Sound and the City Research


What I tried to do:

I took “projection” (even though it was not mention it was implied) too relevantly.

My first impulse was to take a projector and use the film inside it as a trope for the “reality” in my project and a transparent process of automated manipulation (including recording, manipulation and re-projection of that processed image onto the same surface with a digital projector) as instructional performance (think learning by seeing) as a way to communicate my project to a broader audience.

I spent a lot of time on the film, I was looking for it’s reality. I found scratched audio to be a good trope because it has direct correlation of form, image and sound. But this was more about film as a medium.

Next I collected a series of screen tests and began to splice them together. But this was also problematic because while it represents the politics of film in a nice way, it has nothing to do with some “reality” of film.

Last night I finally realized, naturally that the thing that makes most sense about projection was to go to my site, have its photons project onto my film, project my film onto the screen and then begin to “edit” live the footage, eating it up and spitting it out with the digitizing process in a very clear way.

The effects in my patch were all designed to have to do with working with film (ie affecting framerate, exposure, etc. ). But that is probably not the right approach again, probably the best method would have been to try to affect only the time and rhythm of the image, or the content in a way that recognizes it’s shapes.

Documentation of what I did below.



March 24, 2010 | Comments Off on Sound and the City Research  Tags: , , , , ,