“Neither created nor destroyed”

Published date
Resource type
Research committee, Albert Laurence School of Communication Arts, Assumption University
Call no.
Other identifier(s)
Copyrighted date
File type
6 pages
Other title(s)
Other Contributor(s)
The 2nd CA Creative Work Faculty Showcase 2016 "Sufficiency", 62-67
Degree name
Degree level
Degree discipline
Degree department
Degree grantor
Table of contents
Last year, my creative work was about “complex illustration”. I tried to apply complex design theory, often used to cre- ate inseparable combination marks (em- blem), to an illustration instead of a logo. The result is a “complex illustration” where each parts cannot be separated from one another. Since my favorite medium has al- ways been film, I contemplated since last year how to apply this complexity design theory to motion pictures. The differences between a design that is complicated and complex, according Ju- rgen Appelo, is as follows. When some- thing is complicated, it has many parts, but each parts can be taken out to examine (a car, a computer, a network of roads), but something that is complex cannot be taken apart without disrupting the whole thing (crowds, cooking process, a detailed rug). So a complex film should not be able to be taken apart and must always come with the full chunk or else it lost its mean- ing. The “parts” in context of film I think can be applied to the “shots”. Film is something that is unique from oth- er types of 2 dimensional medium (paint- ing, photograph, illustration, etc.) in that it is not just the composition and design elements within the frame that contains the meaning of the work, but the order in which the shots are arranged must also be considered. Series of shots edited in a dif- ferent way can tell an entirely new story, as demonstrated by a Russian filmmak- er Lev Kuleshov. He came up with what film students know as the “Kuleshov Ef- fect” where a meaning of a shot change depends on the content of another shots that come before and after. For example, let say I have Shot A, showing an ABAC student sitting on a bench, looking straight at a camera, smiling and nodding. Now, if a shot that came immediately afterward shows another student accepting an award from the school’s president, then Shot A’s meaning is that the boy was happy for his friend. But, if shot B is a clip of a girl trip and fell, and her skirt flew open. Shot A, still the same clip of a boy smiling and nod- ding, would change the meaning of who the boy is entirely. So for this research, I decided to focus on the sequence of the shots rather than managing other elements within the frame. Before finding a way to connect an en-tire movie inseparably, I wanted to start by focusing on two shots. How do I make two shots inseparable? The first and easi- est thing that came to mind was to use a cutting technique called a Cross-dissolve, where a shot slowly loses its opacity as the next shot become clearer, and of course, the two shots are seen overlapping at some point. By doing this, no one can cut out the shots completely from another. I am tempted to use this technique, but it has become a clichéd in the digital film era to use cross dissolve. I decided to look at another types of shot transition called a Match Cut, when happened when a move- ment that occurred in a shot continue into another shot that is actually a scene change.
Spatial Coverage
This work is protected by copyright. Reproduction or distribution of the work in any format is prohibited without written permission of the copyright owner.
Access rights
Rights holder(s)
View External Resources