cuts to a different angle

[unpakwon]

I'm not sure of what the following in red is describing. Would you please paraphrase it?

David Eagleman..... explains that even under mundane circumstances, attention is a limited resource. "Imagine you're watching a short film with a single actor cooking an omelet. The camera cuts to a different angle as the actor continues cooking. Surely you would notice if the actor changed into a different person, right? Two-thirds of observers don't." This happens because attention is a seriously limited resource, and once we're focused on one thing, we often don't notice the next. Of course, any fear response only amplifies the effect. What all of this means is that once the amygdala begins hunting the bad news, it's mostly going to find bad news.

Thank you.

 

[SoothingDave]

A "cut" is when a filmmaker literally cuts the film and splices it together with the next piece of film. In this case the writer is talking about having one camera viewing a scene from one angle, and a second camera on the same scene from a different angle. As you are watching the completed film, you see the scene from the first angle and then suddenly you see the scene from the second angle.

In this experiment, however, the filmmaker has fooled you. He has not cut to a second angle of the same scene, he has cut to a different angle of the same location, but with an entirely different actor.

 

[unpakwon]

A "cut" is when a filmmaker literally cuts the film and splices it together with the next piece of film. In this case the writer is talking about having one camera viewing a scene from one angle, and a second camera on the same scene from a different angle. As you are watching the completed film, you see the scene from the first angle and then suddenly you see the scene from the second angle.

In this experiment, however, the filmmaker has fooled you. He has not cut to a second angle of the same scene, he has cut to a different angle of the same location, but with an entirely different actor.

Thank you for the explanation, but it's still difficult for me. Maybe it's because I don't know well about film-shooting.

I'm still confused about the meaning of "cut to" in "he has not cut to..." and "he has cut to..." In your sentence "he has cut to a different angle of the same location," does this mean "he shot one scene from one angle and spliced it with the scene shot from a different angle"?
My God! it's not easy.

 

[SoothingDave]

Yes, that's what it means. A "cut" is any time that there is a discontinuity in the visual being presented. Any time one piece of film is spliced with another. (Or the same effect being done with videotape, editing machines or computers.)

 

[unpakwon]

So does it mean "when you present a scene spliced with a scene shot from a different angle of the same location with a different actor, most people don't notice that the actor has changed into a different person"? If so, why? Can't viewers see the faces of the two different actors in this case?

I'm afraid I'll never understand this if I don't see the actual scene like this.

 

[chevalier]

So does it mean "when you present a scene spliced with a scene shot from a different angle of the same location with a different actor, most people don't notice that the actor has changed into a different person"? If so, why? Can't viewers see the faces of the two different actors in this case?

I'm afraid I'll never understand this if I don't see the actual scene like this.

If I may - if the scene is filmed in a proper way - you won't notice the difference. Why? Because you are focusing your attention on what is the person doing, not on the person itself.

Let me give you an example. Perhaps that's not the same thing, but it will prove the point.
colour changing card trick - YouTube

[a learner]

 

[Rover_KE]

That's a great link, chevalier. It fooled me.

(Hint to others: keep watching after the cards have changed colour.)

Rover

 

[SoothingDave]

selective attention test - YouTube

Try this classic test.

 

[unpakwon]

I didn't count the passes correctly, but I saw the gorrila. It is surely difficult to concentrate on two things at the same time. ;-)