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!!
Monday, September 29, 2008
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?"
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
