Comment on this post with your responses to "Visions of Light," the documentary about cinematography you watch in class.
Write on at least three separate points from the documentary (3-5 sentences per point). One of your points may be a question about cinematography sparked by this film.
This is a good look at the pastime of cinematography. I thought it was interesting and I did not know most of the things that they talked about in this film. I thought that the issue on sound ruining the movies' was kinda of strange, to me I like sound and yet, I believe can also see why it could ruin the classic american film. Sound and effects like that in a movie catches the viewers attention more on the sound and stuff rather than the picture itself. I guess I can see why some of the film crews were worried about the sound ruining a film's good quality and the meanings. Now a days we focus more so on the noise and effects the movie makes more than the real picture itself, therefore it doesn't enhance the full viewers attention if all they like are the special sound effects. Also I think that the overall emotions and things like that are also a good part of the film and if you take that out then the film didn't do it's job I guess... but I still like the sound effects and stuff like that in movies. But yet I can see their point of view too. Sometimes I believe that it's hard for old film makers to catch the new generation of movies or films that are made today. Also, I did not know that Orson Wells from Citizen Kane helped direct the some films that was cool to hear. Also Citizen Kane was mentioned in this film too that was cool to hear also. I don't know what else to write so I'm going to stop! ;)
ReplyDeleteOne thing that sparked my interest was how much lighting was actually involved. It is one of those things that I really never think about and they had all these kinds of special lights to make it better. I think lighting is even more important in the black and white films because if there is a shadow at all, you can barely pick out the face. This is something that directors need to be wary of.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing that I found amusing was the extreme close ups. Instead of zooming in a lot, they literally stuck the camera right in front of the actors/actress' face. I think this gives bot the actors a lot of credit because I don't think it would be easy to act out a seen and look away from a camera if it was two inches from your nose.
I also really liked the part about when sound was entered into the mix. One guy said if sound had waited fifteen-or-so years, we would have had a lot more quality films because silents were so good. I also found it interesting when they said that cameras were not able to move at the beginning of sound because it had to be in a sound proof case. It must have been a big sacrifice for the cinematographers because they couldn't move the camera at all.
This movie focuses on cinematography. Like they said in this movie, cinematography is more important than anything else in the film. This movie talked a lot about the lighting in films. Back when there was no color in films, the lighting was very important. The people talked about shadows and how important the positioning of the camera is. Most of us don't normally think about how important the elements of cinematography really are. I think that besides a good story, they cinematography really makes the film a lot better. You can always tell when the film was poorly photographed. When the people talked about sound, they said that they were worried when sound came into films. They believed that the focus from cinematography would switch to sound. They didn't want this because they didn't want to see films that were poorly photographed. They said that we should've waited a few more years to add sound so that the art of cinematography could further develop and become more important. I think that it would've been a very interesting experience to be around when there was no sound in movies. All of the focus was on the photographer. I bet that was a very stressful job because everything is on you. I think that it will be a while before cinematography to return to its importance because our modern world is not focused on it.
ReplyDeleteVisions of light taught me a lot about film techniques, such as film noir. Film noir, it said, is usually a harsher story line and is lit with one powerful light source to put shadows on faces and create silhouettes easier. The film showed a lot about how lighting is used in black and white films, how it is usually centered on characters faces, but when it isn't it isn't for a reason usually. to mask an identity or make someone look ominous. I thought it was interesting how that one actress only wanted the one side of her face to be lighted or even filmed, so she made them build sets and point lights specifically so she would never have to show her bad side. Movie stars have always been self centered and snobbish, I guess.
ReplyDeleteI thought that this was an interesting documentary on the history of cinematography and the director of photography. I thought that going through the history of movies and how the DP's are really the ones that had a pretty impact on how movies where made and changed how movies where made they also where the people that help change cameras and make them better so that they could do what the DP's needed them to do. I think that it was interesting how each director of photography is different and how they go about making there movies and like how they did their shots were different just like him they each had their own kind of style.It was also interesting to see how far movies have changed and how they continue to change. I thought that it was also interesting how they added color and sound to the movies as they figured out how to do those types of things also to hear what the directors of photography thoughts on how the movies where made and what they thought about when color was added and sound was added.It was also interesting to hear what they thought abut other directors of photography and comment on how they made their movies I thought that it was funny how even though they could comment and say good things about what other DP's did that was good i couldn't help but notice they could find something that they would do different. But other then that I thought that the movie was interesting to see what it really takes to make a movie and that there is more then just the actors actresses and the director.
ReplyDeletethe history of sound development was so interesting. It was strange how once they added sound they had to put the camera in a sound proof box. I guess the old cameras must have been quite noisy. It was also really interesting to see the progression of color on film. They would even paint each frame. they would get one, maybe two, colors exposed. I liked it also when the DP of in cold blood, and other movies, talked. It was really cool to learn that the rain on the side of Perry's face originated as an accident.
ReplyDeleteThe one example that i found most interesting in this film was the scene where we could see the rain on the guys face. I thought that it was amazing how the director made that happen and it looked as if he was crying because the rain on the window was reflecting so perfectly. It is incredible what tricks u can pull off in film making and i was simply astonished by how they could make it appear that someones face looked as if it was melting.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea that i found intreging was the the whole dea of lighting. Before this class i never had a clue of how important lighting in a movie really is. The director and film editor really have to think through every single scene and how to portray and lighting is a super big part of that. You can not make a great movie without perfecting the lighting of it and that is why i think that lighting can really make or break a movie.
Another key idea that caught my eye in this documentary was that of color and sound. I had a hard time believing that adding color and sound to movies actually decreased the quality in films. But after they explained how if they would have just had a few more years without sound or without color they could have became much better with cinematography it made sense to me.
There were many things in this film that I thought were very interesting. One thing that I thought was interesting was that lighting is such an importance in making a film. It was crazy to me that so many films use lighting to help set a mode or to just make a shot happen. Like in Citizen Kane with all the effects that they did the lighting was the most important and key thing in making the film really work and come together.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing that I thought was interesting in this film about cinema photography was that in the early days the film makers had to keep coming up with new ideas and way to film. One thing that they started to try in films was to film with their hands as a follow cam. This way they could get into places they couldnt have before and to give the film a certain feel. This was a lot easier because of steadyshot that they no have in cameras.
One last thing that caught me in this movie was the idea that film with sound and film without sound were filmed in complete different ways. This never occurred to me because I never lived in the age of silent films, but it makes complete sense to me. After how can a film be interesting without sound, so they had to make it interesting with the way it was filmed and with they way the characters played their roles.
I thought this film was very good because it should us the technicalities of something that people overlook when they watch a movie. People need to realize that cinematography is a key thing when it comes to making a legit film. Film shows all the details that people spend lots of time thinking about and then doing. One of the big questions in this film was did sound ruin the movie business? Did it make the movie worse? well in a way it did because when sound came out people worried less about film angles and cinematography and it made the feel of the movie not as good when angles of camera could tell the story, and the soundtrack could tell the story. but sound isn't bad, if there was never sound we would never have lines like " I could have been somebody, I could have been a contender."
ReplyDeleteWhat caught my attention most out of this film was when they were talking about how the invention and addition of sound actually detracted from film's quality. The contrast between the shot with the couple at a dinner, talking into a potted plant, vs. the man running/falling up/down the stairs showed and interesting perspective on what most people would view as a positive addition to film. Obviously its a bittersweet component of film.
ReplyDeleteThis film also brought up an interesting question as to whether directors were more talented in the early days of film, because they had less to work with, but still made due, vs. modern day directors who can do so much more, but with huge technological advancements. There is really no right answer, but its still edifying and intriguing to think about.
I thought that they said some really interesting things in this movie that i wouldnt have thought about.It brought a lot of things to light that make sense but you wouldnt expect it unless you watch this film. The fist thing that i thought was interesting was when they said how the addition of sound had ruined film. I thought at first that is crazy but then when i realized what they meant and it made a lot of sense. with the addition of sound it took so much away from the movies because you didnt have to convey your message through the camera any more now it can be conveyed simply through having people talking.
ReplyDeleteIf we would have added the addition of sound to film a decade later i wonder how much better cinematography would be today. I think that our movies would be a lot better because the focus is on the film itself and nothing but it.