cinematographic techniques correlated to audience reaction?
Posted 26 April 2007 - 06:13 AM
Posted 26 April 2007 - 10:53 AM
As for the low-angle making someone look bigger and thus more imposing relative to a sitting figure, for example, that's just a logical assumption. Low-angles make objects look taller or obviously suggest the POV of someone in a lower position than the object.
Many compositional principles predate cinema. For example, obviously the larger figure in a frame has more visual weight and importance than a smaller figure, hence why powerful actors fight so hard over the relative size of their faces in the posters for a movie.
There are many cinematic devices where after 100 years, audiences "read" them more or less correctly through repetition. The cliche would be a watery dissolve to a character's past memory as you hear a harp playing... the majority of viewers know that a flashback is coming when they see that happening.
Posted 26 April 2007 - 03:56 PM
Posted 26 April 2007 - 04:27 PM
Posted 26 April 2007 - 10:15 PM
A camera positioned behind a hedge, watching a character makes us feel as if the characters being watched. Sure, these moves are engrained in filmmaker's minds. However, I don't think any study can actually define each technique perfectly, since directors are always shooting in different ways and trying to be unique, which is what I like to see.
Plus, that'd be pretty damn boring if you're watching a slow steadicam shot in a deserted area and KNEW beforehand that something wasn't right, or was about to go wrong, etc.