Following the submission of my coursework, it has allowed me to reflect on the project as a whole. I feel overall the project had both positive and negatives, whilst producing the project we came across various limitations and obstacles such as equipment issues and a lack of effective group dynamic. We came up with a mostly applicable proposal but in many respects as a group failed to effectively make links between the brief and proposal; I feel that this was mostly down to a lack of group communication and co-operation. Although we attempted to effectively challenge and utilise cultural and cinematic conventions which worked well in places, if I were to do the project again I would ensure a better group dynamic is established and I would consider more throughly camera shots and equipment to effectively convey our intentions.
New Start – Semester 2
Similarly to last semester’s brief focused on “Questioning the Everyday’, our brief now is “Disrupting the Everyday” requiring me to adopt a slightly different approach. Unlike last semester, the project was based on video production whereas this semester is based on demonstrating skills in both photography and web based media. We began by analysing two texts…
Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentaion of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday, pp 22-30, 70-76
The Goffman text discusses how we as individuals perform our identities and behaviour. Describing how the individual identity is performed and made up from “Performance”, “Social Font” and “Setting”, these factors all effect our “Appearance”. Our appearance is determined on the skills, experience, knowledge and understanding and performance of that particular role; basically, in order to effectively and convincingly portray a role we must have the correct “Equipment”. The text generally encourages a different way of understanding the world we live in, but in particular linking in with classes and how individuals are categorised into different social groups depending on their “performance”.
Vejby, R. & Wittkower, D. (2010). Spectacle 2.0. Facebook and Philosophy, edited by DE Wittkower. Chicago and Le Salle : Open Court, pp97-108
Similar to the Goffman text, ‘Spectacle 2.0’ encourages an alternative analysis of everyday life, but by adopting a more contemporary approach by focusing on the issue of technology and in particular social networking as a tool of mediation.
The text outlines how the increasing involvement of technology and social networking has led to a society or passive consumerism. Describing how our constant use of social networking has led to a great degree of social and physical isolation, as we are living our lives through screens in the form of a ‘spectacle’ we are becoming passively mediated and loosing control and identity. The text also encourages the movements of the “Situationalist International” which encourage spontaneity and creative innovation in the practices of daily life. Dérive meaning drift, refering to spontaneity and straying from existing paths and to explore your entire terrain and Détournement meaning refers to subversion and recreating situations.
In today’s workshop we began to experiment with cameras and some of the basic rules of cinematography such as…
-Rule of Third/Golden Ratio
-Depth of Field
We created our own briefs by discussing how S Block makes us feel and pairing that with a concept, My images were based on “Neutral” Rule of third, “Happy” depth of field and “Institutional” use of colour, For the most of this session I experimented with Aperture and Time Values; still a contemporary skill I have yet to acquire. I blended some of my proposals in order to explore these new values and ideas in more depth. Here are my unedited shots…
Vejby, R. & Wittkower, D. (2010). Spectacle 2.0. Facebook and Philosophy, edited by DE Wittkower. Chicago and La Salle: Open Court. pp97-108
Goffman, E. (1995). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday. pp 22-30, 70-76