Richland Digital Video Spring 2018

To me this piece of literature was interesting, mainly for the fact that it never dawned on me that mummification and art had a direct coloration. I found that concept to be very eye-opening. Also reading about how art has changed within century as long side humanity and technology was cool because even though simple, I haven't thought about that, or about how people would react to the changes. To me, art has always been in paintings or movies or whatever anyone could express themselves on so I never thought about how people, as usual, would not accept a change like that. This reading kinda inspired me to take an art history class! I also like how they compared the two types of realism and showed how the two got confused.

I found Dziga Vertov's Kino Eye  to present an interesting view on the role of the camera during the production of a film. One of the most evident points of the text is to highlight just how limited humans can be with presenting visual ideas, and how cameras can be used to allow humans to see images and perspectives that would otherwise be impossible. This divide from reality is arguably a primary reason for the popularity of film itself - seeing exciting new views of the world in a way that we cannot normally experience can be exhilarating.

In the reading he mentions a lot of history about the paintings and photographs. He also compares it too. I like how he started literally from the beginning which is the Ancient Egypt time to the  Renaissance time and so on. I agree with most of what he said like how the aesthetic of  photography basically kind of show the reality things. Well thats what i got from that sentence. I also liked how he basically said that paintings and photographs are important. Then he mentioned about how photographs has no limit like you can do anything with it and that was just perfect to me. Photographs to me is like your brain but in a physical film form. Its your choice to what you want to do with it. A limit could be equipment but even that you can find other ways. Also i loved the last few words of the reading which is "cinema is also a language". He could've not that said that any better. Its like learning a whole new language which not a lot of people understands but you can show ...

I personally find it very intriguing how the author talks about how in Ancient Egypt, they made mummies as a form of preservation of life. Then later with time there are different forms of preservation of life, such as paintings, and nowadays, pictures and video. It's really cool how through time, ways that people can preserve life have changed, and it's become more simple to manage to do that. Taking a picture, and immortalizing that moment has become something extremely easy and possible to do nowadays.

    In this piece, Andre Bazin is trying to convey an idea that art must return to its aesthetic roots and stop attempting to be realistic. He backs this idea with truth of photography. Heading into the Renaissance and beyond it, art was attempting to look as realistic as it possibly could. The issue is that it never could become a perfect recreation of reality. Then came photographs, and their recreation of reality was far and gone more exact than the best painters of the time. Interestingly enough, art has fought back against this idea that the pursuit of perfection isn't worth it to them. After the photograph, a new form of drawn art was created, photo-realism. Some of the pieces from this genre are so perfect, not even a trained eyed can tell it's a drawing until zooming in. So this begs the question, is art more impactful if it makes you feel, or is the effort and difficulty that goes into it the most important.

     On the reading Futurist Manifesto by F.T. Marinetti, I feel it is very relevant to what is going on today in our society. I agree that every new and young generation to have the right to disagree and go against the "establishment" that we have today. Whether it be in politics, religion, and even to the arts. I personally am not a fan of old art and museums that display them. I can appreciate the level of skill and talent of olden days, but we have cameras and software today to create even greater works of art and video art. It rings true in the readings that anything new we create today will at some point become boring and obsolete, such is life and our industry itself. I am personally fine with my works of art at some point being challenged by better artists.

     Right off the bat, the Ontology of the Photographic Image is obviously dated. The comparison between a painting and a photograph is ridiculous considering we live in an age of not only colored photography but of 3-D films. But, I can see how and why the writer would go to the trouble of comparing both. He does a good job of giving some history of why images, whether in painted or photographic form, are important to humans. Before photography, a painting by a famous painter of a famous or important person was the norm. Only the rich it seemed were allowed this. In photography, there was no real limit whose image could be taken or preserved. The only limitation it would seem would be of the ability of a person to operate a camera and if they had one at their disposal. No need for real skill. Just point and shoot. I personally am not a fan of photo realistic paintings since we now have cameras. I am somewhat bored sometimes of looking at old paintings for art classes to...

I personally didn't really like this. It got me a bit confused throughout the text but after we talked about it in class then I understood a little more about what it was talking about. A moment where it stood out to me was where it talked about Museums a lot. Marinetti associates museums with cemeteries, public dormitories, and other things. I find it intriguing how the writer connects Museums with these things. When you look at it from a different perspective, it actually makes sense, in a weird way. On the cemetery front, museums could be called cemeteries since they are basically showing off people and things from the past, and cemeteries are where people are buried (obviously...). So yeah, text was a bit confusing for me, but later it made more sense, kinda.

     The issue that Marinetti runs into during this manifesto is reminiscent of a young adult who has not matured past his selfish desires. His call for people to rebel against the structures of the art world is for no other reason than for rebellions sake. He resents elders at such a core level that he calls for himself to be forgotten when he reaches that age. The issue about "progressive" thinkers such as this is they think that their creativity comes from a sense of freed instinctual thought. He believes that artistically he can come to all his fulfilling conclusions on his own, and therefore his peers should too. The problem is that his creativity does not stem from some instinct, but instead from the history he so despises. He aims to starve the next generation by destroying a luxury that he has used countless times. Marinetti has grown bored, which can be understandable after countless viewings, but has allowed this feeling to be morphed into a sense that ther...

     I think there is some merit in the idea of looking to the future as apposed to only thinking of the past. Art is a constantly changing landscape. New techniques and technologies allow us to further explore the infinite possibilities of the human mind. However, both art and the human experience are constantly building upon themselves. Every new piece is a remix of all of the artist's experiences culminating into one product. To completely forget how we got here would be foolish. We rely on our predecessors for the skills they developed such as anatomy and styles that can be built upon. Trying new things is always recommended but if you forget your past, you run the risk of repeating the same mistakes. I also thought that the anti-feminist comment was uncalled for and didn't even make sense in the context of the rest of the article. Maybe this was different in 1909 but, feminism is forward thinking to begin with. I don't understand why someone who is so concerned about...

I liked Bazin’s interesting comparison between painting and photography. I’ve never thought in that perspective. Painting and it's attempting to the production of realism encounters a problem on combining both, the representation of an emotionally real and the representation of the physically real. Even, painting makes immortal what is mortal, painting can successfully express the emotional real but the reproduction of physical real will always lean towards illusion.  I believe that Bazin meant and I agree with that is , the painting art refers back to the painter and his paint. It doesn't refer to the image that was based on. And Cinema and Photography that satisfy our obsession with realism. Photography removes the artist fingerprint evident in the medium of painting and sculpture and it’s much more in line with personal perception. So film and photography most of the times represent an object rather than replace it, which painting and sculpture do. And realism is the optimu...

After reading The Futurist Manifest I could sympathize with the anger about society being so married to the past and the lack of change. I’m not a big fan of conservatism. We are self-reflect animals who always prove ourselves we are capable of greatness and we have no limit point. We are always growing. The prove is technology that we develop, growing so rapidly. And we have to adjust to those changes and progress. But I wouldn't be radical and burn museums and destroy memories because we came from there. That was our start. So it’s important to accept and respect the past and preserve it. The only thing you need to burn is conservative minds that are against evolution and progress. As my favorite English author Neil Gaiman says: “Life is about changing. Either you change or you die”

I found the writing of Vertov interesting in that his definition of the Kino-eye reminds me of the movie called "Koyaanasqatsi" by Francis Ford Coppola in the early 80's. "Koyaanasqatsi"'s Kino-Camera fulfills the definition of Koyaanasqatsi, which is "Life out of Balance". It's done without dialog; only short, fragmented segments with camera in slow motion and fast motion to achieve a collective idea. The whole film can be seen on YouTube in 10 minute segments. The link is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4MXPIpj5sA You'll find yourself checking your phone for what's happening in the outside world thru the first segment but it gets really interesting after that segment. I hope I haven't missed Vertov's message...-Gary Angle

Hello video makers. This will be the area for posting responses to the theoretical or historical readings we will be doing over the course of the semester. Whenever a reading is assigned, the following week we will discuss the content of the reading. Please post your contribution to that conversation here. I ask that you NOT summarize  the reading, but respond to the reading in terms of what it made you think about, what it made you feel, how you agreed or disagreed with the points the writer made, instances in popular culture that it reminded you of. Feel free to post images or links as part of your response. No more than a paragraph or two is needed. Looking forward to the semester with you!