bit mischevious... using actual film and physically creating your film would work, but it of course creates a much more abstract style of film, used less for story, and more for overall effect.... and finally, within after effects, you could fully draw (or cut-out) whatever you wanted, animate it, and then add dialogue to create your story, much like i am going to be doing with my final project in motion graphics class. this is effective, of course, to pull of many many things that real-life filming cannot do.
essentially, the possibilities are limitless, although it is still a bit hard to step outside of the bubble and make a film without a camera....
hmm, lets see... six ways to make a film without using a camera....
1) my imac with a built-in webcam/microphone
2) digital camera - still shots and/or movie mode
3) video phone
4) scanner (same principle as still shots from a digital camera, but with a totally different feel)
5) using clear leader/stock film, and inking, scratching, magazine transfers, etc...
6) after effects
so how do all these fit into the big picture? or why would you possibly choose to use any of this stuff to create a film (sans option 6, which kind of speaks for itself...) ?
well, my initial idea in class, upon learning that we couldn't use a camera, was to use my imac. my girlfriend has a macbook too, so therefore i could have two different "cameras" to use, and depending on the mystery prop, this will probably be my preferred method. although it will more than likely involve me taking my imac outside (which will be stationary, while the macbook will be able to move around) my first thought was just leaving it inside my room as it is now, and using it a sort of "hidden camera" kind of deal that kind of chronicles someones day... using a digital cameras movie mode would create the same effect, but using still shots and editing them together could create an interesting feel, depending on the kind of story you are going for. you could almost use it to "document" a trip that someone was taking, like being a sightseer downtown, and only seeing through the eye of the lens.... a video phone would work, although i do not (and hope to never) own one of those things. again, depending on your story (like that movie with colin farrell in it, "phone booth") maybe that is the only means of communication of the main character... a scanner would work much the way the still shots with the digital camera would work, and could possibly hold a story of a person who is terrible bored at work, and feeling a bit mischevious... using actual film and physically creating your film would work, but it of course creates a much more abstract style of film, used less for story, and more for overall effect.... and finally, within after effects, you could fully draw (or cut-out) whatever you wanted, animate it, and then add dialogue to create your story, much like i am going to be doing with my final project in motion graphics class. this is effective, of course, to pull of many many things that real-life filming cannot do.
essentially, the possibilities are limitless, although it is still a bit hard to step outside of the bubble and make a film without a camera....
some people like it rough
03.31.08
i thought that the reading on The Rough Theatre was very interesting. it's an idea that is familiar to me in theory, but new to me in concrete word. this is perhaps the first time i have ever read an article concerning the necessary lack of style within theatre, and how that can create the essence of the show.
now i'm supposing that this article was mainly concerning itself with the actual theatre, that being the stage play. but this idea can of course be generalized across most any form of art. for our purposes, the film for instance, it need not be a sophisticated movie playing in some lush theatre. it can be a b-grade film projected onto a white sheet in somebody's back yard that could provoke the most interesting conversation and unique inner-dialogue. all of everything (i.e. it is all of these things) creates this kind of experience that actually becomes the rough theatre.
imagine if people were able to leave comments upon pieces of art at a museum. what would happen? if incurred meaning came from the artist and from everybody who had previously viewed that particular piece. i suppose that one of the best examples of rough theatre would be a live showing of the rocky horror picture show. people are encouraged to dress up, bring props, and actually physically interact with the actors on stage. on top of this, the story is a little bit rough in and of itself, but guaranteed to provide with nothing short of a wild experience.
i thought that the reading on The Rough Theatre was very interesting. it's an idea that is familiar to me in theory, but new to me in concrete word. this is perhaps the first time i have ever read an article concerning the necessary lack of style within theatre, and how that can create the essence of the show.
now i'm supposing that this article was mainly concerning itself with the actual theatre, that being the stage play. but this idea can of course be generalized across most any form of art. for our purposes, the film for instance, it need not be a sophisticated movie playing in some lush theatre. it can be a b-grade film projected onto a white sheet in somebody's back yard that could provoke the most interesting conversation and unique inner-dialogue. all of everything (i.e. it is all of these things) creates this kind of experience that actually becomes the rough theatre.
imagine if people were able to leave comments upon pieces of art at a museum. what would happen? if incurred meaning came from the artist and from everybody who had previously viewed that particular piece. i suppose that one of the best examples of rough theatre would be a live showing of the rocky horror picture show. people are encouraged to dress up, bring props, and actually physically interact with the actors on stage. on top of this, the story is a little bit rough in and of itself, but guaranteed to provide with nothing short of a wild experience.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
the yes men
04.03.08
this is a repost of a blog I wrote just now on myspace:
----
so I just watched this great documentary that one of my teachers introduced me to, called "The Yes Men."
----------------------------------
This is what it's about:
"The Yes Men, a movie, follows a couple of anti-corporate activist-pranksters as they impersonate World Trade Organization spokesmen on TV and at business conferences around the world.
The story follows Andy and Mike from their beginnings with GWBush.com, and on to their tasteless parody of the WTO's website. Some visitors don’t notice the site is a fake, and send speaking invitations meant for the real WTO. Mike and Andy play along with the ruse and soon find themselves attending important functions as WTO representatives.
Delighted to speak for the organization they oppose, Andy and Mike don thrift-store suits and set out to shock their unwitting audiences with darkly comic satires on global free trade. Weirdly, the experts don’t notice the joke and seem to agree with every terrible idea the two can come up with.
Exhausted by their failed attempts to shock, Mike and Andy take a whole new approach for one final lecture."
--------------
so I got on the website (theyesmen.org), and this is what I found:
1) How does a person turn into a Yes Man?
A person (male or female) becomes a Yes Man by exposing, perhaps deviously, the nastiness of powerful evildoers. If this describes what you do (the exposing, not the evildoing), and you want your story here on this website, please let us know.
More precisely, there are all kinds of ways of doing what we call "Identity Correction." Soon, we'll post a little list of some ways that we've thought of. There are plenty of ways that we haven't thought of, too.
8) Speaking of Bhopal—didn't you create false hopes in Bhopal with your latest Dow stunt?
No. For 20 years, the victims of Bhopal falsely hoped that Dow and Union Carbide would do something to ease the suffering that they'd caused: a hope that was, apparently, completely false and unreasonable. What we did on December 3 was create false certainties: those who heard our announcement didn't falsely hope, they were falsely certain that their suffering was at long last over.
(so then I think, "that's kind of weird, that's my birthday, I wonder what happened...?")
[insert about 20 more FAQ's]
30) Are you afraid of being recognized?
The world's largest industrial disaster (Bhopal) is still not recognized by many - so how would we be?
-------------------
so then I get on Wikipedia and search for it...
and here's what I found:
"The Bhopal Disaster of 1984 was an industrial disaster that was caused by the accidental release of 40 tonnes of methyl isocyanate (MIC) from a Union Carbide India, Limited (UCIL, now known as Eveready Industries India, Limited) pesticide plant partly (50.9%) owned by Union Carbide located in the heart of the city of Bhopal, in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh.
The BBC gives the death toll as nearly 3,000 people dead initially and at least 15,000 from related illnesses since, while Greenpeace cites 20,000 total deaths as a conservative estimate.
According to the Bhopal Medical Appeal, around 500,000 people were exposed to the leaking tables. Approximately 20,000, to this date, are believed to have died as a result; on average, roughly one person dies every day from the effects. Over 120,000 continue to suffer from the effects of the disaster, such as breathing difficulties, cancer, serious birth-defects, blindness, gynaecological complications and other related problems.
In 2007 Indian writer Indra Sinha published his novel, Animal's People, based on the Union Carbide disaster and its aftermath. A magical realist novel, it is written from the point of view of a boy who is transformed by the chemical leak, and has to walk on all fours like an animal. The novel was short-listed for the Booker Prize in the UK in 2007."
-----------
december 3, 1984. thats my birthday... I guess you learn something new everyday...
-----------
the point?
- one person (well about 5) can really do something...
- get pro-active. create the revolution.
- check out the yes men, it's totally worth it.
- and also, you might want to Wikipedia your birthday, just in case...
this is a repost of a blog I wrote just now on myspace:
----
so I just watched this great documentary that one of my teachers introduced me to, called "The Yes Men."
----------------------------------
This is what it's about:
"The Yes Men, a movie, follows a couple of anti-corporate activist-pranksters as they impersonate World Trade Organization spokesmen on TV and at business conferences around the world.
The story follows Andy and Mike from their beginnings with GWBush.com, and on to their tasteless parody of the WTO's website. Some visitors don’t notice the site is a fake, and send speaking invitations meant for the real WTO. Mike and Andy play along with the ruse and soon find themselves attending important functions as WTO representatives.
Delighted to speak for the organization they oppose, Andy and Mike don thrift-store suits and set out to shock their unwitting audiences with darkly comic satires on global free trade. Weirdly, the experts don’t notice the joke and seem to agree with every terrible idea the two can come up with.
Exhausted by their failed attempts to shock, Mike and Andy take a whole new approach for one final lecture."
--------------
so I got on the website (theyesmen.org), and this is what I found:
1) How does a person turn into a Yes Man?
A person (male or female) becomes a Yes Man by exposing, perhaps deviously, the nastiness of powerful evildoers. If this describes what you do (the exposing, not the evildoing), and you want your story here on this website, please let us know.
More precisely, there are all kinds of ways of doing what we call "Identity Correction." Soon, we'll post a little list of some ways that we've thought of. There are plenty of ways that we haven't thought of, too.
8) Speaking of Bhopal—didn't you create false hopes in Bhopal with your latest Dow stunt?
No. For 20 years, the victims of Bhopal falsely hoped that Dow and Union Carbide would do something to ease the suffering that they'd caused: a hope that was, apparently, completely false and unreasonable. What we did on December 3 was create false certainties: those who heard our announcement didn't falsely hope, they were falsely certain that their suffering was at long last over.
(so then I think, "that's kind of weird, that's my birthday, I wonder what happened...?")
[insert about 20 more FAQ's]
30) Are you afraid of being recognized?
The world's largest industrial disaster (Bhopal) is still not recognized by many - so how would we be?
-------------------
so then I get on Wikipedia and search for it...
and here's what I found:
"The Bhopal Disaster of 1984 was an industrial disaster that was caused by the accidental release of 40 tonnes of methyl isocyanate (MIC) from a Union Carbide India, Limited (UCIL, now known as Eveready Industries India, Limited) pesticide plant partly (50.9%) owned by Union Carbide located in the heart of the city of Bhopal, in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh.
The BBC gives the death toll as nearly 3,000 people dead initially and at least 15,000 from related illnesses since, while Greenpeace cites 20,000 total deaths as a conservative estimate.
According to the Bhopal Medical Appeal, around 500,000 people were exposed to the leaking tables. Approximately 20,000, to this date, are believed to have died as a result; on average, roughly one person dies every day from the effects. Over 120,000 continue to suffer from the effects of the disaster, such as breathing difficulties, cancer, serious birth-defects, blindness, gynaecological complications and other related problems.
In 2007 Indian writer Indra Sinha published his novel, Animal's People, based on the Union Carbide disaster and its aftermath. A magical realist novel, it is written from the point of view of a boy who is transformed by the chemical leak, and has to walk on all fours like an animal. The novel was short-listed for the Booker Prize in the UK in 2007."
-----------
december 3, 1984. thats my birthday... I guess you learn something new everyday...
-----------
the point?
- one person (well about 5) can really do something...
- get pro-active. create the revolution.
- check out the yes men, it's totally worth it.
- and also, you might want to Wikipedia your birthday, just in case...
Sunday, March 30, 2008
originality
03.24.08
it was in Dr. Laudadio's 'writing about film' class a year and some ago when i was first exposed to the idea of un-originality in everything. he was expressing the concept that, in theory, nothing is truly original, because it innately draws from every single thing around it, past and present. this idea is, of course, un-original in and of itself, and in my opinion, both correct and incorrect. it is also the underlying topic of one of last weeks readings, entitled "the ecstasy of influence," by Jonathan Letham.
it's a solid idea, seeing as how it's undeniably true that most thought processes and understandings and revelations are drawn from experience. but still, can pure originality (i.e. true creativity) exist?
it's hard to say no, because on an individual level, you want to know and believe that all of the wonderful revelations and ideas you have are 100% unique and new. but it's also hard to say yes, because you have to recognize the fact that it's only in your brain because you have been exposed to it previously. in millions of forms and fashions, a collective experiential past takes shape to create even the smallest of thoughts.
anyhow, enough philosophy for now...
"the ecstasy of influence" was about just that idea, though, but on a totally different scale where originality is not the point, but the point instead is to purposefully draw from all those sources to create something brand new. (philosophical argument begin: but again, is that truly "new" ? or is it recycled, thus used, thus old, while being a type of new? is a new "used" car new? it's new to you...) i certainly don't know the answer to that question, but what i do know is that something new, and often times wonderful, is created. it can ascribe a totally different meaning to the original piece, or piece before that, or piece before that. like i learned in "the yes men" something can be recycled 10 times, and will still contain approximately 10% of it's original intent....
that said, this idea is very relevant to our current 'found footage' projects, as that is exactly what it is. i am doing two found footage projects concurrently (the other in intro to edit) and much prefer the one in this class, as it gives me free reign to pick my footage. therefore, you can truly shape the idea of what you are trying to say.
my favorite part of the Letham article occurred on page 63, when he writes, "Today, when we can eat Tex-Mex with chopsticks while listening to reggae and watching a YouTube re-broadcast of the Berlin Wall's fall -- i.e., when damn near everything presents itself as familiar - it's not a surprise that some of today's most ambitious art is going about trying to make the familiar strange. In so doing, in reimagining what human life might truly be like over there across the chasms of illusion, meditation, demographics, marketing, imago, and appearance, artists are paradoxically trying to restore what's taken for "real" to three whole dimensions, to reconstruct a univocally round world out of disparate streams of flat sights."
To me, thats the point.
I concur.
----
on another note, i thoroughly enjoyed the ron english, subversion of art film that was shown, and have since spread that word. but as my friend pointed out (and something that i had really not thought about yet): what's the point of him going to eat mcdonalds with his kids at the end of the movie? isn't that a bit paradoxical?
it was in Dr. Laudadio's 'writing about film' class a year and some ago when i was first exposed to the idea of un-originality in everything. he was expressing the concept that, in theory, nothing is truly original, because it innately draws from every single thing around it, past and present. this idea is, of course, un-original in and of itself, and in my opinion, both correct and incorrect. it is also the underlying topic of one of last weeks readings, entitled "the ecstasy of influence," by Jonathan Letham.
it's a solid idea, seeing as how it's undeniably true that most thought processes and understandings and revelations are drawn from experience. but still, can pure originality (i.e. true creativity) exist?
it's hard to say no, because on an individual level, you want to know and believe that all of the wonderful revelations and ideas you have are 100% unique and new. but it's also hard to say yes, because you have to recognize the fact that it's only in your brain because you have been exposed to it previously. in millions of forms and fashions, a collective experiential past takes shape to create even the smallest of thoughts.
anyhow, enough philosophy for now...
"the ecstasy of influence" was about just that idea, though, but on a totally different scale where originality is not the point, but the point instead is to purposefully draw from all those sources to create something brand new. (philosophical argument begin: but again, is that truly "new" ? or is it recycled, thus used, thus old, while being a type of new? is a new "used" car new? it's new to you...) i certainly don't know the answer to that question, but what i do know is that something new, and often times wonderful, is created. it can ascribe a totally different meaning to the original piece, or piece before that, or piece before that. like i learned in "the yes men" something can be recycled 10 times, and will still contain approximately 10% of it's original intent....
that said, this idea is very relevant to our current 'found footage' projects, as that is exactly what it is. i am doing two found footage projects concurrently (the other in intro to edit) and much prefer the one in this class, as it gives me free reign to pick my footage. therefore, you can truly shape the idea of what you are trying to say.
my favorite part of the Letham article occurred on page 63, when he writes, "Today, when we can eat Tex-Mex with chopsticks while listening to reggae and watching a YouTube re-broadcast of the Berlin Wall's fall -- i.e., when damn near everything presents itself as familiar - it's not a surprise that some of today's most ambitious art is going about trying to make the familiar strange. In so doing, in reimagining what human life might truly be like over there across the chasms of illusion, meditation, demographics, marketing, imago, and appearance, artists are paradoxically trying to restore what's taken for "real" to three whole dimensions, to reconstruct a univocally round world out of disparate streams of flat sights."
To me, thats the point.
I concur.
----
on another note, i thoroughly enjoyed the ron english, subversion of art film that was shown, and have since spread that word. but as my friend pointed out (and something that i had really not thought about yet): what's the point of him going to eat mcdonalds with his kids at the end of the movie? isn't that a bit paradoxical?
Saturday, March 22, 2008
everything
there's too much happening in class right now to try and cover one thing, so with this blog i take on... everything... first off, i thought the readings from last week, "molotov man" and "the ecstacy of influence" were both very interesting and appropriate. molotov man made me thing about recontextualization and/or decontextualization in the most basic of senses, for instance the first part of the essay that fully decontextualized the molotov man (who is a father), and the second part of the essay that recontextualizes him. it was nice for his personal life to be somewhat revealed nearer the end of the article. that particular article did raise a few questions in my mind about the authors and their relationships, mainly whether they worked collaboratively or separately on this piece. taking into account their former relationship, it was probably the latter... it has since been decided that alex and i are to be in charge of editing/sound mixing for the one shot. luckily, our basic idea had already incorporated most of our sound into it, including the ambient noise and the dialogue/music. sound effects should come fairly easy, so we'll see how that goes... the rhythmic editing exercise is still escaping me, as i still have no idea in what direction to take it. (i'm only on campus two days a week, and have yet to be able to watch the dvd with examples from past years). once i watch the dvd, i feel like i'll have a better idea of how they'll turn out, and therefore a better idea of what i'd like to shoot for it. until then, it's kind of taking a back seat to my... found footage project! i have literally thought about this every single day since it was assigned, and spend more time thinking on this than any other project thus far (in any class) this semester. i can't wait to make it. right now (and since the beginning) my focus is on a terence mckenna/vs./george bush ideology audio, mixed with images of war. peace/war/where is our country? again, we can only wait and see... as one last note, i loved "the yes men," and am planning on watching the part i missed (due to becoming a fog master) before monday's class, and am very excited about watching the rest of the movie.
cheerio~ |
the line and the cone
| 03.17.08 #1 coming into this, i had no idea what to expect (except that i was going to create some serious fog). in my head, i had imagined it asmore of a laser type of thing, that would somehow (magically) project into the middle of the room, and be more or less a line morphing itself, separating, into a conical shape. i was wrong. even when it began, i didn't understand exactly what it was i was [supposed to be] seeing. (do i look at the wall? the projection light beam?) eventualyl, once the beam began to take it's curvature shape, i was understanding "the line" and "the cone" that it was to become. it also helped when Kreul mentioned, "think of it as a physical presence in the room," (which it truly had become, the most prevalent of) and was asking students to interact with it. my favorite part was actually my job, as the fog-master, because i got to control and 'create' those amazing patterns that appeared in the light beam (that was slowly creating itself ito a cone-formation). on the whole, a very interesting and simplistic artistic form, unique in design. |
Monday, March 17, 2008
one shot
03.10.08
since i was not able to make it to class this day due to unforseen circumstances surrounding my trip back from spring break, i decided to do my blog for this past week about week 8.5: the one shot.
set for saturday the 15th, and only ill-timed due to the tarheels playing in the semi-finals at 1:30pm, i thought the one shot was a very fun project to be subjected to outside of class time. i went into the project regretting that i wasn't able to make class on monday, seeing as how i knew little to nothing about the bolex camera (and still really don't) but luckily for me, i have an ace group (alex, amanda, and patrick) who are always there to help.
before saturday, alex sent me a few update e-mails on what i missed, and catching me up to speed on the idea that they had come up with: the life of a book. at first, i wasn't sold on it, only because with a shot of 56 seconds, i was wondering how we were going to show that when the book didn't have any time to be read, much less opened (the essence of it's life, right?). but then you realize, on occasion, that's not the point...
on saturday, our first task (amidst fleshing out our story as a cohesive group) was to help group #1 on their shoot, which was the demise of balloon head. i was glad they went first, because it gave me a little more to get accustomed to the idea of shooting with a bolex camera (an idea that for some reason, seems very foreign to me). but during their shoot, i picked up some solid bits and pieces about how the camera works, and thanks to looking at projects from previous semesters in class, had a good idea about the perceived effect (i.e. look and feel) of what we would be getting. while group 1 was developing their film, we had time to almost fully block ours, so by the time we got out into the field, our shoot took little to no time.
the book we used was "on the road," by jack kerouac, a symbolic gesture at the very least, and our shoot went off almost without a hitch, minus the fact that during the actual shoot, the film cut off after only 50 seconds of filming. uh-oh... now this is where i got confused (mainly on how the film operates internally) but we had to crank the film back up and shoot the last 6 seconds again (does it not rewind the film to the beginning? what happened?) it's more or less a minor detail that can easily be fixed during the editing process, but i guess the biggest problem is that without an absolutely perfect match-on-action (which is virtually impossible) between the first shot and the second shot, even the editing lab cannot make this appear as a true "one shot."
but then again, i guess thats just how things go...
since i was not able to make it to class this day due to unforseen circumstances surrounding my trip back from spring break, i decided to do my blog for this past week about week 8.5: the one shot.
set for saturday the 15th, and only ill-timed due to the tarheels playing in the semi-finals at 1:30pm, i thought the one shot was a very fun project to be subjected to outside of class time. i went into the project regretting that i wasn't able to make class on monday, seeing as how i knew little to nothing about the bolex camera (and still really don't) but luckily for me, i have an ace group (alex, amanda, and patrick) who are always there to help.
before saturday, alex sent me a few update e-mails on what i missed, and catching me up to speed on the idea that they had come up with: the life of a book. at first, i wasn't sold on it, only because with a shot of 56 seconds, i was wondering how we were going to show that when the book didn't have any time to be read, much less opened (the essence of it's life, right?). but then you realize, on occasion, that's not the point...
on saturday, our first task (amidst fleshing out our story as a cohesive group) was to help group #1 on their shoot, which was the demise of balloon head. i was glad they went first, because it gave me a little more to get accustomed to the idea of shooting with a bolex camera (an idea that for some reason, seems very foreign to me). but during their shoot, i picked up some solid bits and pieces about how the camera works, and thanks to looking at projects from previous semesters in class, had a good idea about the perceived effect (i.e. look and feel) of what we would be getting. while group 1 was developing their film, we had time to almost fully block ours, so by the time we got out into the field, our shoot took little to no time.
the book we used was "on the road," by jack kerouac, a symbolic gesture at the very least, and our shoot went off almost without a hitch, minus the fact that during the actual shoot, the film cut off after only 50 seconds of filming. uh-oh... now this is where i got confused (mainly on how the film operates internally) but we had to crank the film back up and shoot the last 6 seconds again (does it not rewind the film to the beginning? what happened?) it's more or less a minor detail that can easily be fixed during the editing process, but i guess the biggest problem is that without an absolutely perfect match-on-action (which is virtually impossible) between the first shot and the second shot, even the editing lab cannot make this appear as a true "one shot."
but then again, i guess thats just how things go...
Monday, March 3, 2008
povey
02.25.08
having now worked for half a semester on multiple ways to create cameraless films, my interpretation of thad povey and the scratch film junkies’ film “St. Louise” was much different than before. Although I was able to recognize many of the techniques, there was plenty that still mystified me. This film contained a few elemental references, including one clearly defined CO2, which is fitting, seeing as how these films feel very “organic,” (I suppose having to do with the fact that since typically the human form is absent, and therefore the film is comprised of shapes, colors, and sounds). It seemed as though the majority of the film was made with inks, and at one point, I was intrigued by the arrows that were overlayed on top of the base inks. That was one of those times when I couldn’t help but wonder how they did that. There was another section of the film where there was green, almost bacterial looking images and, again, I wasn’t able to discern how they created it. I thought the stock footage used was an interesting choice, and perhaps not necessarily what I would have chosen to use. On the whole, the film was great eye candy, I thought the song choice was superb, and it’s still nice to see professional films created under the same mediums as the ones I am currently learning.
having now worked for half a semester on multiple ways to create cameraless films, my interpretation of thad povey and the scratch film junkies’ film “St. Louise” was much different than before. Although I was able to recognize many of the techniques, there was plenty that still mystified me. This film contained a few elemental references, including one clearly defined CO2, which is fitting, seeing as how these films feel very “organic,” (I suppose having to do with the fact that since typically the human form is absent, and therefore the film is comprised of shapes, colors, and sounds). It seemed as though the majority of the film was made with inks, and at one point, I was intrigued by the arrows that were overlayed on top of the base inks. That was one of those times when I couldn’t help but wonder how they did that. There was another section of the film where there was green, almost bacterial looking images and, again, I wasn’t able to discern how they created it. I thought the stock footage used was an interesting choice, and perhaps not necessarily what I would have chosen to use. On the whole, the film was great eye candy, I thought the song choice was superb, and it’s still nice to see professional films created under the same mediums as the ones I am currently learning.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
earth, wind, water, fire
02.18.08
it's finally time to turn in our first project, the earth, wind, water, fire assignment. on the whole, i thought this was an incredibly interesting assignment. it exposed us to a lot of techniques used to make cameraless films, and they are all very interesting in their own right.
for the project, we decided to use some of our rayogram material for wind (the loose tea particles i used look strikingly like wind blowing), patrick painted with supplied inks for fire, i used magazine transfers to create the water section, and the earth portion was all-encompassing and present throughout, although mainly represented as brown throughout the film.
i found that i got the most intimate with the 100 frame animation section, as it really requires you to sit down and thoroughly think through what you are going to draw. as it turns out, it's a whole lot easier in your head than on film. my initial idea was a bit of strip to start the film, kind of showing the earth forming, starting as nothing more than a bunch of particles of dust and gas in the atmosphere, being drawn together to form a huge ball of fiery lava, eventually being cooled off (over thousands and thousands of years) by the atmostphere (enter the wind and rain elements), and turning into a suitable planet. then i tried to actually draw the planet starting with the formation of pangea, separating into the continents we know in present day, and actually doing a 360 degree rotation in that form (although i feel sure as though it didn't turn out like that. i suppose we'll see soon), and then drawing a simulated camera movement that "zooms" out to reveal the earth figure as the pupil in a mind's eye. perhaps just of the world itself. again, i know this is only going to be about four seconds long, and i'm interested to see how it turns out. the rest of that film strip i painted/drew/bleached on, kind of using as a "summation" for the project. using muddy type swooshes for the earth section in brown (incl. oils), wisps of dark blue for wind, wavy sponge paint in light blue (with overlaying waves drawn on) for water (also incl. oils), and complete chaos in red for fire. i used latex based paint on the emulsions side of the film, and drew on the base side with fine point sharpies.
splicing the film was an interesting experience too, as it took much longer and much more thinking through than i had assumed that it would.
again, i am interested to see how all of these projects turn out.
on another note, i thought the animation exercise we did in class on the 18th was great. forethought helps, but it's really being there and just actually executing the shoot that makes it happen. something like this takes practice, as you seem to run into problems along the way that kind of create themselves, ("how do you make pez levitate and "fly" through the air?") but it was great, and i can't wait to get the footage back into the edit lab to add sound effects and whatnot...
it's finally time to turn in our first project, the earth, wind, water, fire assignment. on the whole, i thought this was an incredibly interesting assignment. it exposed us to a lot of techniques used to make cameraless films, and they are all very interesting in their own right.
for the project, we decided to use some of our rayogram material for wind (the loose tea particles i used look strikingly like wind blowing), patrick painted with supplied inks for fire, i used magazine transfers to create the water section, and the earth portion was all-encompassing and present throughout, although mainly represented as brown throughout the film.
i found that i got the most intimate with the 100 frame animation section, as it really requires you to sit down and thoroughly think through what you are going to draw. as it turns out, it's a whole lot easier in your head than on film. my initial idea was a bit of strip to start the film, kind of showing the earth forming, starting as nothing more than a bunch of particles of dust and gas in the atmosphere, being drawn together to form a huge ball of fiery lava, eventually being cooled off (over thousands and thousands of years) by the atmostphere (enter the wind and rain elements), and turning into a suitable planet. then i tried to actually draw the planet starting with the formation of pangea, separating into the continents we know in present day, and actually doing a 360 degree rotation in that form (although i feel sure as though it didn't turn out like that. i suppose we'll see soon), and then drawing a simulated camera movement that "zooms" out to reveal the earth figure as the pupil in a mind's eye. perhaps just of the world itself. again, i know this is only going to be about four seconds long, and i'm interested to see how it turns out. the rest of that film strip i painted/drew/bleached on, kind of using as a "summation" for the project. using muddy type swooshes for the earth section in brown (incl. oils), wisps of dark blue for wind, wavy sponge paint in light blue (with overlaying waves drawn on) for water (also incl. oils), and complete chaos in red for fire. i used latex based paint on the emulsions side of the film, and drew on the base side with fine point sharpies.
splicing the film was an interesting experience too, as it took much longer and much more thinking through than i had assumed that it would.
again, i am interested to see how all of these projects turn out.
on another note, i thought the animation exercise we did in class on the 18th was great. forethought helps, but it's really being there and just actually executing the shoot that makes it happen. something like this takes practice, as you seem to run into problems along the way that kind of create themselves, ("how do you make pez levitate and "fly" through the air?") but it was great, and i can't wait to get the footage back into the edit lab to add sound effects and whatnot...
Saturday, February 16, 2008
eating pes
02.11.08
i feel like this class exposes me to to the most interesting things.... although i spent nearly all of last class doing another rayogram, it was still a much different experiment than the first time around, as well as a definite learning process. (it's almost like guess and check, what works, what doesn't?)
i thought that the short films shown at the end of class from eatpes.com were absolutely brilliant. there is still some undefined aspect (in my mind) that makes me look at a film like that and think "hey, that looks totally easy to make. i could do that." and to still know deep down that it's an incredibly long, hard process that has taken years and years of practice. perhaps it is the simplicity and recognizability of the objects used. little toy planes, matchsticks, flowers, ornaments, yea sure, we all have that stuff lying around...
i got onto his website to check out some other of his works, and was a bit blown away. first off, at the number of commercials he has made for high profile companies, including nike, psp, bacardi, tic-tacs, and sprint, just to name a few (and just for the record, i really appreciated his tic-tac commercial, entitled "whittlin' wood"). secondly, at the sheer creativity behind his works, as well as the assumed versatility of the peanut. or the pee-nut. roof sex was an incredibly interesting film to watch, and i was surprised to learn during the "making of" video that furniture porn wasn't an original idea. go granny go! (although it's way too bad about the cat). his short shorts are great to watch too, my favorites probably being Moth and Fireworks.
things like this (and people like him) serve as the reminder to me that as with anything, but especially with film, the possibilities truly are endless. there is no need to stay within the lines of any creative boundary. all you need is insight, ideas, and a creative drive to create what you envision. and there you have it: magic.
also, a note on Well's "Notes Towards a Theory of Animation": i thought this reading was great. it was nice to have a bit of a side by side comparison of orthodox vs. experimental films, and i've read and re-read it just to remind myself again of aforementioned revelation. thanks.
i feel like this class exposes me to to the most interesting things.... although i spent nearly all of last class doing another rayogram, it was still a much different experiment than the first time around, as well as a definite learning process. (it's almost like guess and check, what works, what doesn't?)
i thought that the short films shown at the end of class from eatpes.com were absolutely brilliant. there is still some undefined aspect (in my mind) that makes me look at a film like that and think "hey, that looks totally easy to make. i could do that." and to still know deep down that it's an incredibly long, hard process that has taken years and years of practice. perhaps it is the simplicity and recognizability of the objects used. little toy planes, matchsticks, flowers, ornaments, yea sure, we all have that stuff lying around...
i got onto his website to check out some other of his works, and was a bit blown away. first off, at the number of commercials he has made for high profile companies, including nike, psp, bacardi, tic-tacs, and sprint, just to name a few (and just for the record, i really appreciated his tic-tac commercial, entitled "whittlin' wood"). secondly, at the sheer creativity behind his works, as well as the assumed versatility of the peanut. or the pee-nut. roof sex was an incredibly interesting film to watch, and i was surprised to learn during the "making of" video that furniture porn wasn't an original idea. go granny go! (although it's way too bad about the cat). his short shorts are great to watch too, my favorites probably being Moth and Fireworks.
things like this (and people like him) serve as the reminder to me that as with anything, but especially with film, the possibilities truly are endless. there is no need to stay within the lines of any creative boundary. all you need is insight, ideas, and a creative drive to create what you envision. and there you have it: magic.
also, a note on Well's "Notes Towards a Theory of Animation": i thought this reading was great. it was nice to have a bit of a side by side comparison of orthodox vs. experimental films, and i've read and re-read it just to remind myself again of aforementioned revelation. thanks.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
class
02.04.08
i love this class. thats all it really comes down to. unlike many film classes i've opted to take, this class is much less about set structure, and much more about creativity. one of my favorite aspects of being a film major is the idea of being able to creatively push myself to limits that otherwise wouldn't be an option. of course, as with any curriculum, there are certain things you have to do to satisfy requirements, and contrary to popular opinion, film is not just an easy cop-out of a major. but amidst the rigid structure of such classes as editing and screenwriting (i.e. "you are going to edit this footage and make it viewable" or "you are going to write a screenplay"), 6X1 provides an opportunity to have a particular project to do, but to really take it in any direction you choose...
coming into this class (and a few of my other classes this semester) i honestly felt a little bit uneducated and unprepared. luckily for me, the guidance and openness of the instructor is strong enough to where that really doesn't matter. before i withdrew from school last january, 6X1 was a class i was enrolled in, and i had the opportunity to go to the first class, at least get an idea of what 'inking' and 'scratching' on film were, and get the first assignment. since then, and in hopes of returning to 6X1 at a later date, i've been marinating on the earth, wind, fire, water assignment.
so aside from being exposed to alot of really interesting, experimental films (and filmmakers) that i probably would have never heard of otherwise, and apart from learning alot of really necessary things that every filmmaker should know (how to load a film projector, how to process film, etc...) i've been exposed to all sorts of limitless techniques in the way of creating cameraless movies. [which really appeals to me. i'm an incredibly hands-on person, and enjoy not being limited in filmmaking to things such as actors, blocking, scripting, editing, so on and so forth]. thus far, i think the magazine transfer technique has been the most interesting to me. scratching on film, yes. inking, yes. even the rayogram makes sense, it's exposing film while manipulating what's on top covering the light, thus leaving a design underneath. but i had no idea that with just clear packing tape, some torn up magazine bits, and a bucket of hot water, you could make a movie....
this class has kept me on my toes creatively, pushing me to think in ways i never have before, and probably wouldn't otherwise. it's an interesting place to be, mindscape, moviescape, film as a landscape, and if i have to be anywhere at 10am on a monday morning, it might as well be here...
i love this class. thats all it really comes down to. unlike many film classes i've opted to take, this class is much less about set structure, and much more about creativity. one of my favorite aspects of being a film major is the idea of being able to creatively push myself to limits that otherwise wouldn't be an option. of course, as with any curriculum, there are certain things you have to do to satisfy requirements, and contrary to popular opinion, film is not just an easy cop-out of a major. but amidst the rigid structure of such classes as editing and screenwriting (i.e. "you are going to edit this footage and make it viewable" or "you are going to write a screenplay"), 6X1 provides an opportunity to have a particular project to do, but to really take it in any direction you choose...
coming into this class (and a few of my other classes this semester) i honestly felt a little bit uneducated and unprepared. luckily for me, the guidance and openness of the instructor is strong enough to where that really doesn't matter. before i withdrew from school last january, 6X1 was a class i was enrolled in, and i had the opportunity to go to the first class, at least get an idea of what 'inking' and 'scratching' on film were, and get the first assignment. since then, and in hopes of returning to 6X1 at a later date, i've been marinating on the earth, wind, fire, water assignment.
so aside from being exposed to alot of really interesting, experimental films (and filmmakers) that i probably would have never heard of otherwise, and apart from learning alot of really necessary things that every filmmaker should know (how to load a film projector, how to process film, etc...) i've been exposed to all sorts of limitless techniques in the way of creating cameraless movies. [which really appeals to me. i'm an incredibly hands-on person, and enjoy not being limited in filmmaking to things such as actors, blocking, scripting, editing, so on and so forth]. thus far, i think the magazine transfer technique has been the most interesting to me. scratching on film, yes. inking, yes. even the rayogram makes sense, it's exposing film while manipulating what's on top covering the light, thus leaving a design underneath. but i had no idea that with just clear packing tape, some torn up magazine bits, and a bucket of hot water, you could make a movie....
this class has kept me on my toes creatively, pushing me to think in ways i never have before, and probably wouldn't otherwise. it's an interesting place to be, mindscape, moviescape, film as a landscape, and if i have to be anywhere at 10am on a monday morning, it might as well be here...
Saturday, February 2, 2008
brakhage, on giving and taking
01.28.08
as an experimental filmmaker, stan brakhage is a genius. as a philosopher, brilliant. as a writer, wordy and a bit confusing. as a philosophical writer, fine perhaps. while reading brakhage's article "a moving picture giving and taking book" i was a bit disconcerted that his proposed audience were colleagues and student filmmakers. had he been writing to theorists and critics, albeit those with a concentration in film, his old-world style would have worked fine. although precise and understandable, i still thought that his style was a bit long winded and drawn out (i.e. in his explanation of the beloved sprocket-wheels, i thought it could have been half as long, twice as explanatory, and just as effective).
yet still, writing style aside, the information brakhage related is both helpful and necessary to a class like this. he reiterated ideas that are important in almost every aspect of filmmaking, especially cameraless. one point he made early on that i appreciated was when he outlined three important aspects of the moving picture process, and says, "...the success of the illusion of movement depends most critically upon the flips: those split-second interruptions between pictures... --were it not for those interruptions between pictures the pics themselves would blur into an unintelligible mass of lines." this served to me a reminder that all filmmaking, with or without a camera, is truly done frame by frame, and that each one matters. and that those small spaces of time while the shutter's "uneaten part of the pie" is over the gate is just as important as the opposite. there was also a nice review of the A.S.A. as related to film, f-stops, as related to light, (and/or the Nature of Light) which was nice, because this still is a concept that remains fairly confusing to me.
there were times when i thought that this article was perhaps a bit too outdated to matter as much as it does, but then i re-reminded myself that from the past can we learn much more about our present and future situations, so being exposed to ideas such as the splicing issues from back then that we don't really have to bother with anymore just builds a better understanding of the craft, from then until now.
all-in-all, though not a bowl of cherries to read, brakhage's "a moving picture giving and taking book" was a worthwhile and information packed article to read.
concerning class last week: i thought the workshop was very fun. i was impressed at the magazine transfer technique, both how easy it is and how limitless it is. it's amazing the things you can do when you don't limit yourself creatively. also, looking forward to this upcoming week, and using any number of other small objects to project onto film (and assuming that we'll be using the technique as outline by brakhage in his article?) so far, the things i have found to bring in: paperclips, thumbtacks, a nail, a spring, buttons, different and various pieces of textile, grain rice, tea from a tea bag, and a crushed up cream soda dum dum.
see you on monday.
as an experimental filmmaker, stan brakhage is a genius. as a philosopher, brilliant. as a writer, wordy and a bit confusing. as a philosophical writer, fine perhaps. while reading brakhage's article "a moving picture giving and taking book" i was a bit disconcerted that his proposed audience were colleagues and student filmmakers. had he been writing to theorists and critics, albeit those with a concentration in film, his old-world style would have worked fine. although precise and understandable, i still thought that his style was a bit long winded and drawn out (i.e. in his explanation of the beloved sprocket-wheels, i thought it could have been half as long, twice as explanatory, and just as effective).
yet still, writing style aside, the information brakhage related is both helpful and necessary to a class like this. he reiterated ideas that are important in almost every aspect of filmmaking, especially cameraless. one point he made early on that i appreciated was when he outlined three important aspects of the moving picture process, and says, "...the success of the illusion of movement depends most critically upon the flips: those split-second interruptions between pictures... --were it not for those interruptions between pictures the pics themselves would blur into an unintelligible mass of lines." this served to me a reminder that all filmmaking, with or without a camera, is truly done frame by frame, and that each one matters. and that those small spaces of time while the shutter's "uneaten part of the pie" is over the gate is just as important as the opposite. there was also a nice review of the A.S.A. as related to film, f-stops, as related to light, (and/or the Nature of Light) which was nice, because this still is a concept that remains fairly confusing to me.
there were times when i thought that this article was perhaps a bit too outdated to matter as much as it does, but then i re-reminded myself that from the past can we learn much more about our present and future situations, so being exposed to ideas such as the splicing issues from back then that we don't really have to bother with anymore just builds a better understanding of the craft, from then until now.
all-in-all, though not a bowl of cherries to read, brakhage's "a moving picture giving and taking book" was a worthwhile and information packed article to read.
concerning class last week: i thought the workshop was very fun. i was impressed at the magazine transfer technique, both how easy it is and how limitless it is. it's amazing the things you can do when you don't limit yourself creatively. also, looking forward to this upcoming week, and using any number of other small objects to project onto film (and assuming that we'll be using the technique as outline by brakhage in his article?) so far, the things i have found to bring in: paperclips, thumbtacks, a nail, a spring, buttons, different and various pieces of textile, grain rice, tea from a tea bag, and a crushed up cream soda dum dum.
see you on monday.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
the junkies scratched up some film
01.14.08
upon watching To the Beat and attempting to record my response (i.e. thoughts, feelings, utter confusion, etc...) towards it, i was re-reminded about how hard it is to qualify these and many other things through language. hence (some thousands of years later) the creation of music and movies. movie: a delicious blend of audio and visual components, precisely spliced together to create the picture as a whole. or, the Idea, as a whole. a barrage of ideas, perhaps, portrayed not as spoken words, but instead as images on a screen, in your mind, on the back of your eyelids, in your dreamspace. wherever these ideas originate from, it proves lucky for us, the audience, to be able to visually see and then mentally interpret what is beyond that of language, perhaps the most insufficient of all qualifiers...
anywho, i thought that To the Beat was a very interesting blend of reality and fantasy (or perhaps, more correctly, reality and un-reality), that opposition being the abstract nature of the representation of the story. the opening scenes were incredibly interesting, and i found myself becoming very comfortable with the red linear entity that stayed consistent in the background, much as you would with a character in a narrative. i thought that the music was a bit too intense during the beginning of the movie, and therefore lost some of its impact and/or climactic capabilities throughout the film. yet still, this intertwining of visual montage and auditory (specifically musical) stimulation led to me wondering during the film: which came first, the chicken or the egg? the music or the movie? i settled on the option of music, assuming that the musical piece was recorded, and then the visual pieces were edited together to 'fit' the music, although created, more than likely, completely independent of anything at all.
this concern led me to ponder the idea that i really have no idea at all how a film like this comes into being. or at least the techniques that spawn it. there were a few parts that i was able to distinguish (i.e. that is just paint and oil, that is layering and scratching, etc...) but on the whole, i'm still largely unsure of how most of those images got to be the way they did on a small reel of film. one image in particular being the vertical white lines that move horizontally across the screen, dancing from left to right, in and out of frame. honestly, i cannot fathom how this is done. i also found myself wondering about the less abstract portions of the films, namely the real life picture images. are they family photos? are they personal to the filmmaker at all? if so, was this film actually intended to be/have/tell a story? if not, where might one find random pictures like these, and for what specific reason did those particular photos get used? again, subjective to the story of the film, which may or may not be an abstract idea in and of itself.
my most potent internal theme stemming from this film: disassociation.
[i am going to go ahead and apologize in advance (of the rest of the blogs, at least) for my intentional efforts at un-capitalization. since being a young child, i have been strongly against any and all capitalistic efforts in almost every sense, which has therefore led me to prefer letters in the lowercase form... haha, just kidding... but seriously though, i hope it doesn't offend anybody...]
upon watching To the Beat and attempting to record my response (i.e. thoughts, feelings, utter confusion, etc...) towards it, i was re-reminded about how hard it is to qualify these and many other things through language. hence (some thousands of years later) the creation of music and movies. movie: a delicious blend of audio and visual components, precisely spliced together to create the picture as a whole. or, the Idea, as a whole. a barrage of ideas, perhaps, portrayed not as spoken words, but instead as images on a screen, in your mind, on the back of your eyelids, in your dreamspace. wherever these ideas originate from, it proves lucky for us, the audience, to be able to visually see and then mentally interpret what is beyond that of language, perhaps the most insufficient of all qualifiers...
anywho, i thought that To the Beat was a very interesting blend of reality and fantasy (or perhaps, more correctly, reality and un-reality), that opposition being the abstract nature of the representation of the story. the opening scenes were incredibly interesting, and i found myself becoming very comfortable with the red linear entity that stayed consistent in the background, much as you would with a character in a narrative. i thought that the music was a bit too intense during the beginning of the movie, and therefore lost some of its impact and/or climactic capabilities throughout the film. yet still, this intertwining of visual montage and auditory (specifically musical) stimulation led to me wondering during the film: which came first, the chicken or the egg? the music or the movie? i settled on the option of music, assuming that the musical piece was recorded, and then the visual pieces were edited together to 'fit' the music, although created, more than likely, completely independent of anything at all.
this concern led me to ponder the idea that i really have no idea at all how a film like this comes into being. or at least the techniques that spawn it. there were a few parts that i was able to distinguish (i.e. that is just paint and oil, that is layering and scratching, etc...) but on the whole, i'm still largely unsure of how most of those images got to be the way they did on a small reel of film. one image in particular being the vertical white lines that move horizontally across the screen, dancing from left to right, in and out of frame. honestly, i cannot fathom how this is done. i also found myself wondering about the less abstract portions of the films, namely the real life picture images. are they family photos? are they personal to the filmmaker at all? if so, was this film actually intended to be/have/tell a story? if not, where might one find random pictures like these, and for what specific reason did those particular photos get used? again, subjective to the story of the film, which may or may not be an abstract idea in and of itself.
my most potent internal theme stemming from this film: disassociation.
[i am going to go ahead and apologize in advance (of the rest of the blogs, at least) for my intentional efforts at un-capitalization. since being a young child, i have been strongly against any and all capitalistic efforts in almost every sense, which has therefore led me to prefer letters in the lowercase form... haha, just kidding... but seriously though, i hope it doesn't offend anybody...]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
