These are two images
from the same movie. They are from one of my favorite animated movies, Finding
Nemo. I love this movie not only for the cute story line but for the great
use of color with all the sea creatures.
1.color- The hues
used in the first one are blue, yellow, orange, green, pink, and purple. The
color scheme used here can be classified as split complementary with the
red coral and Marlin's orange color in contrast with Dory's blue and the blue
of the ocean. The hues in the second one are blue (many different shades)
orange, white, and grey. The colors scheme in this one is mostly monochromatic,
with Marlin being a complementary color. The top
picture has a great amount of saturation. There is a lot of light in the
scene and the colors of the fish as well as the surrounding coral and plants
are very bright. The brightness, or value, of the first picture is very
light as compared with the second one. In reverse, the bottom image has a
darker value. The water surrounding them is a lot darker than in the first.
This change in value has to do with creating a more frightening emotion
with the shark looming behind them. The
saturation of the bottom image is less than the top.
2.Lighting- In the top image there are very little shadows.
The only real shadow is the one that Dory’s fin makes on her body. There are
also slight shadows within the coral and plants. Overall however there is a lot
of light in this image. This lighting symbolizes
that they are happy and that nothing is wrong. The mood of this image is
calm and happiness. In the bottom image shadows are used a great deal. It is a
darker image and the water all around the shark is one big shadow. This use of
shadow symbolizes the ominous situation that they are in while being stared
down by a big scary shark. The mood of this image is dark and frightening as indicated
by the darker lighting.
I have always really liked the way this scene flows. A lot of
the camera movement is fluid. They don’t cut to different frames, the camera
moves around the scene. In the beginning when the car is pulling into the
parking lot of the pool hall it follows the car that Randal, Mitch, and David
are in. When it cuts to the next scene the director used the 30 rule. He
used this by being 30% or more closer to the actors when David flings open the
door. As the actors begin to walk in the camera slowly zooms out slightly and
then goes backward in front of the characters as they make their way through
the hall. It then cuts to another frame of an establishing shot of the room
showing people hanging out and playing pool and foosball. It uses the rule of
30 again here by rotating the camera 30 degrees. Then the scene cuts to inside
of the foosball table while people are playing. This again uses the 30 rule by
being morethan 30% closer than the last
frame. This one is really close up to the ball and the actions because it is
literally inside the table. In the last frame the rule of 30 is used again when
it zooms back out to show the people surrounding the table that was just zoomed
in on. I could not really find an example of the 180 degree rule in this clip.
I think this is because there was no direct dialog between two characters that
was shown close up. The rule of thirds is used in just about every frame. Most
of the important objects and characters line up with the lines when the frame
is divided by the rule of thirds. I don’t think that the rules were really
broken in this scene. The only one I couldn’t find was the 180 degree rule, and
as I said there was no dialog that was applicable to this rule. Other than that
the director followed the rules. I really like this scene and the way it was
directed. I particularly enjoy the way the characters move in relation to the
camera and the music.
Tempo- (slow, medium,
fast) – the tempo is
medium/slow
Source-(where is rhythm
coming from)- The source of the
rhythm is the guitar strumming
Groove-(describe
personality of rhythm)- the
personality of the rhythm is slow and sad
Listening Phase 2-
Arrangement
Instrumentation- (which
instruments drive the song)-
the only instrumentation in the song is Smith's voice and the
acoustic guitar
Structure/organization-(
order, patterns) the song has
an A A B A A B verse style
Emotional architecture-
the song starts out with a very soft guitar part fading in. the
vocals also start very softly and eventually gain a little bit more
at the end. However it is a fairly soft and slow song the entire way
through.
Listening phase 3 –
sound quality
Balance
-Height- (high and low of
frequency)
The
song has a fairly low range, because Smith's voice is fairly low.
When he gets to the lines that start with “people” he reaches the
highest note.
-Width-( stereo panning)
stereo
panning is not used much in this song. It alls seems to sit fairly in
the middle.
-Depth-(layers of
instrumentation)
There
are not many layers in instrumentation. The only instruments used are
the acoustic guitar and Smith's voice.
Metric- Between the Bars
cover
Listening phase 1- rhythm
Tempo- (slow, medium,
fast)
The
tempo is a bit faster in this one. It is a medium speed.
Source-(where is rhythm
coming from)
acoustic guitar
Groove-(describe
personality of rhythm)
this
groove is not quite as gloomy. It also seems to be in a slightly
higher key.
Listening Phase 2-
Arrangement
Instrumentation- (which
instruments drive the song)
Acoustic
guitar and Emily Haine's voice.
Structure/organization-(
order, patterns)
It has
the same AABAAB structure that the original had
Emotional architecture-
(draw how song builds up and drops)
She
doesn't start quite as slow ans soft as the original. She also builds
up a little higher and gets alittle louder on the last verse.
Listening phase 3 –
sound quality
Balance
-Height- (high and low of
frequency)
It is
about the same range as the original, but her voice is higher because
she is a female.
-Width-( stereo panning)
not
much panning
-Depth-(layers of
instrumentation)
again
only two layers, voice and guitar.
I chose
to do these songs because it is one of my favorite bands covering one
of my favorite artists. What could be better? The song was originally
written and performed by Elliot Smith off of his album Either/Or,
and the band metric did a cover of it for a Rolling Stone
interview. The two performances are very similar in many ways. The
first way is that the lyrics are identical. The melody is the same
progression wise, but is just about a half a step higher in the
Metric version. The organization of the song is also exactly the same
as the original version. There are also a couple things that are
slightly different than the original version. The rhythm in the
Metric version is a little faster as well. As I said the Metric
version is a higher pitch, it sounds to be about a half step higher.
I assume this is to accommodate for Emily Haine's voice which has a
higher timbre than Elliot Smith's. It also goes at a slightly faster
speed and is a little less gloomy.( which is hard to do with lyrics
like those). They also keep the same instrumentation in the Metric
version which I like,because it sounds good as a simple acoustic
song. I don't think it would sound as good with full band
accompaniment. It is really hard to say which version I like better
because I enjoy both of these artists so much. I have thought long
and hard about it, and I have to say I like the original version
better. I hold this opinion simply because nobody can do Elliot Smith
like he can. He just has this certain sadness that puts a unique
emotional charge to the song that I have never really heard a cover
accomplish. He has a unique timbre in his voice that somehow makes it
just a touch gloomier. It might also have to do with the fact that he
was the one who wrote the lyrics so he would have a bit of a deeper
connection with their meanings while performing the song.
