From: Sam Wells (email suppressed)
Date: Thu Dec 18 2008 - 08:29:49 PST
One problem is cinema time is not performance time, in that cinema
traditionally creates it's own time, _subsumes_ experiential time,
performance time.
I think we're used to accepting this kind of "relativity" in the
space that we engage the work ('film') in.
I agree this difference is explored by say, Ken Jacobs' nervous magic
lantern performances.... but in the sense of "questioning the
medium" that you bring up Jorge, I think it might, for example be
fair to say Ken's work does do so by engaging a tradition, a series
of questions, it might be stated as an equation: Eisenstein = montage
as conflict between shots / Kubelka = conflict between frames /
Jacobs = conflict 'between the eyes'
I'm working on a digital piece now, which - if I look at it as a
'movie' (play back a full screen 1920 x 1080 Quicktime) I like a
brisk tempo but if I look at it as an installation (and look at
algorithmically derived loops) I seem to want the playback speed to
be slower - as if the movie is "going somewhere" - A to B (regardless
of whatever linearity or not therein) whereas when the expanding loop
structure is present one has much less sense of a start or finish
line......
Random thoughts.....
-Sam
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.