Claudio's Thesis - QUICKNOTES
28/11/2023
---
tonight, i was trying to film the screen with a more advanced camera, that i rented at the rental station at wdka.
i was trying out different settings - shutter speed, focal length, focus - to get the best, most clear image of the screen's grid structure.
lights were on in the room, long led tubes, whiteblueish light.
i started filming the screen, once again. in the camera's electronic viewfinder I see something strange happening. apparently random flashes of reddish/orangeish light appear on the screen I was trying to film. the camera is still, the screen is still too, but i see this light moving, flashing, dancing
i keep filming. it must be some sort of weird interference between the screen's led structure, the room's lightning system, the camera's sensor.
I go back to my studio desk, willing to see the result. I open the file, no trace of that light, juts the plain, white, griddy surface of the screen. what was it? (tbc...)
-----
am i losing myself in a rabbithole of self referential formalistic shit without any interest for others? am i just staying on the surface of things and not really trying to go beyond the formalistic refelection on images? this is what david is warning me about
should i try to get out? how can i do that?
he said that the more interesting parts are the blind spot and the idea of failure of images. work more on that? on what they actually mean?
24/11/2023
there s something with the surface+
its observation/exploration/scanning and its rupture/deformation/alteration/profanation
profanation of the dispositif (Agamben, always comes back)
interventions on the surface
ideas for final output?
a 16 mm film - screened as a analog projection loop - made as a compilation of short sketches - in between: short still fragmented texts that loosely relate to the images and partially elaborate on the topics involved
use 16mm print stock film - very high contrast, I feel it very much suits the premises of my project - and cheaper
[Steve suggests: in the piece described above, you are also making the viewer conscious of the experience of viewing the piece, which is encoded with 'burning eyes/eyes burning'. Please consider what this mirroring of words does, EYES WATCHING / WATCHING EYES seems redundant, but for me it suggests a shift from the inside of the film to the outside, between the object (the film) and the viewer, between the semiotics and the affect. the dash / is like a hinge that meaning swings on. By this logic FILMINGWATCHINGBURNING could be FILMINGWATCHINGBURNING/BURNINGWATCHINGFILMING. The material and the experience of the material feedback. This is consistent with your desire to work on the border between blindness and sight; visibility and invisibility.]
1 - THAT DASH SLASH / IS THE EDGE, THE TRESHOLD. ALL MY PROJECT IS MOVING ON THAT EDGE, ITS AN EXPLORATION OF THE EDGE BETWEEN
REFLECT ON MY USE OF IT, BRING IT OUT AS A METAPHOR/SYMBOL/IMAGE FOR THE SUBJECT OF MY WORK, TO TALK ABOUT MY WORK - ITS THEMES BUT ALSO ITS TOOLS
/ AS SEPARATION BUT ALSO RELATION, CONTRADICTORY/PARADOXICAL VALUE
/ IMPLIES A DOUBLE SIDE, THE POSSIBILITY OF A REVERSAL - I USE SIMILAR FORMAL DEVICES - THE INVERT EFFECT (FLIP IMAGES ON SCREEN AND POSITIVE/NEGATIVE REVERSAL OF AN IMAGE)
2 - Aitana also pointed out a certain redundancy in the stuff i showed in mentor group.
I feel it's actually a strategy that I am trying to develop. what does that mean? how can I use it effectively/intentionally?
is redundancy the right word? maybe repetition/layering?
(for part 3 / concepts)
other devices i use
slowing down almost to still frames / speeding up footage to a flickering flashing deconstructed perception of footage, altering the time images are given on screen
23/11/23
slowed down Louvre statues (excerpt) https://youtu.be/FfkTtrCsTFQ
make a 2 min piece of
shot:statue
countershot: balck dot on white background
shot: statue (opposite direction)
countershot: again black dot on white backgroud
loop
(an LCD screen filmed very very close)
(De Rotterdam's façade filmed form the Erasmus bridge)
sketch 1 https://youtu.be/ac1rEIsvwpA
sketch 2 https://youtu.be/IVagyN1DFVs
(Agnes Martin, Wood I, 1963 Watercolor and graphite on paper, 15 x 15 1/2 inches (38.1 x 39.4 cm))
(Agnes Martin, Aspiration, 1960 Ink on paper, 11 3/4 x 9 3/8 inches (29.8 x 23.8 cm) )
a refusal to make a fetish of the final “work” - to operate almost exclusively on the level of the sketch. - what is the value of this stance as an artist?
thinking about self imposed limitations to my practice
black and white only
16mm (limitations in shooting and editing)
when digital editing - keep it simple - 4 tracks + effects - aka not make things that would not be possible to make in analog editing
1 channel only? or can you make split screen in 16 mm?
sound? - no input mixer feedback loops