Anatomy of a Shot: Week 1 - By Nate Haustein

I said last week that I’d start a new sort of series on my favorite shots over my years of production. Basically, the idea is to take a screen grab of a great-looking shot and talk about some of the aspects in it that make it stand out. Though there are many aspects that make up a particular shot, I’ll try to focus on one or two of them each post. Today’s topic is framing.

The above shot was taken outside a retirement community in Minnesota. I needed some cover shots for an informational video and headed to the grounds around sunset to try to get some good-looking footage. Sunrise and sunset are known to filmmakers as the “magic” or “golden hour,” where sunlight creates an aesthetic look just about impossible to duplicate otherwise. But that’s another post altogether.

Framing deals with the way a shot is put together. It defines what space an object or character takes up, and how it relates to the other parts of the frame. The specifics of framing can vary according to the aspect ratio of the screen (4:3, 16:9, etc.) but generally, a way of dividing the frame called “the rule of thirds” is used to decide where to place objects as to be the most visually appealing to audiences. For this said convention, the frame is split into nine sections, broken into thirds both vertically and horizontally. There are a number of ways this helps to set up a shot, the horizon, for example is usually placed on one of the horizontal lines, one-third or two-thirds of the way down, rather than smack in the middle. Why? It gives precedence to either the sky or the foreground. Just like depth of field, framing can help to draw the viewer’s attention to focus on particular elements. Much in the same way, the vertical lines create areas of interest, most notably on the intersections of these lines. Often objects or faces are placed on the intersections.

In my shot, you can see that the sun shining through the tree lies on the left vertical division. The brightness of the sun makes it the most prominent object in the shot, and making sure that this “character” lies in a particular part of the frame creates balance. How uninteresting would it be if every character of a film occupied only the very middle of the frame? The V shape of the tree also creates another frame within the larger frame. By placing objects within such natural frames, the shot can again draw attention and create interest. It can sometimes even create an emotional response, for instance if a character seemed to be entrapped within a frame, symbolic or otherwise.

Many variables are active in making this shot, including contrast, color, depth, lens effects, movement and more, but framing makes up the very base of everything, defining what the camera is looking at. Under no circumstances should the rule of thirds or any other “rules” be applied all of the time, or used without exception. Much of what is new, interesting and original comes from the negligence of such standards. The conventions seen in this post are simply a proven way to set up a shot that most people would find pleasant to look at.

Battle of the Hipsters - by Nate Haustein

I’ve found that writing an entry on Sunday night is rather relaxing, so join me tonight in my observations as I look at two marketing strategies from Microsoft–one I think that works, and one I think isn’t quite as effective.

Several years ago, Apple Computer began a sort of reinvention of itself, possibly one of the most notable in recent history. One that upped the computing power of its hardware and marketed its proprietary operating system, OS X, as one of the utmost simplicity. A hit series of “I’m a Mac” commercials featured young, hip Justin Long representing Mac computers, continuously antagonizing John Hodgman, acting respectively as a PC. Still running strong years later, the commercials highlighted all the features available only on a Mac.

Likely sick of being poked fun at, Microsoft needed to come up with a plan to battle these incredibly successful ads. The solution was (uninterestingly enough) the “I’m a PC” campaign. At first, the campaign focused primarily on the supposedly real people who use the Windows operating system. A human interest approach that exposed a good deal of talented and interesting characters and how they use their computers. So far, so good. In the last year or so, however, Microsoft has gone to a new sort of commercial. In these 30 second ads, so called Laptop Hunters are “found” in the parking lot of a big box computer retailer such as Best Buy, and offered $1500 or so to buy any computer they want. If it costs less, they keep the difference. Participants usually walk around, see some features they like in a few laptops, bash the Mac computers for price or performance, and then settle on an offering from HP or Dell.

Lauren is a redhead. Read more about that here. Oh, and EDIT: it seems like Lauren isn't really a random person. She's an actress. Oh well, I almost expected it.

Ok, hang on a sec. Who’s paying for these commercials? The branding says Microsoft, but these ads are selling computers. Microsoft is just making the software that runs on them. In the end, it seems like the take home message is “I got a insert PC manufacturer name here, and not a Mac.” In fact, it’s more like, “Anything is better than a Mac.” Since Intel chips became standard on all new Macs, they can run Windows too. I know I do on mine from time to time. But when it comes down to it, more PC-only models sold means more guaranteed Windows licenses for Microsoft. With a valid competing pre-installed operating system like OS X, it likely cuts the percentage of Windows purchases to the single digits.

Now lets get this straight, I’m not necessarily critiquing the Windows operating system, or any PC manufacturers in particular. I believe that Windows, and it’s associated PC hardware is extraordinarily valid in many situations. Then again, as market shares continue to shift across operating systems, this divide in application may very well change. I do think that Microsoft should rethink it’s marketing strategy to something more original, and perhaps one that actually markets their product for its own quality, rather than relying on the prices of the hardware it runs on.

There’s the bad, now for the good.

Another piece of software that Microsoft holds an incredible market share on is Microsoft Office. Completely integrated in the majority of business and educational establishments, Microsoft needs to find a way to peddle its latest revision of the program suite every couple years or so. We’re all sick of hearing about a program that allows us to do, usually, work. So updates have been, more or less, lackluster. Microsoft needed a way to advertise it’s money-machine as something, well, cool.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is it...

The trailer appeals in every way a viral video should. It’s funny, it’s exciting, it looks good, and it’s short enough for anyone to watch. Another key to the video is that it doesn’t take itself seriously, at all. Nothing is spared from being ridiculed, most notably the help-giving paperclip from years ago and an extensive list of fonts. At the end we all ask ourselves how on earth do infiltration teams and helicopters relate to Microsoft Office, but it really doesn’t even matter. The sheer awesomeness carries the trailer and the productivity suite on its own. Maybe all of this will be explained in 2010...