Mapping Festival Roel Verlinden Special iPodU Session Response
Please post your responses after viewing the interview and looking at the site of collaborators Olga Mink and Scanner http://www.videology.nu http://www.scannerdot.com/
Roel Verlinden worked with processing to create a three-screen display, which could also be a single wide screen. He worked with three other people on a piece that was described as being beautiful by Raph. From what I know of processing I have learned that it is a program that allows the user to create pieces that are more visually based, and that the content and the message is in the image and not the medium.
There are many who disagree with the insertion that the medium is not the message, they believe that the message is the medium. My viewpoint and my position on this matter is rather dependent on the situation. There are times where the message is in the medium, and that the medium is providing an interesting and additive quality to the overall understanding and functionality of the pieces as a whole, in this case the message can be interoperated as being in the medium, if the medium is be used in an expressive way. Where I stand most of the time however is on the other side of the fence, where the message is in the content of the piece, the imagery, and that the message though is a more literal relationship with the viewer, can still often be subjective, and abstract.
It is proof of a sophisticated and meaningful artist who can take a literal message and transform it through a piece and do so in a way that rather than being literal or direct, they can be more abstract in the way that they are trying to convey their overall message or theme. Its how they use the medium, are they being expressive with it , is the artist being creative it, are they pushing boundaries, the edge of what has been done and what is new, all of these can contribute to the message of a piece, weather it be video, a painting, a performance, and installation, nearly every form of art can be looked at in this sense, its not that the message isn’t in the medium, rather that art in a whole is simply to complex to be simplified in such a simple context.
I have to agree with Brian that the medium is not always the message. But disagree with him when he says the medium is sometimes the message. You can write a song, and paint a picture with the same message behind it. It's all the same message, just how you present it is different. A painting and a song can be just as moving.
I didn't totally understand what Roel did, but gathering from Brian's post he did. I understood he was creating a huge video display that could be 3 separate monitors or one huge one. He talked about his work with processing and that he had worked with max and a few other programs, but processing seemed to be the one for him. There has been a lot of background noise in these lectures and it's kinda tricky to pick out exactly what everyone is saying. But I'm trying my hardest to understand.
Roel Verlinden, the man behind the curtain- (or mirror), is an example of an artist who is a voice we do not hear of too often. So, it's nice to hear what he does in collaboration with other artists that have a concept and feel that with his background and knowledge they can utilize that to achieve whatever goals they have set forth.
Processing is similar to Max/MSP but more code based. I feel you have more control with Processing over Max/MSP, but like any piece of software their are pros and cons of both.
I agree with Brian that designing conceptual and choosing a medium and which comes first is rather depending on the situation. Inevitably, when coming up with an idea, we use things that influence us or that we are comfortable with. Of course, I am only speaking from a students perspective. I think an important lesson one can learn is to be able (and comfortable) to adapt based on what they wish to accomplish. Many students are afraid of coding, but their is nothing wrong with working with someone who isn't; and you can learn that way.
I guess I am confused. Really, what is the point in having a direct message and making it abstract? I assumed that in art you are not only expressing one idea but many ideas with relative themes? Of course pushing boundaries and exploring is part of creating- but why make a literal message so convoluted that it's lost in the medium? Maybe you could clear this up for me Brian.
With so many interviews with the "visually based" people, its was good to hear from someone who was at the programming end of the spectrum. Funny how collaboration still plays a major a role in such a medium. It's good to hear Roel, a well experienced programmer, state that he enjoys working with collaboration basically because the 2 heads are better than 1 theory.
I'll have to agree with Brian in that sometimes I believe that the message is the medium. Take Raph's piece: "There is no such thing a global warming." The ice that was used played a major role in the message of the piece since the piece itself only lasted as long as the ice did.
what I was saying is simply that art is a vast ocean of expressive tools, and means of creating, and being creative, and that one way to express an idea may be to show your idea or concept through how you use the medium rather than the literal understanding of what it is that you as the artist is portraying through the literal imagery of the piece.
It’s a combination of what you are using as the medium, but most of the meaning is in the way that you choose to use the medium to express what it is that you are trying to get across to the viewer. So its not that you are trying to make the meaning convoluted or that your taking the literal meaning away, or that you are not working inside of your theme, you can still do all of those things and express your themes through the way that the medium is used, its just a different way to look at the way that you think about a piece and about how you mind works. The meaning isn’t lost in the medium in this caase rather that it is found in the way it is used.
Raph described the three-screen display shown at the Mapping Festival as being beautiful, and when I visited the "videology" website and viewed the still pictures for myself, I would definitely have to agree. I wish I could have seen the performance in motion rather than in stills, because the three screen display was not only larger than I'd envisioned it, but was interactive, not only with itself (when all three of the screens matched up to become one large, widescreen-type image), but with the audience as well. It's one of those things where I don't think you can get the full effect from just seeing pictures or hearing people review it. On Scanner's webpage, he actually wrote, "surprisingly was received very emotionally with several audience members weeping at the melancholic and sensitive imagery and audio". I wish I'd been there. Roel Verlindin's work on this piece was, I think pivotal because it made it all come together. I don't think that we credit his type of work enough: the backstage-type of work, the work that no one sees from the audience, but without which the show could never go on. I, as I mentioned, only saw the stills, but I just have to say, good job Roel! It looked marvelous.
Also, just fyi, on the videology website there is a ton of cool stuff that Olga has done, one video I watched was from 2001 called 'Hands', and it was short but very interesting, I would suggest it to the class because it looks very cool.
I though this was interesting about Olga's process -- "The work of Olga Mink let's itself be classified as a sort of dramatic pixelrealism which merges itself with rather minimalistic image manupilations and design. "
Minimalism is always interesting to me, always so clean and provocative. I really like the term "pixelrealism" -- to talk about authenticity.
I would just like to take a second to respond and say that when Marshall McLuhan said "The media is the message" he was talking about a time when there would pretty much only centralized media that was controlled by the corporate junkies that are are still controlling it today. The only difference now with people like Olga , VJ Theory, Alice, etc, etc. is that a huge partition of media has been decentralized and ripped from a hierarchical structure thanks to homebrew type movements -- as well as availabilities of technology. Medium is very important and almost as essential as the concept itself to a degree. There are certain projects that work well online like www.theyrule.com which you could do an art installation about corporate board members, but the fact it is online for all to see gives the project it's own power. Mediums are very powerful, which is still why the old mediums such as TV (which Marshall was referring to) still have hold of a huge percentage of America. Medium's must be chosen carefully. I agree the medium is not the tell-tale of the specific concept, but almost equally important. Process is just as important as concept.
Also, with the global warming piece, the medium was an overwhelming piece of the message. That project could not have been done with a giant pillow. Ice was specifically chosen in relation to the snow caps melting and the projects we are having about the environment. I would argue that the message relied directly on the medium because without the ice the message would not have been there (or as strongly). Therefore, I think mediums are just as important to analyze and choose carefully as messages. Sometimes people have great pieces with poor concept and the only thing holding them up is their actual medium presentation.
7 comments:
Roel Verlinden worked with processing to create a three-screen display, which could also be a single wide screen. He worked with three other people on a piece that was described as being beautiful by Raph. From what I know of processing I have learned that it is a program that allows the user to create pieces that are more visually based, and that the content and the message is in the image and not the medium.
There are many who disagree with the insertion that the medium is not the message, they believe that the message is the medium. My viewpoint and my position on this matter is rather dependent on the situation. There are times where the message is in the medium, and that the medium is providing an interesting and additive quality to the overall understanding and functionality of the pieces as a whole, in this case the message can be interoperated as being in the medium, if the medium is be used in an expressive way. Where I stand most of the time however is on the other side of the fence, where the message is in the content of the piece, the imagery, and that the message though is a more literal relationship with the viewer, can still often be subjective, and abstract.
It is proof of a sophisticated and meaningful artist who can take a literal message and transform it through a piece and do so in a way that rather than being literal or direct, they can be more abstract in the way that they are trying to convey their overall message or theme. Its how they use the medium, are they being expressive with it , is the artist being creative it, are they pushing boundaries, the edge of what has been done and what is new, all of these can contribute to the message of a piece, weather it be video, a painting, a performance, and installation, nearly every form of art can be looked at in this sense, its not that the message isn’t in the medium, rather that art in a whole is simply to complex to be simplified in such a simple context.
I have to agree with Brian that the medium is not always the message. But disagree with him when he says the medium is sometimes the message. You can write a song, and paint a picture with the same message behind it. It's all the same message, just how you present it is different. A painting and a song can be just as moving.
I didn't totally understand what Roel did, but gathering from Brian's post he did. I understood he was creating a huge video display that could be 3 separate monitors or one huge one. He talked about his work with processing and that he had worked with max and a few other programs, but processing seemed to be the one for him. There has been a lot of background noise in these lectures and it's kinda tricky to pick out exactly what everyone is saying. But I'm trying my hardest to understand.
Roel Verlinden, the man behind the curtain- (or mirror), is an example of an artist who is a voice we do not hear of too often. So, it's nice to hear what he does in collaboration with other artists that have a concept and feel that with his background and knowledge they can utilize that to achieve whatever goals they have set forth.
Processing is similar to Max/MSP but more code based. I feel you have more control with Processing over Max/MSP, but like any piece of software their are pros and cons of both.
I agree with Brian that designing conceptual and choosing a medium and which comes first is rather depending on the situation. Inevitably, when coming up with an idea, we use things that influence us or that we are comfortable with. Of course, I am only speaking from a students perspective.
I think an important lesson one can learn is to be able (and comfortable) to adapt based on what they wish to accomplish. Many students are afraid of coding, but their is nothing wrong with working with someone who isn't; and you can learn that way.
I guess I am confused. Really, what is the point in having a direct message and making it abstract? I assumed that in art you are not only expressing one idea but many ideas with relative themes? Of course pushing boundaries and exploring is part of creating- but why make a literal message so convoluted that it's lost in the medium?
Maybe you could clear this up for me Brian.
With so many interviews with the "visually based" people, its was good to hear from someone who was at the programming end of the spectrum. Funny how collaboration still plays a major a role in such a medium. It's good to hear Roel, a well experienced programmer, state that he enjoys working with collaboration basically because the 2 heads are better than 1 theory.
I'll have to agree with Brian in that sometimes I believe that the message is the medium. Take Raph's piece: "There is no such thing a global warming." The ice that was used played a major role in the message of the piece since the piece itself only lasted as long as the ice did.
Steve
what I was saying is simply that art is a vast ocean of expressive tools, and means of creating, and being creative, and that one way to express an idea may be to show your idea or concept through how you use the medium rather than the literal understanding of what it is that you as the artist is portraying through the literal imagery of the piece.
It’s a combination of what you are using as the medium, but most of the meaning is in the way that you choose to use the medium to express what it is that you are trying to get across to the viewer. So its not that you are trying to make the meaning convoluted or that your taking the literal meaning away, or that you are not working inside of your theme, you can still do all of those things and express your themes through the way that the medium is used, its just a different way to look at the way that you think about a piece and about how you mind works. The meaning isn’t lost in the medium in this caase rather that it is found in the way it is used.
Raph described the three-screen display shown at the Mapping Festival as being beautiful, and when I visited the "videology" website and viewed the still pictures for myself, I would definitely have to agree. I wish I could have seen the performance in motion rather than in stills, because the three screen display was not only larger than I'd envisioned it, but was interactive, not only with itself (when all three of the screens matched up to become one large, widescreen-type image), but with the audience as well. It's one of those things where I don't think you can get the full effect from just seeing pictures or hearing people review it. On Scanner's webpage, he actually wrote, "surprisingly was received very emotionally with several audience members weeping at the melancholic and sensitive imagery and audio". I wish I'd been there. Roel Verlindin's work on this piece was, I think pivotal because it made it all come together. I don't think that we credit his type of work enough: the backstage-type of work, the work that no one sees from the audience, but without which the show could never go on. I, as I mentioned, only saw the stills, but I just have to say, good job Roel! It looked marvelous.
Also, just fyi, on the videology website there is a ton of cool stuff that Olga has done, one video I watched was from 2001 called 'Hands', and it was short but very interesting, I would suggest it to the class because it looks very cool.
I though this was interesting about Olga's process --
"The work of Olga Mink let's itself be classified as a sort of dramatic pixelrealism
which merges itself with rather minimalistic image manupilations and design. "
Minimalism is always interesting to me, always so clean and provocative. I really like the term "pixelrealism" -- to talk about authenticity.
I would just like to take a second to respond and say that when Marshall McLuhan said "The media is the message" he was talking about a time when there would pretty much only centralized media that was controlled by the corporate junkies that are are still controlling it today. The only difference now with people like Olga , VJ Theory, Alice, etc, etc. is that a huge partition of media has been decentralized and ripped from a hierarchical structure thanks to homebrew type movements -- as well as availabilities of technology. Medium is very important and almost as essential as the concept itself to a degree. There are certain projects that work well online like www.theyrule.com which you could do an art installation about corporate board members, but the fact it is online for all to see gives the project it's own power. Mediums are very powerful, which is still why the old mediums such as TV (which Marshall was referring to) still have hold of a huge percentage of America. Medium's must be chosen carefully. I agree the medium is not the tell-tale of the specific concept, but almost equally important. Process is just as important as concept.
Also, with the global warming piece, the medium was an overwhelming piece of the message. That project could not have been done with a giant pillow. Ice was specifically chosen in relation to the snow caps melting and the projects we are having about the environment. I would argue that the message relied directly on the medium because without the ice the message would not have been there (or as strongly). Therefore, I think mediums are just as important to analyze and choose carefully as messages. Sometimes people have great pieces with poor concept and the only thing holding them up is their actual medium presentation.
Post a Comment