Heyo!
I think I should have written a post like this a long time ago. After all, studying screenwriting and visual expression (= SWAVE) is half of what this blog is all about. I did write something about it, as my second post ever, but it was more of a overview. But now I have studied here for six months, and I have enough experience to tell you what it's really like.
Instead of writing of what my average day is like, I'll tell you about all the different subjects/courses that I have studied so far. I think it gives you pretty good idea of studying SWAVE, minus, of course, all the after school stuff.
So, if you have ever wondered what's included in studying SWAVE, and what it means in practice, read on.
(By the way, I like how the word "studying" has the word "dying" in it :D)
Overall, there's 65 different mandatory courses in SWAVE, and our days here mostly consists of these. Of course there's also plenty of optional courses as well and different student projects.
Of those 65 mandatory courses, I have studied, or am currently studying 20. Not counting the orienting studies here.
I'll start with the less exciting ones, that surround the actual creative process without taking part in it. Without any strict order:
English & Swedish
First, language studies. It's mostly like what you think it's like. Except more new words and less grammar. Last week we had to discuss and analyze a short film in Swedish, which I think was rather useful, although hard. Lot of homework and doing essays independently. Speaking language in question, of course.
The necessity of English is obvious (especially in the showbiz), but if you're from abroad and wondering the Swedish: as citizens of Finland, we are obliged to somewhat study our second official language, Swedish, as well as Finnish. It's a small thorn on the side of every non-bilingual Finnish student, and waste of resources, but that's another (long) story.
Business accounting
A bit boresome, unfortunately. Basically learning how to account and where to place credits and debits. Early on a lot of emphasis of how The Law requires double entry bookkeeping system from each company and corporation. After all, school encourages us to become entrepreneurs.
Mathematics
Recap from high school. How to calculate taxes, inflation, etc. So, more practical calculations than earlier, thankfully. Not too hard by itself, but we had to learn how to calculate using only Excel, which caused some difficulties earlier. No paper, no calculator, only Excel. Because that's modern times, apparently.
I'm not arguing against that, though, because there has been some teachers who would like you to calculate everything with only your head and perhaps an abacus.
Information technique
Nice name, but it only means making word and excel files. We have made CVs, job applications, grocery lists and whatnot. Too easy. Good thing is that once you're finished, you can leave, and so every class ends at least an hour ahead of schedule.
Communication skills
How to communicate within a group. How to have a meeting. How people communicate. How to perform in front of an audience. Form of teaching is lecture, so a little of that university feel there. There were some theory about communication in a more abstract level, but cannot recall any particulars. Oh well. A bit silly subject.
A few presentations have been made and are to be made. Next one of mine will be a week from now. I'll have it about a theory of Mr. Michel Foucault. Let's see how it goes.
Information acquisition skills
This course was one big essay. First we prepared for the essay by learning how to use school's own database and how to, obviously, seek information from it. Then we wrote a ten to twelve page essay. Mine was about alternative screenwriting. And man, it was hard work. The essay itself is a sort of practice for the literary part of our thesis.
Marketing communication
How to market your product, and to whom. Public relations, and so forth.
Lecturing and theory. Not a lot of practical exercises, which was a bit surprising.
We were to upkeep a blog during the course, which, I admit, was a nice touch.
Art history
As I write this, we've had only one class of art history. So, my thoughts about the course are subject to change. But as it seems, we go through European art history, from prehistory to modern times. Probably, mostly just lectures and Powerpoints. We'll watch a few films and look at art, analyze it and try to be inspired by it. We'll do presentations of a art era and "modernize" a piece of art. Sounds interesting.
The length of this post grows and grows. So, next time I'll write about the more appealing courses, the ones that actually involve a exciting creative process. Like screenwriting ;). Stay tuned.
J.
Those songs that you already own, but are under your radar for a long time, until you discover them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8D6k3LKeMA0
maanantai 23. tammikuuta 2012
keskiviikko 18. tammikuuta 2012
About art and other stuff too
Hi!
Yesterday started my class of art history. Though it remains somewhat fascinating subject (at least more so than mathematics or economics), it's also a bit of a disappointment. Two reasons for that:
#1 It's mostly history of paintings. Paintings (and much, much later, photographs) are, of course, a significant part of visual expression (which we study), but I'd have hoped for history of cinema to go along with it.
I did study a few courses of history of cinema while I was at open university, and I found it exciting.
I think that studying it would have benefited us as much as studying history of paintings.
#2 It's art history of Europe. Mostly. Okay, we live in Europe, but still. They have taught this to us before. We all are familiar with the Baroque and the Rococo and the Renaissance. Can't we be inspired by Japanese, Indian or Chinese art? Or why won't we study the Australian Aboriginal art, when study similar cave art in Europe nonetheless? Oh, Eurocentrism... The things we lose for you.
Anyway. We discussed a little about art. What is art, and so on. We all been through that conversation many times. But I thought I'd share some of my ideas.
It's often said that art is something that creates emotional response with the viewer. Or it's something that makes you think. But stirring emotions or delivering information is not enough, because almost anything can do that:
One can throw a bible in a toilet. You see it, and think "oh, there's a bible in the toilet". But is it art now? No, it's not.
Someone could throw a puppy in the oven, and then take a picture of it. Sure, looking at the puppy in the oven does make you sad. But it only makes you emotionally responsive person. Is the puppy in the oven a piece of art? No. It's a puppy in the oven. Take it off there!
Almost anything can create emotions or thoughts because we humans are feeling and thinking beings. But it's not enough to make to make something art. Existence of a reaction doesn't make the act an art form.
I think that neither is art a object. Not a single painting, film, book, cd or sculpture is art.
People nowadays easily qualify themselves as artists, if they happen to write a novel, or draw a picture, or sing well. And we know why. Being an artist does give one some glamour and prestige.
During the Middle Ages, some really beautiful and fine mosaics, sculptures and paintings were created. Like the one on the left. Surely a fine piece of work like that was created by an artist?
No. At least that's what they thought.
They weren't artists.
They were artisans. Craftsmen.
And they did handicraft, not art.
Ok. Saying that a sculpture like that is handicraft is a bit of a understatement. But the point is still there.
Artists create stuff. Painters and writers are on a same level as carpenters.
Object doesn't become art when it's inside a museum, nor when it's hung on the wall. It becomes a showpiece.
Ok. What then is art?
I think that art is an experience. It's art if I watch it and get "the art experience" out of it.
It's something in between the object and the viewer, but is in neither. Art is a relationship.
I believe it's a bit like catharsis, but not as finished. If catharsis is a finished emotional state, "art experience" is something that ignites the process, and allows catharsis to happen. It's like a little enlightenment.
It's not a single emotion, nor a single idea. It's something greater and only barely perceivable by a mere human in a universe of astonishing beauty. It's what makes us grow towards good as persons.
But it's not a explosion in consciousness. It's a slow, peaceful opening of a door.
Our reactions to it differ. Some cry, others smile.
But if a object creates this art experience, does it make that object an art? Perhaps as individual perceives it. But there's no universal art.
To me, Mona Lisa isn't art. Experts have sold it to the world as the poster child of art, and perhaps that's what stopped it for ever being art for me.
Sure...
It's beautiful.
It's well made.
It's unique.
It has historical value.
But we have to separate beauty, fine craftsmanship, individuality and historical weight from art. They can be a part of artwork, but none of them makes an object art. There's a tons of great songs
Thus, "artist" should be regarded as a honorary title bestowed to few.
Bestowed by individual humans. Not by organisations. Not by experts and not by history. Not by the artist herself.
Today, I'm a mere artisan. But perhaps someday, to someone, I'm an artist.
J.
I heard that Bruce Springsteen will be touring in Finland. Hurrah! Springsteen's earlier show in the summer of '08 is the best gig I've ever been in.
Springsteen has had a huge influence on me. Rarely I've seen or heard art. Perhaps 15 times in my whole life. Here is two of Springsteen's three songs which I can recognize doubtless as works of art. Such a impact they've had in me.
Thunder Road:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJBYWgfIXdw&feature=plcp&context=C3cde139UDOEgsToPDskKU-RCbvFaiF5vvv_b4GlK-
Racing in the Street:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZTQc0-d5lA&feature=plcp&context=C31e4d51UDOEgsToPDskLG8mz71rhO3kL6Shn1orQ0
Yesterday started my class of art history. Though it remains somewhat fascinating subject (at least more so than mathematics or economics), it's also a bit of a disappointment. Two reasons for that:
#1 It's mostly history of paintings. Paintings (and much, much later, photographs) are, of course, a significant part of visual expression (which we study), but I'd have hoped for history of cinema to go along with it.
I did study a few courses of history of cinema while I was at open university, and I found it exciting.
I think that studying it would have benefited us as much as studying history of paintings.
#2 It's art history of Europe. Mostly. Okay, we live in Europe, but still. They have taught this to us before. We all are familiar with the Baroque and the Rococo and the Renaissance. Can't we be inspired by Japanese, Indian or Chinese art? Or why won't we study the Australian Aboriginal art, when study similar cave art in Europe nonetheless? Oh, Eurocentrism... The things we lose for you.
Anyway. We discussed a little about art. What is art, and so on. We all been through that conversation many times. But I thought I'd share some of my ideas.
It's often said that art is something that creates emotional response with the viewer. Or it's something that makes you think. But stirring emotions or delivering information is not enough, because almost anything can do that:
One can throw a bible in a toilet. You see it, and think "oh, there's a bible in the toilet". But is it art now? No, it's not.
Someone could throw a puppy in the oven, and then take a picture of it. Sure, looking at the puppy in the oven does make you sad. But it only makes you emotionally responsive person. Is the puppy in the oven a piece of art? No. It's a puppy in the oven. Take it off there!
Almost anything can create emotions or thoughts because we humans are feeling and thinking beings. But it's not enough to make to make something art. Existence of a reaction doesn't make the act an art form.
I think that neither is art a object. Not a single painting, film, book, cd or sculpture is art.
People nowadays easily qualify themselves as artists, if they happen to write a novel, or draw a picture, or sing well. And we know why. Being an artist does give one some glamour and prestige.
No. At least that's what they thought.
They weren't artists.
They were artisans. Craftsmen.
And they did handicraft, not art.
Ok. Saying that a sculpture like that is handicraft is a bit of a understatement. But the point is still there.
Artists create stuff. Painters and writers are on a same level as carpenters.
Object doesn't become art when it's inside a museum, nor when it's hung on the wall. It becomes a showpiece.
 |
| "Impression: Sunrise" by Monet. Beautiful painting, not art. |
Ok. What then is art?
I think that art is an experience. It's art if I watch it and get "the art experience" out of it.
It's something in between the object and the viewer, but is in neither. Art is a relationship.
I believe it's a bit like catharsis, but not as finished. If catharsis is a finished emotional state, "art experience" is something that ignites the process, and allows catharsis to happen. It's like a little enlightenment.
It's not a single emotion, nor a single idea. It's something greater and only barely perceivable by a mere human in a universe of astonishing beauty. It's what makes us grow towards good as persons.
But it's not a explosion in consciousness. It's a slow, peaceful opening of a door.
Our reactions to it differ. Some cry, others smile.
But if a object creates this art experience, does it make that object an art? Perhaps as individual perceives it. But there's no universal art.
To me, Mona Lisa isn't art. Experts have sold it to the world as the poster child of art, and perhaps that's what stopped it for ever being art for me.
Sure...
It's beautiful.
It's well made.
It's unique.
It has historical value.
But we have to separate beauty, fine craftsmanship, individuality and historical weight from art. They can be a part of artwork, but none of them makes an object art. There's a tons of great songs
Thus, "artist" should be regarded as a honorary title bestowed to few.
Bestowed by individual humans. Not by organisations. Not by experts and not by history. Not by the artist herself.
Today, I'm a mere artisan. But perhaps someday, to someone, I'm an artist.
J.
I heard that Bruce Springsteen will be touring in Finland. Hurrah! Springsteen's earlier show in the summer of '08 is the best gig I've ever been in.
Springsteen has had a huge influence on me. Rarely I've seen or heard art. Perhaps 15 times in my whole life. Here is two of Springsteen's three songs which I can recognize doubtless as works of art. Such a impact they've had in me.
Thunder Road:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJBYWgfIXdw&feature=plcp&context=C3cde139UDOEgsToPDskKU-RCbvFaiF5vvv_b4GlK-
Racing in the Street:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZTQc0-d5lA&feature=plcp&context=C31e4d51UDOEgsToPDskLG8mz71rhO3kL6Shn1orQ0
maanantai 9. tammikuuta 2012
About Exodus, our silent film project
Hello readers!
In the past posts I've mentioned that I've been working on silent film as a part of our studies.
Actually, a few weeks ago I wrote this:
"Our silent film project, which our crew started months ago, has been finished and publicly viewed. It was great and it got great feedback. Among the best, hands down."
I promised to you that I shall write more about making of this film. And here I go.
Our first practical assignment (after some theoretical studies) had indeed been to make a short silent film, to give us understanding on how things work in practice. Our first approach towards making visual productions. Our camera and lighting teacher insisted that those films should be completely understandable without sound (which presented challenges to some groups), and they shouldn't be more than 2-3 minutes long. Otherwise there were no restrictions or supervision. Group members were selected in random.
After a short brainstorming within my group, we settled on an idea of mine about a man who's trapped in a room. But it was my co-workers, A and L, who came up with the idea of this worst-case-of-morning-after-scenario. I was a bit conservative, as I'd harbored my idea for some time, and I always saw it as a sort of tragedy. But their idea had more potential, and I bent. Style of the result is something of a tragicomic.
We finished the script in a few days and soon started filming, and were first group to do so. Our work distribution went so that I directed and edited, A acted and L shot the film.
Our silent film took place almost entirely in a bathroom and we used L's bathroom for it. The place presented some challenges with its tightness. Bathroom was about 2 meters wide and 3 meters long. And into that space we had to fit a camera and its stand, two to three lights with their respective stands, props, actor and camerawoman, and only the actor could be seen in the shot.
What that meant in practice was, that every time I wanted L to shoot from a different angle, we had to move everything to create sufficient room for the camera in its new location.
Every effin' time.
Good thing we decided early on to shoot every scene first from one side, and then the next day from the other, to reduce the unnecessary work to its minimum. Third day of shooting was for supplemental shots.
The highlight of the movie was to be a montage (not the soviet one). First I imagined it to be from a single angle, but in the end we did it from three different ones. The montage was a great success.
In the end, the shootings came together quite nicely. Sure there we some troubles. We had to shoot many scenes again and again until I was satisfied, and the bathroom setting was a bit challenging with the ceramic tiles and reflecting glare. We broke one lamp, and had to wait for some time for a correct weather for the only outdoors shot. Of course the camera's memory card run out in the middle of the shooting. And as said, we had to move all the equipment every time we moved the camera.
But those were minor complaints. Things could have gone much worse. Our team worked together better than I could have hoped for. We finished sooner than other groups had started.
Then came the editing. The part of the movie making I had waited the most. I had done some editing earlier during high school, and fell in love with it. But the editing part was also the hardest. Part of the fault goes to our schedules. We finished shooting so early, that many parts of the editing process was still to be taught. And I was too impatient to wait for others.
For example, we had a ton of material to work with, which is ideal. But I didn't know how to tag or color code material. So, when I wanted to find a specific shot, I either had to rely on my memory, or to scroll through everything we had filmed.
The editing process took longer than the filming. We filmed Exodus within three days, all together about 7-8 hours of work (a lot for a 2-3 minute film). I edited it for more than 10 hours. Partly because I didn't know "the fast way", partly because I am a perfectionist.
A large chunk of time went to color correction. Another thing that was still to be taught, but our Exodus desperately needed color correction, as some shots were very yellowish, others more greenish. So I self-learned how to correct colors, and did it. Yet again, my way wasn't the most efficient or the most accurate, but it eventually got the job done.
I had to slow down, speed up, mix, match and create mirror images of some of the shots, but finally the work was done and I was satisfied. The running time vastly exceeded the instructed 2-3 minutes: Exodus still is 5.5 minutes long.
I thought the title to be "Exit", but A came up with "Exodus", which was so pompous and grand and biblical that we had to choose it. When naming our characters for the credits, A and me came up with another Bible reference, which basically made to whole film into a Bible adaption. Which is funny because earlier when someone asked me what the film was about, I said that we were making a movie version of the Bible.
(Like this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060164/)
Anyway, Exodus was successful. Our teacher liked it very much, and it was among the better silent films our class made.
I think we are supposed to make audio to the flick in the future, but that's yet to pass. I let you know about that process as well.
J.
And here's the silent film itself. I give you... our first silent film... Exodus:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0_rhIgUhfw
In the past posts I've mentioned that I've been working on silent film as a part of our studies.
Actually, a few weeks ago I wrote this:
"Our silent film project, which our crew started months ago, has been finished and publicly viewed. It was great and it got great feedback. Among the best, hands down."
I promised to you that I shall write more about making of this film. And here I go.
Our first practical assignment (after some theoretical studies) had indeed been to make a short silent film, to give us understanding on how things work in practice. Our first approach towards making visual productions. Our camera and lighting teacher insisted that those films should be completely understandable without sound (which presented challenges to some groups), and they shouldn't be more than 2-3 minutes long. Otherwise there were no restrictions or supervision. Group members were selected in random.
After a short brainstorming within my group, we settled on an idea of mine about a man who's trapped in a room. But it was my co-workers, A and L, who came up with the idea of this worst-case-of-morning-after-scenario. I was a bit conservative, as I'd harbored my idea for some time, and I always saw it as a sort of tragedy. But their idea had more potential, and I bent. Style of the result is something of a tragicomic.
We finished the script in a few days and soon started filming, and were first group to do so. Our work distribution went so that I directed and edited, A acted and L shot the film.
Our silent film took place almost entirely in a bathroom and we used L's bathroom for it. The place presented some challenges with its tightness. Bathroom was about 2 meters wide and 3 meters long. And into that space we had to fit a camera and its stand, two to three lights with their respective stands, props, actor and camerawoman, and only the actor could be seen in the shot.
What that meant in practice was, that every time I wanted L to shoot from a different angle, we had to move everything to create sufficient room for the camera in its new location.
Every effin' time.
Good thing we decided early on to shoot every scene first from one side, and then the next day from the other, to reduce the unnecessary work to its minimum. Third day of shooting was for supplemental shots.
The highlight of the movie was to be a montage (not the soviet one). First I imagined it to be from a single angle, but in the end we did it from three different ones. The montage was a great success.
In the end, the shootings came together quite nicely. Sure there we some troubles. We had to shoot many scenes again and again until I was satisfied, and the bathroom setting was a bit challenging with the ceramic tiles and reflecting glare. We broke one lamp, and had to wait for some time for a correct weather for the only outdoors shot. Of course the camera's memory card run out in the middle of the shooting. And as said, we had to move all the equipment every time we moved the camera.
But those were minor complaints. Things could have gone much worse. Our team worked together better than I could have hoped for. We finished sooner than other groups had started.
Then came the editing. The part of the movie making I had waited the most. I had done some editing earlier during high school, and fell in love with it. But the editing part was also the hardest. Part of the fault goes to our schedules. We finished shooting so early, that many parts of the editing process was still to be taught. And I was too impatient to wait for others.
For example, we had a ton of material to work with, which is ideal. But I didn't know how to tag or color code material. So, when I wanted to find a specific shot, I either had to rely on my memory, or to scroll through everything we had filmed.
The editing process took longer than the filming. We filmed Exodus within three days, all together about 7-8 hours of work (a lot for a 2-3 minute film). I edited it for more than 10 hours. Partly because I didn't know "the fast way", partly because I am a perfectionist.
A large chunk of time went to color correction. Another thing that was still to be taught, but our Exodus desperately needed color correction, as some shots were very yellowish, others more greenish. So I self-learned how to correct colors, and did it. Yet again, my way wasn't the most efficient or the most accurate, but it eventually got the job done.
I had to slow down, speed up, mix, match and create mirror images of some of the shots, but finally the work was done and I was satisfied. The running time vastly exceeded the instructed 2-3 minutes: Exodus still is 5.5 minutes long.
I thought the title to be "Exit", but A came up with "Exodus", which was so pompous and grand and biblical that we had to choose it. When naming our characters for the credits, A and me came up with another Bible reference, which basically made to whole film into a Bible adaption. Which is funny because earlier when someone asked me what the film was about, I said that we were making a movie version of the Bible.
(Like this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060164/)
Anyway, Exodus was successful. Our teacher liked it very much, and it was among the better silent films our class made.
I think we are supposed to make audio to the flick in the future, but that's yet to pass. I let you know about that process as well.
J.
And here's the silent film itself. I give you... our first silent film... Exodus:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0_rhIgUhfw
lauantai 7. tammikuuta 2012
About my Christmas holidays
Hello there! Long time, no see!
It's been about a month since I last published anything. I was supposed to write something, but my Christmas holidays have been a bit busy. Soon I will publish a post about our silent film project, Exodus, but in a meantime, I'll tell you a bit about how I've spent my time in the past month or so. Not that I expect you to be interested, but it's a little something something to keep the easily bored ones occupied.
So yeah. I've had quite long Christmas vacation, almost three and a half weeks.
First week I spent in Helsinki. I was supposed to take it easy, but I actually did much work regarding to Protu's 2nd winter camp. Sometimes I planned and wrote stuff for ten hours straight. There went the relaxation.
Then our whole family traveled to our little cabin to spend Christmas there. Like the good old days, though I'm not really a Christmas person. Lots o' nice presents: like external hard drive and Metro 2033 -book and money. It was all good, until a huge storm cut off the electricity.
Straight from our cabin I went to the camp. I enjoyed it very much and it was worth all the stress. I had high hopes, it didn't meet them all, but one of my better camps nevertheless. But I got sick around the half way point, and lost my voice for five days. Not so nice :(.
Now the last week I've spent recovering and relaxing. Played a lot of Metallica with my electric guitar.
I'm planning to go InterRailing the next summer, and I have this over ambitious idea about it. I won't reveal anything more now, but I shall when the time comes.
But that's it for now. Intermission is over. I'm still in Helsinki but shall depart for Virrat tomorrow. A new period is starting and new subjects as well, like "post-production" and "art history". Oh god, I can't believe I study something this cool!
Next time... Exodus...
J.
Hang the DJ.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyJdiE0l23c&ob=av2n
It's been about a month since I last published anything. I was supposed to write something, but my Christmas holidays have been a bit busy. Soon I will publish a post about our silent film project, Exodus, but in a meantime, I'll tell you a bit about how I've spent my time in the past month or so. Not that I expect you to be interested, but it's a little something something to keep the easily bored ones occupied.
So yeah. I've had quite long Christmas vacation, almost three and a half weeks.
First week I spent in Helsinki. I was supposed to take it easy, but I actually did much work regarding to Protu's 2nd winter camp. Sometimes I planned and wrote stuff for ten hours straight. There went the relaxation.
Then our whole family traveled to our little cabin to spend Christmas there. Like the good old days, though I'm not really a Christmas person. Lots o' nice presents: like external hard drive and Metro 2033 -book and money. It was all good, until a huge storm cut off the electricity.
Straight from our cabin I went to the camp. I enjoyed it very much and it was worth all the stress. I had high hopes, it didn't meet them all, but one of my better camps nevertheless. But I got sick around the half way point, and lost my voice for five days. Not so nice :(.
Now the last week I've spent recovering and relaxing. Played a lot of Metallica with my electric guitar.
I'm planning to go InterRailing the next summer, and I have this over ambitious idea about it. I won't reveal anything more now, but I shall when the time comes.
But that's it for now. Intermission is over. I'm still in Helsinki but shall depart for Virrat tomorrow. A new period is starting and new subjects as well, like "post-production" and "art history". Oh god, I can't believe I study something this cool!
Next time... Exodus...
J.
Hang the DJ.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyJdiE0l23c&ob=av2n
Tilaa:
Blogitekstit (Atom)