Once Brian and I decided we were working together and initiated conversations about both my area of interest, landscape as matter, energy, and information or void, and Brian's interest in film's "long take" and montage, the conversations became incrementally more interested in our built environments spaces. We generalized and at times categorized space into categories not unlike Kevin Lynch's tactics in Image of the City. Consistently we turned back to the more important focus on the long take as a mapping technique and landscape as an atomic carpet riddled with thresholds or connections and simply differentiated through urbanization and patterns of living development.
Ultimately, our more relevant analysis was "post filming" or "post real time mapping". It was not until after we planned the film, walked what would be the film, walked what would be the film again, and then shot the film, watched the film, and watched the film, that we noticed a clear pattern embedded within the area of the city we were filming.
Similar to physics the space under anaylsis has properties or elements that can be easily understood as matter, energy, and information or spaces of utility, activity, and constraint pared with temporality.
In the presented work the rigour is embedded within the production and placement of audio. The audio is contrived not unlike the facades that bifurcate urbanity. Essentially, the audio narrates the landscape slowly revealing, impregnating, and networking the events, energies, and atoms that are composed 3 dimensional, but as shown here 2 dimensionally.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
E=Mc2 film style
The long take is about the experience of an individual - the montage is about collective understanding.
Brian,
I really like this synopsis you have made about two very common filming techniques, (long take and montage).
I think these two types of technique and the respective ideas about individualism and collectivness is similarly concerned with the physical universal principles I mentioned in the previous post.
For example, if the void is accessible information is this to say that the void is a collective interaction similar to the montage?
On the other hand, is the present and dated paradigm E-mc2, representative of the autonomous body and landscapes constructed of fragments of information and material that would be unrecognizable without the "appropriate puzzling"
What if our instillation was a puzzle/film? What the F is a puzzle film? We should figure it out?
I read this really interesting thing by Stephen Hawking where he discuss time, chaos, complexity, and high order. The conclusion is that the world becomes more complex with time. He compared the world to a puzzle stating something to the effect that if the world were a puzzle and we assembled it, that would denote day one. Further if we were to the put that puzzle assembled into a box and give it a shake that would be a future date by which the world will have become less high order and more complex, and with each shake of the the box th universe becomes more complex and more synonymous to our universe.
Brian,
I really like this synopsis you have made about two very common filming techniques, (long take and montage).
I think these two types of technique and the respective ideas about individualism and collectivness is similarly concerned with the physical universal principles I mentioned in the previous post.
For example, if the void is accessible information is this to say that the void is a collective interaction similar to the montage?
On the other hand, is the present and dated paradigm E-mc2, representative of the autonomous body and landscapes constructed of fragments of information and material that would be unrecognizable without the "appropriate puzzling"
What if our instillation was a puzzle/film? What the F is a puzzle film? We should figure it out?
I read this really interesting thing by Stephen Hawking where he discuss time, chaos, complexity, and high order. The conclusion is that the world becomes more complex with time. He compared the world to a puzzle stating something to the effect that if the world were a puzzle and we assembled it, that would denote day one. Further if we were to the put that puzzle assembled into a box and give it a shake that would be a future date by which the world will have become less high order and more complex, and with each shake of the the box th universe becomes more complex and more synonymous to our universe.
Audio-Sound
Sound like all other phenomenal things, light, water, even air, is physically manifested through matter, atoms, or particles. Simply, it seems that sound like light is merely the combination of energy and matter.
Thinking about our project, which we should name, how is sound or audio a montage? a landscape? matter? energy? or void? Considering the void. Atomically speaking we are unclear about the void that exists between the neutrons, protons, electrons, and quarks. Proportionally the void is the same as the void that exists between the stars, planets, and galaxies. Simply, the space the exists between the entities that we physically understand or see, via technology, has a distinguishable amount of potential.
In light of this I think it very important that sound becomes an informative element, eluding to the unknown and very complex nothingness. Possibly, we make the lack of sound more apparent the sound itself through the way we orchestrate the sounds we do make. Perhaps the sound or audio is combination or recorded/altered dialog that brings awareness or information to the final project. Perhaps, the dialog and sound is either paralleled through video or juxtaposed with video. This is to say that the audio could contrast the video or highlight it making reference to the void.
Lets simplify the world. We have E=mc 2, which is to say that energy has an equivalent and that equivalent has a mass meaning it must be made of matter or particles or atoms. Now and probably in the past with less science involved researchs, theoriticians, doctors, philosophers, are discussing a void and asking what is in the void. Potentially the void is consciousness, knowledge, or information. Therefore it would be via this void that we know ourselves despite the fact we physically completely replace ourselves down to the very last atom every 4 years.
Within our project I think it ultimately important to play on these three universal attributes, matter, energy, and information (void). Even more crucial I think we should analyze and utilize the information void within sound, film, and built object.
Matter
Energy
Information
Film
Audio
Object/Field
Thinking about our project, which we should name, how is sound or audio a montage? a landscape? matter? energy? or void? Considering the void. Atomically speaking we are unclear about the void that exists between the neutrons, protons, electrons, and quarks. Proportionally the void is the same as the void that exists between the stars, planets, and galaxies. Simply, the space the exists between the entities that we physically understand or see, via technology, has a distinguishable amount of potential.
In light of this I think it very important that sound becomes an informative element, eluding to the unknown and very complex nothingness. Possibly, we make the lack of sound more apparent the sound itself through the way we orchestrate the sounds we do make. Perhaps the sound or audio is combination or recorded/altered dialog that brings awareness or information to the final project. Perhaps, the dialog and sound is either paralleled through video or juxtaposed with video. This is to say that the audio could contrast the video or highlight it making reference to the void.
Lets simplify the world. We have E=mc 2, which is to say that energy has an equivalent and that equivalent has a mass meaning it must be made of matter or particles or atoms. Now and probably in the past with less science involved researchs, theoriticians, doctors, philosophers, are discussing a void and asking what is in the void. Potentially the void is consciousness, knowledge, or information. Therefore it would be via this void that we know ourselves despite the fact we physically completely replace ourselves down to the very last atom every 4 years.
Within our project I think it ultimately important to play on these three universal attributes, matter, energy, and information (void). Even more crucial I think we should analyze and utilize the information void within sound, film, and built object.
Matter
Energy
Information
Film
Audio
Object/Field
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
I found a really good book on this subject that I checked out from the Library. It is called "Living Systems: Innovative Materials and Technologies for Landscape Architecture." It has some incredible projects and technology stuff, I can drop it off tomorrow if you want to look at it.
On another note, I know I never posted much but I am going to try and put some stuff up over the next couple days.
Here is something I am thinking primarily about:
When breaking down the history and evolution of camera movement and editing in film, the long take and the montage take on more clear purposes that are easier to see when you look at the emergence of editing. In my argument right now, I am aligning the montage with understanding and the long take with experiencing. The montage is a collective. It is a synthesis of collected images and film that are edited together to provide an "objective" understanding of an event, emotion, concept etc. The montage is supposed to enable comprehension of something whereas the long take is primarily concerned with experience - it is a reproduction of the past, that we understand and experience as present.
In applying this to our movement through space and in thinking about landscape urbanism, you can break movement through space, or maybe even the development of space itself, down in to the two categories of understanding and experiencing.
Also, in terms of mapping, the montage and long take fit well into work over the past semester. The montage is the conventional map - it is concerned with enabling the viewer to understand as much as possible - which seems objective. However, the objective appearance was still shaped by a cartographer or graphic designer just like the montage is shaped by the editor. Whereas, the "newer" mapping projects we have been going over (the san fransico cab website, the barcelona bike website, even the NY A/V project) are concerned with the individual "subjective" experience of moving thought space, as a mapping strategy. The long take is about the experience of an individual - the montage is about collective understanding.
On another note, I know I never posted much but I am going to try and put some stuff up over the next couple days.
Here is something I am thinking primarily about:
When breaking down the history and evolution of camera movement and editing in film, the long take and the montage take on more clear purposes that are easier to see when you look at the emergence of editing. In my argument right now, I am aligning the montage with understanding and the long take with experiencing. The montage is a collective. It is a synthesis of collected images and film that are edited together to provide an "objective" understanding of an event, emotion, concept etc. The montage is supposed to enable comprehension of something whereas the long take is primarily concerned with experience - it is a reproduction of the past, that we understand and experience as present.
In applying this to our movement through space and in thinking about landscape urbanism, you can break movement through space, or maybe even the development of space itself, down in to the two categories of understanding and experiencing.
Also, in terms of mapping, the montage and long take fit well into work over the past semester. The montage is the conventional map - it is concerned with enabling the viewer to understand as much as possible - which seems objective. However, the objective appearance was still shaped by a cartographer or graphic designer just like the montage is shaped by the editor. Whereas, the "newer" mapping projects we have been going over (the san fransico cab website, the barcelona bike website, even the NY A/V project) are concerned with the individual "subjective" experience of moving thought space, as a mapping strategy. The long take is about the experience of an individual - the montage is about collective understanding.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)