ERIC Number: ED420089
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 1997
Possible Criteria for Evaluating Shakycam.
The pressure to produce products assures thoughtless imitation and replication in video production. As J. Lynch (1984) observed of the early music video industry, "they borrow the techniques of Dada, Surrealism, and abstract film, and as K. Dieckmann (1985) concurs, the "commercialized industry takes up avant-garde practices to sell products." Those instructors who are obliged to discuss, demonstrate, and evaluate media production practices are burdened with the need and responsibility to define and even quantify such practices. How does an instructor critique the use of such imaging variables as black and white, and Steadicam versus "shakycam?" The shakycam image, also referred to as "the film school look," appears erratic and unplanned. Distinguishing good and appropriate shakycam from bad or inappropriate shakycam requires discerning some form of positive and constructive communication aesthetic within that which appears to be random or thoughtlessly anarchic. "The film school look" might result from a neophyte camera user's lack of bodily motor control and skill in obtaining a desired image composition. An experienced camera user will inevitably develop a sense of composition in accordance with established guidelines. What "authentic" shakycam might exhibit is a camera movement that mimics eye movement. From a production aesthetics standpoint, it is possible to distinguish between good and bad shakycam and other reflexive techniques. A consideration of the fundamental characteristics of perceptual and cognitive processes can provide support for understanding how these techniques function. (NKA)
Publication Type: Guides - Non-Classroom; Opinion Papers
Education Level: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A