http://changethis.com/manifesto/show/45.02.FreakFactor
There were three suggestions that I was not sure about. The first was about how one should not change the flaws that they have. I would think that there are some instances that one would have to change their flaws. If the flaws that you have are hindering the way you can progress as a person and a business owner, then it would be in your best interest to change that flaw. It doesn’t matter that you stay true to yourself if you have started many businesses but can’t keep them open because you are extremely rude to your customers or bring in bad merchandise because you are too cheap to buy good products. So I completely disagree with his notion of forgetting your flaws. Realizing and adapting your flaws help to make you grow into a better person.
I do like how he says that it is extremely difficult to fix your weaknesses and to build your strengths. I can completely understand where he is coming from when he says this. If a person tries to do both, they often are let down by then end product because they realize that they ended up accomplishing neither. His analogy of K-mart, Target and Walmart was a perfect example of this point. Even though I think that target is a bad example of the opposite of walmart (though I am not sure what would be a better equivalent) he demonstrated his point extremely well, and helped to bring his point to light to those who are not quite sure of what he means. From this manifesto, I learned many things. But the one that I never realized was that K-mart went bankrupt. This may be from the fact that I have one right by my house and many people I know still work there.
I think I liked his eighth point the best, mostly because it told you to be different. Though this point is extremely cliché, it makes most people feel better about themselves. It helps to bring hope to those who think that they are too weird to function in normal society. It also makes others jealous of the confidence that exudes from those who are dubbed “weird”. These are truly the people who do not care what “normal” society thinks of them. They do not try and change themselves for others and stay as true to themselves as they can. I admire them because I can’t help but be embarrassed when I have to admit that I play WoW. Or any of the other EXTREMELY nerdy things that I do, sometimes I wonder what I spend more time with, my computer or my friends. Normal society would say that it is bad I would have to question it. I just like to think I am getting more acquainted with the tools of my future trade. But even by brushing them off, I can’t help but feel ashamed that I might spend more time with an inanimate object.
I think I have found what it means to be creative for me. Unfortunately I still have a hard time trying to figure out what other people want or to make up original ideas. Though it is hard to thin of anything that is not already out, I would still like to be the one who things of a great idea and be recognized for it, just like everyone else. I think that is why I decided to specialize in digital media. I can make a great work of art with other great minds and though the main company would be recognized for it, I would still be in the team that made it.
Monday, May 30, 2011
Blog 9A
I thought that there were a couple things that we did not get across well in the presentation. This game seemed to get away from us as we were trying to figure out what exactly it would entail. One of the things that I think we did not get across very well were the OBJECTIVES. I think that they were difficult to get across because the game did sort of run away from us. But what we meant was that the player could choose how to get their materials. They could go along with the natives and get limited amounts of food and materials given to them or they could go out and defy what the natives want and get unlimited amounts off supplies but they would have to find them around the island. One thing that I think we got across well was the MECHANICS. I think this is because mechanics of games are usually straightforward and are easiest to explain. There are not any ways explain health bar any more clearer.
One thing I wish we did though was make a couple of freeze frames. I am a very visual person and I find it difficult to be able to sufficiently understand a concept with out some sort of visual. I think by doing this, we could have cleared up much of the confusion our audience was experiencing along with creating a more enjoyable presentation and presenting a more complete idea.
Blog 7
We went with two different approaches to the jokes. The first was just an interpretation of the actual joke and how it could have been filmed. This first one focused on RHYTHM and MOVEMENT very much. Because it was a silent film, there had to be a ton of emphasis on movement. Everything the actors did had to somehow convey the appropriate emotions and feelings since sound and inflection of voice couldn’t describe the situation. Rhythm was crated through the flashing of the text “cards” and the banter between the sister and the brother. This helped to bring the attention of the audience directly to the two characters as well as create an illusion of arguing or volleying of words. At some points, this also made the audience physically move their heads as if the characters were in the same shot.
The second movie was more of what would happen if the brains were switched. I thought that it was a creative way to look at the punch line of the joke. There was a lot of TENSION AND RELEASE through out the piece. The tension was mostly centered in the beginning of the video, where the parents were worrying over the son and as they were leaving from the hospital. This was immediately released when you heard the two doctors talking and as you saw the aftermath of the surgery. There was also a lot of CONTRAST to the first video. The second video had more subtle humor while the first had more of slapstick. There was also AFFINITY through these videos because of the common theme that they had. There was also emphasis in the way that the videos were shot and executed.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Blog 6B
This is the video game cinematic that I decided to chose. This video accurately portrays the aspect of Lighting.
Blog 5A
I chose to use the last image by Ben Goossens. The image had a picture of an owl sitting on a chair. I am not sure why I am drawn to this picture, but I think it may be because of the way the picture fits. Though it may have very different objects in it, nothing looks out of place like a lot of his pictures. I also like birds so that may have been another reason I was drawn to it.
I chose to reframe the picture the way I did was because I had always thought that the picture was too light on the side that the window was on. So I just got rid of it. The widow didn’t really contribute any thing to the picture itself, all the window did was direct the eye to the owl in the chair. By getting rid of the window, I focused more on the owl.
The chair that the owl is sitting on directs the eye down by two different ways. The first are the two columns that support the back of the chair. Your eye is drawn to the top of the columns and directed downward by how heavy the seat of the chair is. The second is the decorative carving that are on the horizontal rods. the very first rung has the largest carving on the top, directing the eye to it. As you follow the carvings, they seem to shrink in size and finally you hit the top of the owl.
Finally the room directs the eye from the bottom right corner into the chair, as do the other lines that the room creates. the book that the owl is sitting on completes the way that the chair frames the owl. This frame comes from the horizontal rungs on the back of the chair, the two arm rests, and the seat of the chair and the book.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Blog 4A
I would like to summarize both fail and learn
Fail is the first I would like to address. I know that they are trying to be frank about how we think too much about how one’s ambition is hindered by others and how they think of their work. But I cannot help but think that they used the wrong word to try and convince people. Fail automatically gives off a negative connotation and a sense of hopelessness. To fail is to give up and maybe try again, but that chance is unlikely. They could have used “Try” or some other synonym of the word but “Fail” seems too final. I know what the author is trying to say but he just didn’t hit the mark with this.
The second I would like to address it “Learn”. I was somewhat confused about this short article because in the beginning he seemed like he was unhappy with the school system and how they are teaching kids the wrong things. But in this article, he is saying the opposite. What I do not think he took into context was that there is a purpose to the silly math problems that the teacher had us do. Those problems are the beginning points to helping kids find out what they want to do in life. I know that I do not like math, but there are some aspects of it that I do really enjoy, such as trig and finding out what “x” is. These math problems are more puzzles than they are necessary to some peoples lives but if I ever wanted to know when train A is going to be 50 miles ahead of train B then I would know how to figure that out.
Overall I did not really like this article. I thought he seemed rather cynical to the school system and a bit bitter that he didn’t get to do what he wanted. I also don’t think he took into account, if it wasn’t for a school system and a kid that was kept in line, he would not be posting his thoughts online and be typing them on his computer.
Blog 3A
Come On Eileen Original
Come on Eileen Cover
I have chosen this cover of Come On Eileen because it is gutsy to make the song so different from the original. The lyrics are the same for the most part. There may have been an extra line added to the song but there have been no major changes made. The melody much different from the original, you do hear traces of the original song but that is the only indicator of what they haven’t changed. This version, by Save Farris, seems like it has a slightly darker tone to the song. There are more minor notes, and it seems like it is at a lower octave than the first. Though when you look at it from this point of view, the cover is actually at a higher octave but there is a female singing. It is obvious that the singer seems to be pushing the limit on how low her voice can go.
The cover song had a completely different music quality than that of the original song. The Rhythm was faster than the original, which made it more like rave music than folk music. The intensity and pitch were much higher than that of the original. The cover song was loud, which ruined the feel of the original song. The timbre was only a little bit different by the fat that the cover song was led by the electric bass while the original was led by mostly a string bass. The speed and the organization were also different. The speed seemed so much faster than the original. This is one of the reasons why the song seemed so rocky. The organization was different because there was no organization. In the original song, the listener can hear almost all aspects of the songs. You can hear all the different instruments in the original. While the cover song, the listener cannot hear all the different instruments. It seemed like there was so much going on, the listener could not relax and just enjoy the song.
Between these two songs, I do like the original song the best. I may like it just because I have a taste for more folksy music right now or if it is just because I want to learn how to play it on a banjo. But whatever reason it is, I think that this version fits the feel of the song so much better. The cover of the song is too rock and roll for the song to have the same effect that the original had.
The cover also makes the song much more generic than the original. What I think made the original song a hit was because it sounded new and different. The cover cheapens it by adding such a common sound to the lyrics. There is a certain feel of the original that the cover song just does not accomplish what it should have. I think that the cover song could have been more successful if they had incorporated more of the original song into the replica.
Come on Eileen Cover
I have chosen this cover of Come On Eileen because it is gutsy to make the song so different from the original. The lyrics are the same for the most part. There may have been an extra line added to the song but there have been no major changes made. The melody much different from the original, you do hear traces of the original song but that is the only indicator of what they haven’t changed. This version, by Save Farris, seems like it has a slightly darker tone to the song. There are more minor notes, and it seems like it is at a lower octave than the first. Though when you look at it from this point of view, the cover is actually at a higher octave but there is a female singing. It is obvious that the singer seems to be pushing the limit on how low her voice can go.
The cover song had a completely different music quality than that of the original song. The Rhythm was faster than the original, which made it more like rave music than folk music. The intensity and pitch were much higher than that of the original. The cover song was loud, which ruined the feel of the original song. The timbre was only a little bit different by the fat that the cover song was led by the electric bass while the original was led by mostly a string bass. The speed and the organization were also different. The speed seemed so much faster than the original. This is one of the reasons why the song seemed so rocky. The organization was different because there was no organization. In the original song, the listener can hear almost all aspects of the songs. You can hear all the different instruments in the original. While the cover song, the listener cannot hear all the different instruments. It seemed like there was so much going on, the listener could not relax and just enjoy the song.
Between these two songs, I do like the original song the best. I may like it just because I have a taste for more folksy music right now or if it is just because I want to learn how to play it on a banjo. But whatever reason it is, I think that this version fits the feel of the song so much better. The cover of the song is too rock and roll for the song to have the same effect that the original had.
The cover also makes the song much more generic than the original. What I think made the original song a hit was because it sounded new and different. The cover cheapens it by adding such a common sound to the lyrics. There is a certain feel of the original that the cover song just does not accomplish what it should have. I think that the cover song could have been more successful if they had incorporated more of the original song into the replica.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)