Tag: reading

  • Editing as pathfinding: How to Edit a Film

    Editing as pathfinding: How to Edit a Film

    (In response to Walter Mulch’s In the Blink of an Eye: A Perspective on Film Editing.)

    So you make yourself comfortable in the well-equiped editing room, whether in the physical sense or whatever computing setup you use as your virtual editing room. Besides you lies a hundred feet or so worth of film, or alternatively, your computer screen flickers with hundreds of freshly-DSLR’d shots of close ups, tight shots, and context-establishing sequences.

    You feel the heaviness of the weight of the director’s original vision, whatever it might be, and which is often, in itself, a subjective take on the essence of a script and/or original source material, and the potential enjoyment (or lack thereof) of all prospective film viewers.

    To prepare yourself for the elusivity of the high-stakes process of film editing, you summon a “cheatsheet” of sorts that, supposedly, distills the process of film editing. Its contents, if they are of any merit, will most likely be along the following lines.

    1. Remind yourself that the process of editing is a process of pathfinding. You start with no inherent guarantees of what the end product will end up like, but you do know that it will be what it is supposed to be. Shots, in their rawest form are sturctureless, and what you do is to find or synthesise a path towards a coherently fulfilled vision.

    2. Know that the process of cutting is not just that, it is an extensive, iterative process of decision making as to what constitutes a suitable cut, and what can be put aside as a “shadow” cut, regardless of all the effort that went to it. Editing is a process that is measured in quality, not quantity.

    3. Be aware of the reason why (almost) all films need to be cut: Because of the logistic impossibility of having all objects, all actors, and all suitable conditions in the same place to construct a complete film in a single shot. In a way, by overcoming this limitation, filmmakers are freed from the impossibility of controlling every gesture or condition simultaneously to get a perfectly-coherent film.

    4. Recall that editing is not simply “taking out the bad bits,” but more of giving a film its unique nature through the order you bestow upon it. The shots are the DNA and the editing is the sequencing of it.

    5. Get your priorities straight: you should edit for emotion, then narrative, then rhythm. Lower in importance are the viewer’s eye-trace, the stage-line, and the 3D space continuity of the shot. Minimize the compromise you make for the first (tightly-bound) three as much as possible.

    6. Think like the viewer, and direct, or misdirect, him or her towards your narrative through editing. Minute details are  most of the time indiscernible to the viewer. (To help you keep that in mind at all time, you may use a cutout stick figure as a visual representation of the proportion of the cinema-goer against the towering cinema screen.)

    7. Isolate yourself from the conditions of shooting. All effort, time, cost, and agony that went into a shot are irrelevant if they do not perfect the emotional impact, progress the story, or fit into the rhythm of the film.

    8. Engage in editing in a pair or more, part of it is to avoid a locked POV on what should or should not be there, and the other part is to meet the often unforgiving timelines. One of you can be the “dreamer,” while the other will have to challenge the validity of the other’s dream.

    9. Visually distill each of the shots into a single “decisive moment,” preferably as a physically printed shot, that can both illuminate the emotion of a shot, and be used as a linguistic representation of all the details it can encompass.

    10. Conduct test screenings with an audience, but don’t take their explicit feedback to heart. Instead, focus on how does it feel to show your edited film to an audience.  If you must collect explicit feedback, be sure that it is a good time after the screening, so as to get a fully formed impression, not a reaction, or a referred pain, where the reaction is driven by a single scene when the issue is in what leads to or follows from it.

    11. Think of cuts as a blink of an eye amidst one’s continuously perceived reality: it happens when one thought gives way to another, when one emotion overtakes the observer in a way that changes his perception of the moment. Alternatively, think of an edited film as a dream where cuts happen to compress time and space in a meaningful, not necessarily realistic way.

    12. For any scene, there is a finite number of possible good cuts, which results in a specific branching schema that the editor has to bring to his awareness. The meaning of this is that not every moment is a potential cut; if, say, you want your audience to perceive a speaker as a liar, there is only one appropriate cut for that. An earlier or a later cut will result in the misdirection of the audience towards another conclusion.

     

  • “Man is the measure”

    “Man is the measure”

    E.M. Forester, in his short story, The Machine Stops, predicts—among many things, the prevalent paradigm of technology consumption: as a substitute for experience (or, “first-hand ideas”). Technology, he argues, can stand between man and his life—his “naked” humanity, through its persistent administration of convenient comfort.

    In one memorable passage, Kuno, the story’s sort-of protagonist describes the epiphany that helped him see through the veil of techology:

     

    Screen Shot 2013-09-20 at 12.13.31 AM

     

    In the dystopian world in which the story is set, the technologists advocate vicarious experience, as it is, they argue, the most purified and filtered. Vicarious experiences as in lectures, recorded music, telecommunications. As the zealot of a lecturer feverishly declared, the second-hand experience that one generation passes to the other would one day produce a “generation seraphically free  from any taint of personality.”

     

    To save ourselves from such a reality of saccharine death, we can’t help but follow in Kuno’s footsteps, to use ourselves as a measure of the world. Distance can only be understood by traversing it; and we only own things by holding them.

     

    Kuno found his way out by searching for darkness amidst the artificial light, for it is the only real exception among all the artificiality. Discomfort, at times, is the only real thing there is in one’s own context.
  • How to make human-friendly everyday things, a very short introduction

    How to make human-friendly everyday things, a very short introduction

    [In response to Donald Norman’s The Design of Everyday Things]

    Say you were asked to make or remake a piece of furniture, cutlery,  an appliance, or an electronic apparatus.

    You are perhaps a visual designer: you start aesthetically, exploring the palettes, textures, and patterns that interact with the visual systems of the users (viewers, to you).

    Or maybe you are an engineer, so you naturally concern yourself with the completeness of the physical and logical systems that comprise the product in question. You ensure, as a result, that the components run effectively and efficiently, as a whole and in individuality.

    Or, if you are a marketer, you have a business plan to follow, a portfolio of products to maintain to maximise profits and minimise the costs. Those pretty fancy tactile patterns that will take up the whole budget and then some? They’ll have to go. And so does the super fast, deathly quiet gears system that an engineer laboured to make with complete disregard to the budget at hand.

    All of the above are ways to make things; things that are profitable, efficient, pretty. Those are not mutually exclusive parameters. And they are not the only ones; they disregard usability, the manifestation of the user’s point of view, whether explicit or implicit, as opposed to that of the aesthete, engineer, and merchant. This does not mean that the user is not interested in the other three: a user might and will look for things that are pretty, reliable, and cheap. But not only that.

    ****

    So if we go back to you and your desire to make the aforementioned product, tool, etc. You want to do it differently from the aesthete, techie, and marketer above, in that you want your design to be of maximum usability and human-centricity How do you go about it?

    1. You start with the intent of having your design speak of the problem it is solving, without the need for instructions, symbols, etc. How can you do that?

    2. You do that by designing for and with affordance. Affordance is the actual and perceived properties of an object that allows it to perform specific tasks and none other than those. For instance, a table affords placement of things on its surface, but does not afford, say, to be used as a moving object.

    3. Some affordance properties are inherent to the physical reality of an object, e.g. the material it was made from. Soft and straight plywood affords carrying things of a specific weight range. Paper’s porousness affords words to be written on it.

    4. Other affordance properties are created by the designer: a slot in the design affords insertion, whereas a handle affords being pulled in a specific direction.

    5. Affordance is not the end of the story. The next step is to design with visibility in mind.

    6. Visibility of all the possible interactions with the object.

    7. Visibility of the outcome of said interactions i.e. the object should provide proper feedback to all possible operations by the user.

    8. Incorrect feedback mechanisms results in false causality that breeds superstition. For instance, a system failing right after a click of a button results in the user believing that said operation is the cause of the failure, even if that is incorrect.

    9. Affordance and visibility combine to provide mapping, i.e. the relationship between what can be seen and what can be done. Or, more concretely, the relationship between the controls, the operations, and their outcomes.

    10. The best possible mapping is natural mapping, which relies on the conventions (e.g. an arrow indicates direction) and the physical properties of things.

    11. If you keep the above in mind, you should be able to ease the user into a proper conceptual model of the product, where the user can predict the outcomes of his actions towards the object.

    12. A good user conceptual model is achieved when the designer’s own model is communicated simply and properly through  the physical model of the object itself.

    All of the above is a gross simplification, but what isn’t?  But it is a starting point.

    [photo credit: Mental model of how a car works, by davegray [http://www.flickr.com/photos/davegray/236316672/]

  • “Most artists are converted to art by art itself”

    “Most artists are converted to art by art itself”

    1.
    It is known that if one sets out to create a new work, one will have to look in one of two directions: within or without. Such a view operates under the assumption that there is a well-defined boundary between what we carry in our psyches and what we don’t. This dichotomy is because of one’s own “uniqueness,” some would argue.

    2.

    mimic me
    made by yours truly from other people’s ideas

    3.
    How unique are you? You might say very, because, after all, you have your very own genes, and live a strangely distinct and wondrous life. But do you, really? Your chromosomes, all 23 pairs of them, are almost the same as mine, with some variations. How different is your life than mine? We read the same books, we are marketed the same products, we consume the same entertainment, and are pretty much the manifestation of the same social constructs. Socioeconomic factors affect me as they affect you, and we deal with it the same way. We see the same sights, we travel the same paths.

    4.
    I transformed this:
    [soundcloud url=”http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/79013756″ params=”” width=” 100%” height=”166″ iframe=”true” /]

    Into this:
    [soundcloud url=”http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/110237345″ params=”” width=” 100%” height=”166″ iframe=”true” /]