April 19, 2010

new/more






2 comments:

Jacki | April 22, 2010 at 4:39 AM

Monica,
These are so intriguing. I think you found something with these ones, especially the last two. It does something mystical and somewhat magical to the house. The last one just gets to me. Since I cannot recognize your fingers too well, it makes me question the distance of the house, the framing of it and how it is still seen in whole when the windows are visible around the inside view. The third one down too, that one just gets me. I will write more about these after I think of what I can gather from these.

Jacki | April 25, 2010 at 9:20 PM

Monica,
I think what I was thinking came into flourish in class the other day. What is interesting to me about these is that (like Shane said), de-glorifies these houses. I think it's so interesting how people put so much into their appearance of their house, but especially in the city, it can only be seen/appreciated in full at a distance. These peep hole shots allow them to be de-glorified and literally not bigger than a pinch of the fingers.

I would agree with Chris and try to find different peepholes to experiment with, if you can. I think you have something with a lot of potential here. There is something very intriguing about showing your fingers in the shot (s) also.

With the peephole perspective, it literally gives the viewer the advantage of seeing how ridiculous a normally glorified house would be.

Post a Comment