stop stop stop

February 15, 2005 7:49 PM

The “Stop Motion Studies” are a series of experimental documentaries that chronicle my interaction with subway passengers in cities around the world. Begun in the fall of 2002, the project currently includes 13 installments from countries including Sweden, the United Kingdom, France, the United States, and Japan.
posted by onkelchrispy (29 comments total)

posted by squirrel at 8:15 PM on February 15, 2005

self post. delete.
posted by nj_subgenius at 8:21 PM on February 15, 2005

Something tells me onkelchrispy is the 'bad' onkel.

Stop touching Metafilter.
posted by cosmonik at 8:30 PM on February 15, 2005

onkelchrispy's quoting, no?
posted by dhruva at 8:35 PM on February 15, 2005

I'm not sure that this is a self-post - the FPP text is a direct quote from the site.
posted by crazy finger at 8:35 PM on February 15, 2005

This is a neat idea, I'll explore it more later and I'm glad that it was posted. Too bad that it was already derailed by over-achieving self-policers.
posted by crazy finger at 8:42 PM on February 15, 2005

Fascinating! Its really interesting to watch these movements get so exaggerated.
posted by tweak at 8:51 PM on February 15, 2005

aside: onkelchrispy's LJ account says he's in New Jersey, whereas David Crawford is a professor in Chicago. Please don't delete this post, powers that be.
posted by tweak at 8:54 PM on February 15, 2005

Sorry for any confusion. I should have specified I was quoting from the site.
posted by onkelchrispy at 8:55 PM on February 15, 2005

It took two seconds to figure out its not a self post. Jeezus.

I like this a lot. Those high-end digital cameras can sometimes take 4 pictures a second, and there's neat stuff you can do with them. This is a good one.
posted by fungible at 8:57 PM on February 15, 2005

I’m working on a stop motion project at the moment so this is really interesting. Thanks for the post.
posted by Tenuki at 9:04 PM on February 15, 2005

Great link. Is there a random element to the frame order? Looks like it, although I may just be missing the "algorithm" he's using. Also, I wonder if anyone else raised an eyebrow at this quote used all over the site: "It is said that 90% of human communication is non-verbal." Said by whom? Seems a bit high, that 90%.

[Too bad about the missing quote marks and overzealous policing.]
posted by mediareport at 9:13 PM on February 15, 2005

[this is good]
posted by killdevil at 9:19 PM on February 15, 2005

'A frequently asked question is, "What percent of our communication is nonverbal?" According to Kramer, "94% of our communication is nonverbal, Jerry" (Seinfeld, January 29, 1998). Kramer's estimate (like the statistics of anthropologist Ray Birdwhistell [65%; Knapp 1972] and of psychologist Albert Mehrabian [93%; 1971]) are hard to verify. But the proportion of our emotional communication that is expressed apart from words surely exceeds 99%.'
posted by Tenuki at 9:25 PM on February 15, 2005

I like this a lot. Those high-end digital cameras can sometimes take 4 pictures a second, and there's neat stuff you can do with them. This is a good one.

This four pictures per second stuff is crap, IMO. Why can't cameras take 30 pictures per second? They ought to be able to.

Also, I'm not sure this is that great. In a lot of these, people are not really interacting at all, IMO.
posted by delmoi at 9:34 PM on February 15, 2005

If I was stuck on a desert island with only one link I might want one that is as inscrutable and detailed as this.
posted by StickyCarpet at 9:48 PM on February 15, 2005

The notion of quantifying proportions of communication is absurd. I like the idea. I'm a video editor and I play with little frame loops all the time. It's amazing what can come out in terms of expressiveness in just two or three frames. That said, I didn't find this well-designed site to have very much of interest by way of content. The pseudo-academic approach got on my nerves, too.

And, yeah, it was clear immediately that this isn't a self-post.
posted by squirrel at 9:48 PM on February 15, 2005

This (well, some of it) was previously posted, but the link in that post has expired, so no worries. Good to see he's been busy since we last checked in, back in 2003.

On Preview:
Speaking of looping frames, they did a bit of that in the original Star Wars where the bantha(?) shakes his staff above his head after knocking down Luke.
posted by shoepal at 9:52 PM on February 15, 2005

These three in a row are brilliant. An odd, pulsing narrative of three males, three females, and an upside-down shoeless person.
posted by juggernautco at 10:07 PM on February 15, 2005

advice: should probably have used html entities instead of extended characters for the left and right double-quotes in the link
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:38 PM on February 15, 2005

this is excellent, i'm finding myself drawn into these photos. there reassly is something remarkable about how tiny movments, become either telling, odd orotherwise fascinating.

a simple idea well executed. thanks
posted by quarsan at 11:00 PM on February 15, 2005

Amazing. Great find.

How'd he do that, without being seen?
posted by fandango_matt at 12:13 AM on February 16, 2005

ugh, the seemingly random frame rate just gives me the feeling that my computer is overloaded.
posted by surlycat at 2:51 AM on February 16, 2005

This is neat!
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 6:37 AM on February 16, 2005

Nice!

fungible: Those high-end digital cameras can sometimes take 4 pictures a second, and there's neat stuff you can do with them.

The really high end digital cameras are even faster than 4 per second! I have a Canon EOS 300D (not high end) that shoots continuously at about 4 pictures per second (depending on exposure time, of course).

I almost ALWAYS have it dialed to continuous shooting mode to increase the chance that I will end up with at least one (technically) good picture of anything I photograph.

As a side result, I often end up with some interesting stop-motion sequences. I have been trying to think of a way to display especially interesting ones, and I like the way Mr. Crawford has chosen.
posted by syzygy at 7:32 AM on February 16, 2005

Also see Michael Palmieri's video for Beck's "Little One" (this is the second Beck video I've posted this morning!), entirely shot on digital still cameras.
posted by fungible at 8:22 AM on February 16, 2005

These are great, especially paired up with some glitchy Oval for soundtracks.
posted by Dean King at 10:09 AM on February 16, 2005

Beautiful.

I've been experimenting with different soundtracks for it all morning.
posted by dontoine at 11:08 AM on February 16, 2005

those went surprisingly well with the jerky beat of the postal service song i happened to be listening to. nice find.
posted by blendor at 12:16 PM on February 16, 2005