Student Arts Film

[Salvador OHara]

I didn't like it.

Sali from Cali

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

Originally Posted by Salvador OHara

I didn't like it.

Sali from Cali

Salvador, I think it's better if you give some constructive critisism (hope I spelled that right) because if you just say to the boy: "I didn't like it", he doesn't know how to make it better, and he can't.
I haven't seen the movie (maybe do it later this evening) but if I would have a problem with it I could say to him: you could work a little bit on the music. Or you could work a little bit on that camera movement there. But if you just say: I don't like it, he doesn't know if it's the story you don't like, the acting, the lightning,... And why you don't like it.
So, please, give a little more constructive critisism, so if there is anything wrong with his movie, he knows how to do a better job next time around.
Thanks, don't take this offending, please.

EDIT: Now I have seen the movie. Some very nice visuals. I didn't like the indian song that much, but that's completely subjective. And I thought the Waterpump movie dragged a little bit too long, sometimes. Maybe best to cut out some shots, is my opinion. But nice visuals and nice effects! Keep up the good work.

[Sunny Dhinsey]

Hi Salvador and Mathieu,

Thank you both for your feedback.

Salvador, it is no problem that you 'didn't like it', I don't expect everybody to appreciate my work and a negative response is all part of the developing process. However, as Mathieu explained, a small amount of constructive criticism will aid that process.

Thank you Mathieu for your constructive analysis, it has been much appreciated. The Indian song was more to do with the original brief of the film. I was required to tackle the issue of human aspiration and to look at some of the barriers we face in our quests for success, and it has been used alongside the visuals to enforce and parody the overall message.

I am always very interested by the different interpretations and suggestions that people make in relation to my work as it helps me generate ideas and to gain a general audience concensus, so a justified criticism (as in the case of Mathieu) is often helpful in contrast to an inconclusive one.

Thank You,

Sunny

[Sergi Bosch]

hi, sunny

i love the flow of your films- how the music and the images dance together. it seems like you push for conflict in your imagery (it doesn't feel "forced" however) such as how you show the paraplegics, then the hundreds of runners on healthy legs.

wondering what process you went through to prep your clips for the internet. How did you decide what fps to export at? what kbps to export at?

and can you or others out there explain to me the difference between prepping a clip for Windows Media Player vs for Quicktime?

I work on a mac using FCP. Quicktime was chosen for me. But i'd like to prep my video clip for Windowns Player as well. any suggestions?

thanks! --sergi

[Glenn Chan]

Hi Sunny,
I'm not trying to bash you or anything but this is what I honestly think:

To me, the video was boring and the editing was confusing and illogical. I'm used to editing where each shot has a connection to the next and the context of a shot affects its meaning (you interpret a shot differently depending on what comes before it).

Water pump:
I watched the film without the "spoiler" you wrote in your post (not this thread), I had no idea you were trying to express certain ideas. I call it a spoiler because it explicitly states your intentions and I wanted to see what meaning I would derive from the film without the spoiler (which affects the context I see it in). It looked like a bunch of random shots with some cheesy effects.

Urban Context:
More or less the same criticism. The theme/message/ideas are not clear.
I don't "get" it.

I'm not sure what effect you were trying to achieve with these films. I didn't feel it was thought-provoking or entertaining.

The Indian song was more to do with the original brief of the film. I was required to tackle the issue of human aspiration and to look at some of the barriers we face in our quests for success, and it has been used alongside the visuals to enforce and parody the overall message.

I did not interpret "urban context" as a parody on human aspiration... I interpreted the film as confused.

Like for the "downer" parts which show protest and conflict, I think the music should change tone to something less upbeat, so there is no mixed message. That way it's like point, counterpoint.

Sometimes you can use music in an ironic way. Apocalypse Now may be a good example where they use Wagner's Ride of the Valkyries (which suggests honor) while the Americans kill innocent civilians. See
http://www.filmsite.org/apoc2.html

[Sunny Dhinsey]

Hi guys, thank you for your continued responses in relation to my films. All positive and negative reviews have been taken on board!

Glenn, firstly in relation to your post, I will go through your points and perhaps address some of the issues you raised. But before doing so, I will just put these two films into the context of my academic programme, so that you can get a clearer idea as to their purpose (and perhaps this will explain some of the ideas).

I was required to make films to a particular brief, but with little limitations as to what the final product would be. We were shown examples of noted 'visual arts products' and were asked to make something of a similar nature. And Glenn, the films we were shown were far more random (and with far more 'cheesier' effects) than my films. We were not asked (or expected) to make linear coherent movies with a beginning, middle and end. The random nature of the films is indeed intentional in an artisitic sense. The brief did not require any of the shots or sequences to connect to one another - in my films, sometimes they do, and sometimes they don't - but there was no specific requirement as to any structure. However, this does not mean the films are a simple random sequencing of shots, as I did about 4-5 complete edits until I was happy with the finals (of both films!).

We were also required to submit written pieces of 2000+ words explaining some of the concepts behind our films, but we were not asked to provide a full written analysis as it is expected that each has his/her own interpretation of art (which has indeed been the case here). You used the example of 'Apocalypse Now' to explain some film techniques, and I think while that example will work in it's own context (that of a mainstream studio cinematic release to a specific audience), it perhaps doesn't apply to my films which are not of a particularly recognised nature. The song was always intended to be used in it's (relative) entirety, and was actually one of the first inspirations for the project, and to change it halfway through would perhaps be defeating the object.

I think it's true that you can make these films in an entirely different way, and I can think of other ways of editing certain sequences, filming from different angles etc - in the same way a painter can choose to use different colours, paint different subjects, or particular techniques; but perhaps there are no boundaries to artistic expression, and critically, I don't think there should be conventions. In my opinion, you should be aware of different styles and techniques of producing an arts piece, but I don't think that you should necessarily stick to them, as that goes beyond the point of art.

If I was making a documentary about a specific subject (say for example, about Indian street children) then I would need to make it easy for the audiences to understand what the film is about and its message. I would need for it to be coherent, in terms of shot sequence and cohesion with the soundtrack; I would need to perhaps adhere to certain conventions and techniques of documentary making, as I would be targeting a particular market of expectation - but with these two films I am expressing an artistic vision - which is open to interpretation simply because that is what was intended. So for one person to really like the film and for the next not to understand it, means the film is effective in it's purpose as a visual arts piece. The films I was shown, I did not understand sometimes - they seemed 'random' and of no particular order, however they were highly regarded in their arena simply because they evoked varied responses which led to audience dialogue and critically analysis, and I am hoping that I too have achieved this.

Hopefully I have helped in making clear what these films are about (and why they have been made). I really do appreciate your comments and feedback Glenn and am grateful that you have taken the time to respond - and thus hope I have cleared up some confusion - even if to the smallest degree.

Thank You, Sunny.

[Sunny Dhinsey]

Hi Sergi

Your comments too have been much appreciated. I am glad you liked the films.

With regards to posting the films on the internet:

The films were edited using Sony Vegas and I rendered them as .wma files at a rate of 1mbps at a screen size of 320 x 240, with a frame rate of 30fps.

I simply use a preset on the Sony Vegas render panel and then adjust certain properties if need be. I normally render a small portion of the film and playback to check for quality, file size etc and then make any adjustments if I have to.

There are probably easier ways to do this in Vegas (i.e create certain custom presets for certain project sizes etc) but I haven't had the time to experiment with this so I just take each film as it comes.

Unfortunately, I am not too familiar with FCP or Quicktime, but I think I remember someone saying that the file sizes in Quicktime would be smaller (may be incorrect), but in my brief experience of using Quicktime, I have always found it to be not as crisp in quality as Windows Media Player, but as I say I have little knowledge of the programme, so it could just be something that I am doing wrong.

Hope this helps, Thanks once again,

Sunny

[Graham Bernard]

Ah! Found out here you are on these Forums!

WOW! Great work esp the Water Pump . . loads of ideas and I found the narraive in both films work very well ... I love your framing and editing and sense of urgency and movement .. great stuff . . really!

If you need a West London Fan . .I'm here! - Grazie

[Sunny Dhinsey]

Hi Graham - the first responder from home London I believe!

Thank you very much for you appreciation, I'm glad you like the pieces.

I didn't think I have (yet) the experience to yield fans(!), but am glad you enjoyed the films!

The Water Pump will be exhibiting at the public gallery at the University of Greenwich on May 16th.

Many regards once again for your very kind comments!

Sunny

[Daniel Patton]

Sunny, quick question:

Why reduce to 320x240? Did you not start at or near 720 by 480? If so it would reduce better as 360x240 to maintain a more correct aspect ratio.

Just wondering.

[Sunny Dhinsey]

Hi Daniel,

I see what you mean about retaining the original aspect ratio.

The original source clip was at 720 x 576 (PAL 4:3). I simply re-rendered under a Vegas preset and assumed it would maintain a relative ratio.

There are perhaps better ratios which would maintain the original size of the image, but as I was saying, I have not yet experimented with the Vegas presets to that degree.

Perhaps there is somebody out there who can explain of more suitable sizing techniques?

Thank You