livedesignonline.com: A staple of American politics, the Democratic and Republican National Conventions give each party an opportunity to present its candidate in an engaging environment. This year, both conventions showcased production designs that had strong video elements and also brought unconventional twists to the traditional convention look.
5 comments:
Wow there's a lot of money and time that goes into the creation of these conventions! With an entire set of video screens, you not only are designing a physical look for the set, but constant dynamic changes that take place on that entire set. One thing the RNC article brought up that this one didn't is the programming of all of that content- much of it is secret, so you don't want to do it when the arena is open or there are people there (which is pretty much always). So with all that video content, you have to visualize it in a different way until the actual event. That adds just another layer of challenge.
While it is a cool design and looks really good, it's disgusting how much money was spent on this. I am always put off by how much money is spent on political campaigns, but looking at the pictures of both conventions is pretty outrageous. Needless to say all of the money that went into this could have been better spent. It just seems like an example of an extravagant set that is inappropriate. That said, the sets for both conventions were quite impressive.
These two articles talked about things that I really hadn't thought about much, although it's great that things scenic designers (and all designers) learn here, like portraying a message through scenery and relating the "story" you want accurately, are so applicable to this. Even things like moving the audience closer to increase intimacy and adjusting camera angles for media to achieve an effect is something that we deal with in theatre. Personally, I think the RNC's design was a little too distracting, since (I think) the point of the conventions is to showcase the candidate, not the media behind him, but I might be biased.
I also laughed a little at the line in the article about the RNC “From the beginning, I wanted to have the podium be able to take on a different look every night, so that we could reflect and support the various themes and messages”... because the GOP candidate ended up having a different message every night of the campaign, so their set design REALLY worked.
We have certainly surpassed the days of soapbox campaigning. Back in the day it was so much easier to reinforce ones image; Teddy Roosevelt could stage a couple photo shoots in a NYC studio to portray him in a hunting outfit with a rifle in order to relate himself more to the common man than the ranks of the wealthy he came from. And after after enlisting in the military and becoming a hero in the Spanish-American War he was the perfect candidate and he public tours were much more successful. Today it's a bit more complicated than that, it's certainly a production, and as off-putting as the dollar amount attributed to that might be, it's all relative. We have far surpassed the days of only bringing home $3-5 per day and film that projects at 14 frames per second. And as slow and plagued as our economy may be at times the general public would not accept anything less than the most simple, yet elaborate and visually satisfying stage in which to picture and receive the individuals who may lead us forward.
i already commented on the republican convention article - but i want to mention how successful i thought the DNC was at portraying their candidate on a large scale. Its also interesting to note how edgy and modern the DNC design appears - in contrary to the conservative approach of the RNC. interesting that the RNC stayed so close to their political mindsets opposed to going all out and throwing a party.
Post a Comment