Coming to an end.

Starting this class, I remember sitting in lab on the first day, going around the room describing who we thought we were and discussing possible aspirations as a media maker. As this semester comes to a close, having discussed the foundations of media making as well as film, I feel that I've come to a clearer decision of what I see myself doing after I graduate college.

What I have most interest in the aspects of media is layout design and editorial work. With this in mind, I would have enjoyed learning a little more about the history and design aspect of layouts and web design as well as a more in-depth analysis of graphic editing programs such as Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator.

I understand that we only have a limited amount of time to cover new material each lecture but I feel, as a class (and especially those students who enter the class with no experience) only learn the very basics of material and are expected to move onto new material by next class. I don't think we are able to digest enough information to be able to move higher on the media chain.

If you were to ask my opinion about how to change an aspect of the class, I would suggest to focus on fewer but more dense topics of media to discuss in lecture and take about 2 or 3 classes to go over, discuss, and give examples of in detail. This way we have more time in lab applying the principles we had discussed in lecture and we can leave the class with these few things that we have worked hard on and can apply to everyday life. I feel that by next semester when I take higher courses in media that I'll need to go over old material, especially those that involved programming and HTML which I feel is a crucial necessity for modern media since we breezed through it quite quickly this past semester.

However, being a foundations class and a prerequisite for future digital courses, It has helped shaped my ideas towards media making and influenced the direction that I want to take as a media maker.

Design I like

There are so many modern media designs that grab my attention and it's difficult to just focus on one. However, I decided for the moment to focus on a website that grabbed my attention visually and kept me there based on the information and the substance of the website itself. I'm talking about This American Life. I'm a sucker for typography and the process of both proximity and alignment incorporated in the layout strongly stood out. The important idea here is that everything is concise, efficient and easy.

Referring to Donald Norman, visibility is apparent in the website. Hyperlinks are located at the top of the homepage where I can easily access information depending on where I choose to go. Each hyperlink is labelled and effortlessly indicates the mapping between the clicking of the mouse and the information I want to access. The composition of the layout is neatly organized and allows me to clearly comprehend the information, indicating where I should begin and end.

The specific layout shown here has the name of the website located on the left side of the screen in big, bold, text clearly grabbing my attention with this bold choice of typography. The alignment of the layout works well, having comparably larger text on either side of the page allowing me to focus on the smaller text in the middle which showcases weekly radio stories. The headers are bold and modern (using a sans serif font probably Helvetica), allowing me to easily find new entries as well as archival footage that I may have missed in the previous weeks. This website is a minimalist's dream and clearly resonates with Donald Norman's theories: the layout for This American Life defines strong instructions and strong visibility. The visibility clearly indicates the mapping between actions and actual operations and a viewer such as myself, is able to indicate distinctions within the layout and manage it effectively.

Single Choice: Many Lives

Single Choice: Many Lives, a film by Anne Catherine Hundhausen, explores several people who's lives intersect with one another through the implications of donor insemination. Hundhausen starts the documentary inquiring the procedures and ramifications of undergoing artificial insemination by inviting the viewer into doctor appointments, addressing the fact she is in her late 30s and society deems her physically incapable of bearing a child at this point (the documentary opens with a quote "A woman in her 40s is more likely to be killed by a terrorist then to have a child"), and explains the tumultuous years she's spent dating different men to no avail. Hundhausen's story has really captured me on a personal level, by inviting me into her past life and discussing her uncertainty in childbearing. To help aid her decision she interviews several mothers who are in the process of or having had children via donor insemination and the relationships then these children have with this decision and those that decided to donate.
The interviews are extremely enlightening and thought provoking. The way in which Hundhausen fills in the gaps between interviewing each person individually and follows up with her own thoughts and commentary humanizes the situation. Hundhausen's use of imagery in her dream sequence scenes tie together the abstract and concrete ideas of the story. It brings forth a mysterious, unknowing feeling which can certainly be felt throughout the film - the viewer is left wondering, is donor insemination a good choice for me? Is it ethical?

Listening to the mothers being so open about their choice of childbearing breaks down the traditional maternal and paternal roles - it destroys the traditional role of the family and allows a collective family through other donor siblings. Since there is no limit to how many times you can donate, it turns out that there can be numerous siblings from the same donor which happens to be the case for one of the individuals in the film. It questions what the norm or tradition of our society is and what it really has become. In the end, Hundhausen still is not sure of her decision to have a baby and may be even more confused then when she started, but she certainly was granted the opportunity to see the many perspectives of this issue.

What I See

I was in the mood for a 90s throw back movie. You know, the kind of black/romantic comedy that are usually supported by the soundtrack - this one in particular consisting of Luscious Jackson, The Cardigans, and Oasis. I opted for "A Life Less Ordinary" and prepared myself for a movie fit for the MTV generation. Now, this movie comes right after "Trainspotting" from Danny Boyle, so I was expecting extreme close-ups allowing the audience to capture every detail of the character, distortion of scenes, and hard lighting to create dark and edgy scenes; but what I happened to come across was a good amount of both hard and soft lighting. The main characters (Cameron Diaz and Ewan McGregor) are both fairly attractive people so it's not suprising when this type of light is used for a more flattering approach but, in almost rapid succession, hard lighting is used for more dramatic scenes when the main characters are questioning their love for each other right after McGregor's character gets shot in the leg from a bank hold-up gone wrong. The lighting is representing anguish and uncertainty accompanied by heavy brooding with a dark comedic twist. This is further helped by the choice of lens and composition right after this scene - both characters are in a car as they're fighting, once they come to the conclusion that they can't be together, McGregor is kicked out of the car on the side of a desert, left stranded as the camera pulls back to an extreme long shot where he's left watching the black Cadillac drive away. This creates a few things: assymetrical balance, lookspace, and leadroom between the character and the car driving away - it makes the scene aesthetically pleasing while allowing the audience to feel both the physical and emotional separation between the couple.
Throughout the film, the director plays around with camera movements depending on the narration of the storyline usually shot with a normal lens and the dramatic interplay between the characters which is mostly shown in a more distorted and artistic way. As a viewer, I feel it enhances the story and gives it a idiosyncratic touch.

Museum of the Moving Image

During our field trip to the Museum of the Moving Image, I encountered numerous methods of history of film, sound, and image. It was refreshing to witness first hand what we had previously discussed in class and be brought face to face with each concept.

As we walked from room to room a feeling of comfort ran over me - an evolution of video cameras and the use of technicolor reminded me of the movies that I grew up watching as a child. The way in which we saw behind the scenes footage of "The Wizard of Oz" as well as experiencing sound overs in the audio room transformed me from being not a only a viewer but a contributer to this particular type of media. Though this was a small task, I was able to take in new information and apply it to the movie, creating a bond between both myself and the movie.

Walking along the exhibits, new aspects of media were brought to my attention, one in particular being stop-motion film. The interchangeability of ways in which this aspect can be conveyed was truly apparent in the museum - from a video flip-book that you can make with your friends, a video made with cut-out paper props on a computer to the vintage Mutoscopes.

Each of these were able to engage the viewer and turn each aspect into a tangible form of media. By including myself, the viewer into the process, I am able to familiarize myself with the inner workings of each aspect which allows more communicative behavior, more so than if I were to just to witness it without any initiation.