Monthly Archives: March 2020

The Scene in Cinema Week 4 Reflection

In this week of classes, I was unable to complete the exercise to shoot a scene, instead, I did a storyboard, shot list and floor plan of the scene. The process of turning the script into something visual made me realise the number of choices that must be made prior to covering the scene. I chose the cafe scene with Rachel and Barney. With the restriction of using only 4 setups, I had to discard giving every notable line in the script its own shot. Instead of giving Barney his own shot to show him fiddling on his phone, I decided to start the shot with Rachel coming into focus. Robin mentions that this shift in focus to Rachel was different from how the script describes the scene. When creating the storyboard, I did not think about the character focus, by making Rachel enter the scene first, I essentially made her the focus of that shot. This is something I want to investigate further, as deciding whose scene it is can have a major impact on the story and the characters. Looking back at my storyboard, if I replaced the first shot with the camera pointed at Barney on his phone, the scene becomes more closely connected to him instead.

 

In Tim Barnard’s commentary on decoupage, he identifies the difference between it and montage. He states that decoupage “cuts up … the script in its narrative form to create a detailed plan for shooting the film, complete with camera indications, stage directions for the actors and even changes of shot” (2014, p.4). I believe the exercise we did this week is also a form of decoupage where we segmented the script into another form which enables us to shoot the scene in our heads. In the future, more effective and in-depth insight into the process of storyboarding and shot listing would be beneficial.

The Scene in Cinema Week 3 Reflection

In the notes provided for this week’s class, we looked at the difference in form/style in Kubrick’s “A Clockwork Orange” and Anderson’s “O Lucky Man!”. In this discussion, we noted the difference in coverage for both directors. The former seem to utilise locked down tripod shots with a wide lens, whereas Anderson uses standard focal length lens and moves the camera according to the action. For Anderson, there are more closeups of objects to guide our attention. Kubrick, on the other hand, uses long takes and lets the audience to see what is most important in the shot. This had me thinking about other directors and how they might plan coverage for a scene. 

 

We also looked at the coverage of a bar scene in Gossip Girl and A Flame Within. In the two clips, we see a dialogue exchange between two people. In doing these shot reverse-shots, the concept of the 180-degree rule came into discussion. Most notably, how the scene in A Flame Within did not follow this. The result of which was a feeling of disorientation, as the positioning of the characters become difficult to understand. Yet I believe there are ways to cross the line without it becoming disorientating. One such example is in Parasite by Bong Joon Ho.

In a shot-reverse-shot dialogue scene between two characters, the camera crosses the line and delivers the rest of the conversation with the character looking at the same screen direction. Yet, in this example, the positioning of the characters was not confusing. I believe this is because, in a shot, the camera itself moved as it crossed the line, this gives the audience a better understanding of the space they are in.

In addition, the shot-reverse-shot are dirty, and more than half of the frame is taken up by the back of the other character. Through this, we can still understand that a conversation between these two characters is taking place.

 

The Scene in Cinema: Invictus Descriptive & Analytical Writing

1:28-2:56

 

After Nelson Mandela (played by Morgan Freeman) is elected president of South Africa, his personal bodyguards have joined by additional white bodyguards who were also assigned. Jason, one of the bodyguards confronts Mandela and voices his grievances having to work with them.

 

In one of the first racial conflicts presented in the movie, Clint Eastwood covers this conversation between the bodyguard Jason and Nelson Mandela in only a few key setups. The scene features three characters, only two speaks. The secretary character is largely overlooked in the coverage of this scene, likely situated here to demonstrate how busy Mandela’s first day in the office is. 

 

In terms of blocking, both Jason and Mandela are directed to move around. Jason enters the scene and serves as the motivation for the camera as it pans around to reveal Mandela and his secretary. His dialogue with Mandela establishes a line between them; by which the camera setup is based around. Jason brings with him his complaint about the new white bodyguards who were assigned, through the over-the-shoulder shots, we can see that he is the only one standing in this scene, demonstrating his initial agitation over this decision. However, Mandela defends his decision. He too stands up and walks around his table and closer to Jason. As he walks around, the camera pans accordingly to maintain the line, keeping both of them in the shot whilst cutting off the secretary. As Mandela encourages Jason towards reconciliation and forgiveness, the camera too becomes tighter on their faces using a longer lens than the wider shots which precedes it. The camera placement in this scene follows the 180 degrees rule, this is effective for a conversation because cutting between naturally guides our eyes left and right when one character speaks.

The light source in the scene comes from outside the windows, this is used to simulate sunlight. Special care is taken as there are no other objects in the scene that is brighter than the windows, further creating the impression that this scene takes place during the day. The white linen curtains serve as a diffusion for the characters’ faces as this is a dialogue-heavy scene. Apart from this light, many of the lighting choices are to create background separation. I believe there is also a top light created by bouncing off the ceiling. This can be seen also to separate Jason from the interior in the over-the-shoulder shots. The windows behind Mandela acts as a backlight to separate Jason’s brown jacket from the wooden interior of the room as he enters the scene. 

The Scene in Cinema Week 2 Reflection

In class this week, we attempted a block-through of a scene. In it, a student comes into class, makes conversation with others and sits down. For me, I gained a deeper insight into focus pulling. I have used a wireless focus puller before where I could manage the focus behind a monitor away from the camera itself. In this class, we used camera tape on the focus ring of the lens and used focus markers to keep track of my focus on the subject. Focus marking can be done with stand-ins, an assistant to place a marker in a spot that can’t be seen on camera where the subject should be, and then marking the focus on the tape with a pen. This allows the focus puller to know where the focus should be without seeing the viewfinder. 

The chapter by Bunuel discusses the idea of segmentation and its close ties to cinema. He writes that a well-shot film with good camera angles can seem uncinematic because it lacked a good segmentation or decoupage. Whereas a film with ordinary photographic techniques can be a good film with great decoupage. My understanding of decoupage is the process carried out before anything is shot. It takes place during scriptwriting and especially storyboarding. Bunuel echoes this idea, saying that the “very act of setting one’s camera before an object to be filmed presupposes the existence of a decoupage” (2000, p.134). In class, we spoke about the role of the director. In this case, the director who is also in charge of turning the script into storyboard is also in charge of the decoupage of the film. This task differs with the role of the editor whose role is to coordinate shots with each other, however, the arrangement, sequencing of the film was “first projected inside the brain of the filmmaker” (2000, p.135).

The Scene in Cinema Week 1 Reflection

Coming into this studio, I look forward to furthering my cinematography knowledge. This week’s class has been a refresher on some of the basics in camera operation, the exposure triangle and cinematic properties such as depth of field. The term ‘coverage’ was not something I am personally familiar with. My initial thoughts on coverage remind me more of capturing sufficient footage, such as B-roll, for the edit. From what I took away this week, coverage meant breaking down a shot into its basic features. The idea of blocking was experimented upon in the first lesson, with the use of a floor plan, the team could accurately see the beginning and end of their movements onscreen. Prior to this class, I was told that T stops are a more accurate measurement of light entering the camera sensor, which is the reason why most Cine lenses are rated in T stops. However, I now understand that the reason why it is more accurate is that it is a measurement of the light after it passes through the glasses in a lens, although the inaccuracies are barely noticeable.

The exercise on the depth of field is a useful one in this industry. The effect of a shallow depth of field – the bokeh that is generated – is commonly associated with cinema. When clients ask me for a cinematic look on their videos, this is often what they want to achieve. The exercise we did in class showed us the extremes, by creating the most and least shallow depth of field possible. In the reading by Tom Reilly, he defines a shot as what is “photographed in between the words action and cut” (2009, p.16). The most interesting part for me was his mention that generally, 2 4/8 of a page is shot in one day. Taking into account the time it takes to set up lights and a camera, directing the actors and breaks, it does not surprise me that the average amount of script covered is 2 4/8 pages.