Shelby Lee Adams presentation content

http://www.putlocker.com/file/2085069A69AE02A9
http://shelby-lee-adams-napier.blogspot.co.uk/


What, Who, Why?

Who The documentary I have chosen is The True Meaning Of Pictures focused primarily on photographer Shelby Lee. The documentary was made by director Jennifer Baichwell, the film was shown at both the Toronto Film Festival and the Sundance Festival.
What
The film is shot in the deep southern state of Kentucky, focusing predominantly on the Appalachian Hollers in which a number of rural southern folk live, almost untouched by 21st century life. We are transported to this world through the eyes of Shelby Lee's camera lens. Shelby has been photographing these fascinating people since the mid 70's and so is an authoritativeness figure on these people, if you support his controversial methods. The True Meaning of Pictures: Shelby Lee Adams' Appalachia is a documentary which offers an in-depth look at Adams and his work, as well as the people he documents and the perspectives of other photographers.
We focus on a number of different families, all with diverse histories and family members that they seem more than happy to openly discuss. I feel the film holds the audiences interest as it gives a almost entirely unbiased view on the its subjects, they exist in their own surroundings talking about varied events in their undeniably colorful history.
Why?
The films primary focus point is to cover Shelby Lee's practices and how he manages to achieve pictures that have captured wide attention, his methods are openly questioned and criticised within the film by not only his peers but also his critics. His decisions to stage a portion of his shots have been labelled false and a poor representation of Appalachian people and the way of life they subscribe to.
One of the main criticisms fired at Shelby is that he is perpetuating "hillybilly" stereotypes in his photographs, as well as of exploiting his subjects, using various questionable techniques (lighting, flash, wide angle lenses) to distort and theatricalize them and of presenting his work as documentary when it is not.
This film is a wealth of evidence in the debate of representation that has, and continues to, surround Shelby's career.

Techniques
Music -
All the music used in this film are traditional Appalachian folk gospels, all performed by subjects of Shelby. Frequently the film will show one of the subjects casually playing music and then use that track as a backing for other images, I think this gives the film a rustic feel that encourages the viewer to look at the subjects with the same inflection the music suggests. Primitive.
Camera Shots -
 The camera shots used in this film are again fairly primitive, not in the quality of the shooting. Im sure the shots used and the suggestions they give are entirely intentional. With the use of invasive close ups, wide angles and cuts to previously shot footage (90's) it gives an extremely simplistic feel.
They also use extreme close ups in order for the audience to empathise with the subjects, they want you to feel for them, the poverty they live in. But also the stark and blatent contrast between our own lives and theirs.
There are also a number of long distance establishing shots of the small Hollers these people live in, compared to the sheer vastness of the Appalachian ranges emphasizes exactly how remote and secluded this people are.

Conventions
Conventionally this film doesnt really play by the rules. It doesnt have a stats, facts and figures. It doesnt have a definitive narrator. Instead it uses audio tracks from different people (unnamed) discussing how they feel about Shelby as a photographer and occasionally as a man. It also has regular comments from Shelby explaining where he is, what he's doing and why he's doing it. I suppose if you had to identify one narrator, you would have to say Shelby.
The footage used on the grounds or in the peoples houses, modern day, is all genuine, non archived footage. The way that they have shot this film, to me, suggests that the angle they were aiming for was to give the film the same rawness and realism that Shelby's photo's appear to give.
The archival footage used is well signposted and dated.   There is also a stark difference in quality, obviously, so this also points out the difference in footage. I think the archival footage is put to good use as it demonstrates the change, or lack there of, within these families and their lifestyles. Also the frequent use of Shelby's own photography emphasizes the taking points excellently. Still's have been utilized expertly to contextualize points in this film.

Summation 

I think this film excellently debates the facets of representation in its entirety. Not only does the film study a real life debate in the form of Shelby Lee Adams and his portrayal of subjects through his widely viewed medium of photography. But at the same time covering one of the most stereotyped groups of people in modern day history. The Hill Billy. With a rare glimpse of how these people actually live, their family structures and their cultures the film does an excellent job at revealing the subjects with absolutely no filter. They simply present them as they are. With no spin or prejudice to tarnish them with. This gives the viewer a refreshing experience opposed to the agressive persuation styles of other documentary film.