Sunday, October 16, 2011

Storyboard Imitation




In this scene only one rule was broken and that was the 180 degree rule. If you notice the camera shifts directly across the line through the exchange of dialogue. It is broken when the camera switches from one side of the table to the other. This is because they are engaging in a conversation, and the point of view changes from Mark Zuckerberg, to the prosecutor who is asking him the questions. This camera change is also known as a reverse angle or shot. The sole motivation for the switch is perspective and it works because they stick to the established positions that the people are in.

The rule of thirds is applied to this scene for the most part. If you notice in the first scene Mark Zuckerberg is position in the left grid of the frame, and the attorney is framed in the right part of the frame. As the director breaks 180 this continuity stays mostly accurate because then the prosecutor is framed in the right side of the frame during the switch, but Mark Zuckerberg is more in the left center in the next shot. I think this is motivated by wanting your focus to be on Zuckerberg first at all times, due to the fact that we visualize things from left to right. Therefore you are always seeing Zuckerberg first.

The 30 degree rule applies to these shots. There are no jump cuts, or any jarring switches that take away from the attention of the scene, unless it is on purpose(such as the attention to the window when Zuckerberg says "It just started raining)."

I think the director's motivation for this whole entire scene was putting Zuckerberg in the center of it all. He is the person we care about, not the people talking to him. This scene is totally about him. The cameras are framed in such a way that you're always focused on him, rather than the other people in the room. This is due to his framing.

Animation Deconstruction




These two characters are from different times and from completely different animation genres. Bugs Bunny is from the 1940's and is from the classic Looney Tunes genre. Eric Cartman is from the comedy central show South Park.
Bugs Bunny was on a show that was characterized for slapstick humor that was usually appropriate for children, whereas Eric Cartman is from a show that utilizes verbal humor, and satire of popular culture. This show is usually not appropriate for anyone but adults, or as the show labels it in the opening credits " This show is not appropriate for any viewers and should not be watched by anybody."

For the purposes of this assignment I am going to analyze color, and lighting. Bugs Bunny's character utilizes an analogous color scheme by using white and gray right next to each other. Analogous colors usually elicit a positive response aesthetically, and can be associated with a cooler feel. I think the purpose of his color scheme was to emulate real life rabbits, who are plentiful gray and white.The blue hat in the frame is also just an emulation of real life, by trying to characterize him in this particular picture like a colonial from the 1700's. The contrast of his bright character, with the brown background creates a great depth of field. The lighting also accentuates this by showing the shadow of the brown structure coming down far in the background. I think that is the purpose of that picture. By the way he's standing it also makes him look powerful, and almost has him as tall as the brown structure, making it seem like this is a moment when he is feeling dominant.

Eric Cartman's picture is utilizing complimentary blue and red with a hint of yellow. This gives a bright, warm feeling to the picture, and makes him look innocent. I think it's purposely done to be ironic of what his character really is, a mean, selfish, bully. The lighting pays great attention to his clothes, because his face is almost as white as the background he is standing in front of. This puts an emphasis on the clothes. The lighting symbolizes an almost alone feeling, since there is nothing else around in the photo, and he is in a spotlight of soft lighting. I think this could be interpreted as a way to analyze his character, who truly is alone throughout the entire show.

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Blog 4 Song Deconstruction

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDj44n5bjWU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0yaQ20dpWI&feature=related

Here are my two songs. The song is entitled For Emma by Bon Iver. They are songs by the same artist, and they are the same song. The difference is the arrangement in which they are played, and one is a recorded studio version, while the other is a live a capella arrangement.

The First Song: A capella version:

Rhythm:

Source: The source of the rhythm is coming from the voices and the snapping of their fingers. Due to this song being totally a capella the rhythm derives from the voices and the finger snapping and clapping. Specifically from the two shorter man's voices and even more specifically from the " Da Da Da Da Da Da Da " they are making with their voices, and from the taller mans snapping.

Time/Tempo: Due to knowing a lot about this band I know that they mess around with time signatures. They try not to have a concrete time signature in their songs due to the fact that they want people to concentrate on the lyrics, rather than the beats of their songs. This song does not have a concrete time signature, because it variates due to harmonies and lyrical focus. The main time signature if I had to guess stays around 1/4.

Groove:
The personality of the rhythm is melodic or melon collie. This is due to the lyrics, the sound of the song, and personal feel of the song. The main focus of the song is not instrumentation but vocal harmony, which also makes it more melodic.

Arrangement:

Instrumentation: The instruments that drive the song are the voices. Vocal melodies and harmonies are the driving factor of the song.


Structure/Organization: The structure of the song is based on the class song writing style of rock music. Verse Chorus Verse Chorus Bridge Verse.

Emotional Architecture:
The song builds and drops based off of the verses and the choruses. The song stays relatively calm and quiet during the verses by having only one person singing. During the chorus the rest of the voices come in to sing the lyrics and build up the song louder and with more layers.

Sound Quality:

Height: The songs frequencies also derive from the changing from verse to chorus. During the verses the song has a low frequency, and as the harmonies work together in the chorus the frequencies jumps up due to the higher pitch voices coming in to accentuate the lower pitch.

Width: The width never changes due to it being a live performance. The sound is always audible equally from left and right.

Depth: There are only three layers of instruments in this piece and they are all voices. They are always all layered on top of each other but during the verse two of the voices are less intense to keep rhythm and then they get louder during the chorus for accentuating harmony.

The Second Song: Studio Version:


Rhythm:

Source: The rhythm in the second song is coming from the guitar, which is accentuated by the snare drum in the background. The guitar has a chord pattern that emulates a drum beat, which keeps the rhythm.

Time/Tempo The time signature for this song is 1/4. If you count along with the change in guitar chords, it changes four times, before going back to the first one.

Groove: The personality of the rhythm in this song is also melodic, but it also encompasses a folk, upbeat sound that differentiates it from the last one. There is more going on in this song that gives it more personality, such as the guitar having a folk sound to it, while the lyrics and the melody is still melodic.

Arrangement: I would argue all the instruments drive this song, but in different ways. For instance the rhythm guitar and drums carry the rhythm of the song, but the background slide guitar and trumpets carry the melody of the song.

Structure/Organization: This arrangement also follows the classic rock style song writing technique of utilizing verse chorus verse chorus bridge verse. The song stays relatively quiet in the verses, picks up in the choruses, and slows down even lower than the verses in the bridge.

Emotional Architecture: The verses draw the song into the eventual build into the chorus. The verses are relatively quiet compared to the choruses and this derives from the rise in voice layers and instrumentation layers. The last chorus drops into the bridge, which builds into what we would call the "outro" which leads us into a drop again, or a fade out of the song.

Sound Quality:

Balance:


Height: The height of the frequencies differentiates from the first song in this one due to increase in instrumentation. The frequencies still stay relatively low in the chorus, but there is no longer the presence of a strong baritone in the frequency. It is about in the middle. The frequencies tend to stay higher in this piece with high pitches in the vocals accentuating high pitches in the instruments.

Width: From listening over and over again with only one ear, there is no stereo panning. They did equal layers of each track and puts them in both ears to create an equal width.

Depth: As far as layers go in this song, there are multiple layers of vocal tracks for his main voice singing the focal lyrics(my guess would be about 2 or 3). There is another layer or two for his background vocals, and his band mates background vocals. There is a layer for the rhythm guitar, backup guitar, slide guitar, horns, and drums. There is no bass present in this song. It is a heavily layered song compared to the last one.


Although these songs may seem alike due to being the same song but different takes on it. The lyrics are identical in this song, but there is a variation on them in the first song. I mean this in so far as that they change certain parts, and put in words that weren't in the studio version. The melody of the two songs are also the same, but they are carried differently between the two songs. For instance in the first song(the a capella song) the melody and rhythm is carried by the voices. The melody is carried by the tall lead singer, while the rhythm is carried by the two background guys singing "da da da da da da" in the the same rhythm that the guitar is in the second song. This differentiates itself from the second song due to the fact that the rhythm in that song is carried by the acoustic guitar, melody by the slide guitar and the horns, and background rhythm to accentuate the guitar with the drums. The rhythm in the first song is also accentuated by the clicking of fingers or clapping of hands to to add layers to the "da da da da da da." The timbre of the two songs are also highly different. The first song does is much more tonal, and less complex. There isn't much going on besides voices, and the utilization of body parts as instrument replacements. In the second song the timbre is higher. The song is much more complex due to instrument layers(depth), changes in height, and has a greater emotional architecture, or more building and dropping. The structure of the songs are relatively the same, except the first song is cut shorter than the second. The speed is also very different in the songs. The first song is slowed due to lack of instruments and only voices. The second song is more upbeat and carries better due to the presence of the guitar and drums. In conclusion I personally like the first song better(the a capella song) for its uniqueness. I mean this in so far as that this version is unconventional. They took a song with tons of layers and complexity, and broke it down into it's simplistic pieces. Their voices are so powerful, and harmonized so well, that it almost makes the song more personal. The second song is still very good, but not as unique as the a capella take on it.