[-empyre-] CG and all things fuzzy, and some thoughts on ethics
christopher sullivan
csulli at saic.edu
Tue Feb 16 07:26:55 EST 2010
Hello Paul, IU will check out your book, as far as the word opposite, opposite
of what? sounds like we are in agreement. In my Non fiction class, I show the
introduction by roger Ebert of graveyard of the fire flies, he captures the
notion of animations. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yU3mZT0a9Rw
Quoting Paul Ward <pward at aucb.ac.uk>:
> Hi, it's me again!
>
> A couple of my main research interests are Animation (quelle surprise!) and
> Documentary, and I've been looking into how animation and nonfiction work
> together (or not) for some time now.
>
> See Chapter 5 of my book "Documentary: The Margins of Reality" (Wallflower,
> 2005); plus "Animated interactions: animation aesthetics and the
> 'interactive' documentary" in S. Buchan (ed.) with David Surman and Paul Ward
> (Associate Eds.) Animated 'Worlds' (John Libbey, 2006). The latter discusses
> 'Going Equipped' alongside Bob Sabiston's 1999 short 'Snack and Drink'
>
> I think the idea of animation as a 'filter' is apposite - it is the filter
> through which re-presentations of real people and events are 'creatively
> treated' (to echo John Grierson again). This also makes some interesting
> possible connections to animation and memory, or animation and states of
> mind, and how these areas overlap (or contrast) with 'documentary'.
> Animations like 'Waltz with Bashir', 'Persepolis' or Andy Glynne's short
> films 'Animated minds' (about mental health) are all, arguably, sub-types of
> the animated documentary category, but approach it in very different ways
>
> best wishes
>
> Paul
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au on behalf of christopher
> sullivan
> Sent: Sun 14/02/2010 18:22
> To: soft_skinned_space; Suzanne Buchan
> Cc: soft_skinned_space
> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] CG and all things fuzzy, and some thoughts on ethics
>
>
>
> Hi Suzanne, thanks for the generous discussion. As a "practitioner" I will
> say
> that I am really not too bothered by the issues of representation, and truth,
> or
> authenticity, I think those are interesting points of discussion, but
> nothing
> that will ever be cured. but are we really that confused in the theater? I
> have
> found that children for instance have very clear understandings of what is
> real,
> what is manipulated, what is fantasy. the idea that media is continuously
> lying
> to us, can also lead to a lot of political empathy,
> I teach an alternative animation history class, and one of our weeks
> we
> show all non fiction animation.
> here is the week.
> Reading: Understanding Animation, chapter 3 Narrative strategies. 68-92
>
> Week 6 October 19th NON FICTION-
> These films all use animations power to manifest images that have no filmic
> record. The result is a curious take on truth and representation.. Is there
> an
> emotional safety in these cartoony depictions, of otherwise unbearable
> images?
>
> Roger Ebert , speaking about Grave of the Fire flies.
> John and Faith Hubley. Sample 1960-75 The Dara Dogs. Denise Topicoff.
> -A is for Autism, Tim Web 1998. Champaine by Michael Sporn.
> Some Protection, Marjut Rimmenen,1987 -Brother, Adam Benjamin Elliot
> 2003-
> Going Equipped ,Peter Lords 1989 -Abductees , Paul Vesters 1998
> The Fetishist, Jim Trainer 1998- Ryan, Chris Landrithe 2003
> A Room Near By, still life with animated dogs, Paul Ferlinger 2002- 2004
>
> these films all deal with the strange in between possibilities of animation
> as a
> filter for truth. I often show Ryan this week also, The students are always
> interested in discussing the inclusion of Chris Landreth in the film. it is
> both interesting and problematic, that his desire to implicate the
> documenter,
> is also very problematic. does he truly believe that his state of crisis
> parallels Ryan Larkin, in a SRO facility?
>
> I argue that the real issue of representation through animation is not nearly
> so
> complicated. and why do we have to create a theoretical censoring bureau,
> just make the work, and let it hit people, all sloppy and imperfect.
> do the questions below really need to be brought to some kind of conclusion?
> is it truly a crisis?
>
>
> "The increasing convergence, barrage and resulting pervasiveness of
> > manipulated imagery, including traditional and digital animation, has
> > overwhelmed many of its viewers, and this has pressing philosophical
> > and ethical connotations. In terms of the status of indexicality and
> truth
> > claims of the visual, in 1998 Elsaesser suggested a crisis was evolving:
> > "Any technology that materially affects this status, and digitization
> > would seem to be such a technology, thus puts in crisis deeply-held
> > beliefs about representation and visualization, and many of the
> > discourses - critical, scientific or aesthetic - based on, or formulated
> > in the name of the indexical in our culture, need to be re-examined."
>
> as media professors, I think we have to also challenge media literacy Dogma
> which implies that all viewers are completely at the mercy of the moving
> image.
> once something is digital, sorry Lev, but it means nothing, it is a
> technical
> expedient.
>
> Animators have the opportunity to carve out new and wonderful ways of
> creating
> work and bringing subjects to the screen that were not possible before.
> A true act of political subversion is the recent screening of Don
> Hertsfeilds
> new films. the audience came to see funny. instead they saw an amazing
> maturing
> of his work into a dark and beautiful piece that made me weep several times.
> He really seized the moment to talk about something important.
>
> I say let's focus on content, not media, and get to work making the films
> that
> we feel must be made. Chris
>
>
>
> Quoting Suzanne Buchan <sbuchan at ucreative.ac.uk>:
>
> >
> > Renate
> >
> > (I can't turn off HTML on the email I'm suing, so I hope the inserted line
> > breaks improve reading.)
> >
> > Many practice-based animation and film programmes - as well as
> photography
> > and design -
> > are increasingly replacing analogue with digital, with all the
> > implications.
> > While I'm not a hands-on 'practitioner' per se - I don't teach practice -
> I
> > can say that
> > my university has two programmes, and both use digital tools but
> foreground
> > fine arts-based style, process and students attend life-drawing classes.
> > There are others who follow the same material-based philosophy, including
> > Simon's and the RCA' this is not, however, representative of the wider
> > general
> > shift to digital.
> >
> > With the current disastrous funding cuts at HEIs in the UK, a room of
> > computers is more sustainable than puppet animation studios and
> > art rooms; hence it is becoming digital almost everywhere. This has
> > implications on how students learn, speeds up production instead of
> > slowing down, the process of drawing, painting and model building
> > is very much part of developing narrative, and good analogue films
> > need time. Others here in empyre who are practice-based can probably
> > answer your question better.
> >
> > Your question about CGI brings me to another set of thoughts about the
> > digital and the artefact and some ethical implications that arise from
> the
> > use of CGI in animation and film. Since the digital shift, the
> manipulated
> > moving image has been the focus of heated debates around representation,
> > truth values and ethical responsibility of its commissioners, makers and
> > distributors. The unreliablility of the photographic image as it became
> > enhanced or altered by digital technologies has had a profound effect
> > on audiences, a topic thematised by Thomas Elsaesser, Lev Manovich
> > and Siegfried Zielinski, ethical philosopher Jane Bennett (The
> Enchantment
> > of Modern Life, 2001) and by others who may be on empyre.
> >
> > The increasing convergence, barrage and resulting pervasiveness of
> > manipulated imagery, including traditional and digital animation, has
> > overwhelmed many of its viewers, and this has pressing philosophical
> > and ethical connotations. In terms of the status of indexicality and
> truth
> > claims of the visual, in 1998 Elsaesser suggested a crisis was evolving:
> > "Any technology that materially affects this status, and digitisation
> > would seem to be such a technology, thus puts in crisis deeply-held
> > beliefs about representation and visualization, and many of the
> > discourses - critical, scientific or aesthetic - based on, or formulated
> > in the name of the indexical in our culture, need to be re-examined."
> > (Elsaesser, Thomas, "Digital Cinema: Delivery, Event, time", in:
> > Cinema Futures: Cain, Abel or Cable?,1998. Pp. 201-222)
> >
> > While following these debates, I became sensitised to one specific i
> > mpact of manipulated images during a screening of Roland Emmerich's
> > 1994 Independence Day. In the rather naive encounter between the
> > American missionaries and the alien Mother ship we witness a brief
> > moment, only a few frames, when a fireball engulfs the pilot on impact.
> >
> > Now in itself, this is not an unfamiliar scene, and it has been repeated
> > in action and war films to excess. My point here is that the image
> > manipulation was of the 'invisible' sort, i.e. not 'in-your-face' CGI that
> > creates spectacle that is highly aware of its difference to so-called
> > normal perception and representation.
> >
> > The fireball in the cockpit was created to look like live action.
> > So - what's the problem? Well, in that fraction of a second of ID4,
> > an image flashed in my mind that, depending on your generation,
> > may also be indelibly etched in your own.: this 1963 photo by Malcolm
> Brown
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%ADch_Qu?ng_D?c
> >
> > The mental image of this while watching ID4 was an emotional response
> > on my part, a response of what could be described as 'negative empathy'
> > that incited ethical awareness about the inherent 'wrongness' of this
> scene.
> >
> >
> > This personal example might illustrate why we need articulated critical
> > reactions to films like these, to facilitate a sober understanding of the
> > impact such films are having on our collective sense of ethics.
> >
> > In light of the inane acceptance of violent images
> > just because we are 'used to them' and the role CGI and animation
> > has to play in this, addressing the crisis rooted in the loss of indexical
> > truth could effectively address a re-examination of the discourse around
> > ethical responsibility in image production. Discussions around animation
> -
> > especially the kind we are not supposed to see - have tended to focus
> > on technical wizardry and the properties of programmes to create the
> > impossible. It may be part of a new body of work for critical
> > investigations
> > of spectatorial manipulation in a digital age, a territory that needs
> > ethical navigation to understand the philosophical consequences of
> > this kind of imagery.
> >
> > The next issue of the ANM journal (5.1) will have an essay by philosopher
> > and cultural studies scholar Elizabeth Walden that explores just these
> > issues
> > and discusses a puppet animation film; she discusses how "elements of
> > the narrative structure and the camera work give the materials used in the
> > character's project a moral standing in the film, which draws audience
> and
> > filmmaker as well as the character into an ethical situation which is
> > significant to our shared moment in the digital era."
> >
> > So I'll leave this for now, and see if anyone has some thoughts on it.
> >
> > I'm also happy to engage with the Quays' works, if there is interest out
> > there.
> >
> > Suzanne
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au on behalf of Renate Ferro
> > Sent: Sat 2/13/2010 04:37
> > To: soft_skinned_space
> > Subject: Re: [-empyre-] CG and all things fuzzy
> >
> > Dear Paul and Suzanne,
> >
> > Can you both talk about how CG fits into your animation programs? At
> > Cornell, Computer Graphics and 3D animation is taught by Computing
> > faculty. It is in the art department where students, particularly
> > recently, have been creating stop action, frame by frame, roto-scoping,
> > drawing based and a medley of other fuzzies. Whether working from
> > photography based or original drawing. their novel, quirky rendering
> > styles, interdisciplinary interests and criticality make their work fresh
> > and innovative.
> >
> > How does it work in the UK?
> >
> > Renate
> >
> > Renate Ferro
> > Visiting Assistant Professor
> > Department of Art
> > Cornell University, Tjaden Hall
> > Ithaca, NY 14853
> >
> > Email: <rtf9 at cornell.edu>
> > Website: http://www.renateferro.net <http://www.renateferro.net/>
> >
> >
> > Co-moderator of _empyre soft skinned space
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empyre
> >
> > Art Editor, diacritics
> > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/dia/
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >
> >
>
>
> Christopher Sullivan
> Dept. of Film/Video/New Media
> School of the Art Institute of Chicago
> 112 so michigan
> Chicago Ill 60603
> csulli at saic.edu
> 312-345-3802
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
>
>
>
*********************************************************************************************************
>
> The contents of this communication are confidential and intended solely for
> the use of the named recipient(s). If you have received this email in error
> please delete it and do not disseminate, distribute, copy or alter it.
> Any views or opinions expressed are those of the author and do not
> necessarily represent those of The Arts University College at Bournemouth.
>
> Although The Arts University College at Bournemouth has taken reasonable
> precautions to ensure no viruses are present in this email, the University
> College cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from the
> use of this email or attachments.
>
>
*********************************************************************************************************
>
Christopher Sullivan
Dept. of Film/Video/New Media
School of the Art Institute of Chicago
112 so michigan
Chicago Ill 60603
csulli at saic.edu
312-345-3802
More information about the empyre
mailing list