Movie Responses

Video Response: Brian Bress 370 cover

This video was so trippy! When it started, I had a hard time figuring out what was going on, I thought maybe a fuse was burning in between the colored stripes or something. As the film progressed, I began to recognize that something, or someone, was cutting out abstract shapes from the striped canvas with an electric saw. I started laughing when recognized the figure was a person dressed in all stripes of perpendicular direction of the stripes on the canvas. The flat lighting used in the video made it difficult to see the depth and distinguish between foreground, middle ground, and background which increased the illusion of the stripes and the moving figure with the geometric shaped head covers. Once the artist was done cutting shapes out of the canvas, he just stood there moving and turning slightly, creating new illusions with each second as the contrasting black and white stripes interplayed. It seemed like there was some film editing at the end when the shapes blended and stopped at exactly perpendicular angles as the googles disappeared. I don’t know if this qualifies as photography, performance art, film, sculpture or painting. I think it is a mix of all these combined because the artist is sculpting in a video, cutting out of painted canvases that ends with a still photo. In a way his work reminds me of Georges Rousse, how he incorporates illusion, depth, geometric shapes, and patterns in his photos. It was interesting that the artist became part of the art himself; he was no longer a subject, but rather an object of contrasting stripes. Everything combined in this video made me really enjoy it. This video taught me how much we can push the bounds of the idea of photography by incorporating unique aspects that make the audience really think.

Movie Response: An Interview with Penelope Umbrico

I find it interesting since in class we are trying to define what photography really is, that Penelope Umbrico calls her work photo-based art as opposed to photography. In her work, she studies how people take photos instead of studying the subject taken. As soon as the web became available for people’s use she has had a limitless resource to study people. What Penelope does is she takes all the images people shot of the sun and uploaded on flickr, crops out the sun and uses these images in her work. Sometimes she puts them in a grid and prints them out. She is just compiling other people’s work to show the similarities and differences in the photos. It reminds me a bit of how Bernd and Hilla Becher documented old buildings and put them in a grid structure for comparison. Penelope wants to compare how people take photos of the sunset, or rather show that there is somehow a set code that people follow when photographing the sun. She mentions that when everyone does something similar, it takes away from the beauty of the photo because we are so used to seeing it that it doesn’t “wow” us anymore. Another thing she did was compile the sun photos for a screen saver that is so fast and colorful it could give someone a seizure. I think it is hilarious that the screen saver she made really does exactly opposite of what a screen saver is supposed to do. It originally was made to save your screen from having a hole burnt through it if an image was left up too long. This “Sun Screen” saver she made would have actually caused a burn in the old screens. This is because she has cropped them all to be similarly placed that there is always a bright sun in the center of the screen to show how people photograph certain subjects in the same way.

I also thought it was interesting that she used Second Life to create a never ending sunset. The first time I had heard about Second Life was when we watched the video about Cao Fein. Both of these two artists were trying to create a surreal place that people would want to be in. They have some realistic aspects, like the city and a sunset for example, but unrealistic aspects that make it just impossible enough that it can’t be real such as the sunset never ending.

Movie Response: Walead Beshty at The Curve, Barbican Centre, London

This video focused on Walead Beshty’s large scale installation for the Barbican Centre’s The Curve. He talked about how they took cyanotype images of every piece of equipment they used every day for a year working in the studio. Much of what I thought about when watching this for the first time was sustainability. After reading and presenting on packaging sustainability for another class I have, I now consider materials artists utilize much more, especially paper. At first I felt that Walead Beshty was being entirely wasteful in making prints of all these pieces of trash that were getting thrown away. But the longer I watched, I felt that it was instead a sustainable project because much of the paper they were using was old newspapers or other previously used paper. He was turning the trash into art and making people aware of the wastefulness of our culture. The fact that they had to limit the wall to 7,000 images out of 12,000 shows how consumerist we are. 12,000 things used up and thrown away in the span of a year is a big number; it is rounded to approximately 32 things thrown away per day. I was surprised by the size of some as well. I really liked the ladder cyanotype image, but the ladder didn’t look broken or used up which made me wonder why it was on the wall if they only documented discarded objects. The part I felt was most wasteful about the whole project was the 41 volumes that was a full compilation of all 12,000 documented images. These books were very large and many of the pages only had tiny photos printed on a full page which to me was very wasteful.

I loved all the connections he made at the end of the video about the curved wall being like a panorama from 19^th century which is the time the cyanotype was invented and also the golden age of the “gentleman’s encyclopedia” which were all aspects of his documentation project. I don’t know if he came up with that all before or after the project started but it was a nice cohesive closing.

Movie response to Cao Fein in “Fantasy”

My eyes were opened when I watched this film about people living in virtual reality and as COS play characters. Previously, I had thought that people dressed up as their favorite characters and reenacted scenes just for fun, not as a way to escape their own personal identity and life; but maybe that is only in my privileged American culture. The fact that people are so discontent with reality that they embody an imaginary character is depressing to me. They are motivated to create a better world for themselves, but since it seems impossible to change the real world, they just live in a virtual fantasy. In this “Second Life” people have the opportunity to be whomever they wish and can do whatever they want. Cao Fein created a free society with a democracy and new mayor every few months much different than the communist society of China. She also created the city to be completely functional and have an interrelationship between humans and nature. If only there were a way to create this type of society in the real world where people live in harmony and are not oppressed by the government or capitalism.

Movie Response: Walead Beshty at The Curve, Barbican Centre, London

Movie Response to: RIP a Remix Manifesto

The film, A Remix Manifesto, brought to light the issues of copyright, intellectual property, and human nature. Copyrights are intended to protect the ideas and creativity of the inventor or artist so that they can receive profit for their work. Human nature’s creativity though is always based upon something else; it is always built upon from a previous conception. For example, songs could not come about without someone inventing a system to distinguish notes. Therefore, is it copying someone if you are using the notes and words someone else came up with, but writing your own song? I wonder now about all the cover songs and people doing their own styles of famous songs. Is this against copyright because they are making money off their performances of someone else’s songs, or is it not illegal because they acknowledge that it is a cover and not their own complete intellectual property? But does that mean then that Bruno Mars owns and should profit off someone’s home video of his song? Back in the Viennese Classical Era, it was considered a tribute to have your musical themes copied and reused, even without recognition. Time period styles are based off of people creating similar art; we would not have styles if it weren’t for people creating similar artistic work. Creativity and copying can sometimes be a fine line. As the film said “Culture builds on the past”; the past is where our inspiration and creativity come from. Postmodern photography builds on the past in the sense that the photographers were trying to not create in the similar style as previously. We are influenced by things we experience in our past, whether it is something we see, hear, touch, smell, taste or feel emotionally. Can someone put a price on what or how we have experienced something and then choose to express that feeling? Art is an expression of an individual person’s feelings and varies vastly.

Artistic expression and appreciation can be enjoyed for what they are, without a price. I believe one should be free to appreciate and enjoy the creativity of others. As long as they are not making profit off of the work of others, and giving appropriate credit when due, I don’t see a problem with art expression. I think it is acceptable to express appreciation of how we connected or emotionally felt about the original art when creating an appropriation of it. That expression or feeling is our own, and we should be free to share that how we want.

I love that this movie used remixes and editing and such to tell about copyrights. It basically did everything illegal based upon the information it was presenting. I especially liked the part where he stopped playing the music and said he could not use the song anymore because it was illegal since he already used it to get his point across, then proceeded to play something from the free domain which was an old Viennese Classical symphonic piece. This song clashed styles with the video so much it was comical.

In today’s world though I think listening to music is different. We have unlimited sources to stream that the line between listening and downloading is much fuzzier. Downloading seems less serious since we already have access to the streamed version.

As someone studying graphic design, the issue of copyright and creativity become more serious since it is a profession that profits off original creativity. Every day in America, we are bombarded by thousands of advertisements, graphics, and images whether we realize it or not. I challenge you to observe your surroundings next time you walk to class and try to count how many you see, this should include the ones you see on your electronic device that you look at while you walk. Often times, we don’t even cognitively comprehend them, but it may influence our subconscious and therefore indirectly influence our work. This can cause problems so we must be very careful not to accidentally copy someone else’s design. This becomes tricky because we have to research what has been done in the past in order to come up with fresh ideas, but at the same time we have to then look at the past designs which then can influence our opinions and sometimes limit our thinking to only those images we saw and so culture and creativity continue to build on the past. It requires much effort to branch out and be creative.

I am always skeptical of presentations like this though when someone so ardently defends an argument because they seem to only show evidence that makes them sound innocent and correct while the other side is the bad guys. I would like to have seen more actual data from both sides so that I could understand both sides of the argument better and choose what I think is good and bad. I don’t think either side is entirely evil or trying to rip off everyone, they each just take a strong stance on one aspect of the debate and fight for it.

Movie Response to: Bernd and Hilla Becher

Bernd and Hill Becher were a group of German photographers that collaborated together to document industrial complexes before they got demolished. They photographed these structures to capture the most detail by using techniques such as overcast days for flat light, a zoom lens so as not to distort any details, a low horizon line to not to interrupt the building, and choosing the most objective angle among many other compositional techniques. It was most important to them to show the detail because they were concerned solely with documenting this history of human culture. Their work is some of the first ever in the deadpan style photography.

In terms of the film, I found it extremely important that they chose not to show the photographers but rather only their work because that was their focus. It made sense to show their work as they described it. There was one specific scene that stands out to me where the paused on one image of the grid of silos as they talked about the importance of their grid structure. I had plenty of time to ponder their techniques that they talked about as well as appreciate the detail and critique the photos. In addition, I am not sure whether this was a result of the translation and language differences, but there were long pauses before the narration started in most sections. I think this was a smart choice on their part because as a viewer I had a good amount of time to look at the photos, make my own interpretations, and ponder the detail of the structures in each. Then, when they did start explaining I was able to understand what they were talking about since I had that time to study the images previously.

As for their work, I was mind-blown because of how they were able to manipulate me by the way they used the grid of similar objects to make the me compare them all to each other. When I first looked at their work, I was unconsciously comparing all the structures, finding the similarities and differences among them, and tried to decide which structures were the best in terms of aesthetics and function. Later, as they talked about the concept behind their work, I realized their purpose in making the grid was to have the viewer compare all the images. They put so much thought into the location of the photos in the grid to make the best comparisons. It was so well done and flawless and I didn’t even realize that was their intention. As a whole, without focusing on one particular image, the grid of similar photos made a pleasing pattern to enjoy as well. By watching this video, I have come to appreciate the work of Bernd and Hilla so much more because I understand their organized concept, intent and process.

Movie Response to: Physical Theatre-The Cost of Living

When this movie first started, I saw the clown faces I thought, “oh no” because I don’t particularly like clowns. But it turns out the intro scene was my favorite. It was very clever how the head turning and music timed with the spoken lines which were very humorous.

I think this film was about movement and how we perceive the human form. One of the main characters was a deformed person who didn’t have any legs. Just how unnatural he looked to us was the purpose of the film. There were hundreds of questions and assumptions that popped into my head when he first appeared on screen such as “Was he in an accident or was he born that way? How does he perform normal human tasks? His arms, shoulders and neck were exceptionally large so he must have been like this for a while and those muscles grew to compensate for the lack of legs. etc. etc…” Halfway into the film there was a section where a “random” person went up to the man and asked him many of the same questions that were going through my head and I immediately felt ashamed for thinking those questions because of how annoying the unwanted interviewer was. This was on purpose to teach society that disabled people are human too and that their disability should not define them. I really enjoyed the dance that followed where a group of guys were dancing on their hands like the disabled man, Dave. They were down on his level and showed a bit of what the world looked like from his perspective.

Throughout the film they used clever camera angles and perspectives to give illusions. The final scene as the credits rolled was the most powerful of all these illusions. At the beach, Eddie gives Dave a ride, but the way he’s is walking on all fours makes it look like Dave is really walking on two legs. This shows that in their lives, both friends support each other in all aspects of life and how we should not get caught up with what seems “normal” but rather learn to utilize our strengths and weaknesses to build a stronger world.

Movie Response to: Contacts Vol 2 Jeff Wall

Jeff Wall talked about his inspiration for becoming a photographer and how he was influenced by contemporary photography. He chose photography over painting because he believed it offered more possibilities of expression. He dipped in and out of all styles of photography, from surreal and extremely fabricated images, to the simple near honesty of landscapes. In some of his obviously fake images he left clues to the viewer that it was constructed such as the torn up room you can see the outside frame supports of the set. His in-between style was collaborations with actors to create a truthful performance or cinematic scene as if from a movie. The concept was to make these look like a representation of an actual event, not the real thing itself.

Jeff Wall experimented and worked with many different styles and techniques. One of these techniques he explored was illuminated pictures, which was a medium not previously explored. There were limitations he found, that the photo prints were not large enough so he had to put two prints side to side to get the size he wanted. There was a slight overlap where these met up that caused an almost black line to appear. His comment to this was that he liked the limitation of medium and the ugliness made it more beautiful. This line of imperfection also shows that the photo isn’t real, it is only a representation of the image. In addition, when your eye focuses on the cut in the image it brings your attention to the surface of the image, the physical material of the unrealistic space. Jeff Wall described this as a dialetictic between depth and flatness that causes an illusion to your visual senses.

Another technique he worked with was photomontage where he took many photos and put them together to create one full image. One of his these was titled “Dead Troops Talk” and it was about soldiers and what they would say if they woke up from death on the battlefield. Each actor or group was photographed individually on the huge constructed mountain set with different emotions expressed through their poses, faces, and actions. A second montage Jeff made was a 180 degree panorama of a round 360 degree room. This was a very calculated procedure where he implied half the space by having the model look out into it so the viewer knows something is there but can only use imagination.

I enjoyed learning about his work and he was very clear in articulating his processes and concepts. It was mind-blowing how he created the images before photoshop.

Movie Response to: Waste Land

The documentary “Waste Land” covered Vik Muniz’s experience making art with the gatherers of recyclable material from one of the world’s largest landfills in Jardim Gramacho, Brazil. The project was to create portraits of the people using the materials they worked with every day, the garbage and recyclable materials. It was an emotional experience to learn about these people’s lives and watch them transform. Through his project, Vik wanted to bring about an awareness of the workers to the world and help get them out of poverty if possible by giving them all the proceeds that the portraits were sold for.

The process of creating the work was very involved. First, Vik Muniz met with the people and learned about their lives and jobs at the landfill. He went on site to the landfill to get a feel and understanding of the environment and the materials he wanted to use in the portrait. He began to interact and form relationships with the people and got their permission to be photographed. Once he had a group of people in mind for the project, Vik took some more photos in the studio. After choosing the photos to use, he called in the people and had them arrange different garbage materials on the floor over a giant projection of the portrait. From a distance, recognition of the actual materials disappeared as the illusion of the portrait became dominant. Finally, Vik photographed the illusion from a high distance above, and then the floor was swept clean; there was no visible trace left of the work except for the photos he had taken.

This is a prime example of Social Design, or using design to increase the livelihood of people. According to socialsquare.dk “social design can be defined as the design of platforms and processes that leads to people participating and contributing in creating an output that is greater than the individual input.” Social design can literally be anything that benefits a certain group of people and makes their lives a little bit better. There is much collaboration involved in social design not only among the group of designers but also between the designers and the target group because their use of the product is what makes it successful. In the case of artist Vik Muniz’s project with the poor people of Brazil, he actually involved them in the production process. This project was supposed to raise awareness for the impoverished people living there and help them to find better lives. Each person involved had their life changed, but all in different ways. Some people benefited from the monetary aspect and were able to start businesses, others benefited more from the emotional empowerment knowing they are beautiful and their lives are not worthless.

Movie Response to: Georges Rousse

Georges Rousse’s journey in his art and style is fascinating! He began with figures of people floating in the space, move to simple geometric shapes, became more complex with different colors, then built his own sets within the space he was photographing, then began writing his notes and drawing maps in the photographed spaces. His growth was incredible to watch as he found his niche and explored every aspect of possibilities within to express his thoughts, views and person through light, content and color.

He would create something beautiful in a desolate, abandoned place. Georges Rousse saw beauty and potential everywhere he went and wanted others to see it too so he would bring his imaginings to life for the world to witness.

I was shocked that the 2-dimensional shapes he painted in his photos were painted before he took the pictures in the 3-dimensional space. I thought he painted over the photo print but instead he painted the walls, ceiling and objects in the room by imagining a terrific perspective. He created an optical illusion for the viewer by his placement of the camera in the space in relation to his paintings. If his camera were moved even slightly, his perfect perspective would be off and the illusion would no longer trick people. I imagine the process to paint the space by looking at his 2-D shapes in the camera glass viewfinder was tedious and time consuming.

As he progressed in his work, he began to create it more conceptually. Sometimes he painted his notes in the perspective in the space which made their original meaning incomprehensible, but gave new meaning to some of the legible words. Also by using the maps of places he has been he added an abstract version of the world in his real space. This connects his work to the real world and his experiences, giving these works a more conceptual meaning.

Movie Response to: Cindy Sherman-Nobody’s here but Me

I found this film to have great insight into the concepts and development of the work of contemporary photographer, Cindy Sherman. I had never heard of her or her work before so I came into this with a completely unbiased opinion which helped me to critique it honestly.

Cindy Sherman has proven to be a very postmodern photographer, she doesn’t appropriate actual images, but she appropriates styles from contemporary art, most notably from horror films that she enjoyed watching. In her earlier work she would portray a woman in different parts of life and society using the same mystery through lighting techniques and expressions as in the horror movies.

In addition to being postmodern in style, Cindy Sherman’s work is postmodern in concept because she is expressing the modern American women and how she views they are treated in society with the intention of changing those the standards. Each of her photos shows the solidarity of women and how they are pressured because of the high expectations that society has for women. She purposefully gave them ambiguous expressions so that the viewer can connect with the art, try to make up the story behind the image, and feel an emotional connection or relate directly with the subject.

My favorite part of the video was when she talked about her work with the centerfold style images that showed normal women alone and how they dislike the societal standards of women. These were meant to be centerfolds of magazines to replace to oversexualized images of women that normally appear there. Cindy’s intent here was to make men feel guilty for their ridiculous expectations of women by making the women look like victims. Cindy said this was the only time she consciously thought about the male gaze and purposefully wanted to make them feel guilty. This one instance shows how powerful Cindy is as a postmodern artist and how she can create feelings in people and make them think about their actions to potentially change for the better as an individual and altogether as a society.