Continuity in film making Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 5000 words

Continuity in film making - Essay Example Continuity is a task for all the production team as it has to be maintained at all levels of the production team. From the script supervisor, film director to the most important touch in postproduction - the editor, continuity is important. By identifying the connections that form continuity among the production team members, it can minimize the number of errors that usually occur in the production of a film. There are too many production team members to describe each and every connection in detail. In this thesis, the focus is on the director and the editor. This will allow us to go through the preproduction process, the postproduction process, and most importantly the understanding and the ability to identify the responsibilities, of each team member at each stage of production. Although not including many of the individual pieces, to get a better understanding of the basic cinematographic process I have included a basic description of the overall process. Visuals are pictures and sequences of motion pictures is a film, which captures the motion or action, so the camera by recording these events, does its job. The person who controls the camera is the cameraman. This person is in charge of moving the camera in predetermined directions which can serve the purpose of achieving the best shot is taken. The director provides the direction, how the camera moves or what should be shown in the frame gate, based on their interpretation of the script of the story, provided by the script writer. After completing the shots and sequences, the editor gathers the footage and compiles them in a way that they match and gives the feel for the entire footage. The editor is also responsible for matching the sequences shot, which gives the illusion of continuity. Justification of the Research To create a motion picture, regardless of expertise of the crew, there is a requirement to achieve continuity. Continuity requires more attention and especially during a large film productio n as it requires script, budget, and equipment. All of these processes have to be combined together to make a film. It is a complex process and can involve a large number of people to work together in a film project. One fact is that, no matter how easy it is to see the movie or a motion picture, it is a much more complicated process especially when it gets to the structure of making it. Historically films have been made by three main countries; Great Britain, France, and the United States. It hasn’t been until the last couple of decades that other countries such as India have joined in the cinema field with successes. Not only have other countries joined in the film making business, but so have amateur filmmakers with low budgets and fresh ideas. The growth of the motion picture making around the world is expanding and most of the developers are young which means the future of filmmaking is bright. The growth of video making is exponential, especially with the advent of Yout ube.com and the fact that at any time in 2012 most people have at least one camera at their house. Many of those individuals would like to tell a story, so to tell a story visually the fact of continuity has to be present. As the visual creation needs to be in the right composition angle and camera movement, all of data collected has to gather to tell a cohesive story. Methodology and Case Study A focused theoretical

IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM LAW Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3250 words

IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM LAW - Essay Example The ECHR decided in the case of Soering v. United Kingdom, 161 Eur. Ct. H.R. (1989) that this provision meant that individuals cannot be extradited if they are threatened with torture or inhuman or degrading treatment in the requesting country. In this case, Jens Soring fought extradition from Europe to the United States because he would face capital charges in the United States, and Article 3 of the ECHR forbids extradition for this reason. While the European Court of Human Rights decided that transferring a person who would face the death penalty would not violate the Article 3 of the ECHR, if a prisoner or a person would be transferred to a country where he or she faced torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, then this would violate Article 3 of the ECHR (Collyer, 2005). Lilich (1991) states that this judgment was significant because extraditing states must consider the ill-treatment of other states when considering whether to send an individual to that third stat e. The ill-treatment may be beyond the control of the state, and the state may give no assurances that the person would not be subjected to ill-treatment. This decision, according to Lilich (1991) also obligates signatory states to not extradite to other states that would subject the person to ill treatment, and even non-signatory states would not be able to do so. Directly after this case was decided, the ECHR decided several other cases. One such case was Cruz Varas et al. v. Sweden, 46/1990/237/307. In this case, Hector Cruz fled from Chile to Sweden to seek asylum, which was rejected. The court there stated that Mr. Cruz’ extradition did not violate Article 3, in part because the situation in Chile was improving. Another case was Vilvarajah et al. v. United Kingdom, 46/1990/237/307 ,  Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights,  20 March 1991. In this case the petitioner was attempting to ensure that he did not have to return to Sri Lanka. The court in that cas e found that there was only a possibility of ill treatment, therefore there was not a breach of Article 3. In Vivayanathan & Pusparajah v. France, 75/1991/327/399-400 ,  Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights,  26 June 1992, the court decided that there was not yet an expulsion order for the petitioners, who were trying to fight being expelled from France into Sri Lanka. Therefore, they could not decide upon the erits of the case. Tomasi v. France (Series A, No. 241-A, Application No. 12580/87), European Court of Human Rights (1993), found for the applicant, who was abused in custody. Allweldt (1993), states that the prohibition on expulsion of individuals to countries hinges on whether or not there is a real risk that the person would be subject to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment. Allweldt (1993) states that the risk that the person faces does not have to be a high probability, just that it exists. There also must be a substantial grounds for the belief tha t the person would be subjected to torture or inhuman treatment in the receiving country. Addo & Grief (1998), states that Article 3 is brief because it sets out normative standards, and that each country is free to adopt these normative standard