For the third and final experiment, I decided to ask myself the question of “the similarities between the two different mediums of photography and videography”. I intend on approaching this question by combining the images and videos I’ve collected over the past few weeks. Because this is a different type of experiment in comparison to the previous two (this will not involve physically going out to capture a chosen location), I will not be writing a recipe but instead, just a simple and literal prompt to help me get started on what it is I would like to compare.
I may have already mentioned this in my previous posts but I would like to observe and illustrate the interaction between man and society. Going more into it, this means that I would have to capture each and every features of humans and the natural environment they are in. The main focus are foliage and white objects. These two attributes are a good representation of man’s interaction with nature. I believe that white is a colour that signifies us as humans and can sometimes be seen as “unnatural” in nature. Yes, white does exist in nature, but it is quite rare that it will ever appear naturally in nature. We may see a few white flowers here and there, but when do we see white leaves? Whether it would be a natural or an unnatural white, it is a shade that tends to stand in the environment. White, after all, is the representation of all the colours in the rainbow.
Now for the prompt –
To cut it short, the prompt for this final experimental task will be noticing the difference between photography and videography that have I have already explored in the previous experiments.
This may be quite general and vague but it leaves a lot of space for creativity and imagination to take place.
Here are the results of what I captured through photography, and editing it into a collage through Photoshop! I will now be stating and discussing the similarities and differences between these two opposing images. These differences range from the colour, shape, exposure and so many more factors of the image but most importantly, the interaction between these white “things” and nature (plants to trees).
In the first image, we immediately see the difference – the branches of the tree and the white “object”, which in this case is not an object but a living thing – a dog. It is easy to forget that living things are a part of nature but it is up to our mindset whether we want to be one with nature or not. Therefore, it is up to the viewer to decide whether the dog in this image is deemed as “nature” or deemed as a “white object”. A question during week six was addressed – “Why can’t humans and animals be considered as “collective forces of moving matter while water, sky, and wind can?”. This was the reoccurring question that made me ask myself why I chose this dog as the “subject” – we all have different perspectives of what constitutes nature but from the interpretation of the artist (myself), I believe that this image is contradictory itself as I believe that animals are closest to nature. However, it still follows the criteria of being “white” and as mentioned in previous posts, it is rare to find white in nature but it isn’t non-existent or impossible to search for. I can say with confidence that these two images are comparable when it comes to the topic of nature. The only differences are the physical characteristics which are immediately apparent to the viewer.
In this image, there is almost little to no similarities between this comparison. Among a clock and a flower, there is really nothing you can point out to what is identical. Unlike the previous photo, this is a prime example of a contrasting image – I wanted to not only include an ambiguous comparison (like the first image) but also a collage that was strikingly different even from the first look. We can clearly tell that the clock is something that is part of humans. Nature has no concept of time or numbers and therefore, this object immediately contrasts against the blooming, pink flower. The clock’s hard, rigid features sets it apart from the delicateness of the cherry blossom. It is also with the camera’s settings that differentiates these two images – the depth of field. The cherry blossom’s shallow depth of field adds more to the smoothness of the image, it is as if you can almost feel the texture of the flower because of how close you can see it. Overall, the difference is the main theme of this collage, while the similarities are almost little to none.
The final collage is in the middle of the murky waters of ‘similarities and differences’. It is unique from the other two because it is not too similar nor is it too different from one another. There is a perfect balance of difference and similarity between these two images – they both exude a soft impression whilst the other still shows some degree of sharpness such as the branches of the cherry blossoms. The colours are also both neutral, with only the pink standing out. Despite that, the most important aspect is for myself and the audience to be able to separate the two characteristics of these images, with it being a “white object” and a “foliage”.
Through this experiment, I successfully answered the question of what it is I saw when I used photography as a means of noticing. I was able to fully understand the differences between the white object versus the foliage and has especially helped me with understanding the two mediums of photography of videography.
The question that will shape my final experiment is,
What are the similarities between video and photography in the aspects of our world that you have noticed?
Moving onto the next experiment, I wanted to capture the same features of my immediate environment as I had done in the initial experiment. However, the only difference is that I will be using a different type of medium – photography. The question I have asked myself and plan on tackling through Experiment II is:
What will you see when you capture the same aspects in the form of photography?
The reason why I decided to change the mode of capturing is to get a different point of view. With video, the movement of certain objects are easily detectable and are easily noticed. With photography, I believe that it can reveal more of the plant’s and more of the white object’s features and characteristics, enabling me to see the difference between videography and photography. Therefore, here is the recipe along with a solid criteria of what it is I must do for Experiment II:
Using a different medium to explore the same characteristics of the world
The aim of this task is to explore the same aspects that had already been seen in Experiment I. You will, however, be capturing images and not video recordings.
Ingredients:
the same camera previously used in experiment I (Nikon D3200)
yourself, of course!
a computer for editing
Adobe Photoshop software
Method:
Within your immediate location, capture the required characteristics of that place, as you have done in Experiment I.
Remember to take full advantage of the camera’s settings and that it should always be on the ‘Manual’ mode.
Once you have captured around 10-20 pictures or as long as you are satisfied with the images, make a collage through Adobe Photoshop.
Rules:
The camera’s focal length always has to be at 35mm for this experiment.
It is crucial that the camera’s settings are always on ‘Manual’.
Finally, it is also important that you use Adobe Photoshop to make the collage. No other apps or software must be used.
Here is my first experiment – my first creation in Task Three! As previously stated in my prompt, the aim of these upcoming tasks was to apply the questions I have previously asked into the experiments that I have been conducting. As I recall, my aim was to essentially use my new-found perspective whilst also familiarising myself with the settings of the camera. I believe that I have achieved my initial goal into exercising this vision I had into the final product of my first experiment. I made it a point to notice these two things in particular: trees, plants and foliage in general and also the white objects. In terms of the process of making the video, I could ask myself a few questions:
Why did I choose this particular location?
In my situation, it was mainly for my convenience and the time I had. Within my immediate surroundings and/or the schedule I had for the day, I decided to utilise my surroundings as part of my experiment. Much like how Ivens describes how he observed the railroad bridge over the Maas River in Rotterdam, he described the place as a “laboratory of movements, tones, shapes, contrasts, rhythms and the relations between all these”. I decided to use the same state of mind that Ivens had used in order to capture what I needed for the experiment. It worked to my favour that my parents had travelled to Heidelberg on my day off and therefore, a new location where I had no familiarity was a good starting point to begin filming.
Why did I choose to notice these particular aspects?
My vision had already been finalised before filming – as I have said numerous times, I wanted to notice and record the environment with the two of these forms being the foliage and white cars. However, it eventually evolved into noticing anything that was essentially white (objects such as shoes, displays outside shops, store signs, etc) whilst still continuing to notice all types of foliage/plants.
The reason behind this sudden change from white cars to anything generally white was because in the midst of filming, I noticed that when I was attempting to capture white cars, my camera would always come across something that was already white and I thought that it would work more in my favour if I were to choose objects over cars. I mention the same thing in my audio recording.
The reason why I chose these two aspects to notice was that because it is something that I would not immediately look for or look at and therefore, motivated me to explore these aspects of our everyday lives. I still followed the theme of recording foliage/plants and how it interacted with the busy environment but essentially, it was about the correlation between white objects, its interaction with nature and vice versa. I decided that whilst also capturing what I noticed, I did an on-the-spot reflection (via voice recording) of what I was currently feeling about my work, the location and essentially, the evolution of my notcing:
This audio was mainly just about what I saw during my observation/recording and the current vision I had for my work at the time. Upon listening to this piece of audio recording, I thought to myself, “Why didn’t I include this as part of my final experimental product?” I think it was mainly because of my focus on the aesthetics and to be frank, there was nothing special or appealing about this audio reflection. I intended to use this audio mainly for my own reflections.
What is something that you could have done better/paid more attention to whilst capturing what you intended to notice?
In terms of critiquing my own work, I definitely think that I could’ve spent more time formulating a solid idea of what it is I wanted to capture – I could have avoided having that last minute decision of changing from white cars to white objects. Viewing my own work, I could have also definitely stayed in a single position instead of moving everywhere – this would have given me more time to practice and improve on my use of the camera as that was also one of my main goals in this experiment. Finally, I could have also prioritised my noticing over the convenience but unfortunately, it was not up to me to stay in Heidelberg for as long as I wanted.
Overall, I am quite pleased with how this video has turned out, it captured everything that I had intended to capture and is a good representation of the vision I had in mind. The alternating sequences between the plants and white objects also worked and definitely highlighted the two differences of these two aspects – even from the way the camera work was done on both, we could see a striking difference in both the plants and the white objects.
Now my next question for experiment II is,
What will you see when you capture the same aspects in the form of photography?
The first stage of this project is to question your craft, particularly with noticing and how ‘attuned noticing’ enhances your ability to focus and pay more attention to your surroundings. From the previous project, ‘Unfamiliar Noticing’, we were asked as media practitioners to form a question about how one is able to create media through noticing. Two of the questions that I formed were the following:
How can I further expand this new perspective that I have gained? Before tackling this question, I did receive feedback from task two about how I should shift my focus to “noticing” as a practice. While I did mention it in my reflections and theories, I lacked the physical practice of noticing and instead dwelled on the actual imagination rather than the action of noticing. Therefore, I shall make it a point to actually incorporate ‘purposeful noticing’ on what I intend to notice. Moving on to the actual question, I would like to practice more of this perspective whilst also incorporating new styles of perspective and getting to know the uses of my tool. With these factors, the act of noticing shall be a far less challenging with my awareness of my surroundings and my new outlook as a media maker.
How can I use this skill to improve my artistry and use of the camera? My initial thought towards the question was the technicality of the camera and thus, it became easier to forget about the art of noticing. To me, it was all about the settings of the camera such as the exposure, ISO, aperture, etc – after getting my feedback from task two, that is when I realised that I had forgotten about noticing as the main priority. While it is important to take the camera’s settings into consideration, it is important to include and mesh the practice of noticing into your work. With the “new-found” perspective that I have gained from task two, I believe that my enhancement of noticing can improve my artistry and therefore, the use of the camera.
By answering both these questions with a clear consensus of noticing, I have made it a point to incorporate more of noticing by applying a formula or a rule, much like the previous task:
“Notice every white car and foliage within your chosen location”
Film a particular aspect of my chosen location – A BUSY ROAD? – what aspect of the busy road should I record? – every white car? Moving plants/foliage around the area and how it interacts with the environment as a whole? Maybe both? Are we following the theme of nature vs man? This is where the recipe comes in:
The aim of this task is to apply the questions previously asked from Task Two whilst also heavily incorporating noticing to your chosen surroundings.
Ingredients:
a camera, preferably the same DSLR previously used in task 2
yourself to carry the camera (arms + hands are important!)
a computer for editing
Premiere Pro software
Method:
With your chosen location, use your camera to record the place for 10-15 minutes. You can video record several aspects of the place with different camera angles being used.
Make sure you also experiment with the different settings of the camera such as the ISO, exposure, aperture, shutter speed to get different perspectives of your location.
Once you have finished filming, edit your video through Premiere Pro and reiterate the items/objects you have seen.
Rules:
The catch of this recipe is that you MUST notice ONLY notice white cars and any types of plants or foliage.
You are welcome to use any of the settings from the camera to your heart’s content – just so long as you experiment and explore new techniques from the camera.
In his classes, he famously asks his students to forget their personal narratives and any attempts at dramatisation and to merely experience what is happening for a long time in a not very eventful place
– Panse (46)
Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to attend week 5’s workshop class so I had to take the matter into my own hands. This exercise was supposed to be done in pairs but being by myself at home, I was unable to find a partner. Nonetheless, I have managed to record a “not very eventful place”. Here is the result:
This is the front gate of my home, filmed around 6 or 7 in the morning. Before jotting down my observations, I have already watched the film and found that it was difficult to see any changes at a normal rate. However, if I amp up the speed, it will be easier to see changes in the surroundings. So I suggest pressing the settings button and maximise the speed to 2.
OBSERVATIONS
It’s easy to tell that there’s a slight breeze due to the branches of the leaves being softly pushed
In terms of the audio, you can hear the engine of the vehicle running every now and then from the cars passing by
There is music in the background from my laptop
Static noises, bumps/thuds on the wall, footsteps, furniture being moved
The sound of clock ticking right next to the camera
The colour of the sky has also changed – from a muted blue to a paler, baby blue
The wind has also died down throughout the middle of the video
By 8 minutes, the sky becomes white as more clouds have appeared
Also, more birds are starting to chirp and outside activity is starting to get more active
In terms of the imagery, the most prominent change has been the sky from a blue, to a light blue and eventually white due to the clouds. Other than the clouds, the only thing you really see moving are the branches from the tree.
On the other hand, the sound is more active than the image – various sounds coming from inside and outside the video appear and can be heard without having to try hard. I think says a lot about the different mediums – by looking at the video, it can appear really quiet and serene but once listening to the audio, you realise that it’s quite the opposite.
This experience has enlightened and educated me about a place that I am vividly familiar with versus a location that I have never been to. It is a really an uplifting experience that adds on to the practice of introspection and noticing.
While I have focused on tiny little aspects that go unnoticed in Brunswick, it is also important to also see the overviewing aspects of the place to truly capture what one would expect when visiting the town. I have never been to Brunswick so these images were taken from a fresh set of eyes and perspective; it is important to see any location with this type of mindset and point of view. This newly-found skill can definitely be applied to future projects and upcoming assessment tasks for Seeing the Unseen.
In terms of making media, I would like to further refine these skills by practicing this type of noticing – this also includes the consideration of the angles, lighting, composition and so much more aspects that come with photography, filmmaking and media-making in general. By applying this type of perspective that was attained from my experience in this task, I hope to become a type of media-maker where I can immerse my audience in my perspective.
~ Queries and Questions ~
How can I further expand this new perspective that I have gained?
How can I use this skill to improve my artistry and use of the camera?
These are some of the questions that I have been pondering about before and whilst undergoing this task – within this studio, I would like those questions to be my form of motivation and my progression as a media maker this semester.
What are the differences and similarities between what you expected to notice and what you recorded?
Previously mentioned in my prompt post, my expectations of Brunswick were mostly of cafés and eateries that catered to the brunch culture in Melbourne. However, reflecting upon on the photos, it was clearly not the case. My photos seldom had any images of food, let alone cafès and eateries. It consisted of close-up shots of the objects and mainly bits of pieces of Brunswick:
An example of Brunswick’s little bits and pieces were these fabrics from the fabric shop. I was taken aback to come across shops like these. My expectations of Brunswick were of a modern image with newly-opened restaurants but in reality, it was an old town that widely contained run-down shops (this is not necessarily a bad thing), opportunity shops and so much more. It was like any other old suburb I visited, suburbs such as Niddrie, Fitzroy, Northcote, etc. It definitely had the atmosphere of an old, Victorian style town. That was the difference in my observation of Brunswick – what I expected to notice beforehand.
On the other hand, the similarities between my expectations of what I was going to notice versus what I was going to I recorded was very little – as I previously said, my expectations of noticing were going to be of cafès and eateries, however, I did not record anything that involved a cafè or better yet, anything brunch related. The only thing I can mention about the similarity that coincided between my expectations and what I recorded was capturing the culture of Brunswick – it was really the little details that encapsulated and therefore, fulfilled my aim of my expectations with my recordings.
Moving on, Lizzie’s form of recording versus mine was very different, proving the versatility of our ability to notice. We did not discuss how we would notice and record with a certain style except for what kind of tools we would use to notice. Thus, this resulted in both unique forms of noticing; Lizzie had aimed to notice Hosier Lane from one perspective of the location whilst everything around her changes.
On the other hand, I had decided to walk around a small area of Brunswick and capture whatever caught my attention. This was also proven in out videos – Lizzie wanted to highlight the traffic of people that were coming in and out of Hosier Lane, while I recorded places and objects that were unmoving and unapparent to the people around what I noticed (except for one of the footage with the woman walking her dog). This both displays our different ways of noticing and interacting the environment around us. Our collaboration helped us both see our places in a new perspective, broadening our capacity to be introspective.
In relation to the Bogost reading, I based it on Bogost’s theory on photography – he describes photography as “commonplace” that some or most media makers ignore its practicality. I agree with Bogost in this statement, seemingly as we sometimes want to photograph for artificial purposes. I believe that this project has led me to understand what Bogost was saying, and that we should not take the power of photography for granted. It presents so many dynamics and complexities that we have yet to understand about the world – it helps us see what cannot be seen by the naked eye. I previously would not have gone to the lengths of recording what I recorded in Brunswick but after this experience and Bogost’s reading, I will do more of it from now on.
At the same time, Patrick Pound’s exhibition can be partially acknowledged for the production of these images and videos. His hobby/work to collect has inspired me to be more aware of what was going on around Brunswick and the world in general. Each individual and item has so much character and story to tell in his exhibition that I wanted to capture what Brunswick had to offer.
Overall, my work has highly been influenced by Bogost’s take on photography and Pound’s extensive range of collection of various things. This has shaped the result of my work and has provided Lizzie and I a different perspective of Brunswick.
Lizzie and I have decided to notice our locations based on the time limit and formula of 10 pictures in 10 minutes (thus, 1 image per minute) and a 10-second video of the chosen location.
In my mind, I knew this task was definitely going to be related to the Bogost reading where he describes ontography in great detail – “Ontography is an aesthetic set theory, in which a particular configuration is celebrated merely on the basis of its existence” (Bogost, 2012). In relation to noticing, ontography plays a crucial part especially in the collection of our thoughts and what we immediately notice. In this case, what we notice in the location chosen for us – Lizzie chose Brunswick as my area of noticing/observation.
I thought it would be a good idea to use this reading as a starting point and preparation for the task because of the reading’s segment of “Visual Ontographs” – Bogost, first of all, discusses the ontography in its simplest form – lists. He then implements its simplicity onto a different medium that is, photographs. This is highly relevant and helpful to our process of collection mainly because Lizzie and I will be utilising visuals as part of our task of noticing.
The process invites the artist to see the scene to be captured separately from the way the camera will see it.
Meanwhile, I ponder about Brunswick and its unique culture and wonder what it has in place for me to explore – having no experience with Brunswick, I was preparing myself to see this suburb of Melbourne and also set myself up some expectations. Here is a chat between Lizzie and myself, explaining to her some the assumptions I had about Brunswick, after exploring the area. I also included my conclusion of the place and how it proved me wrong about some of my earlier assumptions.
My speculations about Brunswick, without any research, was the thriving brunch culture. Both Instagram and word of mouth from friends showcased what Brunswick had to offer in terms of the foodie culture. However, I was taken aback with the other aspects once I arrived – that shall be explained in my reflection post. Overall, Bogost’s posts and our time limit to record the media assisted in the process of noticing our chosen locations.
