Today I decided to notice, mark, and record some of the shadows I saw on my walk across campus. It was late afternoon and the shadows were getting quite long and pretty which was fun to observe until I entered into the dark abyss of building 9.
(Pro tip: it looks nice if you zoom out your browser so the photos look like a triptych)
In today’s workshop, we screen a mini film festival of our completed portraits. We teamed up into groups to give feedback on each other’s films, keeping in mind de Bono’s six hats system, which I mentioned earlier on this blog, the technical and aesthetic aspects, the controlling idea, and more.
Firstly, Jason Hendriks’ portrait of a barber. I thought this portrait was really well done. I liked that it opened with a few establishing shots of the barber shop, and there was really good coverage of the shop overall, utilising different angles and shot types. The opening titles look good and it was clear that time and effort was put into this. As with many of the portraits, the audio quality was quite poor and it is quite jarring when the barber first begins to speak, but it was clearly audible over the background music. Also, the split screen editing used the space of the frame in a quirky, interesting way.
Sylvia’s portrait of an artist used lots of varied camera angles which made it an interesting film. It was however hard to understand the subject at times as his voice was competing with the background music. I think some of the transitions between shots were quite hard and could have been softened a bit. However, the controlling idea (art, creativity) is clear and the film remains interesting throughout.
Yolanda’s portrait was about a student fashion designer. These was a variation of shots of the subject working on a dress, but these shots were quite long – I think some faster editing could have heightened the engagement of the portrait, perhaps interspersed with more shots of the interviewee speaking. I did like that different shots were included of the subject buying fabric.
Watching everyone’s projects was really interesting and inspiring (and a little sad for me because they were all so good). It’s cool to see how everyone takes a brief and fulfils it in very different and creative ways.
If you came here expected a Buzzfeed quiz in the vein of what dog are you?, you’ve come to the wrong place. If not, feel welcome to keep reading.
Whilst discussing the readings in our workshop this week, regarding teamwork and communication, we touched upon the topic of the type of people the media industry attracts. In general, the media industry is a creative one, and therefore attracts creative types. These types, as we discussed, tend to have traits such as being obsessed with details, extremely passionate, eccentric.
One trait that we couldn’t really pinpoint was if these types are likely to be extraverted or introverted. From my experience, no person is fully extraverted or fully introverted. How people behave and express themselves is dependent on the situation they find themselves in, for instance, a person may me introverted at work but extraverted at home. They may be introverted when they are sad or extraverted when they are happy. I know that when I’m happy and comfortable around people I know I can be extraverted, but these moments are more rare than moments that I’m more quiet and reserved.
In the end, it comes down to empathy. People may behave in different ways, but to help you work with them, it’s important to understand how they feel and where they are coming from. So, in the eloquent words of Luke O’Dell, introvert, extrovert, doesn’t matter.
I was recently watching TV/procrastinating and noticed an interesting advertisement for a funeral services company whose name I cannot remember and cannot find online anywhere. Instead, I’ve provide you with a different funeral related video that is no less interesting and a good way to spend 10 minutes instead of reading my blog.
The advertisement comprised of snippets from interviews of different people, saying things like “there would have to be fairy bread” and “I’d have one of those big floaty men outside” and more. The advertisement leads the audience to think that these people are talking about hosting a party, which I also believed, however at the end it reveals that these people were talking about their own funeral.
Personally, I felt a bit betrayed as I’d been excited about the prospect of parties and fairy bread and funerals were the last thing I wanted to think about at that point in time. Then I thought that the advertisement was a great example of manipulating audience expectations to present an argument (in this case, sell a service), and was thus also a good example of rhetorical form in non-narrative film. I think it uses a subject centred argument, which according to Bordwell and Thompson in Film Art, An Introduction (2006) say “ appeals to beliefs common at a time in a given culture.” (p. 349). I would propose that the dominant belief in 21st century Australian culture is that funerals should be personal and reflect the life and desires of the person they are commemorating, which the advertisement appeals to in an attempt to persuade the audience that this service is right for them and their loved ones, as it recognises this value.
One of the topics covered in this week’s Lectorial was teamwork, and how communication is crucial to a successful team. However, different people can have different ways of communicating, which can be a cause for conflict. Personally, I’m a big fan of communicating through messaging on Facebook – it’s quick, easy, and has almost instant gratification as you can tell when a person has received a message. But I do recognise the flaws of this way of communicating. Some people are not active often enough, or will give you the dreaded ‘seen’ treatment, whether this be intentional or not.
I’m not one to make a phone call unless it’s absolutely necessary. If it can be done through a message or email, I’ll take the easy way out. Other people, particularly older people (I’m looking at you, my grandparents) are of the sort that believes mobile phones are solely for phone calls, and will call for anything. There are also those who are difficult to communicate with via any media, and who will prefer face to face communication in almost any situation.
In all aspects of life, you’ll meet people who communicate differently. Whilst it may be difficult, a way to work around this must be found, especially when having to work as a team. This will be especially relevant going into Project Brief 4.
Non-narrative documentary films can be presented in different types of form, which according to Bordwell and Thompson in Film Art: An Introduction, (2006), pp. 342-370.
Firstly, categorical form. These categories don’t have to be strict and exhaustive, they can blend with each other. These films may have simple and logical patterns of progression – however, they can also risk boring the audience if the categories are too dull. An example cited by Bordwell and Thompson is the film Gap Toothed Women, directed by Les Blank, who has chosen a category that is both interesting and broad enough to include a variety of women.
Rhetorical form is seen within a film where the filmmaker is presenting a persuasive argument. The filmmaker is trying to persuade an audience to have a certain opinion and act on it. There are different types of arguments, including arguments from source, subject centred arguments, and viewer centred arguments.
Abstract form and associational form are characteristic, but not limited to, of experimental film. A good example of abstract form is Ballet Mecanique (1923-1924), which is organised by shapes, colours, forms and music. Ballet Mecanique is interesting for me because it manages to make me feel incredibly uncomfortable – through a combination of discordant sounds and the odd combination of images. It is therefore very successful at shaping my experience of the film.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QV9-l-rXOE
Associational form relies on grouping images together to suggest ideas. Bordwell and Thompson compared some aspects of associational form to poetry, and techniques of simile and metaphor used within that.
I thought these are interesting ways of looking at non-narrative film. Some aspects of this had already been covered earlier in Introduction to Cinema Studies, so it was helpful to have further discussion about this to help me gain greater understanding.
For Project Brief 3, I interviewed my sister, Ashley, who is transgender and enjoy making costumes. I initially wanted to focus largely on her being transgender and how this has affected her life, and therefore I wrote the questions also focusing on this. I organised the interview with her fairly early, so I’d have plenty of time to edit, and recorded it using the Zoom recorder which I borrowed from the school.
As I created a storyboard for Project Brief 2, and found it immensely helpful in streamlining the production and post production process, I wanted to do the same thing for this project. However, as it was difficult to predict what my subject’s answers would be, I really struggled to do so. In hindsight, I think this was due to a lack of creative vision in regards to the narrative structure of the project. Next time around, I will need to spend more time in pre-production and work out what I’m trying to say with my project. Admittedly, I think my slackness in this regard may be due to the fact that I was interviewing my sister, who was readily available. As a media practitioner, I need to be consistent in my work practices and not allow myself to skip important tasks, as a lack of a strong plan really hindered my progress on Project Brief 3.
Keeping in mind the Lectorial regarding interviewing, I tried to write open ended questions. Despite this, my sister was still quite shy and her answers were not as elaborate as I would have liked. This made me think of one of the points Louise raised, regarding making sure the interviewee is ‘good talent. My sister was definitely no Donald Trump in terms of charisma, but nevertheless, I thought there was an interesting story to be told and I was determined to make it work.
I sourced my found footage from www.archive.org and Youtube. This footage consists of shots from 1950’s instructional videos that show women in traditional roles, such as sewing, as this linked to my subject’s practical skill of making costumes. I also used footage of ‘cosplayers,’ as this provided more visual reference for what my subject does with the costumes she makes.
My initial idea was to have purely voice over, through the interview clips recorded on the zoom recorder, which would be combined with visuals of my subject and found footage clips. I struggled editing this together however, due to the brief answers of my subject, I found that it didn’t tell the story I wanted it to.
After the Narrative Structure Exercise in the week 6 workshop, I realised that there was a lot lacking from my portrait. I decided add a stronger focus on my sister’s costume design, and to tie this together with her being transgender, and how it helps give her ambition, and helps her cope. Thus, I wrote more questions and interviewer her again, this time recording the interview on a Canon 600d, as I didn’t have time at this point to borrow the Sony camera from the school, and I thought this had comparable visual quality. However, the audio quality was not as good, and it ended up being quite noticeable where I transition from using the original recordings and the new ones. By adjusting the volume and adding background music, I tried to minimise this effect, but as I mentioned earlier, this problem could have been avoided by being more clear about my creative vision during pre-production.
In the end, I’m glad that I recorded the additional footage as it added a lot more to the final portrait. I also thought the simply animated opening credits (which I created in Adobe Photoshop and caused me a fair share of frustration) worked quite well and suited the overall motivating tone of the portrait. As I’ve mentioned earlier, I wish I’d planned the project better so the portrait would have been stronger and more unified, but overall, I’m not entirely dissatisfied with the result.
Where would we be without memes?
Yep. Teamwork. Capable of striking fear deep into the hearts of the world’s university students. The su.bject matter of countless dank memes posted to student run Facebook pages – and yet – an essential skill for everyone to possess, especially those intending to have a career in the media industry.
I’m not going to focus on the negatives of teamwork, as I’m sure we’re all familiar with those. In no particular order, it is good for sharing ideas, gaining inspiration, getting support, working quickly and efficiently, enable us to tackle bigger projects by sharing the workload, and more.
The characteristics of positive collaboration include:
I must admit I was initially hesitant about tackling a group project, as I, like many, have had some bad experiences in the past. However, I do recognise that teamwork is an important part of life, not only in the workforce, but in almost every element of our lives. I’ve already, from high school and part time work, that there are always going to be people who you don’t get along with, no matter what you do, but despite this you must find a way to collaborate and work efficiently together despite your differences. This is no different to collaborative work within the media.
After today’s Lectorial, I’m determined to keep a positive outlook towards teamwork going into Project Brief 4, and the rest of my career.
Every day I walk to and from the station to make my way to uni. Today, however, freshly inspired by the Media 1 workshop and John Mason’s Researching your own practice: The discipline of noticing (London: Routledge), I decided to make a deliberate effort to notice, mark, and record (right here!) some of the interesting things I saw. So without further ado, here you go.
These are only a few of the things I noticed that I was able to mark and record. I quite liked this exercise – it was a fun way to get more acquainted with my neighbourhood and add some life to an otherwise mundane walk.
Zodiac (2007) dir. David Fincher
Fincher crafts an elaborate film about obsession and details, woven through true events from the Zodiac killings in the 1960’s and 70’s. Jake Gyllenhaal’s performance stands out. ★★★★
Russian Ark (2003) dir. Alexander Sokurov
This ambitious film was shot in one 90 minute take in the Hermitage Palace in St Petersburg, Russia. The end result is an absorbing journey through the history of the palace, that at times is a touch ambiguous, but I couldn’t look away. ★★★
Bridge of Spies (2015) dir. Steven Spielberg
If someone ever made a biography of my life, I’d want Tom Hanks to play me. The cinematography is incredibly beautiful and the story (based on true Cold War events) is well told. ★★★★
Suspense! (1913) Dir. Lois Weber.
The first thriller silent film by one of America’s first female directors. It features some impressive triptych editing, and is surprisingly advanced for its age. ★★★
Aquamarine (2006) Dir. Elizabeth Allen Rosenbaum
A classic teen girl movie, featuring a tiny Emma Roberts. There’s not much technically impressive about this movie, but it is good fun. ★★