Video installation

here is our next task.
we have to prepare a video installation.
purpose: to attract people to give presents for children at St. Nicolay's day.
image: a screen where different parts of a SAD kid's face can be seen(eyes, lips,etc).
under it - small hands in "pray" position made from plastic or clay where a button is.
process: the visitor sees the sad parts of a child's face on the screen. As soon as he touches the plastic hands, he pushes the button at the same time and suddenly the sad mimics transform into smiling ones.
idea: it is to show that a simple interaction can make one kid happy: A touch/ that in our case will symbolize a present.

soon, i will upload the detailed sketches of the project.

TANGO - Zbig Rybczynski 1980 - Intrattenimento

http://vodpod.com/watch/3066585-tango-zbig-rybczynski-1980-intrattenimento-libero-video

Tango is a short film by Zbigniew Rybczynski. There is a static shot of a single room and over the 8-minute span of the film, 36 different characters enter the room at different times and perform a specific action. Each character never acknowledges the presence of the other characters.

Tango won an Oscar for Best Animated Short Film in 1983. Rybczynski talks about the project on his website:

Thirty-six characters from different stages of life – representations of different times – interact in one room, moving in loops, observed by a static camera. I had to draw and paint about 16.000 cell-mattes, and make several hundred thousand exposures on an optical printer. It took a full seven months, sixteen hours per day, to make the piece. The miracle is that the negative got through the process with only minor damage, and I made less than one hundred mathematical mistakes out of several hundred thousand possibilities. In the final result, there are plenty of flaws ® black lines are visible around humans, jitters caused by the instability of film material resulting from film perforation and elasticity of celluloid, changes of colour caused by the fluctuation in colour temperature of the projector bulb and, inevitably, dirt, grain and scratches.

Watch this funny video!
And not only the video is funny, the story afterwards too:

At the 1983 Oscar ceremony, Polish director Zbigniew Rybczynski had possibly the worst night that any Oscar winner has ever had at the Academy Awards. When his short film, Tango (1981), was announced as the winner of the Best Animated Short category, presenter Kristy McNichol mispronounced Rybczynski's name as "Zbigniewski Sky." When Rybczynski accepted the award, his speech was cut off by the orchestra. After talking to reporters in the press room, Rybczynski stepped outside the auditorium to have a cigarette. When he tried to return, an overzealous security guard refused to let him in. Rybczynski was holding his Oscar, but was dressed in a cheap suit and sneakers because he had been unable to afford better clothes. He tried to explain to the guard that he was an Oscar winner, but his English was limited. Hearing Rybczynski's Polish speech, the security guard assumed the director was drunk and shoved him up against a wall. During the altercation, Rybczynski reportedly yelled, "American Pig! I have Oscar!" and tried to kick the guard in the groin. Rybczynski spent the night in jail before the mess was sorted out.

TANGO - Rybczynski

"In Tango, exploits this concept of the single offscreen space by filling it with a plethora of actions. It soon becomes obvious that such a small space, that of a small room, could not possibly contain all the actions taking place. Rybczynski also makes critical use of off-screen space, exposing it for the artifice it is. Off-screen space is the imaginary area beyond the edge of the screen, and in front of or behind the camera. There are a number of ways through to off-screen space in Tango - a window and a door in the back wall, doors on either side of the room, and cupboard which also has its uses. Rybczynski orchestrates his entrances and exits with great precision.”

- Roger Noake, Animation Techniques, Secaucus, Chartwell Books Inc., 1988.

The tango Rashevski

Le Tango des Rashevski
Belgian-Luxembourg-French romantic drama, 90 min, 2003
A nice, liberal Jewish family in the everyday life of chaotic and non-everyday Belgium. Woody Allen's European style, the composer of the music of Mood for Love.
Director:
Sam Garbarski

Adolphe 'Dolfo' Rashevski travels to Israel with grandson Ric, but his brother, orthodox rabbi Samuel 'Shmouel, refuses to come attend their fellow Auschwitz survivor sister Rosa's funeral. Back in their home, the whole well-integrated family and their 'gojim' (non-Jewish and would-be) partners regularly wrestle with the meaning of Jewish blood, traditions and religion. For one it seems the way to gain a wife, for others the bomb under or the obstacle for a marriage. Yet love tends to conquer all but death. Written by KGF Vissers

Synopsis:
Director Sam Garbarski marked his feature film directorial debut in 2003 with the family-comedy drama Le Tango des Rashevski (The Rashevski Tango), a tale of one extended family's struggle to find meaning and identity within their own somewhat dormant Jewish heritage. When 81-year-old family matriarch Rosa Rashevski passes away, her descendants are left unprepared, as they have no idea what traditional Jewish rites they should be practicing. As a result, various Rashevski begin some rather intense periods of spiritual introspection, ranging from Rosa's granddaughter Nina's (Tania Gabarski, daughter of the director) proclamation to start and raise a Jewish family to grandson -- and former Israeli military man -- Rica's (Rudi Rosenberg) turbulent relationship with his Muslim girlfriend, Khadija (Selma Kouchy). To further complicate matters, a non-Jewish family friend named Antoine (Hippolyte Girardot) shows up at the funeral and strikes up a conversation with Nina, whom he used to baby-sit when they were both younger. As he grows more fond of the young woman and becomes intent on making her his wife, he learns of her intentions to have a Jewish family and tries to find a solution that would make the young woman reconsider him as a suitor.

~ Ryan Shriver, All Movie Guide

Video-Film--> Differences

Video:
- B cathegory
- Feeling real
- Has a closer relation to the viewer (family relations)
- people involved are non professional
- usually these are family members/friends
- it s about every day life
- shorter
- it's moving/shaking hands
- the subject matter/ day by day events
- the jumps between the scenes

Film:
- A category
- expensive
- need for the scenery
- professional
- special effects
- actors
- fantastic/fiction
- memorable, makes interested everyone
- longer
- smoothly captured

Basic differences between video and film - as we see it.
02/18/2005
Q: "So why does video tape look different than film?"

A: Whether analog or digital, videotape will probably always appear different from traditional color film. Many people still hold to the notion that video is "inferior" to film. But one of the most important reasons for the difference may surprise you.

Color video - and for convenience we'll talk about the standard NTSC format used in the US - actually duplicates the way our eyes see much more accurately than most color film formats. A video camera captures RGB (Red/Green/Blue) information, essentially using three cameras in one: one sensitive to red light, another to green light and a third to blue light. This is very close to the way our eyes see. We also have cells that are sensitive to light - luminance - in general. Video also captures luminance information, which it combines with the color information. So what we see on video very closely resembles our own experience of vision. Digital video cameras work the same way but convert the image information into binary data for storage.

In most film, by contrast, the light is being captured to four photosensitive layers called CMYK. One layer is for the Cyan (blueish-green, to us) colored contents, one for the Magenta (a hot pink), and one for Yellow. The fourth layer (K) records light strength in general. Actually, in most film processes the three "color" layers are originally black and white; the appropriate color dyes are applied during processing. Part of the charm of film reproduction lies in the fact there's a certain degree of error - not all colors are reproduced and are therefore shifted. The overall result is what we perceive as "warmer." Sound familiar, analog audio freaks? We're so accustomed to seeing these colors - and film directors and cinematographers have so creatively manipulated them - that we rarely notice the difference. There are actually several color film process technologies including the best known, Technicolor (which hasn't been used in America for many years).

Another difference is found in the frame rates of the two mediums. Almost all film is recorded as 24 still pictures per second. Each still picture was captured in one shot just like an ordinary still camera works. In video reproduction there are 30 (approximately) still pictures playing back per second. Each of these pictures was created by scanning the source from top to bottom and from left to right. Although both frame rates suitably create the illusion of motion, our eyes pick up tiny "cues" that our brain receives and translates as film or video, based on our experience of both.

There are changes coming, however. One is the adoption of the 24P frame rate for digital (and high definition) video, plus progressive scan playback, both of which more closely approximate film. Additionally, 10-bit RGB values (coming to a megaplex near you in Star Wars Episode III) allow finer distinction between hues. Though it is theoretically possible for digital video technology to completely emulate the quality that film provides it isn't yet practical to try to do so. Further, the various distinctions between film stock and processing methods makes the specific goal of what, exactly, one would be shooting for not very well defined - very similar to the analog versus digital audio debates.

DOGMA FILMS

What is actually a DOGMA FILM?

Let s start with the definition of it. It s a doctrine relating to matters such as morality and faith.
It's a principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. For instance, the dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present.
Related to that, here is what I have read:

Dogme 95 is an avant-garde filmmaking movement started in 1995 by the Danish directors Lars von Trier and Thomas Vinterberg, who created the "Dogme 95 Manifesto" and the "Vow of Chastity". These were rules to create filmmaking based on the traditional values of story, acting and theme, and excluding the use of elaborate special effects or technology.[1] They were later joined by fellow Danish directors Kristian Levring and Søren Kragh-Jacobsen, forming the Dogme 95 Collective or the Dogme Brethren. Dogme is the Danish word for dogma.
The genre gained international appeal partly because of its accessibility. It sparked an interest in unknown filmmakers by suggesting that one can make a recognised film without being dependent on commissions or huge Hollywood budgets, depending on European government subsidies and television stations instead. The movement has been criticised for being a disguised attempt to gain media attention. Dogme was initiated to cause a stir and to make filmmakers and audiences re-think the art, effect and essence of filmmaking.

The manifesto and its companion vows were drafted by friends and initial co-signators Von Trier and Vinterberg. Vinterberg said that they wrote the pieces in 45 minutes.[2] The manifesto initially mimics the wording of François Truffaut's 1954 essay Une certaine tendance du cinéma français in Cahiers du cinéma.
They announced the Dogme movement on March 22, 1995 in Paris, at Le cinéma vers son deuxième siècle conference. The cinema world had gathered to celebrate the first century of motion pictures and contemplate the uncertain future of commercial cinema. Called upon to speak about the future of film, Lars von Trier showered a bemused audience with red pamphlets announcing Dogme 95.
In response to criticism, Von Trier and Vinterberg have both stated that they just wanted to establish a new extreme: "In a business of extremely high budgets, we figured we should balance the dynamic as much as possible."[citation needed]
The first of the Dogme films (Dogme #1) was Vinterberg's 1998 film Festen (The Celebration). It was critically acclaimed and won the Jury Prize at the Cannes Film Festival that year. Lars von Trier's Dogme film, Idioterne (The Idiots), also premiered at Cannes that year but was less successful. Since the two films were released, other directors have made films based on Dogme principles. French-American actor and director Jean-Marc Barr was the first non-Dane to direct a Dogme film: Lovers (1999) (Dogme #5). The American Harmony Korine's movie Julien Donkey-Boy (Dogme #6) also was considered a Dogme film.
Het Zuiden (South) (2004), directed by Martin Koolhoven, included thanks to "Dogme 95". Koolhoven originally planned to shoot it as a Dogme film, and it was co-produced by von Trier's Zentropa. The director decided he did not want to be so severely constrained as by Dogme principles.
[edit]Goals and rules

The goal of the Dogme collective is to purify filmmaking by refusing expensive and spectacular special effects, post-production modifications and other technical gimmicks. The filmmakers concentrate on the story and the actors' performances. They believe this approach may better engage the audience, as they are not alienated or distracted by overproduction. To this end, Lars von Trier and Thomas Vinterberg produced ten rules to which any Dogme film must conform. These rules, referred to as the "Vow of Chastity," are as follows:[1]
Filming must be done on location. Props and sets must not be brought in. If a particular prop is necessary for the story, a location must be chosen where this prop is to be found.
The sound must never be produced apart from the images or vice versa. Music must not be used unless it occurs within the scene being filmed, i.e., diegetic.
The camera must be a hand-held camera. Any movement or immobility attainable in the hand is permitted. The film must not take place where the camera is standing; filming must take place where the action takes place.
The film must be in colour. Special lighting is not acceptable (if there is too little light for exposure the scene must be cut or a single lamp be attached to the camera).
Optical work and filters are forbidden.
The film must not contain superficial action (murders, weapons, etc. must not occur.)
Temporal and geographical alienation are forbidden (that is to say that the film takes place here and now).
Genre movies are not acceptable.
The final picture must be transferred to the Academy 35mm film, with an aspect ratio of 4:3, that is, not widescreen. (Originally, the requirement was that the film had to be shot using Academy 35mm film, but the rule was relaxed to allow low-budget productions.)
The director must not be credited.
[edit]Uses and abuses

The above rules have been both circumvented and broken, from the first Dogme film. For instance, Vinterberg "confessed" to having covered a window during the shooting of one scene in The Celebration (Festen). With this, he both brought a prop onto the set and used "special lighting." Von Trier used background music (Le Cygne by Camille Saint-Saëns) in the film The Idiots (Idioterne).
Since 2002 and the 31st film, a filmmaker no longer needs to have his work verified by the original board to identify it as a Dogme 95 work. The founding "brothers" have begun working on new experimental projects and have been skeptical about the later frequent interpretation of the Manifesto as a brand or a genre. The movement broke up in 2005.[3] Today, filmmakers submit a form online and check a box which states they "truly believe that the film ... has obeyed all Dogme95 rules as stated in the VOW OF CHASTITY."[4]
[edit]Criticism

Remodernist filmmaker Jesse Richards criticizes the movement in his Remodernist Film Manifesto, stating in Point 10, "Remodernist film is not Dogme ’95. We do not have a pretentious checklist that must be followed precisely. This manifesto should be viewed only as a collection of ideas and hints whose author may be mocked and insulted at will."[5] American film critic Armond White also criticized the movement, stating that it was "the manifesto that brought filmmaking closer to amateur porn". He believed the movement would be rejected as insignificant by film historians.[6]
[edit]Notable Dogme films

Complete list is available from the Dogme95 web site (via Internet Archive).
Dogme #1: The Celebration
Dogme #2: The Idiots
Dogme #3: Mifune's Last Song
Dogme #4: The King Is Alive
Dogme #5: Lovers
Dogme #6: Julien Donkey-Boy
Dogme #7: Interview
Dogme #8: Fuckland
Dogme #11: Diapason
Dogme #12: Italian for Beginners
Dogme #13: Amerikana
Dogme #14: Joy Ride
Dogme #15: Camera-Dogme15
Dogme #17: Reunion aka American Reunion
Dogme #18: Et Rigtigt Menneske
Dogme #19: Cabin Fever
Dogme #20: Strass
Dogme #21: Kira's Reason: A Love Story
Dogme #22: Era Outra Vez
Dogme #23: Resin(film)
Dogme #24: Security, Colorado
Dogme #25: Converging with Angels
Dogme #28: Elsker Dig For Evigt (Open Hearts)
Dogme #29: The Bread Basket
Dogme #30: Dias de Voda
Dogme #31: El Desenlace
Dogme #32: Se til venstre, der er en Svensker
Dogme #33: Residencia
Dogme #34: Forbrydelser
Dogme #35: Così x Caso
Dogme #37: Gypo (film)
Dogme #38: Mere Players

facts that I found out in the class + SPIDER!

Broadcast quality = 720x576
HD = 1980x1024
Tv = 320x280

Here is a curious video that made all of us kind of shocked at the end :)
It is called SPIDER:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zdj9vMH4BfQ

and here is another one: Black Hole. I discovered it while showing the SPIDER to my friends and thought why not to watch some others of this kind:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5_Msrdg3Hk&feature=channel

funny ones..:)

Then, we discussed about the importance of the sound and agreed that the movie can be bad quality, but if the sound is good, it has chances for success!
But the most important, is not the quality of the movie and not even the sound. In my opinion, a GOOD movie has to have an ARTISTIC VALUE. Well, both the sound and the quality gives it, but I am sure there should be something else too...

The 4th year, NEW< ADVENCED MEDIA PRODUCTION CLASS!!!

New start, new beginnings..

Here is the Movie we talked about in class: BLOW UP!
I watched the whole of it in youtube and was impressed!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wygqlfUoJEs

Blowup is a 1966 British-Italian film directed by Michelangelo Antonioni, his first English-language film. It tells of a photographer's accidental involvement with a murder, inspired by Julio Cortázar's 1959 short story, "Las babas del diablo" or "The Devil's Drool",and by the life of Swinging London photographer David Bailey. The film was scored by jazz pianist Herbie Hancock, although the music is source music, as Hancock noted: "It's only there when someone turns on the radio or puts on a record."Nominated for several awards at the Cannes Film Festival, Blowup won the Grand Prix.
Critical
Andrew Sarris said the movie was "a mod masterpiece". In Playboy Magazine, Arthur Knight wrote that Blowup would be "as important and germinal a film as Citizen Kane, Open City and Hiroshima, Mon Amour – perhaps even more so".
Time magazine called the film a "far-out, uptight and vibrantly exciting picture" that represented a "screeching change of creative direction" for Antonioni; the magazine predicted it would "undoubtedly be by far the most popular movie Antonioni has ever made".
Bosley Crowther of The New York Times called it a "fascinating picture, which has something real to say about the matter of personal involvement and emotional commitment in a jazzed-up, media-hooked-in world so cluttered with synthetic stimulations that natural feelings are overwhelmed".