hi all absolutely disagree.
On 10/02/2010, at 6:49 PM, David Jones wrote: > If you follow that logic to its logical conclusion, then why have a > video blog at all?, why not just an audio podcast? > Or at least why not 160x120 for even more bandwidth saving and speed? if you follow that logic to its logical conclusion then why be online at all and instead be in a cinema, or project via some hi-rez system against a wall in an installation? it is a wrong argument as it is like saying because I'm a painter and I can have a 4 metre square canvas anyone who chooses to paint miniatures, or even small canvases, isn't really doing painting. (Or if I write a novella instead of a novel I'm not really a writer, etc.) There are deliberate creative, aesthetic, technical, theoretical, practical reasons for choosing scale in these ways so that choosing to be small is recognised not as a default condition of all that the technology allows but a deliberate creative decision. Like choosing to write a haiku when I could also have written a short story. Or a novel. It also ignores the entire role of constraint to creative practice and art (there is no art without constraint, pixel dimensions does not have to be a constraint, but it does not follow from this that you must therefore only go for the highest current available pixel dimensions). For example things like Daniel Liss' "seven maps" or Will Luers' "217 Views of the Tokaido Line" work because of constraint - of rules and of composition. Particularly with Will's project the scale is essential precisely because it is not big, it is about Japan, the small, the miniature, the everyday (think Pillow Book of Sei Shonagon or of course what Will's work directly refers to). Finally in my own work I take a different view as I think of the computer and the network as the medium for the work, in which case it lives in a complex ecoystem and visual field with other windows, other applications, other attentions. So my video should not take over your screen in the same way that I despise any app on my computer that assumes it has the right to all of my screen, all of my attention, etc. I don't think of the computer and the network as just a clever delivery device to get my video onto other screens at full resolution but as something small that sits there in amongst your email, photos, and the 12 apps you're currently running and flipping between. All power to full screen video, but please don't make an argument that this is the only way to approach video online. cheers Adrian Miles [email protected] Program Director, Bachelor of Communication Honours vogmae.net.au/research/contact-me/
