film

Overall Set Report – Three Nights of Filming

by lukeegan

At the end of all our shoot dates we acquired sufficient footage to create our music video. Looking back one thing I would change would be the number of days spent shooting. We filmed on three separate dates. One outdoor shoot and two studio shoots. I think we could have easily gotten away with just doing one day in the studio and just being well organised. Especially seeing by the last day everyone’s enthusiasm had dropped a little bit.

To recap the purpose of our outdoor shoot was to capture footage of the ‘witches’ running through the bush in the night. In terms of equipment we were well prepared with a Canon 5D, 70D, a mix of lenses, tripods, 3 portable LED light panels, some torches and a homemade reflector. The various lighting gear was paramount in the night-time shoot and allowed us to shoot at night. My main regret is not lighting the scenes more, both for dramatic feel and to avoid opening the aperture too much. As this led to difficulty in keeping all our shots in focus and it this shows when reviewing the footage.

For the first shoot we all adapted to our roles quickly. Andrea directed, Ella filmed, Jenny was in charge of the projection shots and I lit the scenes. We automatically set up dynamic that would continue for the next two shoots.

Our second shoot was in the studio. I was excited for this one but also a bit weary as I don’t think any of us had much experience working in the studios. It was fantastic to have that level of control though as opposed to the outdoor shoot. The first thing we had on the list was to get footage of the leads singing with the projections of the leaves we had shot the night before on their faces. We had a lot of trouble with the projected footage in terms of calibrating it so it matches with what the 5D was shooting on in terms of frame fate, shutter speed and frequency. We played around until we minimized the flicker as much as we could. Fortunately the projection of the leaves on Mo and Emma worked perfectly, particularly because it would only be visible for short amounts of time. It ended up being quite effective with the warm torch-light illuminating the leaves matching the bright orange hair of the singers.

After getting a few more shots of the lead singers we called the extras in. Originally we were planning on using the smoke machine for some of these shots but after testing it once it filled up the entire room for about 30 minutes so we found it impractical. Not to mention we were worried that if the smoke escaped the studio it would set off the fire alarms.  We primarily shot the extras dancing, as well standing in a witchy circle and staring down the barrel of the camera creepily. By now we had figured out how to connect the camera to the large LCD television in the studio and we used this as a monitor so we could all see things more clearly. At the time we probably should have been more weary that what we saw on the television wasn’t necessarily what the footage would come out like in terms of color and brightness etc. In saying this, it definitely helped having that monitor. The dance scene turned out quite dynamic with all the women wearing black with the black background with Mo and Emma standing out with their bright orange hair.  This shoot was the efficient and most succesful of our three filming dates.

The third and last shoots purpose was primarily to get shots of Mo and Emma singing the song. We ran through the song multiple times both on black and white backgrounds. Personally I thought the white didn’t work to well but the black looked great. Furthermore, we obtained some more shots of extras in a tableau style shot. I think this could have worked a lot better if we gave them more stage direction and created more movement within the frame. To wrap up our three days of shooting we decided to have some fun and shoot some cameo shots of Andrea which mostly involved her smashing grapes on her face. It was a bit of a laugh but it actually looked really good.

 

 

Film by Hilary Harris (Initiative Post 2)

by lukeegan

In last Friday’s Film3 Studio we focused on experimental film. Robin showed us some work by Hilary Harris which really captured my attention. While some film feels like science Hilary Harris’ abstract work come across a pure art. I was particularly impressed by his film Highway made in 1958. Watching it I was reminded of being in the back seat of the car as child and looking out the window to see the city lights. The shots are pieced together perfectly with the tempo of the jazz/rock & roll music and I think that is what makes this video such an experience. The five long minutes create this sense of repetition, repeating the same shots over which I think is clever as that’s often how it feels on the road. Interestingly, after a little research I discovered to capture these moving shots Hilary Harris drilled a hole in the bottom of his car to create a mount for his camera.

Highway (1958)

His 1951 creation Longhorns was truly something I hadn’t seen before. I saw it as a cinematic dance with no human actors, just a pair of long horns with there mesmerizing movement. It had that hypnotic and memorising feel that seems to be common in his work.I discovered that he was a sculptor and I think this film must have been a middle ground between the two mediums of sculpting and filmmaking. Besides that, do I know what this film means? No. Do I need to know? No. 

Longhorns (1951)

Another mesmerising work of Harris is The Nine Variations On A Dance Theme released in 1967. At first I just thought it was a bit weird. It gave me that same hypnotic feeling, making me calm but somewhat eyrie at the same time. It took me a moment to realise that it was the same dance movement every time. I started to see its beauty as I watched the same movement 9 times but every time I saw something new. Every variation seemed to feel more intimate and more intense as the variations in Harris’ camera techniques become more elaborate and complex. Adding to this is the slight change in soundtrack for each occasion. Even though it changes the sound and vision seemed to merge into one one smooth series of movements.

Nine Variations on a Dance Theme (1967)

After enjoying these films so much I decided to watch a lengthier and more recent work by Hilary Harris titled Organism (1975). It depicts Harris’ epic vision of New York City shot over 15 years (1959-74) in which time he pioneered time-lapse film making techniques. Using this he achieved this unique experimental view of New York City. The film juxtaposes scientific commentary on anatomy with the time-lapse video of the city. For instance the voiceover describes digestion while shots of New Yorks dumps comes on-screen. similarly, when the commentary talks of the process by which cells communicate it shows New Yorks JFK airport. I was mesmerised by this film. I believe it was making a critique on the invasion of technology in the world.

Organism (1975)

When Hilary Harris was asked why he makes films at all? He responded “To give a richer vision of surrounding reality. My aim is to lift people out of their preconceptions.” Through his films he searched for understanding of the complex world.

By looking closely at Harris’ work I have learnt that film does not need to follow a formula. It dosen’t need a story arc or characters to be a great film.  Its more important to have purpose and make the audience feel something.

 

Over and Out,

Luke

First Filmmakers (the initiative post)

by lukeegan

We are lucky in modern society to have powerful video technology that fits in the palm of our hands. We have the ability to instantly film with the click of a button and output high quality video. If we accidently shoot the wrong thing we can simply delete it and try again. The beauty of the digital age. Robin has stressed in class that we shouldn’t take this for granted. It’s too easy not to think about what we are filming and how we capture it because today technology can do so much of it for us. To truly appreciate film as both an art and science we should look back to those who pioneered the movie camera. Using the most basic movie cameras they created masterpieces so I wanted to learn more about some of first filmmakers and their creations.

In 1894 inspired by Edison’s peephole kinetoscope the Lumiere brothers developed the cinematograph which was a portable, crank operated camera. A year later they shot their first film titled The Workers Leaving the Lumiere Factory and it featured exactly that. One of their other early actuality films was titled Arrival of a Train at La Coitat Station. French filmmaker Bertrand Tavernier described this film as evidence of the Lumiere brothers being much more than inventors of the cinema or the first filmmakers but genius in ‘their very modern approach to filmic composition, such as their use of diagonals and contrast’. This 50 second film simply documents a familiar everyday occurrence, despite this it’s attained fame and is now a film history icon. It’s interesting to note that this film actually caused fear and terror by cinema audiences. German journalist Hellmuth Karasek wrote “although the cinematographic train was dashing towards the audience in flickering black and white (not in natural colours and natural dimensions), and although the only sound accompanying it was the monotonous clatter of the projectors sprockets… the spectators felt physically threatened and panicked”. It seems to strange to look back and think people were frightened but it’s important to remember the audience weren’t accustomed to seeing a moving image, especially not one that appears to be moving towards them.

The Lumiere brothers were the first real documentary filmmakers and they mostly stuck to making these ‘actuality’ films. George Melies on the other hand was quite the opposite. His films were much more fantastical, theatrical and often involved film tricks or special effects. The ‘cinemagician’ discovered the classic substitution stop trick in 1896 and was one of the first filmmakers to use time-lapse photography, multiple exposures, dissolves and hand painted colour in his films. While the Lumiere brothers documented reality, Melies transformed reality through cinematography. Furthermore, unlike the Lumieres who shot on location, Melies worked mostly in a studio, often using elaborate sets. Interestingly, Melies was an audience member of the Lumiere brothers’ first screening and approached them wanting to buy their cinematograph device. The brothers refused his offer so he built his own.

By learning about the Lumieres and Melies we are contrasting fiction and non-fiction methodologies. Melies created fantastical fiction and the Lumieres made actuality documentaries yet both tried their hands in the others art.

 

Over and out,

Luke Egan