Tuesday, April 28, 2015
XR: final project
https://vimeo.com/126012421
version2: https://vimeo.com/126171045
in camera edit redo https://vimeo.com/124774474
version2: https://vimeo.com/126171045
in camera edit redo https://vimeo.com/124774474
Monday, April 27, 2015
Danielle Rennalls: Extra Credit - Technicolor Exhibit
Attending the “In Glorious
Technicolor” exhibit at the George Eastman house was a very fulfilling and
rewarding experience. Entering the exhibit with not even the slightest idea of
what to expect, I was completely blown away by all the artifacts, information
and images that represented the introductory of Technicolor and color cinema.
“The Technicolor Motion Picture
Corporation began in Boston in 1915 and rapidly grew into an essential part of
the American film industry, fundamentally shaping the aesthetic, cultural and
industrial nature of cinema.” The introduction of Technicolor transformed
cinema from black and white and gave it a whole new colorful meaning. Still in
operation today, “…Technicolor created the only commercially viable color
process for motion pictures” and today still “provides high-quality digital
services to the motion picture industry, from digital intermediate and
restoration to international distribution.”
This particular exhibit at the
George Eastman house “celebrates Technicolor’s vivid history…[and is]
comprise[d] of previously unavailable documentation, posters, behind-the-scenes
photographs, cameras and other original artifacts…” The exhibition also
celebrates the one hundredth anniversary of the Technicolor Motion Picture
Corporation as well as its great achievements. The exhibit highlights early
Technicolor films such as The Wizard of Oz and Gone with the Wind, the initial
two color process which consisted of green and red color separation and early
filming equipment weighing two hundred pounds.
My favorite section of this exhibit
that caught my attention for a lengthy period was the wall lined with dyes used
throughout Technicolor’s film coloring existence. These dyes were used in a
“sophisticated dye-transfer process” which ultimately aided Technicolor to be
the best in the industry. This particular section of the exhibit was very
interesting to look at, as it reveled how little I knew about the process of
creating colored moving images. Furthermore, it demonstrated that often times
consumers like myself take the film making process for granted as we become
ignorant living in a world so advanced that we fail to realize that this wasn’t
always the case.
Another section of the exhibit that
I found rather interesting was the section in which the process of generating
color schemes was described. Initially, Technicolor believed that there were
only two primary colors (red and green) and so they created a process that
utilized and separated these colors in order to produce a color palette for
their films. However this color palette proved to be very limiting as they were
unable to achieve colors that consisted of purple, yellow or blue. Therefore
Technicolor went on a hunt to discover the missing element and after realizing
that this key element was blue, Technicolor transformed the cinema as “[it]
could finally reproduce the world in all its natural color.”
However, the equipment and the
process developed to capture the world in its natural color was in itself
another hassle. The cameras were so delicate and heavy that it required trained
technicians to operate and several persons to move them around. “Unlike with
black and white films, the Technicolor process was so complicated that the
company mandated that studios purchase a full package, hiring the camera and
camera crew from Technicolor, which previously was not the case with black and
white cinema, as studios had the ability to use their own cameras and cameramen.”
Moreover, the company also supplied a color consultant to advise on appropriate
colors for makeup, costumes and set design in order to ensure that colors used
during filming would represent their appropriate meanings.
Nevertheless, after twenty years of
dominating the color industry, Technicolor came to its decline. With the film
industry changing so rapidly in the 1950s Technicolor was now faced with strong
competitors such Eastmancolor and many others who were making a similar color process
but was significantly cheaper. “Within three years of the film industry switching
to Eastmancolor, Technicolor retired the last of its three-color cameras” as Eastmancolor
was much more appealing and moreover “Technicolor could not handle the
introduction of the wide screen.” Therefore, Technicolor stepped down and
offered its services to the public in another way by “offering its superior dye
transfer printing for films photographed with color processes.”
Getting the
chance to see a small synopsis of the process by which color cinema was
developed was very gratifying. Though in this day in age the digital era has
taken over, it was nice to take a step back and appreciate all the hard work,
time and dedication that went into the process so that a digital age can even
exist today. Technicolor was truly a company that was ahead of its time and was
able to impact the film industry in more ways than one.
Citation
“In Glorious Technicolor” Exhibit, George Eastman House,
January 24 2015 through April 26, 2015 in Special Exhibition Galleries.
Tuesday, April 21, 2015
McCluhan has thoroughly considered the effects of the medium itself in his essay. I found his point of view interesting though I'm not sure I fully understand it, because while many of his points of view are compelling some seems contradictory. In essence, I think he is saying there is a fundamental way in which we absorb media determined by the medium used in and of itself. This idea has been reestablished as new media and technology have developed. For example, McCluhan references Cubism, which fundamentally changed how people take-in visual art works. It told the audience to see the work in a particular way. "The effects of technology do not occur at the level
of opinions or concepts, but alter sense ratios or patterns of perception
steadily and without any resistance." I really enjoyed this statement, and think it applies to cubism appropriately. However, the impact of cubism is really the function of the style and not really the medium itself I'd say; it's still a painting. But it is because it's a painting that the audience has to change their approach in viewing. I think this is really the way in which "the medium is the message"; there is something about a work's particular medium that affects the audience in a way no other medium could.
Really, I'm torn by this argument. In one way I totally agree that an art work maintains an element of its power in the exact medium it showcases. But to Mcluhan's stance overall, I see a problem in saying that the medium is more important than the message, and that's what he seems to be suggesting. I like the claim that people "never used to ask what a melody is about", and I agree. But a piece of much is much more about the melody, and different songs can convey very different emotions. To respond more directly to the author: A melody can work very effectively, but it is not obsolete because it uses similar theory as older songs. Perhaps I'm getting confused by his statements, specifically that "if it work's it's obsolete." This one stuck out to me, mostly because Mcluhan seems to believe it so strongly yet it sounds like a contradiction.
And while I do believe in experimentation in art and "art from adversity", there is nothing lacking on a fundamental level of an art piece if it is not actively redefining its medium. Sometimes- often, actually- the medium is nothing more than a vehicle or tool to deliver a more important message. Unless I've missed something critical (possible), this is Mcluhan's argument.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)