Roger Ebert’s essay introduced quite a few new ideas to me about filmmaking and the different methods that make it effective. His explanation on his “shot at a time” sessions was an interesting way to analyze film. Ebert describes that one does not need to be a film expert to effectively break down film. The method is to pause the film analyze wat is on screen. Ebert describes some of the general rules used in filmmaking and how they effect the consumer’s perspective on the film.

The video compiling clips from Stanley Kubrick movies using a one-point perspective gave an interesting view on the director’s reoccurring filmmaking choice. I never realized just how many scenes Kubrick shot with a fixed camera position capturing what is happening in the scene. It makes the watcher feel like a fly on the wall of the actual scene instead of just watching it on a screen. Kubrick also does a variation of this shot often where the camera will move like it is attached to a certain character or object to keep it in the same part of the frame. It makes it feel like the you are following the character through the scene.

Quinten Tarantino uses camera angles shot from below the subject of the frame. Most of the scenes in the compilation video are from a characters point of view that is in the truck of a car or looking down the barrel of a gun. They are usually dead or close to it. This camera angle brings a sense of hopelessness to the viewer about the character that the camera is taking place of. Other characters are often shown looking down at the camera and talking about the character that it is representing.

The story begins with a description of the cold wilderness that the main character is living in. It describes an eirie feeling and that the main character gets prepared to leave the trailer and go out into the cold and snowy woods. The main character challenges himself to move as quietly as possible through the snow until he hears something else outside with him. The character sees a deer that is described to be a once in a lifetime find, but something about it doesn’t seem right. The deer is eating a rabbit, which is not normal because deer only eat plants. The main character starts to run as he gets chased by the deer until he finds himself back at the trailer and stops right in front of it. He listens, then turns around and goes back into the woods as the story ends.

Glynn Washington, the host of the Spooked Podcast, uses many of the audio techniques that are explained in the earlier parts of this unit. The main one that stuck out to me was his pacing of his voice. He speaks slowly and takes a lot of pauses which creates tension and suspense as the story is told. The pauses also make it seem like he is actually telling the events from memory as if they happened. It makes the story seem much more genuine because it takes a second to think about the details of what happened.

The music and sound effects that are included in the story also contributed to the overall spooky feel of the story. It starts off with some slow jazzy music because there is not a lot of tension at the beginning. However, as the story continues, the music quiets and turns to more suspenseful sound effects. The background effects get more intense as the story does. It peaks as the main character is getting chased. There are sound effects of the monster chasing the main character with spooky suspenseful music. At the end, it is silent except for Washington’s voice because to make the listener focus on the twist ending. The silence after all the dramatic suspenseful sounds makes it seem like there is more to the story but then it comes to an abrupt end.

Ira Glass gave a point of view on storytelling that I’ve never really thought of before. I have always noticed the effects that audio has on a story, but I did not realize the full depth and the importance. The way Glass explained things by using examples was a good way to show the significance of how something is said or heard.

Ira’s explanation on anecdote is something I’ve never thought about but makes sense when hearing it. He explains that anecdote is just a series of actions strung together to make a story. That didn’t make a lot of sense to me until Glass gave an example, and then it clicked. He told a story that had no purpose, plot, or really any meaning at all. However, Glass told it in a way that keeps the listener hooked because of the descriptive words he used along with the speed and intonation.

Another main part of storytelling that Glass explains is the moment of reflection. Good stories need both anecdote and reflection for them to have good meaning. Many stories have great anecdote, but it means nothing because there is either weak or no reflection at all on the events that took place.

Glass also had a unique take on finding good stories and what it takes to do so. He explains how failure to find good stories is expected and necessary to be successful. It is trial and error and success by numbers. If you find five bad stories you might get lucky and find one that is good and makes the other five worth it.

Reading The Vignelli Canon felt like sitting down with a designer who has stripped away every distraction and is showing you the bare, essential bones of what design should be. What stood out most was Vignelli’s insistence on not viewing discipline as a constraint, but as a form of creative clarity. His belief that design should be timeless rather than trendy was refreshing compared to the way I usually think about visual work. Instead of chasing novelty, he pushes designers to chase meaning and structure. The idea that design is fundamentally about expressing the essence of something stuck with me more than anything else.

Another thing that stood out to me was the way Vignelli splits Intangibles and Tangibles into two separate parts. The Intangibles are design concepts and fundamentals that impact the overall effect. Things like semantics, pragmatics, and discipline are all things show the intention of the work. The Tangibles are the actual methods and tools used when designing like grids, typography, color, and layouts. Vignelli splits the two concepts in the booklet to explain each of them clearly. However, good design comes when the Intangibles and Tangibles are used together to create something meaningful and useful.

The most useful part of the Canon was his breakdown of syntactics and pragmatics. The way he talks about grids, alignment, and typographic systems makes them feel less like technical tools and more like foundations of how good design should be. His approach to typography is something I can immediately see improving my work. Specifically, using fewer typefaces, treating type with respect, and relying on hierarchy rather than decoration. Even his comments on color were surprisingly grounding. He advises to use it sparingly, purposefully, and never as a crutch. It’s a reminder that every design choice should have a reason behind it.

Going forward, I can see myself applying several of Vignelli’s principles directly. The biggest one is the commitment to simplicity. Not minimalism for its own sake, but clarity through reduction. I also want to adopt his mindset of building strong structural systems before worrying about aesthetics. Using grids more intentionally, limiting my type choices, and focusing on timelessness instead of trends all feel like practical steps I can take right away. Ultimately, The Vignelli Canon made me realize that good design isn’t about adding more; it’s about removing everything that doesn’t serve the message.

Photography Tips Reflection

Learning about these methods made me realize that taking pictures is more than just pointing a camera and clicking. The tips about knowing the equipment you are using and what its capabilities are were pretty straight forward to me. You cannot get the best quality photos without knowing exactly what every setting your camera does and how it affects the picture. The tips that were not obvious to me were the ones about the actual content of the picture. Things like lines, lighting, colors, and objects in a picture can change how a photo is interpreted. Photos can have a deeper meaning than what is on the surface when they are thoughtfully planned out.

Concepts from the Readings

The main concept from the readings that stuck out to me the most was actually the quote by Ansel Adams in the reading. “There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs.” This was funny to read right after reading all of the tips or “rules” to make photography better. However, it makes sense after thinking about it. The tips are to better understand the fundamentals of taking meaningful pictures. Once the fundamentals are mastered, you can branch out and start to break those fundamental rules to in specific ways to make a picture tell the story that the photographer wants.

Visual Storytelling

The video on Visual Literacy by the Toledo Museum of Art started by describing images and text being the same because everything we see are images. Being able to read images like text and understand the small details and components that make up the big picture is the main idea of visual literacy. The storytelling aspect that photos can have comes from the level of visual literacy that the photographer has. Someone who just snaps pictures usually is not telling a story with that picture. However, someone who is visually literate can use that knowledge of how to read and interpret what is in their shot and how to use it to create a story.