Final piece

So I started to paint my final pieces. This is one of them, however still unfinished.


J.J.*Jolanta Jasiulionyte* said...

I like the arrangement of space.I know it is a work in progress, but fail to understand what is the front object ( bridge? ) and .. hmm.. some colour pallete tweaking would benefit the image
But defo, illusion of space - spot ot, I'd say :]

J.J.*Jolanta Jasiulionyte* said...

*spot on

tutorphil said...

for me, the structures in the distant feel 2d in comparison with everywhere else - as if they might be painted - as opposed to built. Obviously you've got them as if shrouded in fog, but these elements seem immune to any light source - which is keeping them looking flat.

tutorphil said...

Evening Ernesta,

Okay, so in regards to your written assignment. There is a weakness to your analysis at the moment, because you're not really dealing with the visual concept or production design on a thematic or 'metaphorical' level - rather at a technical and descriptive level. So, for example, the essay is really asking you to examine how narrative ideas are communicated through the mise-en-scene of a film. The Cabinet of Dr Caligari is a very clear example of this, because the settings of the story are as 'mad' as the characters themselves - therefore there is a clear relationship between the physical spaces of the film, their 'meaning', and their meaning in relation to the events of the film. It would really help you to read the two articles available to you on myUCA/Space/Unit materials which are about production design in general (it's role etc.) before you return to your written assignment. Anyway, you will need to give a general definition of 'production design' in your assignment before you apply that definition to Lord of the Rings. When you write your assignments, you have to imagine that you're writing them for a person who knows nothing about the subject, therefore any specialist terms, technical terms or theoretical vocabulary needs to be introduced and defined within the main body - never presume prior knowledge on behalf of your reader - that way you will always define and contextualise your content.

You need to watch your capitalisation for your film titles.

So - put simply, instead of explaining the tech, 'how they did it' stuff, you need to find something insightful to say about the metaphorical 'purpose' and justification for the designs of the spaces and places in Lord of the Rings. For example, why does the Elvin architecture look the way it does - what does it derive from? What ideas lie behind it? Likewise, what is the visual concept behind Minas Tirith - what were the production team/designers hoping to achieve on a metaphorical level? Again - think of Alien - the design of the alien planet isn't simply 'stuff' and telling your reader that it was a miniature, or a model, or made of clay is okay, but also telling them how the biomechanical designs of HR Giger add more layers to the film's psycho-sexual subtext is much more 'critical' and much more 'analytical'. I think you need to dig deeper - and read more widely - to actually be in a position to say something interesting about Lord of the Rings, apart from that the New Zealand scenery is awe-inspiring - which it is - and the world of Middleearth is part model, part cg, part live action. You need to think in conceptual terms - just as the 'meaning' of fashion isn't best described by discussing fabric types or colours, but rather 'fashion' as statement, as 'idea', as 'message'...

tutorphil said...

For your info:


Post a Comment