digital cinema in dslr

Dave Stump
David Stump, Director of Visual Effects & Photography
Los Angeles California USA

©2010 CreativeCOW.net. All rights reserved.


Article Focus:
Dave Stump ASC explores the innovations and limitations of DSLR cameras and offers his insights into how and when to work with them successfully.



Dave Stump, ASC, has spent over 20 years as a director of photography, a visual effects supervisor and VFX DP. Along the way, he won an Academy Award® for Scientific and Technical Achievement. Add his position as Chair of the Camera Subcommittee of the American Society of Cinematographers Technical Committee to the mix, and you have a unique combination: a rigorous, scientific mind with direct responsibility for evaluating new cameras and technologies for his peers in the ASC, and a guy who is used to doing whatever it takes to get the shot -- the scholarly and the practical.

In his role as Rigorous Scientific Guy, Dave has been part of the Camera Assessment Series (CAS), jointly produced by the ASC, the Producer's Guild of America, and Revelations Entertainment, which is the production company founded by Morgan Freeman and Lori McCreary. The goal is simple: to shoot demanding scenes with the industry's highest-end cameras, side-by-side, to illustrate their strengths and weaknesses.

[Ed. note: Robert Primes, ASC, described the CAS in Creative COW Magazine's "Blue Ribbon Awards" issue, and how DSLRs stack up, in an article called DSLRs: A Time Exposure.]

We knew that Dave has heard reports from his peers in the ASC that are using DSLRs and has been taking a closer look at them for his own work. We asked him how well these new cameras hold up for digital cinema, both technically and in practice. This article contains some of the observations he made during a recent conversation.

We brought a Canon 5D Mark II along on some of the Camera Assessment Series setups, but it was never intended to be part of the actual primary testing, because the CAS had strict criteria that excluded it. Among the rules: the participating cameras have to be commercially available, have to have shot commercial motion picture work, and have to have 4:4:4 capability. But we did actually sneak one in alongside a couple of setups, just so that we could see what there is to the craze.

Unofficially, it was an interesting experience to see them included in side-by-side testing of the material. There is obviously some pretty interesting stuff being shot with DSLRs in those commercial motion picture and television work -- but I find that the backend workflow for the screen leaves a lot to be desired. The codecs for handling material from DSLRs are pretty low in color bit depth, and fairly high in compression, and there are not many options to derive higher quality for large screen use of the images.

There are also limitations for using DSLRs on set. For example, there is not much in terms of video tap output for monitoring while shooting.

They are also difficult to keep in focus unless you put cine lenses on them. And when you put a cine lens on, if you don't connect the camera to some kind of fairly rigid platform, focusing with a cine-style focuser actually deflects the camera. You get a snap-jerk to the image -- just by virtue of the camera's light weight, and of the torque of the focus puller's arm -- focusing the darn thing. Unless you get the camera connected to something, focusing will actually point the camera down and away or up and away. It's as if the light weight works against you in some scenarios.

For the shooting itself, DSLRs are yielding good latitude -- not as great as the highest-end digital cinema cameras, of course, and certainly not as good as film. But there's some very powerful image processing going on inside those cameras. They have done a lot of dark subtraction work to quiet those sensors down, and can make them very quiet in the blacks.

But for now, you can really only output HD for motion imaging from DSLRs. You can't get the full benefit of the resolution of the sensor to do motion picture RAW work with any of them. I don't know if anybody has hacked that yet, but it really would be a lot more valuable to be able to derive for motion pictures the same resolution in RAW format that you can for still images from those same cameras.

And truthfully, while the images generally look really good, the right image criteria is going to stress the sensor -- or at least stress the QuickTime output wrapper -- and you will get some color aliasing.

So it's just an absolute mystery why manufacturers haven't purposely designed these DSLRs as digital cinema cameras, based on the technology that's already in them. I think that companies like Canon have an enormous potential for building awesome digital cinema cameras, but they don't seem inclined to go that way... or at least I haven't seen them, or anyone else, SEEM to be inclined to lean that way yet.


EVALUATION

The thing that I always keep in mind when I evaluate the trend towards using DSLRs is the same thing I keep in mind when evaluating any new camera: I don't have a judgment about it one way or the other. It's just another tool in the toolbox for certain kinds of shots.

What it really is, is an indicator -- a barometer of what cinematographers want. They want a camera that is smaller, lighter and easier to use, and that produces better looking pictures. The Canon 5D Mark II is the size that people wish the Sony F35 could be. If you could get that kind of performance in such a small package, then the result becomes the cinematographer's dream camera.

That has always been true. In the 40s and 50s, we shot movies and TV on big, heavy Mitchell BNCR's. And then along came ARRIFLEX (For image and more information please view Gary Adcock's article, "Digital Cinema Comes of Age.") with this amazing but noisy little thing called the 2C, which was sort of a byproduct World War 2. Everybody jumped in and had to have one, because it was so much smaller and lighter, and yeah, who cares about the racket it makes? Now we can handhold the camera!

That was a revolution -- but it's a revolution that a lot of people have forgotten about. It really is the same revolution that the Canon 5D Mark II has created. In that respect, it is already a big success.


NOT JUST "POTENTIAL" VALUE

We don't need to limit our conversation about DSLRs in digital cinema to their future potential. I think that DSLRs have a lot of value right now.

For example, I do a lot of visual effects work. I can use these cameras to get a shot that nobody has ever seen before. Say I was going to put a camera out on some train tracks to get run over by a train: I wouldn't put an ALEXA out there. I wouldn't put a RED out there, but I can go to a producer in good conscience and say, "I can get the plate that we need by putting a Canon 5D Mark II out on the railroad tracks, and running over it with a train."


There are also times when it helps to have stealth in your toolbox. You can get a shot that, if you were there with a film camera or with an F35, you might have problems. If you are doing a wide shot in a public place, people might shy away from it, or they might just stare into it. You might even attract the ire of the local authorities, whereas if you are just standing there with a still camera on a tripod, you can gather an establishing shot of traffic going by for a movie or a TV show, fairly efficiently, without interference, and without attracting too much attention. To me, that's extremely useful.

There are numerous television shows that have been employing them to great effect. That is what has led to things like an entire episode of "House, MD" being shot with DSLRs [by Gale Tattersal, ASC], and episodes of "24" [by Rodney Charters, ASC].

I personally am not inclined to try and shoot a whole television show with a DSLR. But there are guys who want to be out there, on the hairy edge. This is sort of what they're doing to stay in the avant-garde. They're shooting entire TV shows, and even moving into features with the Canon 5D Mark II. I think it has that kind of value. I personally might never do that, but I honor those who would.


THE CINEMATOGRAPHER'S RESPONSIBILITY

I have done some of my own testing with the Canon 5D Mark II, and I really enjoy shooting with it. As with any new camera, I enjoy finding its unique characteristics.

To me, one of the responsibilities of a cinematographer is to know how to use all the tools available, so that you can let the script and the story and the circumstances tell you which camera to use, rather than just picking a camera that you have a comfort level with.

It obeys a really old axiom, that when the only tool you own is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. If you know only one kind of camera, then every job you do looks like a job for that camera. But ultimately, what we learned from CAS is that every camera has its strengths and weaknesses. If you let the job tell you which camera to use, rather than just your knowledge of only one camera, then you are ultimately doing the greatest service to your producer.

The thing that I think about most is my responsibility to the projects that I do. Sometimes part of the job description entails that you're here to save them from themselves. In the same respect that it's possible to spend too much money on a project, it's also possible to spend too little. Making the right choice palatable and desirable is a delicate dance.

Ultimately, a question that you must ask your producer and your director, as a responsible cinematographer is, "What is your expectation of the shelf life of this product that we are creating? How hard do you want me to work to make this product future-proof?"

By knowing and educating myself on a lot of different camera systems, I can make a choice. There's an important distinction to be made here. If I only know one camera system, I can't make a choice. I can only decide to use the tool that I know.

I can't choose some of the others that might work better, if I don't know what they are.






Dave Stump, ASC has worked as a DP, effects cinematographer and VFX supervisor on dozens of films including Quantum of Solace, X-men and X-men 2, The Bourne Identity, Army of Darkness, Star Trek: First Contact, Batman Forever and many more. He chairs the American Society of Cinemtagraphers subcommittees on Cameras, and Metadata.

In 2000, Dave was part of a team that received a Technical Achievement Award from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences® for hand-development of advanced camera data capture systems, which he describes in his first article for Creative COW Magazine, Metadata and The Future of Filmmaking. There, Dave describes a possible future for filmmaking -- faster, less expensive, and more creative -- as cameras and metadata come together.

synopsis of a work in progress film

Narrative Synopsis

The main objective of the film is to trace out the image- making process which is quite unique with an identity of its own. Pithora painting is a comprehensive understanding of mundane needs and depiction of creation myth. The vicinity of the process is the construction of narrative in a ritualistic manner - a performed art form to thank god or a boon to be granted

Pithora painting is the premise of the film to analytically observe the contemporary life and expression of indigenous genre of image making. The film has three parts to deal extensively with the image-making processes of three different members of the same adivasi community.

Part-1

The priest, Badvo (painter, head of the village) the master craftsman of the village

In this part the traditional process of making pithora been shown along with the rituals and songs which accompany the act. The iconography of the Pithora along with the social placement of the tribe will be depicted. This will be visualized by juxtaposing the myth and painted stories on the wall. At the same time the Badvo is a curious follower of traveling talkies. The film begins with an introduction of arrival of travelling talkies in a mela (village fare) where the Badvo is a curious observer of it. Later the film moves to the preparation of the wall for making Pithora ... Subsequently the life and myth of Pithora making is narrated through the eye of the Badvo .

Part-II

Japani –a story teller on canvas

Thirty two year old Japani is the daughter of Jangadh Singh Shyam- the tribal artist who committed suicide in Japan while working in a private gallery. Japani lives in Bhopal and participates in art campus all over India. She paints on canvas but greatly follows tribal motives and iconography for narration. She is a follower of television programs


Part-III

Ganshyam-in search of virtual dreams

This part deals with the fantasies of Ghanshyam, who is a fifteen year old boy and comes to the capital city Ahemadabad to study image manipulating softwares adobe photoshop, corel draw etc

He is a fan of Bollywood films. His images are mostly influenced by tribal style but there is a presence of Bollywood narration in all his expression.
.

1-Existence of ‘Adivasi’ or Dalit community as an entity - an entry point for the film concept. 2-Folk-form as a categorical imperative within human mind which could be evolved as an art work by any community or group. 3- The relation between environment and material. 4-Indian tradition of artistic activity enhancing mythical (non-linear) time and space. Folk form of practice as a domain for alternate representation/reality


Director’s note

as the time progresses beyond the light and darkness
as the steps lead to the mountain
by listening to the oral folk tale
the weathering mind seek the hero in the colors
are they there still?
does the chromium light change the skin color
are they in search of a dismantled rainbow
my anguish is the realization of a celluloid dream
a ribbon get ridden off
ribbon itself is a rainbow the immense potential of narratives impeded on the painted wall echoes the fantasies and imagination of a community, a community self contented with beliefs and practices. My fantasy of following a rainbow destined me in the brown sunlight spread landscape of stories. once again ears and eyes followed the origin and destination of the words flown from mouths . That was the beginning of a new parable …may be that is the parable I am trying to confirm through three different image makers. There is always three different levels of consumption and depiction of pithora such as traditional, legendary or mythological and contemporary. These three different people philosophically represent the three different levels - the badvo priest and master craftsman, japani the thirty two year old daughter of a tribal artist who committed suicide in Japan where he was commissioned to paint in a private gallery, japon herself is an artist who paints traditional motifs on canvas. The third is a fifteen year old boy who works as a computer trainee in Ahemadabad (the capital city of the state) and expresses his fantasies in photoshop and other image making software

All three of them belong to the same tribe of rathwas.

One line synopsis

The film traces artistic lineages of Adivasis of North Western India through a dialogical narrative mapping their mainstream myths and its representation in paintings.

followed a woman thorough the window of

my seven story apartment on a full moon night

she was blowing in the air in blues
the stars appears below on the road
as well as far in the sky scrapers


i followed her following the smell
it was all silent till i feel her skin

suddenly

i woke up in to another morning of mumbai with a survival instincts
on the road traffic already began the orchestration

Act-1

I am still learning

Born March 30, 1746
Fuendetodos, Zaragoza Spain
Died April 15, 1828
Bordeaux, France




I am Goya!... I am the voice Of war, the charred wood of towns...

I am the throat of the woman who’s hanged body, like a bell,

Clanged over the empty square...I am Goya!

By Andrei Voznesensky





The self portrait image above is a an ink-wash drawing Goya did at near the age of fifty. The original is in the metropolitan museum of Art in New York City.


During the time that Goya lived and painted, Spain, the place of his birth, went through repeated upheaval and periods of extreme violent crisis. He lived through the political dysfunction of changing leadership in Spain, the revival of the Inquisition, military occupation of Spain by France, and the installment of Napoleon's brother Joseph Bonaparte as the King of Spain.
Afterwards, when the oppressive Spanish King Ferdinand VII was reinstated as monarch, Goya was "officially rehabilitated" along with other Spanish notables, but this situation was pre-empted by another revolution (1820), in which general Rafael Riego led insurgents against the King, and put in place a new government and liberal constitution. However, with military backing, King Ferdinand was back in power by 1822.
Despite the fact he was named to the highest privileged position for an artist in Spain, "First Painter to the King," Goya, as did many others, left the country in a search for stability. Though he would return on trips to the Spain he had lived in for most of his eighty-some years, Goya died an exile in Bordeaux, France.
Goya has often been accused by some writers for an apparent misanthropy and general bitterness toward the world. They overlook that Goya's work repetitiously disdains cruelty, arrogance, and savagely attacks - - sometimes with satire, but often with blunt reportage - - the venal practices of the powerful people he knew. That Spain was in Goya's affections is not disputable; but that he harbored a loathing for the weaknesses and the proud cruelties, the moral chaos and the failure of intellectual ideals that added to the chaos, is discernible in the evolution of Goya's approach to presenting images, and chiefly in his choices of subject matter. He was, above all, an artist, and as a man, one who learned about the failures around him by experiencing them himself.

"His analysis in paint, chalk and ink of mass disaster and human frailty
pointed to someone obsessed with the chaos of existence..."


From the book on Goya

by Sarah Symmons (1998).


Act-2

Room and the wall as space of expression


In this session I am dealing with series of work done by goya in 1820 which are known as black paintings .they are all the sort of hidden expressions on the walls of the houses he lived series dark and oppressive imageries
Thisis more art history oriented writing with reference of art historical writing on black paintings .later in the act 3 I will compare and probe in to cinematic transformation of these paintings


The anxiety and danger in which Goya lived duringthe years prior to 1820, and also in the years following the restorationof the King’s absolute power, were the reasons for his not havingPublished them, and that, in order to protect himself from any possible danger that might result from their interpretation, he only kept a series of proofs, to which he gave these vague titles, under the general heading of Disparities, so as to render them completely inoffensive.

They thereby became totally devoid of comment or criticism mere disparate even though initial purpose may have been to criticize actual deeds or events.
Their meaning would only be apparent to thosewho knew his own hidden thoughts and opinions concerning the politicalsituation of the time. The same spirit lay behind them as lay behind thepaintings on the walls of the two rooms in his Quinta property: the?black paintings?, so called because of the dominance of that colour.

This property, from the bill of sale dated 27 February 1819, consistedof some ten hectares of cultivated ground and a small house, situated onthe far side of the Manzanares, with extensive views over the city. The house was enlarged by Goya, and he himself decorated two rooms in this extension, one on each of its two floors. One was intended to be used asa reception room, and the other as a dining room. He painted them in away that was unusual by any standards, since, from a technical point ofview, it is extremely rare for oil paints to be applied directly toplain whitewashed walls. It is also a technique that renders the painthighly susceptible to deterioration.



The fourteen paintings that comprise the two groups were completed afterhis serious illness in 1820. The mysterious quality of the differentscenes depicted and the fact that their meaning is so hard to interpret,does not mean that they developed piecemeal as work progressed, with noprevious overall plan. In the inventory drawn up by Brugada after Goya’sdeath, mention is made of seven small preparatory sketches, which showsthat he prepared this decorative scheme with the same care that he gaveall his other works.

In fact, a number of small sketches have recentlycome to light that may well have been done by Goya, and it is possiblethat they are the same ones that Brugada came across while preparing hisinventory.



Personally, I am unconvinced by the various attempts to explain the two groups of paintings in terms of their philosophical and symbolic meaning, but there does undoubtedly exist a relationship between thedifferent compositions, and in order to interpret them?to read them?we must examine precisely the way in which they relate physically one toanother, both side by side and face to face. It also seems certain thatthe underlying feeling which Goya gave the paintings was linked to hisrelationship with Leocadia Weiss, a young and beautiful woman, who wasliving with him at the time, as well as to a conscious awareness of hisold age, the inevitability of death and a general disillusionment withlife and his fellow men. Ail these elements combined to make him paintthese great, nightmarish compositions. Their colouring is not black there are other shades and tones, which combine to produce anoverpowering feeling of gloom, nowadays further accentuated by thecondition of the paintings. Black however, would certainly describe Goya’s mental state as revealed by the pictures, which can only be described as reflections of deep-seated pessimism. We have no alternative but to interpret them by using the titles given them by his family, which we know through Brugada’s inventory and a later description of the pictures by Yriarte. Both of these sources agree with each other on all the main points and they confirm that the traditional titles were still being used by the family in 1867.



In the room on the ground floor, on each side of the main door, theinventories state that there were two portraits, of the master andmistress of the house, with, on the left hand side, la Leocadia thiswas the name by which Leocadia Weiss, the woman who lived with Goya, was commonly known - leaning against a mound surmounted by a low railing,which must be interpreted as belonging to a grave (pages 147, 148- 149).

it is also possible that the pose was derived from an engraving by Ribera, known as The Poet. On the right are the Two Old Men, one ofWhat is certain is that on the walls opposite the door into the room, oneach side of the window, we again encounter the two protagonists, hiddenbehind the cloak of their symbolic representation: Leocadia appears as Judith, an obvious allusion to the latter?s victory over Holofernes by virtue of beauty and treachery, while Goya appears as Saturn eating one of his children. Saturn symbolizes melancholy and the passing hours devoured by him. It has recently been suggested on the basis of early photographs that Saturn appeared with his member erect, a representationhich would give a clear picture of the reasons for the liaison with Leocadia: a picture completed by the portrait of Judith and Holofernes.

If that was indeed the case, then Goya’s relationship with Leocadia through those long, lonely years,could be explained by a combination of his desire for her and a terror of becoming her victim, as Holofernes had become the victim of Judith.
Next m Leocadia, on the main wall, was a portrayal of /The Witches Sahbath, /in which the Devil appears as a horned goat, surrounded by his female disciples, all of them hags, except for the enigmatic figure of a young woman, almost a child, who bears no relation to the bestial conclave in which she finds herself. The significance of this figure inthe composition, however, remains a mystery.



On the opposite side of the room was the /Pilgrimage of St. Isidorein which groups of people and couples wander throughan arid landscape in the far distance, while in the foreground a groupof young figures are singing at the top of their voices. If one comparesthis scene with that of the Meadow of St. Isidore paintedin 1788, the extent of

Goya's profound spiritual transformation becomes immediately apparent.The latter exudes all the joie de vivre of a spring evening, with the buildings of Madrid bathed in a pink and white light in the distance,and the majos and majas picnicking and chatting on the grass. InQuinta del Sordo, in the painting that both inventories describe as
Pilgrimage of St. Isidore the countryside is scorched and the men wander aimlessly through it. The joie de vivre has become melancholy,with an element of violent anguish in the expressions of the frenzied singers in the foreground. Between la leocadia and the counterpartportrait of Goya, above the door, was the painting of Two Old MerrEating, probably an illusion to the door?s function: it may well have been the one through which dishes from the kitchen were brought in.



In order to visualize the appearance of either room, we must bear in mind what Yriarte wrote, and also what the paintings themselves tell us.The rooms were of very modest dimensions?, which would have made the figures in the paintings seem larger: certainly larger than they now appear in the museum in which they are housed. This would also have made them appear even more overpowering. It should be remembered, too, that,according to the inventories, the furniture was upholstered in yellow,which would have further emphasized the gloominess of the paintings, as would the matching yellow curtains that in all probability framed the doors and windows.



In the case of the first floor room, we have not been able to establish such clear links between the different compositions, but undoubtedly the overall theme was that of death, and, as has already been said, the significance of each painting would have been enhanced by its physical relationship to others in the group.

To the left of the door was Atropos or The Fates a picture that still remains an

Enigma there are, as is well known, only three Fates, but what, then,is the identity of the fourth figure, whose wrists appear to be bound?

The next scene, on the other side of the door or window, was the one called The Strangers or Cowherds in the inventories, which iscommonly known as The Fight with Cudgels. It shows two men fighting with cudgels, locked in mortal combat and imprisoned up to their knees in mud or sand. In painting this composition, Goya was recalling Saavedro Fajardos 75th allegory or 'emblem', Bellum colligrit qui discordias seminat, which, according to the authors interpretation,means: 'Medea sows [in order to prepare for the theft of the GoldenFleece the teeth of serpents ... and squadrons of armed men spring forth, who, fighting amongst each other, are destroyed...'. Theengraving of the scene shows a fight between men who seem to be buried up to their waists or half submerged in water. Saavedra went on to clarify his allegory by explaining how some Princes stir up discord, and thereby find themselves faced by wars and unrest within their countries.

By fermenting disharmony, they think they will be able to enjoy peace and quiet, but things turn out quite contrary to their designs. At thetime that Goya was recalling this allegory, it could well have been applied to the policies of Ferdinand Vll and to Spanish politics in general.

Opposite the wall of the entrance door, on both sides of the door orwindow, were the compositions of Two Men, as it is called in Brugadas inventory, or The Poiticians, as Yriarte describes it, and Two Women or, alternatively, /Two Women laughing their heads off The latter painting, which shows two women laughing at a man indulging in the vice of Onan, would seem to hold the key to the meaning of both works. The incessant talk of the politicians, one of whom is reading a newspaper that they seem to be passing comment on amongst themselves, was perhaps, in Goya?s eyes, as sterile as the solitarypleasure which the women are making fun of.



On the wall to the right of the entrance.door, which must have beendivided by a door or window, were the Pilgrimage to the Fountain of St.Isidoreand Asmodea. Asmodea is spelled with the feminine a ending, rather rhan as Asmodeus the conventional spelling for the evil slayer of husbands, but we do not know the reason for this change of gender; nor do we know why she is shown flying over groups of warring soldiers or what significance there is in the mountain that dominates the scene in the background. In the case of the Pilgrimage (also known

as the Holy Off ice), however, with its figures in 17th century dress,we can assume rhat there is a connection with the steps taken by Ferdinand Vll to revive the inquisition soon after his restoration to the throne. This was an anti-liberal measure, which Goya seems to haveclassified as anachronistic by the old-fashioned dress he gave the black-clad man on the right, with his large collar, like the ones worn during the 16th and 17th centuries. There is also an implicit criticism in the grotesque way that he has portrayed the monks in the procession.

Finally, next to the door was the most enigmatic of all the paintings:The Dog, whose significance Yriarte clarified by defining it as A Dog fghting against the Current /(page 147). Perhaps this is how Goya saw his own situation: as a dog who was barely able to keep his head above the water or the sand, a personificarion of the proverbial ?swimming against the current?. We have already stated on several occasions that these murals in La Quinta were conceived in the same spirit as the Proverbs. there are also a number of other, small compositions that were inspired by the same sentiments: the four in Besancon Museum, for example, and other series, of which four are in the museum in Munich and two are in Spanish collections

All of these contain certain elements that link them thematically to some of the lithographs of the same period. As far as portraits from this time are concerned,
their scarcity indicates Goya?s growing isolation, since the only onesthat he did paint were of his closest friends: men such as Dr. Arrieta,who, as has already been mentioned, appears in a portrait along with the artist himself, and also Ramon Satue and Tiburcio Pe?rez Cuervo, in whose house Rosario Weiss took refuge, and DonJose?Duaso

in whose home the artist himself sought refuge during the early months of 1824, when he felt that he was in danger of arraignment. As well as these, he did a portrait drawing of Francisco Otin, Duaso?s nephew,and an extremely fine portrait of Maria Martinez de Puga, about whom we know nothing, but in whose portrait, by his sober composition and his brilliant use of black, Goya achieved a monumental quality similar to that of his later Bordeaux portraits.

i edit therefore i am

preface

What is happening to me
Am I back in to a realm once I lived and then left
Am I so conscious of my words and virtues of the uttered words
This is the time for changes and resolutions
Taking a walk in the morning through the memoirs of time past
Wouldn't come in use to get riedoff of memoirs
Past appears in presence
When the sky behind hostel turns red
When the birds settle on the branches of tree
The shadows gather under wisdom tree
For their stories and celebrations
There are sounds and images of all emotions
Alcohol takes away the boredom
Life becomes a journey through variable mind space and moods
There are many things left untold
There are many accusations of violence
But beside all these
Life is a valuable hutch pot
Has less to do with untold stories
Because it is changing time
We all bound to tell stories
My story is all about cut
i wonder weather a cut can hurt
How this word could find a common tolerable value In the technical vocabulary of editing process
Is the cut a mark ??
Something synonymous to the marks on body
Are they the reminisce ??
Are they the axing points of time choppers

I think I just trip over the scribbles with a genuine idea of writing something
I dedicate the essay to all the good memoirs and alcoholic mad days in ftii
I obliged great to people and machines in the relam of great value and virtues
Shall I say thanks or I say I have memoirs


Introduction

My attempt here is to look at a painting by goya and make an essay on the cinematic adaptation of it

The subject matter I am dealing is the the role of editing in the process of transforming a static image in to a continues rolling narration

The methodology adopted here for the study is the comparison of different media

That is cinema and painting

The whole essay is formulated as four acts –a deliberate activity to bring the activity of separation as an inevitable element in all the media

Probably claim for the presence of an invisible editor who exists there in every day life participate actively in all activates

Here the bell rings for the first curtain raise


Act-1

A painter who edits images for constructing a narrative


continues......

are the fingers are capable to expand the communication
by taping on the key boards !!??

by pressing the enter are we entering to unknown realm ??

are we in search of the for bidden desires ?

many windows are open to the infinite

but many doors are closed

tak..tak..tak...

delight ,delicacies of a night rider