Ken burns effect sample from a few threads ago?

Out of context: Reply #4

  • Started
  • Last post
  • 8 Responses
  • pr2-7

    Actually it has nothing to do with Ken Burns. THIS effects was first used on "Kid Stays In the Picture" documentary (2002).

    Make sure to comprehend that by manipulating photographic artifacts you destroy the credibility of those artifacts so if the aim of your doc is to search for truth than in turn you destroy credibility of your documentary in the eyes of the ones who care and understand power of visual communication (yes, there is a few of us out there).

    pr2 -7Permalink
    UpvoteDownvote
    Flag
    • r u hidoesnotexist
    • morning sunshine!sea_sea
    • Good point.nb
    • Of course, then we can spend all day debating whether the "artifact" contains any real truth. Photos not being truth, etc.nb
    • Manipulated photos are even less "truth" worthy.pr2
    • Are they? They might be perceived as less "truth" but in reality every scene is manipulated by the person who took it, and who selected the photo, not just how it is presented.nb
    • took the photo, and by the person that selected the photo, plus the manner in which it is presented.nb
    • You can be cynical like that and presume that if nothing can be true then there is no point in making any statements/points. Still manipulating those images even more takes you yet further apart from truth.pr2
    • statements. Still manipulating those images even more takes you yet further apart from truth.pr2
    • Further from the truth, perhaps. But if the original image was misleading (at best) does it make a difference?nb
    • If you start with: majority of images are nothing but lies, then yes; if you start with: majority have significant portion of truth than no.pr2
    • portion of truth than no.pr2
    • a photograph is always a lie anyways...are you all smoking the same shit?doesnotexist
    Show [[ numHiddenNotes ]] more notesAdd Note
    SaveCancel

View thread