Wednesday, May 10, 2006

Complete degree film???

Have now finished Pt IV of the film, and am in the process of encoding all four parts for DVD to have a look at it in the lecture theatre, the nearest thing to what my exhibition will look like (only without the seats). The piece has been provisionally titled:
‘Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds (1963) frames …-…’
After this would follow ‘Pt. 1’, then the subsequent titles for the different parts of the film. Also, I haven’t yet calculated exactly which frames I have used, but when I do I will insert these in the title. While the film speed for both the 35mm and digital format is 24fps, I wonder whether it’s worth noting in the title that I have used the digital model, and how this will affect interpretation of the piece. Obviously this work was not constructed using analog methods, but if I include the word digital in the title, then perhaps this alludes to the theory I’ve been interested in, suggesting McLuhan, Kittler, Manovich, et al. Perhaps ‘…digital frames …-…’ would be better, though who can be sure. I’ll have to think about it, besides, I should be thinking about my encoding and what sort of effect I want. At the minute I have been encoding as a ‘2-pass VBR, 4:3, 60mins Best quality for DVD’, or something like that. I haven’t put on any deinterlacing, which I think could cause some problems, but at present I just want to get it done, and then see how best I can resolve any inherent problems with it. It is taking a very long time, and says it should be done in about 18 hours (total time taken). Once this is complete I can put the whole thing on DVD as a single track loop. I think I’ll also include chapter markers so I can skip between sections (for ease of viewing/reassessment).
Of course, while my computers busy I’ve had time to do other things, so I’ve been going back over some research and looking up interviews with Nam June Paik among others, work by Paul Sharits, whose flicker films have a lot in common with the ending of Pt. III, which flickers, stutters and stammers to a full stop. I’ve also been looking at some of the theory in greater detail, after all this is all stuff which will pay dividends next year, and when I come to write my MA dissertation. I’ve mainly been looking at Youngbood’s Expanded Cinema, and researching topics around this. The introduction (and comments throughout) by Buckminster Fuller seem like flights of fancy, even now, 30 years or so after it was written. I do however like the examinations of films such as 2001:A Space Odyssey, in particular the ‘Star-gate’ sequence, designed by Douglas Trumbull, but also, more video art orientated films such as Michael Snow’s Wavelength (the archetypal structural film), Stan Barkhage’s Dog Star Man (1959-64), Will Hindle’s Chinese Firedrill (1968), Patrick O’Neill’s 7362 (1965-66) and John Schofill’s XFilm (1967).
One artist who particularly interests me is Jordan Belson, who produced several animated films in the 1960’s, and is still working today, though it is his work from the 60’s which seems best documented. I have yet to see any of these images move, but the stills alone display Belson’s skill at constructing intricate forms and patterns. This all suggests I should do some further research. It is, with Belson’s work, strictly the patterns I’m interested in, his films, according to Youngblood, have a mystical, religious tone to them, which I have no interest in whatsoever, it is strictly the effects and means of production I find fascinating. Anyway, for next week I hope to have encoded my films to a sufficient standard, and have looked at them properly and decided a proper course of action.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I say briefly: Best! Useful information. Good job guys.
»

11:43 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nice colors. Keep up the good work. thnx!
»

6:05 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home