Joke Videos

Here's the videos Alex, Paula, John, Cameron and I made for our jokes. The first one was supposed to be film noir and then we did the second video as a silent movie.

The contrast between the line of the two videos is very noticeable in my opinion. I think a lot of it has to do with the lighting in the first video affecting the quality of the video, however I like the lines we established in the shots of our silent video much better. I especially like the overhead shot of Alex while he's playing with his "train" because of the flat space created by him laying against the plain background of the floor focuses the attention of the viewer on the action he's doing.

I also think the silent movie did a better job of actively engaging the viewer. Because we didn't use the literal space of the kitchen and the livingroom and we also had frames with the dialogue on them, I think the viewer had to pay more attention to grasp the concept of the video. I prefer having viewers actively engaged in my work and making them think a little bit for them to get the joke just because I feel that the joke is more funny if the audience is more in the moment.

How to Be Creative

Hugh MacLeod - How to be Creative

Audio Critique of Scene

Video Game Imagery Critique

Reimagining: Visual Framing

I chose to reframe this photograph taken by Sally Mann to focus your attention even further on the girl holding the cigarette. I was initially drawn to this photograph because I could see the way that Mann used space, line, and our perception of line to give the viewer's eyes something interesting to look at, while subconsciously focusing your attention directly onto the girl in the center.

Mann creates deep space by having the road extend behind the subject and having another object in the background. This sense of depth gives the viewer something else to look at besides the subject, the girl holding the cigarette, however, Mann chose to keep the person in the background out of focus so as to not detract from what she wants us to focus on. Mann also uses virtual line to create deep space. The girl standing with her back towards the viewer appears to be looking at the person on stilts this virtual line drawn from the second girl's eyes to the person on stilts runs parallel with the right side of the road and pulls your focus from the person to the girl in the center.

Mann also uses the space in the frame to keep our attention focused on the girl. She has the girl front and center within the frame and has the other two people off to the sides, which adds to the forces pulling your attention to her.

Mann uses contrasting directionality of lines created by the person, their stilts, the girl's arms, the cigarette, the waistline on her dress, and the other girl to change the way you perceive the image. The person in the background and their stilts along with the girl standing on the right side of the frame create vertical lines within the fame. The girl in the center, as a whole, is a vertical line, however, by the way she positioned the photo, Mann gives the girl in the middle more detailed lines once you look closely at her. Her her arms, hair, and waistband frame the girl's face. The cigarette and her fingers all point directly towards her face. Then there's the virtual line drawn from the girl's eyes to the camera. This girl is looking directly at you. She's making a connection from your eyes to hers. While this line may be virtual, it's the strongest one in the photo.

I reframed the photo to show just the girl. It eliminates the context that Mann gives in the original photo. I chose to reframe the photo this way to emphasize how the other elements Mann adds make her photo better that to just have a medium shot of the girl with an out of focus background.

The space has gone from deep to flat. The reference points that Mann had, are gone. There are still the lines that focus your attention but, even without those lines, you'd focus on her anyway because there's nothing else for your eye focus on. I feel that the image was much more powerful when you have something to ignore. Mann's original images is active in that you have to ignore everything else in the picture to pay attention to this girl, whereas my photo just puts the subject in front of you and doesn't give you the option to look at anything else and is didactic.

Song Critiques

Songs:
- Jordan's Song 
- Joe's Song
- Adrian's Song

Critiques:

Temptation

 

I’ve tried to under sta-and—why on earth Cradle of Filth decided to cover Heaven 17… Cradle of Filth is an extreme metal band that made the inexplicable choice to cover an 80’s pop metal band’s song “Temptation”. Whatever the reason, I feel that Cradle of Filth managed to make this song listenable. Normally, I don’t much care for Cradle of Filth’s music, but somehow, by covering a pretty terrible song, they managed to do a song that I love and listen to all of the time. I even went out and bought Cradle of Filth’s album, Thornography, which contains the song.

The original song done by Heaven 17 is really upbeat and innocent-sounding. The musical tracks are low in intensity and give the song a carefree air. However, Cradle of Filth’s version has high-intensity musical tracks and added melodic musical tracks that harmonize with the rest of the song, adding a great deal of depth to the song, making it sound like a symphony. The Cradle of Filth version does a lot more justice to the lyrics which are about temptation gripping you with an unbreakable hold. The vocals, which are sang with guttural vocals by frontman Dani Filth and backing vocals done by featured artist Dirty Harry are loud and full of emotion. The backing vocals done by Carol Kenyon in Heaven 17’s rendition are higher in pitch and don’t do much to bring emotion to the song. It’s like listening to Pat Boone sing "Long Tall Sally" after hearing Little Richard sing it.

If you listen to Heaven 17’s version and then Cradle of Filth’s, you can see that there’s a massive difference between the two. But if you listen closely, you can see that Cradle of Filth don’t really change that much. The rhythm is the same. The drummer uses the same beat, the speed is kept consistent, the Cradle of Filth version is actually longer. So what did they change? Well for one, they increased the intensity ratio between the synthesizer, guitar, bass, and drums and the vocals. The levels are more even in Cradle of Filth’s version, but the two vocal tracks still manage to stand out. The pitch is lower, especially in the female backing vocals, however every note is still sung at the same pitch, just at a lower octave. The lower pitch, I feel, changes the groove somewhat and makes it sound sexier, which is good for a song that’s about temptation.

It’s easy, of course, to identify the different timbre. The added distortion of the string instruments combined with the synthesizers make Cradle of Filth’s version sound a lot more dangerous and filled with intrigue and sensuality. The emotion with which Filth and Harry sing and the strain they put on their voices make the lyrics sound much more passionate.

The creative elements that Cradle of Filth added and manipulated to enhance the sound of the song combined with those elements they chose to keep similar, work extremely well, in my honest opinion, and transform an irritating and insignificant 80’s pop song into a song that can be enjoyed by many.