Posted 28 July 2005 - 11:41 AM
Posted 28 July 2005 - 11:56 AM
Posted 28 July 2005 - 12:10 PM
Narration certainly does not have to follow the visuals in the same context. Narration exists for the same reason that visuals exist- to relay information. Narration should offer additional information that is otherwise unsupported in you film or used to reiterate points or ideas. It can be used to contrast the visuals to relay a certain mood or idea or comment. There really is no limit to the function of narration, just as there are any number of ways that visuals can work for any given shot or scene.
The main function of a documentary is to be true to both you subject and your audience and to represent both with as much accuracy (not necessarily factual) as possible.
Posted 29 July 2005 - 09:26 AM
Drew-town, It's funny how one needs to hear these words of clarity once and awhile when in the thick of things. it seems funny how one can loose the vast perspective one has regarding all other works of art but when dealing with ones one sometimes one can get confused along the way. I like the idea of following ones instinct to an unusual way of doing things as to following the well worn path. Do you think it's necessary to have what is on the screen being described by the narrator ???
I guess it all depends..... like most things.