What happened to the 'Beautiful Cinematography'?

Started by War Wager, Dec 19, 2007, 09:50:39 PM

Author
What happened to the 'Beautiful Cinematography'? (Read 7,376 times)

Alienseseses

Quote from: Chocolate man! on Dec 21, 2007, 11:23:15 AM
I agree with you.  In a music video that someone made, I don't know how he got access to the footage) the sewer scene was fairly light.
Hug? I wanna see!

Porkus Maximus

It was on youtube but has been taken down.

jimmylace

The compositions in this movie are very considered. Thats something. But, if anything they're TOO considered. Virtually every shot is going on the rule of thirds/mild abstractions and it makes the movie a little too stylised for my tastes.



LukaKovach

Quote from: jimmylace on Dec 21, 2007, 09:03:15 PM
The compositions in this movie are very considered. Thats something. But, if anything they're TOO considered. Virtually every shot is going on the rule of thirds/mild abstractions and it makes the movie a little too stylised for my tastes.




Please explain that, me does not understand  :-* :-\

jimmylace

jimmylace

#34
right well this is from photography/art.

the rule of thirds, or more complexly the Golden Mean/Section is essentially a mathematical principle- a universal constant to do with aesthetics.

a/ lets say you have a piece of paper. you draw a tree right in the middle.
b/ same as above, but using golden mean you calculate where the tree should be placed on the page. it will, theoretically always be more pleasing to the eye when it is placed off-centre.

Its loosely called the rule of thirds, because the most aesthetic way of diving the page tends to look approximately like it is 2/3 in. If you look at the composition of most of the clips from AvPR, the actors, buildings or foregrounds are usually 2/3 in the frame. Or the frame is divided in thirds al around. Mild "abstractions" is simply a quick way of saying "cropping the environment/background of the frame so that it looks as pretty as possible- almost like a pattern."


jimmylace

jimmylace

#35


see? look at the composition. the son is about 2/3s of the frame in. you can easily divide this composition into thirds.

jimmylace




and again, all of the "action" occupies 2/3 of the frame. Again you can divide this composition easily into thirds. 1/3= Foreground tree. 2/3= action/people 3/3= background.


jimmylace



again you can divide this composition into equal thirds fairly easily.

wolfboy

Dude...you could've put all of those into one post.

jimmylace



and again. guy on the left, empty space= 2/3. 1/3, the other two guys.

jimmylace

Quote from: wolfboy on Dec 21, 2007, 09:39:50 PM
Dude...you could've put all of those into one post.

the server traffic is too busy for me to open a new window

wolfboy

What? Just edit your first post and add the images into there then delete the rest.

jimmylace



again 1/3s.



and again 2/3rds



and again



and again

you get the point

LukaKovach

That's a great explanation, thanks, I know what you mean now.  ;D

But is it a really bad thing, or do you think they overdid it?

Yautja161

.... whats bad about it?

It is that u tell this things, otherwise i even didnt noticed these details.
I dont give a f**k about this.
Looks all good to me

AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News