淺談3D立體影像概念跟技術

Great info about stereoscopic form CG expert Teddy Young blog!
淺談3D立體影像概念跟技術 『趴萬』Part 1
淺談3D立體影像概念跟技術 『趴吐』Part 2
淺談3D立體影像概念跟技術 『趴思立』Part 3
淺談3D立體影像概念跟技術 『趴惑』 Part 4

Thanks again Teddy sharing all wonderfull info here....

'Cannibal Tours' as Filmic Anti-Journey

Dennis O'Rourke is a Sydney-based filmmaker who has made a number of documentaries about people and situations in Australia, the Pacific and Papua New Guinea. His film 'Cannibal Tours' gives us insights into the phenomenon of tourism by Europeans and Americans to coastal Papua, and offers us a series of ironic episodic encounters between tourists and locals. The film is very definitely not an observational record of a single time-bound visit to a single identifiable place. It is quite difficult to form a sense of particular places (although a small number are mentioned) and there are no clues as to time. Although the film appears to start with an arrival and ends with a departure, almost everything happens in between has an arbitrary, unlocated, unspecific character to it. The only constant is that locals comment on the visitors, alternating with visitors commenting upon the locals. And there is a sense that the visitors' perceptions are usually countered with a specific anti-perception by a local. That is clearly a very deliberate construction even if it is made to look spontaneous, and balanced in a tit-for-tat exchange process.

Perhaps the opening of the film is intended to playfully evoke Conrad's Heart of Darkness, but it could equally well be a spoof on a Tarzan film. The film starts out in a boat, a little bit out from a coast. We hear bulletins of news from different radio stations around the world. We approach slowly by water through shots of enigmatic palm trees, a young boy who stares and drops his eyes and stares again. A local man is carving a ritual object. There is an atmosphere of Mystery.

Then a white man aims a camera at the landscape - is this to make us think of Conrad's description of the gun firing into a Continent? A white tourist is shown a place where he is told by a local that 'human sacrifices' took place. He wishes to photograph it. He is clearly enthusiastic about the idea of human sacrifice. He is a plump middle-aged man, German, Swiss or Austrian (?) who reappears throughout the film. he is weighed down with cameras. He turns out to be much travelled, articulate, and aware of the arguments against the very form of tourism he is enjoying. Is he Mr Kurtz? MacCannell (1990) seeks to link him to National Socialism, even though he could scarcely have been born by 1945. (Would National Socialists have chosen to spend their holidays on the Sepik?).

One theme of the film is mutual incomprehension - but with a difference. The tourists are 'informed' superficially about Sepik culture. They know there is no longer cannibalism of any sort. They know the people have been changed, and that they once lived in some sense closer to their local environment. But they are stuffed with preconceptions, such as that with the locals you have to bargain for what you buy. Or that the locals are happy as they are, still living a life in which they can easily satisfy their wants without money.

But the locals tell us that they feel poor, and are not happy as they are and that if they were paid more for the things they sell they too could be tourists and travel. And they tell us that they really do not understand the whites - particularly, why they take photographs, but more profoundly, who they are and where they come from.

The incomprehension is partly because of the differences of power, and also, we can see, because of the lack of common languages. The visitors cannot speak the local trade language, Tok Pisin, and few of the locals we meet can speak good German or American English. We come to appreciate the sense in which the contacts are inevitably superficial, and lead to little real insight.

On comment on the film deserves to be disputed. MacCannell has written, 'The tourists are most unattractive, emotional, self-interested, awkward and intrusive. It is difficult to imagine a group of real people [i.e. non-actors] simply caught in the eye of the camera appearing less attractive. This is not because of any obvious filmic trick...' (1990). This is in contrast to the locals who are 'attractive ... lightly ironic ... clear-sighted and pragmatic ...' I wonder how MacCannell would react to a documentary about the Khmer Rouge, or the Kray twins, if these tourists are the most unattractive people he can imagine? Surely, as documentarists are fully aware, the casting of central characters is crucial here, and the selection and discarding of material, equally so. Whether we call them 'filmic tricks' is a matter of taste, but there is no reason to suppose that these tourists are thoroughly typical of all visitors to the Sepik. They have been carefully framed, in several senses.

There is one crucial difference in the attitudes of visitors and locals. The locals are clear about what they do not know or understand, but the visitors are complacently sure that they know a good deal about whom and what they are seeing. They appear, then, to make an anti-journey which takes them nowhere and teaches them nothing. Such reflection as there is, is done by the locals, and, through further layers of irony, by the audience.

[This is a slightly edited excerpt from the chapter 'First Exits from Observational Realism: Narrative Experiments in Recent Ethnographic Films' by Peter Loizos, originally published in Rethinking Visual Anthropology, edited by Marcus Banks and Howard Morphy, Yale University Press, 1997, pp. 88-90. Three short excerpts from 'Cannibal Tours' can be viewed online here and further information on the film and filmmaker is available here.]

The Tour de France 2010

The worlds greatest cycling race, Le Tour de France, starts today...in Holland!



The first three stages pass through the Netherlands and Belgium on routes designed to replicate some features of the spring classics, including seven cobblestone sectors totalling 13.2 km, the longest distance of cobblestones in the Tour since 1983, on stage 3.


There are six mountain stages, three of them with

Question: Freeview reception in Spain?

"freeview reception in spain"

This is a common question asked by people, even on Google.

So here is the answer.

You cannot get Freeview in Spain.

There is no Freeview reception available in Spain.

No satellite TV installer in Spain can get Freeview reception in Spain - dispite what some of the "cowboy" say.

"Freeview" is the brand name of a UK Digital Terrestrial TV service.

It is

Trinh T. Minh-ha on Images and Politics

Trinh T. Minh-ha is a Vietnamese independent filmmaker, post-colonial theorist and feminist thinker whose work is widely shown internationally, and who has taught at various universities in the United States, and also in Japan and Senegal. Her work as an artist, teacher and writer consistently engages questions of hegemony, methodology and patriarchy. Her 1982 film 'Reassemblage,' made as part of her ethnographic research in Senegal, challenges the dichotomies of self/other, object/subject, and maker/viewer. Rather than reproducing the authoritative narrative voices and linear story lines of documentary film, for 'Reassemblage' she offered virtually no narration and employed a disorienting editing style of constantly shifting images, musical snippets and occasional silences that challenge the conventions of representation. In this essay, she uses her films as a point of departure for a discussion on the necessity of making films politically, the task of interrogating various forms of repression, and the ongoing struggle to move across and beyond boundaries so as to work, think and act differently.



Let me start by asking myself: What do I expect from a film? What I expect is borne out by what I work at bringing forth in my films. The films I make, in other words, are made to contribute to the body of film works I like and would like to see.

Through the way it is made, the way it relates to its subject, as well as through the viewer's receptions, I expect that it solicits my critical abilities and sharpens my awareness of how ideological patriarchy and hegemony work.

The commercial and ideological habits
of our society favor narrative with as
definite a closure as possible once the
narration is consumed one can throw
it away and move on to buy another one

clear linear entirely digestible

There is more and more a need to make a film politically (as differentiated from making political films). We are moving here from the making of a genre of film to the making of a wide range of genres of film in which the making itself is political. Since women have for decades worked hard at widening the definition of 'political,' since there is no subject that is 'apolitical' or too narrow, but only narrow, apolitical representations of subjects, a film does not necessarily need to attack governmental institutions and personalities to be 'political.' Different realms and levels of institutional values govern our daily lives. It is therefore in working at shaking any system of values, starting with the system of cinematic values on which its politics is entirely dependent, that a politically-made film takes on its full significance.

never installed within transgression
never dwells elsewhere

Patriarchy and hegemony. Not really two, not one either. My history, my story, is the history of the First World/Third World, dominant/oppressed, man/woman relationship. When speaking about the Master, I am necessarily speaking about both Him and the West. Patriarchy and hegemony. From orthodox to progressive patriarchy, from direct colonization to indirect, subtly pervasive hegemony, things have been much refined, but the road is still long and the fight is still goes on.

It is thrilling to think - to know that for an act
of mine, I shall get twice as much praise or twice
as much blame. It is quite exciting to hold the center
of the national stage, with the spectators not
knowing whether to laugh or to weep

-Zora Neal Hurston

Hegemony is most difficult to deal with because it does not really spare any of us. Hegemony is established to the extent that the world view of the rulers is also the world view of the ruled. It calls attention to the routine structures of everyday thought, down to common sense itself. In dealing with hegemony, we are not only challenging the dominance of Western cultures, but also their identities as unified cultures. In other words, we call attention to the fact that there is a Third World in every First World and vice-versa.

The master is made to recognize that his culture is neither homogeneous nor monolithic, that he is just another among others.

One's sense of self is always mediated by the
image one has of the other. (I have asked myself
at times whether superficial knowledge of the
other, in terms of some stereotype, is not a way
of preserving a superficial image of oneself).

-Vincent Crapanzano

What every feminist, politically-made film unavoidably faces is at once: 1. the position of the filmmaker, 2. the cinematic reality, and 3. the viewer's readings. A film, in other words, is a site that sets into play a number of subjectivities - those of the filmmaker, the filmed subjects, and the viewers (including here those who have the means or are in a position to circulate, expose, and disseminate the films).

The stereotyped, quiet, obedient, conforming modes of
Japanese behavior clashed with white expectations of
being a motivated, independent, ambitious thinker.
When I was with whites, I worried about talking loud enough;
when I was with Japanese, I worried about talking too loud.

-Joanne Harumi Sechi


Walking erect and speaking in an inaudible voice, I have
tried to turn myself American-feminine. Chinese
communication was loud, public. Only sick people
had to whisper.

-Maxine Hong Kingston

The assumption that the audience already exists, that it is a given, and that the filmmaker has to gear her making towards the so-called needs of this audience is an assumption that seems to ignore that needs are made and audiences are built. What is ideological is often confused with what is natural - or biological, as often implied in women's context. The media system as it exists may be most efficient for reaching the audience desired, but it allows little direct input from the audience into the creative process (critics and citizen groups are not defined as part of the audience, for example).

A responsible work today seems to me above all as one that shows, on the one hand, a political commitment and an ideological lucidity, and is, on the other hand, interrogative by nature, instead of being merely prescriptive. In other words, a work that involves her story in history; a work that acknowledges the difference between lived experience and representation; a work that is careful not to turn a struggle into an object of consumption and requires that responsibility be assumed by the maker as well as by the audience, without whose participation no solution emerges, for no solution exists as a given.

The logic of reaching 'everybody' often encourages a leveling of differences - a minimum of elements that might offend the imaginary average viewer, and a standardization of content and expectations.

Apartheid precludes any contact with people of different
races which might undermine the assumption of essential
difference.

-Vincent Crapanzano

Working against this leveling of differences is, also, resisting that very notion of difference, which defined in the Master's terms, always resorts to the simplicity of essences. Divide and conquer has for centuries been his creed, his formula for success. But a different terrain of consciousness is being explored for some time now. A terrain in which clear-cut divisions and dualistic oppositions such as counter-cinema versus Hollywood, science versus art, documentary versus fiction, objectivity versus subjectivity, masculine versus feminine may serve as departure points for analytical purpose, but are not longer satisfactory, if not entirely untenable to the critical mind.

What does present a challenge is an organization that
consists either in close association or in alliance of black,
white, Indian and Coloured. Such a body constitutes a 
negation of the Afrikaan's theory of separateness,
their medieval clannishness.

-Ezekiel Mphahlele

I have often been asked about what some viewers call the 'lack of conflicts' in my films. Psychological conflict is often equated with substance and depth. Conflicts in Western contexts often serve to define identities. My suggestion to this so-called lack is: Let difference replace conflict. Difference as understood in many feminist and non-Western contexts, difference as foregrounded in my film and work, is not opposed to sameness, nor synonymous with separateness. Difference, in other words, does not necessarily give rise to separatism. There are differences as well as similarities within the concept of difference. One can further say that difference is not what makes conflict. It is beyond and alongside conflict. This is where confusion often arises and where the challenge can be issued. Many of us still hold on to the concept of difference not as a tool of creativity - to question multiple forms of repression and dominance - but as a tool of segregation - to exert power on the basis of racial and sexual essences. The apartheid-type of difference.

difference, yes, but difference
within the border of your homeland, they say
White rule and the policy of ethnic divisions

Let me point to a few examples of practices of such a notion of difference.

The positioning of voices in film. In documentary practice, for example, we are used to hearing either a unified voice over, or a string of opposing, clashing views from witnesses which is organized so as to bring out objectively the so-called two sides of an event. So, either in unification or in opposition. In one of my films, Naked Spaces, I use three different voices to bring out three modes of informing. The voices are different, but not opposed to each other, and this is precisely where a number of viewers have reading problems. Some of us tend to consumer the three as one because we are trained to not hearing how voices are positioned and to not having to deal with difference other than as opposition.

The use of silence. On the one hand, we face the danger of inscribing femininity as absence, as lapse and blank in rejecting the importance of the act of enunciation. On the other hand, we understand the necessity to place women on the side of negativity (Kristeva) and to work in 'undertones' (Irigaray) in our attempts at undermining patriarchal systems of values. Silence is so commonly set in opposition with speech. Silence will not say or a will to unsay, a language of its own, has barely been explored.

The Veil. (As I stated elsewhere), if the act of unveiling has a liberating potential, so does the act of veiling. It all depends on the context in which such an act is carried out, or more precisely, on how and where women see dominance. Difference should neither be defined by the dominant sex nor by the dominant culture. So that when women decide to lift the veil, one can say that they do so in defiance of their men's oppressive right to their bodies; but when they decide to keep or to put back on the veil they once took off, they may do so to reappropriate their space or to claim anew difference, in defiance of genderless hegemonic standardization. (One can easily apply the metaphor of the veil here to filmmaking.)

Making films from a different stance supposes 1. a restructuring of experience and a possible rupture with patriarchal filmic codes and conventions; 2. a difference in naming - the use of familiar words and images, and of familiar techniques in contexts whose effect is to displace, expand or change their preconceived, hegemonically accepted meanings; 3. a difference in conceiving 'depth,' 'development,'or even 'process' (processes within processes are, for example, not quite the same as a process or several linear processes); 4. a difference in understanding rhythms and repetitions - repetitions that never reproduce nor lead to the same ('an other among others' as mentioned earlier); 5. a difference in cuts, pauses, pacing, silence; 6. a difference, finally, in defining what is 'cinematic' and what is not.

The relationship between images and words should render visible and audible the 'cracks' (which have always been there; nothing new...) of a filmic language that usually works at glueing things together as smoothly as possible, banishing thereby all reflections, supporting an ideology that keeps the workings of its own language as invisible as possible, mystifying hereby filmmaking, stifling criticism, and generating complacency among both makers and viewers.

Working with differences requires that one faces one's own limits so as to avoid indulging in them, taking them for someone else's limits; so as to assume one's capacity and responsibility as subject working at modifying these limits. The patriarchal conception of difference, as we have seen together, relies heavily on biological essences. In refusing such a contextualization of difference, we have to remain aware of the necessary dialectics of closure and openness. If, in breaking with patriarchal closures, feminism lead us to a series of musts and must-nots, then this only lead us to other closures. And these closures will then have to be re-opened again so that we can keep on growing an modifying the limits in which we tend to settle down.

Difference is not otherness. And while otherness has its laws and interdictions, difference always implies the interdependency of these two-sided feminist gestures: that of affirming 'I am like you' while pointing insistently to the difference, and that reminding 'I am different' while unsettling every definition of otherness arrived at.

[This essay is by Trinh T. Minh-ha and was originally published in the film and video monthly journal The Independent, Vol. 10, No. 4 (May 1987), pp. 21-23. In addition to 'Reassemblage,' which can be viewed in its entirety in four parts here, her other films include 'Naked Spaces - Living is Round' (1985), 'Surname Viet Given Name Nam' (1989), 'Shoot for the Contents' (1991), 'A Tale of Love' (1995), 'The Fourth Dimension (2001), and 'Night Passage' (2004). Her publications include Framer Framed (1992) and Cinema Interval (1999).]

English Football Premier League - who has Rights this year (2010)? How to watch UK football in Spain?

A question often being asked at the moment...

Which broadcaster has the English Premier League International broadcasting rights for TV in Spain?

For Sky UK subscribers, Sky have also gained the return of the Monday Night Football. Only the saturday 530 kickoff will be omn ESPN.

In Spain, only D+ and GOLTV have the combined Premier League rights. EPL will no longer be shown on TVE 2 or

Sky Sports price increase by £3 pm from Sept 2010

According to reports, as part of its annual priceing review, Sky Sports package will be increasing.

The cost of receiving Sky Sport 1 and Sky Sports 2 will increase by £3 per month from 1st September 2010.

Sky Sports 3 and 4 are "bonus" channels for those who subscribbe to both 1 and 2.

Sky are saying that this is due to the fact that the are showing more live sport then ever before, and 115