User:FilaT/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Psychocinematics[edit]

Psychocinematics, a term first coined by Arthur P. Shimamura, refers to the empirical analysis of the a viewers film experience or filmmakers' techniques that capture the viewers thoughts, sensations, and feelings. It aims to examine the techniques filmmakers have used to attract and affect audiences. Through acting, staging, sound, camera movement, and editing films develop a storyline or narrative that engage the viewer. [1] What sets Psychocinematics apart from other ways of understanding films is its reliance on empirical research. The viewers experience is content analyzed by experimental research. [1]It does not, however, address all aspects of film studies, particularly societal ramifications, as Psychoanalytical film theory does. [2]

Acting[edit]

The face is a powerful mechanism for conveying identity and emotion. In film, when character recognition is often critical for understanding plot, filmmakers can use facial perception to understand different lighting and concealment techniques to manipulate the viewer's ability to recognize characters. Regions of the face that have the greatest identifying power are the hairline, facial shape, eyes, and mouth even seen in the periphery.Cite error: The <ref> tag has too many names (see the help page). [3] Filmmakers use attention manipulation and occultation to hide the identity of certain characters. They also use "bottom-lit"Cite error: The <ref> tag has too many names (see the help page).[4]characters that are difficult to recognize by concealing their key identifying features.Cite error: The <ref> tag has too many names (see the help page).Casting also plays a role in how characters are recognizable in film. More attractive faces or notably unattractive faces are the easiest to recognize.Cite error: The <ref> tag has too many names (see the help page).[4][2] By choosing faces that stand-out, casting directors aid film makers in controlling how the viewers perceive their work.

The perception of facial expression is important in understanding the emotional meaning of a scene. Subtle changes in facial expression have a great power on non-verbal communication. The perceptual system can process emotions of a character as a result of previously known facial expressions. Variability in facial expression between characters provides an extra sense of dimension to the character.Cite error: The <ref> tag has too many names (see the help page).[4][5]This allows the viewer to identify and connect with the emotional expression of the actor.

Staging[edit]

A film's visual aesthetics is based on lighting, object placement, scenery, and the actors' movements, all of which create a mise-en-scène. The distance between moving objects and the surrounding characteristics, like direction or color, can change the perception of a set of motions between "global (moving with respect to the scene) and local (moving with respect to other elements of the scene." [6] Global movements are easily perceived than local ones and are often the most popular mechanism for conveying motion in film. The perceptual system tends to group similar movements together. These groupings are formed based on proximity and similarity of their properties and are perceived as the generalized motion. [7][8] The globalization and localization of moving objects explains why chase scenes stand out. Because all extras walking are clustered together, the motion of the runners is perceived independently of extras.

Dominant colors also add to a film's visual aesthetic. In films like Avatar, color is used to create wonder and introduction to the new reality of the film. Since colors are most readily identified by category, they can be used to visually associate different elements of a scene. It allows the viewer to distinguish between different groups with out having to recognize individual characters. [9]

Sound[edit]

The synchronization and pitch in a scene is highly important in understanding its meaning. Desynchronization of audio and conversational gesture in conversational scenes muddles understanding and quality of a scene. Similarly, raising the pitch of spoken film, especially in animated films, reduces quality and the emotional content of a scene.[10]

Camera Movement[edit]

In making a film, it starts with the shot, the sequence of frames continuously form a camera. Very early films were single shots taken by a stationary camera.[11]Early on, limitations in the process of cinematography hampered film making. Cameras were bulky and difficult to move. Film emulsions were limited to their sensitivity, and bright lights were often required to obtain good images. Great care had to be taken to ensure contrasts in light and dark as different color frequencies seen by the eye can appear equally gray on black-and-white film.[11][11]The aesthetic appeal of a shot depended largely on the application of cinematographic techniques to enhance creative vision of he director and cinematographer. These days, shots can include camera movements, such as tracking (moving the entire camera with the action), panning (rotating the camera head to the left or right), or tilting (rotating the camera head up or down, and various focus shots that zoom in or out of a scene.[12][12]

Moving images are created by the rapid succession of shots. The on-and-off flicker rate must be fast enough to not notice the change between the frames. With old cameras the flicker rate is at less than 16 frames per second, that resulted in a noticeable flashing or flickering when viewed. As film technology advanced, the flicker was eliminated by projectors running at average of 24 frames per second. The illusion of seeing movement from the rapid succession of shots, apparent motion, is based on the set of process that were studied by Max Wertheimer, a Gestalt psychologist. A camera angle has an effect on depth perception Cite error: The <ref> tag has too many names (see the help page).[4]. Viewing actors or the set, from angles where the depth cues are obscured can distort the illusion of three dimensional viewing. Objects at the edges of the frame are perceived to be more important. Using the wrong viewing angle can distort what is perceived as important. The perceptual system favors symmetrical figures and has a tendency to "complete" blocked objects using their symmetrical form. Bad camera angle or cut-off of important information can result in misunderstanding of scene and even film.[13][14]

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b Shimamura, Arthur P. (Editor) (2013). Psychocinematics: Exploring Cognition at the Movies. Oxford University Press. {{cite book}}: |first= has generic name (help)
  2. ^ a b Hillstrom, Anne P.; Yantis, Steven (1 July 1994). "Visual motion and attentional capture". Perception & Psychophysics. 55 (4): 399–411. doi:10.3758/BF03205298.
  3. ^ Post,, RB; Whiteny D. (2008). "Egocentric and allocentric localization during induced motion". Experimental Brain Research. 4 (191): 495–504. doi:10.3758/BF03205298.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)
  4. ^ a b c d Cite error: The named reference scene perception was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ Schwan, S.; Ildirar, S. (7 June 2010). "Watching Film for the First Time: How Adult Viewers Interpret Perceptual Discontinuities in Film". Psychological Science. 21 (7): 970–976. doi:10.1177/0956797610372632. PMID 20530390.
  6. ^ Hochberg,, Brooks (2007). "Movies in the Mind's Eye.",. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)
  7. ^ Hochberg,, Brooks (2007). "Movies in the Mind's Eye.",. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)
  8. ^ Levin, Daniel T.; Wang, Caryn (1 June 2009). "Spatial Representation in Cognitive Science and Film". Projections. 3 (1): 24–52. doi:10.3167/proj.2009.030103.
  9. ^ Wiese, Epi (October 1982). "Gibson at the Movies". Leonardo. 15: 287–290. doi:10.1086/209215.
  10. ^ Reitsma, Paul S.; O'Sullivan, Carol (August 2009). "Effect of scenario on perceptual sensitivity to errors in animation". Transactions on Applied Perception. 6 (3): 15–27. doi:10.1145/1577755.1577758.
  11. ^ a b c Cutting, James E; Brunick, Kaitlin L; DeLong, Jordan E; Iricinschi, Catalina; Candan, Ayse (1 January 2011). "Quicker, faster, darker: Changes in Hollywood film over 75 years". I-Perception. 2 (6): 569–576. doi:10.1068/i0441aap.
  12. ^ a b Cutting, James E; Brunick, Kaitlin L; DeLong, Jordan E; Iricinschi, Catalina; Candan, Ayse (1 January 2011). "Quicker, faster, darker: Changes in Hollywood film over 75 years". I-Perception. 2 (6): 569–576. doi:10.1068/i0441aap.
  13. ^ Hochberg,, Brooks (2007). "Movies in the Mind's Eye.",. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)
  14. ^ Zacks, Jeffrey M.; Speer, Nicole K.; Reynolds, Jeremy R. (1 January 2009). "Segmentation in reading and film comprehension". Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 138 (2): 307–327. doi:10.1037/a0015305.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:FilaT/sandbox&oldid=636845409"