Kumi Yamashita - Shadow Art

I was looking for inspiration for another blog entry and recalled a seminar session during which the use of light and shadow was discussed.

The artist 'Caravaggio was given as the main subject of discussion', but to be honest, old painters and such artists (as remarkable as they were) are a little too.... traditional for my personal tastes.

And so, my thought process immediately turned towards a more modern and unusual style of art: Shadow Art.

To the left, and below, are a piece from an artist called Kumi Yamashita, who is well-known for creating artwork by placing unusual objects into a precise order and adding a light-source.

This light-source creates a shadow of the objects used, to in turn create a whole new image.

In terms of visual communication, it's a crazy notion.

To use one visual cue to create an entirely new and original graphic through which expression and discussion can be manifested is quite a remarkable feat.

There are two differing sources of discussion in Yamashita's artwork; the first being the unusual objects used to cast the shadows, and the second being the shadow itself. It is almost as though there are two conflicting images combined onto one canvas, and in a sense, they are fighting for attention: the mind wants to consider how the image has been created (by looking at the objects) but at the same time, the main focus of the image is the shadow (without which, the image would not be impressive enough to warrant such apt attention).

It leads me on to consider how the mind can be tricked with the addition or removal of a light source. For instance, it is stereotypically believed that to best experience a horror film, you should watch it in the dark. This is presumably because the film itself has dark overtones which compliment the viewer's surroundings to heighten the experience. The viewer becomes fully intergrated into the film, because in a sense, they are experiencing similar key elements themselves via the removal of a light source.

A further point brought up in the same seminar was how possible it is to still experience such feelings when in an industry that demands such depth of analysis. By looking so deeply into the image, it is sometimes the case that the 'magic' is lost, and you become so involved with how the image was produced, that you forget to take a step back and simply enjoy it. I, personally, find it quite an exhilarating thought to know I can deduce how something has happened and yet still marvel at the content of the image. In a way, it's almost as though I know something the rest of the world doesn't - even if that is through my own self-evaluation of the image. I can see the image from two different angles - as both a viewer, and also as a producer.

Two points of view through one pair of eyes. Which leads me neatly back to Shadow Art, with their two different images combined onto one canvas to create a whole product. Clever stuff.

Analysis of 'Independence Day' Trailer

Courtesy of THX1968 at YouTube

Independence Day is a 20th Century Fox broadcast released on July 3rd 1996, starring Will Smith, Bill Pullman and Jeff Goldblum. A science-fiction and action film, it was a turning point for CGI-aided moving pictures and proved to be widely accepted in many countries, becoming a big hit in the United States of America and Great Britain. The trailer broadcasted before its release played a significant part in promoting the film and helping in its world-wide fame.

The film’s primary target audience is fans of science-fiction films of any age between early teens to late forties, proven by its futuristic, alien-inspired plotline and exciting CGI sequences. For people of this vast age group, it would be fairly easy to understand the film and its plotline, while to anyone younger it could be a little difficult to grasp. I also personally believe it is aimed more at males, rather than females, judging by its inclusion of fast-paced action sequences, the alien storyline, and the CGI-created explosions and their related special effects.

The film’s secondary target audience is fans of the actors who star in the film, like Will Smith or Bill Pullman. The fact that such widely acknowledged actors have managed to grab a role in the film encourages their fan-base to watch the film, if only to see them.

CGI plays a big part in the overall acceptance of the film by its audience, but it is incredibly difficult and extremely expensive to make a CGI-aided sequence. Because of this, 20th Century Fox had amazingly high production costs, both due to the CGI but also because of the use of such well-known actors. Famous actors expect a higher wage.

However, due to the fact that 20th Century Fox is such a vast media company, they have managed to gain themselves a reputation of excellence. So just showing their logo and the company’s personal sequence at the start of the trailer helps to promote the film before it even begins; viewers know that, while it is not guaranteed that they will enjoy the film, they can be certain that they’re viewing something of extremely high quality. The purpose of any trailer is to promote the film, to advertise it, which will, hopefully, encourage more people to watch it and pull in more money, which is any film’s ultimate goal. So the fact that viewers straight-off know that the film is of a high standard gives the film an even greater chance of being accepted by the audience.

Another way Independence Day wins over its intended audience is its constant use of enigma. Even the trailer, lasting about a minute and a half, is full of mystery and hails a large number of questions that need answers. The text that helps to push the trailer along uses ellipses, and example being the opening shot of the phrase, ‘On July 2nd …’. This ellipse signifies that there is more to come, so the audience has to continue watching to find out what will happen on July 2nd.

Another enigma is shown through the graphics themselves: showing the people staring up, shocked at the sky makes viewers want to know what has shocked or amazed them. A second example of an enigma within the footage itself is when the opening sequence shows shots of famous American landmarks being overshadowed. Right from the beginning, people want to know what this shadow is, what is making it and why.

While the ‘shadow’ sequence serves to provide mystery, however, it also has a second function. The shadows are representational images imported into the film. The fact that they cover the Manhattan Skyline in one scene serves to represent the threat, which is, as of yet, undiscovered by the audience due to the fact that the trailer has yet to reveal what it is, to America’s economy. This shadow also covers a statue of Abraham Lincoln, who was responsible for the abolition of slavery, signifying the freedom of the American people being quenched, and the fact that it also covers the Statue of Liberty reiterates this point.

There are other points of representation within the trailer, though. The alien threat itself is represented through the spaceship and its shadow, as well as the use of lasers, which are almost always highly associated with aliens and their technology.

War is also represented within the trailer, shown through the CGI explosions and the fighting scenes and also in scenes of destruction and devastation (post-invasion scenes).

The trailer includes various pieces of ideology, ranging from the classic ‘good versus evil’ morale which is featured in many films – in this case, the aliens are evil, symbolised by the dark shadows shrouding the ship and the fact that they are attacking the humans -, to ideologies specific to America (demographics are key, here, as the film is produced and filmed in America, with American actors and an American setting), which can include Democracy signified through the shot of the White House, to the idea that a country should work together, shown through the shots of the American citizens working in unison to bring down the alien threat.

There is also a value with the fact that the shadow covers the Statue of Liberty. It gives the sense that this unknown threat is more important, and much more significant than America, which is highlighted further by the fact that the camera angle has the viewers looking up to the Statue of Liberty, rather than down upon it or straight at it.

As well as this shot, there are various types of Camera shots included within the trailer, ranging from low-angled shots of landscapes or people or action shots, to high-angled shots of locations like the White House. The fact that we are looking down upon the White House signifies diminished power, and that the shadow proves that the threat is supposedly far more powerful than the United States, (which in turn is represented by the White House as it is the seat of ultimate power in America).

Throughout the entire trailer, all camera shots are sharp and completely focussed. Certain scenes are fast-paced and follow action-packed sequences, pulling a lot of shots into a few seconds to get the maximum effect, advertising as much as possible to persuade the audience to come and see the film without spoiling the plot.

One of the best uses of camera, in my opinion, coincides with an impressive piece of CGI, about a minute into the trailer, when a fireball is reflected in a car window. I believe this is a strong demonstration of the skill that the special effects and CGI teams had during the film’s production.

Another piece of Media Language demonstrated within the trailer is its use of colour. There’s a strong use of contrast between darks and bold and bright colours; darks shown through the shadows, to eerie colours that represent the aliens, to bright, colourful explosions. This wide variety of colour serves to keep the audience interested, as it continuously jumps from one to the other, from dark to bright, often coinciding with the content on screen and how characters are deliberately portrayed – classic dark tones for bad guys, and lighter tones for good guys (stereotypical of modern film and TV characterisation).

I personally believe that the trailer for Independence Day is incredibly effective. It promotes the film perfectly, keeping a strong balance between action and mystery, showing just enough to make people want to see it without giving away the whole plot. Which is, in a sense, all you can ask of a film trailer.

Analysis of the Cadbury Gorilla Advert

courtesy of macegrove at YouTube.

This is, quite possibly, one of my favourite adverts of all time, just because it is so unusual. At first glance, there is very little in the way of content to associate the ad with the product being advertised. I see no bars of chocolate in sight until the outro. Only people who recognise the subtle hints as to who the producers are prior to the end of the ad would have any idea that this is, in fact, a tremendously massive company.

The purple colouring refers to the packaging. The 'Glass and a Half Full Productions' slogan was created and plugged as being the official slogan for the company's forthcoming series of chocolate adverts (including this one). The silver of the drumkit symbolises the inside wrapping of the packaging. But... I see no actual chocolate bars to demonstrate they are, in fact, still a chocolate production company. For all the advert suggests, they could be promoting Phil Collins, a Drum-kit company, a famous Gorilla... who knows?

But that is the point. The advert is lacking anchorage until the outro kicks in. This is a deliberate marketing technique. It's so unusual, it will stick in your head. Viewers remember the ad, will remember who made it because it is so bizarre, and are subsequently more likely to purchase a product because the advert made them smile.

The gorilla is a signifier for happiness. The happiness that customers will experience if they purchase this particular brand of chocolate. I can deduce this from the happiness and freedom expressed by the gorilla when he begins his drum-solo. It is almost as though the majority of the ad is in place to build up to this one moment. The suspense. Which, in turn, could signify the suspense consumers will experience as they're waiting to take that first bite.

In conclusion, I believe that the advert for Cadbury’s Dairy Milk, while being controversial due to a possible lack of understanding for some people, is a great example of advertising. It grabs viewers’ attention, mixes audience’s likes of music and chocolate with an unusual main character and, above all, advertises the product enough to increase profit, which is, essentially, any business’s underlying goal.

Graphics Tablet Suzuki Bike - Flash Drawing

So. I started with this....

A photo of the 'Rio Grande' road in Western Texas (apparently one of the most scenic roads in the world!).

With a little photomanip and a whole lotta love, I ended up with a scene that would better suit the 'Flash drawing' design of my own artwork (you will see later!) to use as a backdrop. Gladly, I would have taken this photo in person to use for this particular piece of artwork, but alas, flying to Texas just to take a photograph would have been a bit too great a stretch for a student budget.

Next, now that I had a lovely comic-style background (and I've just realised a lovely 3 on 3 pattern happening with regards to the 'Rule of Thirds' but more on that in a second), I used a Graphics Tablet to draw a Suzuki Bike in Adobe Flash CS3 (see below).










Aannnnddd, finally! The moment of truth...



Combine Flash-drawn bike with Comical background....


And happy days.

The bike actually fits in with the image. See, as I was drawing it freestyle in Adobe Flash, the background was plain and boring and grey. Which was great while I was drawing, but as a finished image, it lacked a little... shall we say, pizazz? When I combined the flash-style super-bike with the original Rio Grande photograph, it looked dramatically out of place. As an image, if I were going for making a statement, it could have worked, I suppose. 'Expressive meets Tradition', and all that. But at the end of the day, due to my fascination with comic-books and the wonderfully simple and bold style of drawing in Flash, it just made sense to combine the two elements together for the finished piece.

Rule of Thirds - twice! One second...

Okay, so it's not exactly perfect, but considering it's a manipulated photograph, it's pretty damn close. Almost as though Mother Nature herself understood the concept of the Rule of Thirds when creating the landscape (or insert religious idol of choice, if it isn't Mother Nature according to your beliefs).

Upper section = sky.
Middle section = mountain range.
Lower sections = road, bike, ground.

Each section draws the viewer's attention to a certain aspect of the image. It's quite amazing that the correct positioning of a camera can create an image with clear proportion, enough to purposefully segregate elements of that image according to this rule.

(As a footnote, yes, I am British. And my superbike wants to drive through Western Texas into oncoming traffic for the laughs, just because we do that at home. Seriously, are we the only people to have 'left-hand-traffic' laws? Call the bike's positioning a culturally-inclined alteration to the norm of drive-time in southern America. Just because I'm British.)

Roland Barthes - Relay

Reference to:

Barthes, R. (1977) "Rhetoric of the Image." Image, Music, Text. Ed. and trans. Stephen Heath. New York: Hill and Wang. 32-51.

As a follow-up, here's the other side of the 'language and image' marriage:

"The function of relay is less common (at least as far as the fixed image is concerned); it can be seen particularly in cartoons and comic strips. Here text (most often a snatch of dialogue) and image stand in a complimentary relationship."

Take the image on the left as an example (I'm sorry, but it made me LOL so hard. Had to include it).

It is pretty obvious in the image what is happening, though without direction, some unusual persons could probably mis-read the image minus a caption (aka chavs).

To dumb it down for said unusual individuals, a 'macro' - or caption, in posh terms - has been added to compliment the image (or to demonstrate in lay-mans terms just exactly what is happening in the image).

For hilarity, rather than using 'proper English' to describe the content, text speak (or game speak) has been included. This makes the image immediately attractive to gamers, youngsters, geeks, (even chavs!), etc. I suppose it would probably not count as a relay example to those who do not understand the meaning behind the word represented (bless, it would probably just serve to confuse them). However, for those who do understand that 'powned' is a gamer term for being beaten quite violently by an opponent, the language directly compliments the image, thus relaying meaning between text and picture.

Before you ask, no I'm not going to include this in my essay... but it made me chuckle.

I doubt Barthes could ever have predicted his theories would one day be used to describe a Macro image...

Roland Barthes - Anchorage

Reference to:

Barthes, R. (1977) "Rhetoric of the Image." Image, Music, Text. Ed. and trans. Stephen Heath. New York: Hill and Wang. 32-51.

The concept of an image having endless interpretations without an attached caption to ground the viewer's rogue imaginations fascinates me.

Barthes believed, "... all images are polysemous; they imply, underlying their signifiers, a 'floating chain' of signifieds, the reader able to choose some and ignore others."

In a sense, he describes an image's ability to give off a great (sometimes limitless) amount of different interpretations, depending on social, ethical and stereotypical inclinations of the viewer in question, who can then choose for themselves what they believe to be the truest interpretation. What is depicted for one type of person will differ completely from what another person sees in the image; due to reasons like social status, personal upbringing, cultural reference and individual opinion. Without a caption to ground the image and describe / explain EXACTLY what is depicted, there is no way of saying for certain what the true purpose / description of the image really is.

Anchorage does this - adds a description or a caption to an image, giving the reader absolutely no doubt as to what the content actually displays. This way, the media artist can get across a specific meaning, one that will be virtually universally recognised for what it is. Without this 'anchor', the possibilities are endless.

People will believe what they want to believe until it is proven otherwise.

Take the image on the right as an example.

I could tell you that it's actually an image of my great uncle. And unless you'd seen the image before, there's absolutely no way to disprove my interpretation. (The fact that I did have a great uncle who looked rather like him is irrelevant).

Similarly, I could admit to you that it's actually a sketch-drawing of Roland Barthes, himself (if Wikipedia is to be believed...). But there's nothing to say I'm telling the truth (even though I am). Thus, demonstrating that Barthes' thesis does actually make sense: without an anchor, viewers are free to interpret the image in any way they choose.

Like I said. Fascinating.

Owl City - Fireflies Single Cover - Analysis

While my previous post demonstrated how the colour 'blue' can represent sadness, my next image shows the colour in a much more positive light. The purpose of doing this is to demonstrate that not all colours are symbolic of a single meaning. Colours can represent a number of different emotions depending on the content and context of the image, and indeed the cultures of those who are viewing that image at any particular time.


I am uncertain if my prior knowledge of the band has swayed my feelings towards this image, or not. For people who have not heard their musical style - for those who do not know how... refreshing and uplifting their music really is - it may provoke a slightly different reaction.

But, whenever I see this single-cover, I smile.
Perhaps it isn't the same for everyone. As with most artistic endeavours, personal opinion is key; if somebody doesn't like something, they don't like it. Simple. In this case, people who are not interested in cityscapes, or who do not find them appealing to look at, would probably feel differently about the image. Similarly, those who do not like the band may not like the image for that reason, because it represents something they have little interest in.

But for me, personally, I think it is a beautiful image.

I absolutely love the cityscape backdrop. The rule-of-thirds has been executed artistically - with the band name and song title in the bottom third, the cityscape in the middle third and the 'spacey' skyline in the upper third. Though, in this case, the thirds are not all identical in size - the bottom one being much larger than the top, rather than equally spacing all 3 sections.


The blue overtone makes the image sparkle, almost. It definitely has a futuristic feel, I believe. The skyscrapers and buildings are symbolic of man's desires to reach for the stars - to one day be out there amongst them, reaching up like infant hands groping for their mothers, their protectors, the angels (or 'stars', as depicted in the upper third, which could in turn represent the fireflies referenced in the song, itself) watching over them from above. I'm unsure of the image's true intentions (aside from promoting the single, of course - profit is everything in business), but I see man-made glass and steel creations reaching out to the stratosphere: I see Man's unquenchable thirst to reach out and become a part of the Universe. And it makes me smile.

The 'out-of-this-world' feeling I depict from the image can in turn represent a significant part of the style which makes up the music created. A lot of Owl City's songs seem science-fiction-inspired, with soft, twinkling melodies and whooshy, gliding undertones. When I see this image, I think of a modern-to-futuristic style of music. They certainly deliver, in that respect: see fan-made music video, below...

-- The video was created by blackiebrens (as seen on YouTube) and the lyrics and song belong to Owl City. The Doctor Who clips belong to the BBC (Stephen Moffat, etc). No copyright infringement intended and no money is being made, here. Use of video and content is purely for educational purpose. --