Dziga Vertov

The whole kino-eye concept thing was quite confusing for me in the beginning but as I keep reading I was starting to understand what the author was trying to show us. What I understand is that the kino-eye is very good at capturing things but the author said that there are things which the kino-eye is not capable of capturing it. So instead of just do the same thing as the kino-eye the author try to give the audience a whole new perspective. Things that human eye not normally see are what's creating the difference.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is Cinema

 Although I could not relate too much to this reading, I did find some comparisons very interesting. I notice the author compares a lot of sociology and psychology to Photography and Cinema. Being someone who comes from a field of sociology I am actually impressed that the two have anything in common. The thing he compares photography to the most would be paintings. Which makes a lot of sense because many artist even take pictures or use pictures before painting and artwork.
Read more

What is Cinema

In all honesty, I could not follow this excerpt almost at all. My reading comprehension is already fairly bad, and reading this excerpt made me really confused because I had a hard time understanding what I was reading. All I could grasp from this reading was the main idea of comparing photography and paintings. I honestly cannot think of what to respond with since I could not understand what was being said in this excerpt. However, I do know both ends of the comparison. Although I have never sincerely partaken in anything photography related, I do know about it and some of the process photographers go through, and as for paintings, I have personally made paintings of different styles. Both of these art forms can affect people in many ways and both capture the artist's views in a creative yet wise way.
Read more

Walter Murch "In the blink of an eye"

From January 29th, posted in wrong place: The exert from "In the Blink of an Eye" by Walter Murch was filled with things that surprised me. Firstly, the 1,250,000 feet of film absolutely blew my mind, I had no idea that movies would come even close to a million feet of film. I've never seen "Apocalypse Now" so I am not quite sure how the final product ended up. I would like to watch the movie now after learning about how much time and effort was spent editing. The editing process of this movie helped me understand more about cutting shots, because the majority of it is not actually cutting the shot, but instead deciding where to cut. Also, the shadow splices was interesting because it meant that for every cut they had changed their mind about it 15 times. The whole process shows the flexibility of editing and how a story can be made many ways depending on the editor. I had a few takeaways from this. First, that I am very glad we get to use technology to edit ...
Read more