[-empyre-] CG and all things fuzzy, and some thoughts on ethics
Richard Wright
futurenatural at blueyonder.co.uk
Mon Feb 22 06:16:57 EST 2010
Ha ha! Royksopp - that's "sarcastic data"...
"Like a car engine, the heart depends on electrical energy to start
it and keep it beating regularly".
Mitchell Whitelaw: Data Walks
reminds me of the "analogous landscape" projects by C5: http://
www.c5corp.com/projects/analogouslandscape/index.shtml
R
On 17 Feb 2010, at 23:10, Sean Cubitt wrote:
> Hey richard
>
> Try Rpoyskopp’s video remind me
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBvaHZIrt0o
>
> And check Mitchell Whitelaw’s data visualisation blog at
> http://teemingvoid.blogspot.com/
>
> sean
>
>
>
> On 17/02/10 10:25 AM, "Richard Wright"
> <futurenatural at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Hi there,
>> I just wanted to respond to a couple of recent posts about
>> animated documentary and those thorny indexicality questions.
>>
>> I once wrote a proposal called "Data Visualisation as the
>> Successor to Documentary Film Making" (thinking actually of
>> animated film making). I wonder if Paul or Erik or anyone else had
>> any thoughts about this possibility of taking data records and
>> animating them? Either directly and algorithmically or using more
>> interpretative or even non-digital techniques? The source of the
>> data and the circumstances in which it was obtained can also
>> create difficult ethical questions, quite apart from questions of
>> veracity (they might have been obtained under torture for example).
>>
>> There are very few film examples of this I can think of, not even
>> my own. One of the few is Aaron Koblin's "Flight Patterns" (http://
>> www.aaronkoblin.com/work/flightpatterns) and another is Jane
>> Marsching's "Rising North" (http://www.flickr.com/photos/
>> efimeravulgata/3496999939 for a view of the installation version
>> of the video). Andrea Polli possibly. Much of it to do with
>> climate change data. I'm not mentioning these specific ones
>> because I particularly like them (the "Rising North" piece, for
>> instance, looks a bit too much to me like deciphering a multimedia
>> interface). But I was struggling to think of any others and I
>> wondered if anyone else knew of any film makers that were moving
>> in this direction...
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> On 15 Feb 2010, at 18:37, Paul Ward wrote:
>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> ********************************************************************
>>> *************************************<winmail.dat>__________________
>>> _____________________________
>>> empyre forum
>>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://mail.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20100221/5ca9ac85/attachment.html
More information about the empyre
mailing list