After hearing that the captured pieced can be preformed as well, I have came up with an idea for my phase 3 in hopes of blurring the distinction before what is captured and constructed.
For my captured piece, I plan to record something that is obviously constructed so that it will fool people to think that it is actually constructed when it isn't. For my constructed piece, I plan to either to construct the piece that I will record for my captured piece, make additions of sounds on top the the constructed piece so fool the audience that it is playing in the background of a captured piece, or use different 'natural' sounds to make the constructed seem like it is captured.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
Phase 3 - Sound
As an introduction to phase three, Marc has given us a briefing on sound with the movie
"The Conversion" by The Director's Company. This movie is interesting because it examines a conversation with three different microphones placed in different positions. It is through careful editing that the main character finds out what the man was saying to his friend in a noisy background. This leads us perfectly to our phase 3 because sound is something that travels around with no exact location where receivers in different location will have a different depiction of it. The way I understand phase 3 is that we are supposed to record 1 sound in its existing environment and create 1 sound which is a constructed with different sounds. The goal is to make both the sounds sound like it is constructed by emphasizing on the layers of sounds to understand the matter more in depth.
I just have one question at this point: Can we record sound using cell phones or do we have to use some high tech equipment?
"The Conversion" by The Director's Company. This movie is interesting because it examines a conversation with three different microphones placed in different positions. It is through careful editing that the main character finds out what the man was saying to his friend in a noisy background. This leads us perfectly to our phase 3 because sound is something that travels around with no exact location where receivers in different location will have a different depiction of it. The way I understand phase 3 is that we are supposed to record 1 sound in its existing environment and create 1 sound which is a constructed with different sounds. The goal is to make both the sounds sound like it is constructed by emphasizing on the layers of sounds to understand the matter more in depth.
I just have one question at this point: Can we record sound using cell phones or do we have to use some high tech equipment?
Monday, March 9, 2009
Winter Term - 1st Class
Today's lecture focused on the topic of surveillance vs. souveillance (watching back). I thought this is interesting because we are used to being captured on surveillance cameras in our public life, but we have never thought about acting and watching the ones that watch us back. It leads me to wonder who is watching you on the other side or if there really is anybody, which relates to the example we talked about in lecture today.
Marc gave us an example of the panopticon, it is jail in which the cells are lined in a circular shape one on top of each other. The jail guards watch them in a tower in the center, where the window spans all the way across. The glass is tinted so the inmates have no idea when they are being watched or if there is anybody watching them. This forces the inmates to behave themselves at all times. This example relates to myself because I know that I am being watched all the time outside from home (sometimes inside my home) if not by cameras, by other people. Souveillance is similar when I look back at somebody that is looking at me.
In real life when my gaze is caught with somebody else, one or both of us would immediate turn away avoiding the gaze. This can be related to the surveillance camera performers as they perform in front of security cameras for the security and surrounding people to see. This is highly unnatural and, similar to my example, the security would like to avoid this from happening again and would rush to the scene and tell them to stop.
Why do people watch people if people don't like to be watched? Is it fun watching other people? - a question to think about
Marc gave us an example of the panopticon, it is jail in which the cells are lined in a circular shape one on top of each other. The jail guards watch them in a tower in the center, where the window spans all the way across. The glass is tinted so the inmates have no idea when they are being watched or if there is anybody watching them. This forces the inmates to behave themselves at all times. This example relates to myself because I know that I am being watched all the time outside from home (sometimes inside my home) if not by cameras, by other people. Souveillance is similar when I look back at somebody that is looking at me.
In real life when my gaze is caught with somebody else, one or both of us would immediate turn away avoiding the gaze. This can be related to the surveillance camera performers as they perform in front of security cameras for the security and surrounding people to see. This is highly unnatural and, similar to my example, the security would like to avoid this from happening again and would rush to the scene and tell them to stop.
Why do people watch people if people don't like to be watched? Is it fun watching other people? - a question to think about
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Fluxus....
I was just looking at some information for my presentation topic and I came across this video on you tube.
Fluxus
I found this video pretty neat because it blends different media and modes of art together to form this clip. It fits in to the concept of fluxus because the video is basically made from the flow/intersection of one type of media to another. It also ties in to detournement and appropriation because something new in meaning is created from existing pieces of art. I am feeling good about this topic because it is beginning to tie in to what we are doing now. I think that I have a much better understanding of this topic now than before.
I was going to end this post but something just hit me now, I don't remember if it was this class or was it a design lecture but I remember the prof talked about mail art. Someone in the circle sends a piece of paper to the next person whom adds a little bit to it and send it to the next person and so on. The mail piece would look different each time someone receives it. By the time the first sender gets it back, it would look nothing like the original and would probably have an entirely different meaning. This ties in to the fluxus concept because the circulation of the mail creates an environment where nothing added is planned and resulting piece would be the combination of different artists' additons. Some may choose to go with its original meaning and some would recontextualize it and make it in to something different. However the piece is free flowing, no one has complete control over the result unless it is the last person.
This leads me to one final question: Does fluxus involve control or is it the spirit of free flowing limitless ideas? And if it doesn't require control, then in what instance can a piece of art be truly fluxus, or is it even possible when someone is involved with it?
Fluxus
I found this video pretty neat because it blends different media and modes of art together to form this clip. It fits in to the concept of fluxus because the video is basically made from the flow/intersection of one type of media to another. It also ties in to detournement and appropriation because something new in meaning is created from existing pieces of art. I am feeling good about this topic because it is beginning to tie in to what we are doing now. I think that I have a much better understanding of this topic now than before.
I was going to end this post but something just hit me now, I don't remember if it was this class or was it a design lecture but I remember the prof talked about mail art. Someone in the circle sends a piece of paper to the next person whom adds a little bit to it and send it to the next person and so on. The mail piece would look different each time someone receives it. By the time the first sender gets it back, it would look nothing like the original and would probably have an entirely different meaning. This ties in to the fluxus concept because the circulation of the mail creates an environment where nothing added is planned and resulting piece would be the combination of different artists' additons. Some may choose to go with its original meaning and some would recontextualize it and make it in to something different. However the piece is free flowing, no one has complete control over the result unless it is the last person.
This leads me to one final question: Does fluxus involve control or is it the spirit of free flowing limitless ideas? And if it doesn't require control, then in what instance can a piece of art be truly fluxus, or is it even possible when someone is involved with it?
Further process
At this stage I found the clips mentioned in my previous entry and have begun to piece them together. The rendering duration is hideous because I am dealing with a several video clips and it is taking up to 30 minutes to render it. This is also my first time using final cut so I'm not too familiar with using the tools. One of the problems I am having now is with the transactions between the clips, I don't want to make the video seem choppy but I don't want to fill it up with transactions between every single clip. I am trying to figure out how to expand the duration of the fade-in transaction, I tried to drag it, but it doesn't work. Other from this, its going so far so good.
Oh yes, and I'm not sure if there is lecture tomorrow because it is supposed to be a make up day for Monday and Mark said that there is no lecture this week. I haven't received any e-mail regarding about this and I live quite a distance from York, so I think I wouldn't be able to make it to the lecture (if there is any) tomorrow seeing its my only class (only 1 hr long).
Oh yes, and I'm not sure if there is lecture tomorrow because it is supposed to be a make up day for Monday and Mark said that there is no lecture this week. I haven't received any e-mail regarding about this and I live quite a distance from York, so I think I wouldn't be able to make it to the lecture (if there is any) tomorrow seeing its my only class (only 1 hr long).
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Phase 2 Process
Change #1
I have made a several changes to how I will present my ideas. Instead of doing an in depth news report and replacing the on-site footage with cartoons and other material, I have decided to cut out the actual news report and replacing it with a short intro. of the Jetsons. The idea here is to have the actual news intro and ending, so it makes it seem like the viewer is missing the entire news report but actually the question is 'are they REALLY missing it' because nowadays the news can be so biased we need to ask ourselves whether we are shown the truth or only fragments of it? Watching the news and watching cartoons may have no difference at all.
Change #2
After going in to the critique in class just now, I have decided to change my video once again. The Jetson's intro is surprisingly a parody when placed along with the news intro. because they but show images of the globes and outter space. Instead of using the Jetson's clip as the main highlight, I will piece chunks of it together with a several news intros playing on the parody to give a more immediate reflection to the viewer. Apart from that my main idea is getting across pretty slowly so the goal for now is to find a controversial issue (I picked gun control) and find clips of biased opinions and methods of presentation from different news broadcasts and piecing it together to strengthen my point.
Yep...and thats how I am going to go about phase 2 for now.
I have made a several changes to how I will present my ideas. Instead of doing an in depth news report and replacing the on-site footage with cartoons and other material, I have decided to cut out the actual news report and replacing it with a short intro. of the Jetsons. The idea here is to have the actual news intro and ending, so it makes it seem like the viewer is missing the entire news report but actually the question is 'are they REALLY missing it' because nowadays the news can be so biased we need to ask ourselves whether we are shown the truth or only fragments of it? Watching the news and watching cartoons may have no difference at all.
Change #2
After going in to the critique in class just now, I have decided to change my video once again. The Jetson's intro is surprisingly a parody when placed along with the news intro. because they but show images of the globes and outter space. Instead of using the Jetson's clip as the main highlight, I will piece chunks of it together with a several news intros playing on the parody to give a more immediate reflection to the viewer. Apart from that my main idea is getting across pretty slowly so the goal for now is to find a controversial issue (I picked gun control) and find clips of biased opinions and methods of presentation from different news broadcasts and piecing it together to strengthen my point.
Yep...and thats how I am going to go about phase 2 for now.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Ideas For Phase 2
My main idea of phase 1 is to question the audience about the intersection of art and technology, I want to carry this idea through to my phase 2 project by asking the viewers the following questions:
- Is the audience really passive? Or can they judge and reflect about the media they see?
- Can the audience differentiate between what is real and what is fake shown in television?
- Can the audience differentiate between what is entertainment and what is serious?
- Does technology aid or degrades arts and ideas i.e.) through plagiarism?
- Are we being shown the truth, or only fragments of it?
- Are popular cartoons just moving images, or can it have a deeper meaning?
I plan to touch on the ideas above by replacing the on-site footage of a news program with entertainment sources such as cartoons, movies, and drama that are similar from the reported incident. This will force differentiation upon the audience about the two opposite sources and question them about what we are shown on television and film.
- Is the audience really passive? Or can they judge and reflect about the media they see?
- Can the audience differentiate between what is real and what is fake shown in television?
- Can the audience differentiate between what is entertainment and what is serious?
- Does technology aid or degrades arts and ideas i.e.) through plagiarism?
- Are we being shown the truth, or only fragments of it?
- Are popular cartoons just moving images, or can it have a deeper meaning?
I plan to touch on the ideas above by replacing the on-site footage of a news program with entertainment sources such as cartoons, movies, and drama that are similar from the reported incident. This will force differentiation upon the audience about the two opposite sources and question them about what we are shown on television and film.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)