McLuhan's "hot" and "cool" media from the 60s.
/\
< DV > Gregory Gutenko
\/
On Aug 8, 2016, at 2:05 PM, Tara Nelson
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hello Mr. Withers,
I am very interested in the topic of perception and frame rates in film vs.
video. My own work has involved research on the technical differences between
moving image formats, and the effect of those differences on the human
perceptual mechanism.
I began conducting research on this topic in 2009, while in Graduate School at
MassArt. At the time I was working in Super 8 and 16mm film, and observed that
audiences had a greater empathetic response to Super 8 film (18 fps with lower
image definition) than to 16mm (24 fps with higher image definition), even when
the image was identical. I was also studying the work of Rose
Lowder<http://lightcone.org/en/filmmaker-199-rose-lowder> and reading Movement
as Meaning In Experimental Film
<https://www.amazon.com/Movement-Meaning-Experimental-Consciousness-Literature/dp/9042023856>
by Daniel Barnett, along with texts on perception by Rudolf Arnheim and
phenomenology by Maurice Merleau-Ponty, among others.
The phenomenological experience of projected film became the focus of my work,
and I created interactive "cinema sculptures" to experiment with frame rates
and perception. I was also researching the Gestalt Principles of Organization
as well as the mechanics of early motion picture technology. Very influential
as well was John Geiger's book Chapel of Extreme
Experience<https://www.amazon.com/Chapel-Extreme-Experience-History-Stroboscopic/dp/1932360018/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1470683034&sr=1-1&keywords=chapel+of+extreme+experience>,
which explores the history of stroboscopic light and Brion Gysin's Dream
Machine.
Link to CATHARSIS<https://vimeo.com/38341893>
I believe it was Barnett who theorizes that when there is less information
(stimuli), the perceptual mechanism (mainly the nervous system working with the
senses) effectively "fills in" the gaps. Effectively: Less Information = More
Imagination. And when the imagination is triggered, there is a tendency to
"feel" more, rather than to simply process observable information.
The space between frames is the space of the imagination - a rich territory of
emotional, psychological, spiritual and cognitive awareness. Video, as you
observed, does not provide space between frames - there is always information
(stimuli) to be processed, leaving the perceptual mechanism without any "gaps"
to fill in. More Information = Less Imagination.
Here is a link to my most current work in this area, a series of installations
which project a unified image using four formats. This is a work in progress,
and a collaboration with my husband, Gordon Nelson.
Link to FourMats<https://vimeo.com/155081792>
Password: FourMats
I have so much more to say on this subject, and I look forward to the
discussion that follows!
Tara Merenda Nelson
Curator of Moving Image Collections
Visual Studies Workshop
31 Prince Street
Rochester, NY 14607
T 585 442 8676
F 585 442 1992
www.vsw.org<http://www.vsw.org/>
On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Francisco Torres
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I have given it some thought and so far what I have noticed is that digital
projection is very different from film projection, so even ''24 fps'' mean very
different things in each. You discussed the reasons why in your OP so I will
not go over them again, what I think is that there is nothing in digital
projection like the effect those film makers achieved with film projection.
Plus there are issues regarding how film was exposed in the camera itself...
So to achieve those kind of effects will require a whole new and different
practice in digital media.
2016-08-08 10:48 GMT-04:00 Robert Withers
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>:
Looking for information . . . writings . . . practices . . . thoughts . . .
In film practice, certain artists such as Frampton, Sharits, Conrad, Lawder and
others (even myself) sometimes built film rhythms based on the 24 fps rate,
choosing shots or images of specific frame lengths (1, 2, 4, 8, 24, etc) for
specific effects. The effect in projection was also modulated by the projection
technology, which would typically project each film frame more that one time,
with a black interval in between. We had different kinds of flicker effects
interacting with the psychological/perceptual phenomenon of persistence of
vision, with the odd result that audiences in a movie theater would be sitting
in total darkness for a portion of any film screening, watching the images that
persisted in their brains.
Now in digital cinema there is a choice of "standard" frame rates, especially
24 fps and 30 fps, modulated to a more unpredictable effect by use of displays
and digital projection systems, which have been standardized in commercial
cinema theaters but not in all systems. So 8 frame sequences in 24 fps digital
could conceivably have a different flavor than in 30 fps sequences. In digital
display there is no more effect from closed film projection shutters: digital
frames are projected in sequence with no significant interval between. (Pace
the blanking interval.) Hence digital cinema is typically always "on" with no
intrinsic (even if unperceived) flicker. Further, there are automatic
background manipulations done by some display technologies that convert between
24 fps, 30 fps, 60 interlaced fps, etc., without the viewer being aware of this
or tipped off in any way.
I'd be very interesting in hearing about anyone who is writing, practicing, or
thinking about these issues, and any references.
Many thanks,
Robert Withers
cinesouvenir.com<http://cinesouvenir.com>
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
