Saturday, October 22, 2011
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Reality v. Illusion
Alexandra Ramirez
Visual Literacy
Blow Up Paper
10/17/11
Blow-Up provided its audience with an authentic look at the propensity a camera has to detach its owner from the scene taking place through its lens. It puts into clarity the dehumanizing potential of photography – perfectly depicting how numb it can make you feel to reality. Blow-Up also introduces us to the characters of its time: impulsive, acquisitive, and bored.
David Hemmings, who plays a self-indulgent and equally self-important photographer, runs through this movie in a casual loop of a day in a life of someone in the world. He is perpetually in motion: moving from one event to the next, unable to focus on a single moment. We are witness to his sporadic and hasty judgments: wanting to purchase an antique shop even though his home décor shows he cares nothing for the historic, buying an airplane propeller for no particular purpose or usage, even trying to buy an unfinished painting from a nearby abstract painter. For each and every one of these objects, Thomas (David’s character) loses interest a few minutes after he encounters them. The perfect example is when Thomas goes to listen to a band perform at some nightclub in London and has to literally fight off the crowd when he catches the broken neck of the guitar one of the band-members threw out into the audience. He fights his way through the thick and hostile crowd, and even outruns some eager fans that attempt to follow him to retrieve the piece of the instrument, but when he has finally lost his pursuers and realizes he has obtained the object, he drops it and walks off.
The photographs of the “maybe murder” that Thomas takes in the park provide him with his only genuine interaction with reality. But, just like the times before, this interaction, too, is fleeting. By the film’s conclusion Thomas is no longer reflecting upon the photographs he took, just as his miniscule attention span no longer remembers his momentary desires for the painting, the antique shop, the propeller, or the neck of the guitar.
The results of Thomas’ photographs from his afternoon in the park are neither logical nor factual. By the movie’s end it still is unclear whether Thomas actually photographed a murder, or just believe he had. Although the photos look as though there is the silver hair from the possibly murdered man in the bushes, it is an interpretation of the picture not an actual reality. And when Thomas goes to the park to see for sure, the fact that the body is laid out in the open hints that perhaps Thomas’ interpretation is not as trustworthy as we first imagined. He also forgets his camera, the first time ever in the film he goes without it, and when he returns the next day the body is gone, once more suggesting his point of view is not based in actuality. Ultimately Thomas sees what he wants to believe he has been a witness to; in the exact same way the mimes at the end of Bow-Up believe they are witnesses to a tennis match. Thomas’ photographs depict a staged reality, and when we allow our minds to run away with possibilities we truly begin to play loose ends with reality and illusion.
Reality vs. Illusion
Just like the mimes at the end of the movie believed they were witnessing a tennis match, Thomas allowed his imagination to convince him that he witnessed a murder.
Blow-Up
David Hemmings' "Thomas" was a self-indulgent photographer who had troubled deciphering reality from illusion.BLOW UP REVIEW - Branden Negron Visual Lit
Branden Negron
Professor Hammond
“Blow Up”
The fact that I didn’t absolutely love Michelangelo Antonioni’s “Blow Up” does not take away from the fact that I appreciated it very much. Visual Literacy has taught me to see movies in a different way, not only seeing them for what they are and understanding their plot but to really appreciate the directing taking place in every scene. Antonioni’s masterpiece is just that. While the untrained eye may be bored with the classic way of film, I saw this piece as a work of film genius. Some of the shots were revolutionary in a way, definitely setting a standard for motion pictures today.
The story revolves around a fashion photographer from London who happens to capture images of a murder during a candid photo shoot that he believes to be of just a couple in a park. Caught in the act, Thomas, the photographer, is faced with the female from the couple who says the pictures will just further complicate her life. Throughout the movie he struggles to solve this crime while the woman does whatever it takes to get the roll of film back.
While some scenes may seem boring, most viewers fail to acknowledge the beauty of the work. One aspect of the movie that I found to be interesting was the camera angles and shots during the driving scenes. With cameras mounted behind, in front, and away from the car, the audience can really get a feel for the driving, almost placing you in the scene, feeling what the driver is feeling. The movie's obscurity may seem to be going nowhere but in reality, the images shown to the audience were meant to break the mold and give the audience of that time a feeling they hadn’t felt when during prior movies. The risqué scenes strike chords, letting you in on the photographer’s crazy, pop-culture lifestyle, but also made this work groundbreaking and different in a time where sexuality was not seen to this extent in films.
What differentiates this movie from many others is the feel of it. The movie reveals the fast life of someone in the entertainment industry, surrounded by weed and women. This is the life that many dream to have during an age where pop culture is relevant and very popular. It allowed people to mix mystery with more mystery, meaning that people could now try to understand what goes through the mind of a creative photographer/ artist while also trying to solve the mystery of murder.
The way in which the movie ends is what declared this movie great in my eyes. It does not conclude with the photographer finally solving the murder, which is what the audience is hoping for. Instead, the final scene includes Thomas picking up an imaginary ball hit to him by mimes playing tennis and throwing it back to them. After throwing it back to them you can hear the sound of the mimes playing the ball, hitting it back and forth. This is what got me thinking, wondering what the significance of this ending was. Then I thought it was symbolic of the outcome. Since he was unable to solve the mystery murder, the invisible ball being played seems to hint at the fact that just because you cannot see it does not mean it is not there. To me, this ending is enough to label the movie as genius. The way that they portray their plot is not black and white but rather deep.
Blow up - Justin DoBosh
Justin DoBosh
Professor Hammond
October 16, 2011
“Blow Up” review
“BLOW UP”
The movie “Blow Up” directed by Michelangelo Antonioni in 1966 was a movie about a London fashion photographer; who while out on a walk stumbles on a couple in a park and starts taking pictures of them. However he later realizes he was photographing a murder; and this bothers him greatly throughout the movie. This movie was one that was filled with lots of sexual and weird scenes throughout it. It is considered by Premiere to have one of the "the sexiest cinematic moment in history". This movie was however very intriguing and enjoyable to watch.
Blow got great reviews from the mass media; Time Magazine called the film a "far-out, uptight and vibrantly exciting picture" and represents a "screeching change of creative direction". Most people agreed that “Blow Up” would undoubtedly be the most popular movie Antonioni has ever made. I agree with what Time Magazine says about “Blow Up”; this movie is one that really makes you feel the way that David Hemmings was feeling throughout the whole movie. Whether it was the anger you felt when he was yelling at the models to pose in different positions and they couldn’t get it right or the feeling or desire when he was photographing Vanessa Redgrave.
Bosley Crowther, a film critic for The New York Times, called “Blow Up” 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". However not everyone had high expectations for the film Bosley Crowther originally though it was going to be another seemingly endless wanderings and redundantly long movie by Michelangelo Antonioni. The movie “Blow Up” is not a long movie at all it is only 110 minutes and most current movies today are that and longer. Also the plot for “Blow Up” was one that was easy to follow; as a viewer I never had to make hard inferences to be able to keep up with the movie nor did I ever have to stop and think about what was going on.
However this movie ends in a way that I don’t like; it ends with David Hemmings giving up on solving the murder and throwing an imaginary ball back to the mimes playing tennis. This is the only part in the movie that confuses me because it just ends there. What I think it is supposed to mean is him relinquishing the task of finding the murder because it was never his problem to deal with in the first place it just fell into his lap and he felt like he had to do something about it. The ball symbolizes the problem of finding out who the murder is and the mimes playing tennis are the supposed to represent the couple in the park. And now after he has put all this effort into trying to solve the murder and he can’t; he has decided to give up and move on; Which is symbolized when David Hemmings throws the ball back to the mimes This is the only part that I had to make my own inference about what the movie was supposed to mean; however that’s what I believe made it so good because it left it up to you to decided what you though it meant.
The Movie “Blow Up” is one that takes two unrelated events and puts them together in a way that; makes this movie interesting to watch. Michelangelo Antonioni’s movie “Blow Up” is considered by some to have the sexiest cinematic moment in history while also being a movie about a murder mystery. “Blow Up” has so many different components in it and does such a good job at linking them all together that it has earned the right to be called a great movie.
Works cited
"Blowup." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 18 Oct. 2011.
"Blow-Up (1966) - Movie Info - Yahoo! Movies." Yahoo! Movies: Read Movie Reviews, Find Showtimes and View Trailers. Web. 18 Oct. 2011.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Saturday, October 15, 2011
COM 232 Visual Literacy
Fall 2011, Assignment 2
Close analysis of an image
David Diaz
Untitled, 1976 by Jerry Uelsmann
Jerry Uelsmann is an internationally recognized photographer; famous for his incredibly complex photographs. He shoots and prints in large format and does the entire photo editing in the darkroom. His photographs are one of a kind since the entire process from shooting to framing in done in the traditional way; there is not digital alteration at all. This piece belongs to the permanent collection of the
The image is a black and white photograph. In the photograph the viewer can appreciate the interior of a room with highly elaborated decorations on the walls and furniture perhaps resembling those of the 18 or 19 century architecture style. We can see a fireplace that seems to be ready to be lit. On top of the fireplace a decorative plate hangs. In the back of the room, fresh flowers in a base rest on top of a cabinet with a mirror hanging on the wall behind them. A chair with an intricate pattern sits by what seems to be a door way. A second cabinet also holds a base with flowers, and a second chair with different size and pattern than the first sits close to the cabinet. An entire wall in the room is filled with books in book shelves. A big rug covers most of the wooden floor. In the middle of the room a desk is the main object of the photograph. The desk does not have a chair, and two book rests in top of the desk. One closed and one open; on top of the open book the figure of a person appears walking as if he was just about to step in to the desk which look like sand. A candle to the left of the desk appears to be floating; there is no flame on the candle. The ceiling of the room is gone and all it can be seem is a beautiful cloudy sky.
The content of the image is very rich in elements which open the doors for a variety of interpretations. This photograph suggests a range of interpretations depending on the part of the image the viewer concentrates in. the books in the book shelves are a symbol of knowledge memories, history, or the past. The fireplace without flame could be the absence of warmth perhaps lack of closure with a partner, family or friends. The flowers in the bases in the back of the room could be interpreted as hope and life, but they are in the back; farthest from the object of the picture and the viewer. Hope and life are hard to reach; they remain isolated in the back of the room. The door way in the back has a similar symbolism. The door is in the back and chairs and cabinets are in the way making it even harder to get to. The door leads to the outside. An unknown path, but a new path. Perhaps a escape from the current situation or a way to change for a new future. The absent of a chair for the desk suggests that nobody can change or interfere with what is happening. No one is meant to sit in that desk. The candle close to the desk lacks of a flame. The flame of a candle is commonly connected to life and dead. A lit candle is the light of life; on the other hand, a candle with no flame is darkness and the end of life. The closed book and the opened book could be also an analogy for life and dead. One book is closed; the last chapter was written, and there is no more to write. The person is not among us anymore. The opened book still has pages to be written. The person will keep writing the book of his life. The figure of the person walking off the book into the sand on top of the desk is the most intriguing and interesting element of the photograph. He walks alone out of the “book of life” leaving behind the closed book. Perhaps he lost a close relative. He may be feeling hopeless and lifeless. The flowers symbol of hope and life are far from reach. The door that could take him out of that situation is also far away. There is no a fire in the fire place or the warmth of that person. The candle is out. The books in the book shelves are all the memories and the past they once share. The beautiful sky covers everything. The sky is bigger and more powerful that any bad situation, and even though is cloudy right now, It will clear and the sun will shine as a reminder of the power to overcome any situation and the fact that life do not stop, and he will have to keep living his life.
The composition of the image is very powerful. The photograph conveys several ideas open to interpretation. The relatively open frame let us explore the different element of the photograph; the different elements in and near the walls; the ceiling and the desk. The lens use to capture this photograph varies. This photograph is a composition of at least four photographs. For the room, the artist may have use a standard or wide angle lens. For the person walking he may have used a telephoto lens. For the sand he may have use a standard lens and for the sky the artist may have used a wide angle. The subject or subjects in the photograph are both static and dynamic. The room is static and the person is dynamic. The distance varies too photograph to photograph. For the room he may have done a long shot. For the person and the sand, he may have done a long shot. For the sky he made a extreme long shot. The angle is middle for the room, high for the person and the sand and low for the sky. The depth is focused, the depth of field is big and all the elements of the photographs are focused. The lighting is a low key; That really helps the mood of the photograph and also technically having low key lighting helps in the photo editing process. The color used is black and white which also set an atmosphere in the picture that predisposes the viewer to a specific temper. Fast film was most likely use for this piece; 100 ASA/ISO or even less is common with large format cameras. There is no visible grain on the photograph.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Monday, October 10, 2011
Friday, October 7, 2011
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Andrew Unvericht
Evaluate an Image
October 3, 2011
Professor Tom Hammond
Evaluate an Image
The image that I choose was the cover of a book about Ben-Hur that I had in my room when assigned this assignment. It was very appealing to me because it shows a great scene from the movie that can be viewed many different ways but it will still remain beautiful. The image represents a pinnacle scene from the movie, which shows the protagonist, Judah Ben-Hur during a chariot race. I the main reason I choose this image is because it has many aspects that we went over in class and also is a very beautiful image from one of my favorite movies. I’m not quite sure if it is the best image to analyze because it can’t be interpreted to many ways but it still represents something both beautiful and expansive.
I thought I would start off by going over the details that we talked about in class. First of all the picture is presented in open frame and widescreen, which allows the viewer to see more of the image. Its open frame shows that there is much more that can be going on that we cannot see. It is a dynamic image because it shows the films protagonist in a chariot moving from end of the image to another, which implies that he is racing away from something. In the background we can see that there are more people in the chariots and that there is an audience watching said chariot race. The audience is also a bit blurry which implies that the main protagonist is far away from the audience while the other racers in the image are much closer to them.
Now I am going to move onto the color of the image. The image is lacking color in certain areas but the majority of the color is there to represent the main protagonist and the chariot that he is currently in. I personally found this to be the best part of the image because it shows that the man in the chariot is the main character and that everything going around him is not as important as the main characters journey throughout the film. I thought it was a good thing to do to the image because it lets the main character, Judah Ben-Hur, stands out in a crowded image like the one I picked. I don’t know how to explain the color theme but it was a good choice in my opinion and I think it makes the image beautiful and a work of art even if it is just a movie still.
The distance of the image is a medium shot with a long shot background. I feel that it is better if it is a medium shot because it focuses more on the main character rather than focusing what going on around him. It lets the person who is viewing the image to know that this is the character that the story is going to focus on and how he is the person who is triumphant in the scene that the image is depicting. There is a lot going on in the image and it is a good quality to focus on who the character is and how he relates to the rest of the image. As I asked my brother and his girlfriend about the image and how they thought about it they had the same reaction to the image that I did. My brother specifically feels that it is an image that is meant to represent the main character and his girlfriend spoke about the motion of the picture and how it represented what the main character was doing in the image.
I think that the image best displays that main character and what he is doing in the picture. I liked the picture when I saw it and thought that it would work well for this project. It is a beautiful image that really makes me think more about the image from the film and how I feel about the way it is shown. Like I said earlier I choose this image because it depicts a great scene from one of the most entertaining films that I’ve seen.
Close Analysis of an Image
Matt Borzomati
October 4, 2011
Visual Literacy
Hammond
Close Analysis of an image
The image I chose to analyze was a photograph of Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia, home of the Philadelphia Phillies, before the conclusion of the 2008 World Series. As a diehard Phillies this photo is of significant value to me and will always remind of me of the first World Series won by the Phillies in over 25 years. The reason this photo can be studied is that it is a relic of time and cannot be changed. I remember looking at photos of ebbets field and the polo grounds and seeing how different things were then, in another 50 years someone can look at this photo and say the same thing and they will still know what took place because baseball should always stay the same. From my point of view, many people may not agree, but I can feel the life at the ballpark just looking at it. The players waiting for the pitch to be thrown, the thousands of fans in the crowd all are watching the same thing, and the colors that are seen because of the light towers with a dark sky.
The preferred reading of this photo can be simple, it’s just a baseball field, but it can also be read complex by picking apart each individual aspect of the field and the atmosphere. When I look at this photo I think of the movement that transpired just seconds after it was taken, the players moving after and the crowd either cheering or booing for the outcome of the play. Obviously I see these things because of my passion for the team and the game but also for what baseball stands for in my life. as someone who does not always see eye to eye with my father the one thing that we always had in common is baseball so we use it as a bridge to become closer, not to sound cliché but my father and I are closer because of the game. I believe that someone who is not a fan of baseball can still enjoy this photo because of the completeness that it portrays it is very full and balanced on an artistic level and the lines draw the viewers eyes to where they need to go to fully recognize what they are looking at. Whenever I will look at this image I will remember what happened and how I felt when it did so I can imagine that it could have the same effect on other people and also makes me realize what an image can do.
Looking at this image from a contractual standpoint the viewer’s eyes are brought first to the field itself then draws out to the crowd in a way that works more than it would if there were no fans and it was just a baseball field. The foul poles are used as a frame and helps focus in on everything in between them, the field, the screen, and the play. These things are everything that you need to be paying attention to in the image and the poles indirectly help do that. The levels of the stands give a better idea of the depth of the stadium and lets people know how many people are there and how they saw what we are looking at from their perspective. The light coming off of the screen is the only distraction of the image and can get in the way of someone’s view of the image. However it is also balanced out on the other side of the illuminated liberty bell, which is perfectly framed against the black background of Philadelphia. In my opinion you do not need to be a baseball fan to enjoy this image if you just sit back and look at it in the perspective of movement and what is to come.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)