P.S. I'm really focusing on the graphical representation thing alone, apart from the narrative or the facts illustration in broadcast news thing, but discussion of it would also be welcome.

Thanks!!

Have a look at the video, its not in every shot, but there are enough examples of what I mean - most of them are b/w.

• Was this created on set/in camera?
• How did he light the faces?
• Any post production tricks?
• How to do it today?
• How to do it today without tracking every eye and using power windows?

(I wish I could smile like Norman Bates....that would help beeing a teacher ;-)

Your recommendation might just be for a great film that you think others would appreciate in which case a short description of the film followed by a subjective score would be helpful to others (eg. enjoyment 8.5/10)

You may feel that the film helped you in specific ways, or you feel compelled to break down your own opinion into other categories that you feel are significant (eg. cinematography/editing/story/innovation/technical expertise/humor/ use of CGI/etc...)

Whilst developing a list of helpful resources for all members to use for their own benefits, there are obviously going to be differences of opinion expressed. Rather than trying to undermine somebody elses subjective score on a particular resource it would benifit everyone if you just add your own opinion next to your own entry, this will allow others to develop an understanding of everyone's "Personal-View". Leading to opinions that we will value based on who's subjective opinion we value, rather than the thread ending up as a flame war on this very subjective subject.

Thank you :)

support creator: https://www.patreon.com/directorsseries?ty=h

One day in 1977 in the Sydney Opera House library, I scrawled his "nine degrees" lessons into my notepad. I had no idea that I would often return to these notes for guidance - not only in acting, but in almost any field.

*from Leonard Cabell. Pronko, THEATER EAST AND WEST. Perspectives toward a total theater.

Zeami advises actors to start with with getting a grounding at number 5 (ample and precise), then try the higher grades (6 and up) and only go for the lower grades later.

I try to think I do my camera work with precision and amplitude (i.e. attention to detail while managing the big picture). Just once in I while I imagine I might be verging on what Zeami calls "the style of the genuine flower" but it's fleeting.

Zeami talks of artists who attain the "Style of the Marvellous Flower" happening only once in every few hundred years.

I find I often think about where I'd put certain artists (like Brian Wilson) in terms of Zeami's Degrees. Or Chaplin. Or Pina Bausch. Even non-actors, like some gifted mechanics. It helps me get a perspective. That's pretty much all I retain of Zeami's writings: get good at what you do, then try to get a bit of magic into it, and only when you can't get any better do you allow yourself to do the rougher stuff. Oh, and I do remember the bit about the duty of the artist to pass on his/her trade. (Which brings me to contemplate some exceptional teachers I've known, those who were merely powerful and meticulous, and the majority whose simple precision and amplitude got the job done).

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/zeami-motoyiko-zeami/1101966103?ean=9780231139595

Chris Cunningham has flirted with the crossover between music video and art instalation over the past few years, as media saturation increases I'm sure we will start to see more sound and visual combinations that start to break away from traditional formats. The collapse of rigid boundaries is bound to bring critisim, as all unfamiliar art has in the past, but I welcome this :)