Link to project: projects.hannahbrasier.com/student-work/untangling

Dividing the project into 3 different environments allowed all group members an opportunity to observe their chosen environments at a leisurely pace. This enabled three atmospheres to be captured differently depending on the individual, which shows a reflection of everyday life. Aspects that we somewhat restricted ourselves to was a shot list, where we discussed how to physically shoot clips so that it was transparent throughout the entire project. We decided to primarily shoot in still shots as Lam (2018, p.210) said , we wanted to  ‘[play] with the tension and stillness’, in which we thought would convey the human struggle to interact with something we will never understand. Observing these rhythms offered some limitations, as we wanted the focus to be water, the environments of our choice had to have water environments entangled within them in some form. Building from this concept, we created a diverse range of material that allowed us to manipulate in order for individuals to interact with and explore further.

The method of capturing these environments proved to be limiting. Capturing the surrounding land seems well within our abilities, however, gathering close up shots of the water seemed sometimes problematic. Practices such as using a Go Pros would have enabled us to capture a more realistic representation of the elements, whilst enabling a more approachable way to film the water environments. The biggest limitation was the accessibility, but other aspects such as the time limit we put ourselves to proved to be a hassle. As a 15 second time frame sometimes missed huge moments within the shot, therefore creativity limiting us due to these restrictions. We attempted to explore as Carlin (2018, p. n.d.) says the ‘unsettling human hierarchy,’ whereas our reality of this is somewhat skewed. In the future, having access to more filming equipment would have proven to be very useful, or even, going the extra mile and hiring out a boat to be on the water in an effort to understand it.

In order to sense the rhythms that we exhibited throughout our project, the importance of allowing users to interact with the environment, much like we did, was crucial to our media artefact. Through this sensing, we wanted to focus on the individual experience and therefore thought fit that the program Korsakow seemed like the perfect way to present and demonstrate this experience. The concept of a choose your own adventure or reset the game was a key idea that we wanted to explore, as we set out to test the limitations of capturing these environments, specifically water, we wanted the viewer to understand and go through it too. This program much like academic Miles et. al (2018, p.311) states, that Korsakow allowed us (the filmmakers) to release our control that is traditionally utilised, to now be ‘negotiated or surrendered’. The entanglement of this project allowed even others to interact with each other, as the continuous nature of the program allows for infinite opportunities. Whilst also appealing to the individuals experience, we also wanted it to be authentic with the way in which environments serve this nature too. It is up to the individual ,but also we wanted to interact with other beings, and this connectiveness allows for entanglement to occur.

We hope that viewers interact with our project and allow themselves to be entangled within the environments as we were. Through the use of flowing water, this limitlessness was created so that it could be understood but also emphasising that it will completely never be. It also reinforces that all environments are entangled and communicating like we are with one another.

 References:

Carlin, D. (2018) Fieldwork, Sydney Review of Books. Available at: https://sydneyreviewofbooks.com/fieldwork/. viewed 18 October 2019

Miles, A., Weidle, F., Brasier, H., Lessard, B., 2018. From Critical Distance to Critical Intimacy: Interactive Documentary and Relational Media, in: Cammaer, G., Fitzpatrick, B., Lessard, B. (Eds.), Critical Distance in Documentary Media. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp. 301–319

Lam, S., 2015. It’s About Time: Slow Aesthetics in Experimental Ecocinema and Nature Cam Videos, in: Luca, T. de (Ed.), Slow Cinema. Edinburgh University Press, pp. 207–218

 

 

 

Snapshot of a clip of the Merri Creek

One thing that worked really well in terms of our project was our concept and idea of how we want to present our different environments. From the Merri Creek, to the beach to the waterfall, our thoughts on how we want the audience to travel through each environment and the connects they all have with the water is a great representation of the ‘limitless environments’. It also seemed to be well receive by our classmates. Now, the only issue we have is will we be able to execute the clips to reflect what we want using Korsakow.  

One aspect that isn’t working as well, purely because we have not done it or attempted to yet, is the editing and coding of the project on Korsakow. Having no previous knowledge of the program nor anyone else in the group, this causes some concerns to our project, as we often ask the question can we effectively present the ideas we want to the way we want to.

The feedback we received in class was something that we were unsure about and asked our peers what they thought better represents ‘how limitless are environments’. In terms of our timing and lifespan of our clips we will present, we tossed around whether to make all clips have an infinite lifespan or to cater our audiences experiences by leading them back to the water environment. They were more in favour of the unlimited lifespans where individuals can go through the program however they liked, but it is something we will consider in the future when we code our clips.

The Impossible Image, "The Enclave" by Richard Mosee sourced from YouTube

The creative piece from Richard Mosse ‘The Enclave’ helped develop an idea for the visual aspect of the media artefact. The infra red highlighted the land in which we can explore, and interact with. The environment that has less limitations to us human beings as compared to the blue sky or water within the film that you can also see. This was purely chosen as a possible concept for us to distinguish for the audience, what they can and cannot control completely. The academic research from Timo Jokela’s Art, Community and the Environment, as an environmental artist, he described the relationship between land and a person and how that can shape art you create. It was not explicitly related to our project, much rather everyone else’s too, but it highlighted how important it is to choose the environment. Jokela described the environment as a “multidimensional concept” (Jokela, 2008 p.13) and is something that can never be fully grasped or understood entirely.

The feedback from the research I did was met with a likening, the idea of distinguishing concepts with colour within the film was understood, but it would need a lot of attention and effort to be able to be pulled off. It’s something that I may look into doing in the future, however at this stage due to time constraints and my capabilities with technology and programs. It just seemed a little far fetched, but it’s something I’m excited to work with in the future and would have really worked well with this media artefact.

 

Reference:

The Impossible Image 2014, YouTube, viewed 3 October 2019 ,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTVkqwuLYHU>

Couttes, G & Joleka, T (eds.) 2008, Art, Community and the Environment, 1st edn, Intellect Books, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago

 

 

In terms of ideas, we found that our intention to present this artefact using Korsakow was a good and concrete idea. However, many questions arose from this causing somewhat concern or doubt. The idea which we were unsure about was the orientation in which we should film our footage in. The square layout- that we all agreed we liked, we could not film it on our iPhones. Hence we will have to resort to shooting in landscape, which we are confident will be good but we’ll see how it goes.

Towards making the final media artefact, we are now at the stage of gathering material to effectively display the entanglement and limitations of several different environments. We now have divided the environments between us, Catherine focusing on a waterfall, Ailie on a beach and me on the Yarra River. We have established the amount of shots and shot duration we think will create a really good array of material for us to choose and edit from.

We gathered a lot fo feedback for the set up and the intricacies of using Korsakow. Things such as the tagging and how we want to present the ‘story’ was very helpful to us and allowed us to set a goal of what we want our final piece to look like. More feedback that we received from our classmates were whether we were going to focus on water (which is our main focus for the project) in a positive way or a negative way. Which was a very good question and something we will think about for the future.

Picture of brainstorm for creating the question we hope to answer for Assignment #4

1. How will these ideas allow you to observe, pay attention and capture the rhythms of the environments you might focus on?My group and I decided to focus on the limitations of capturing environments, to the extent of, how close can us human beings get to seeing them? This idea, and its complexity, will force us to to pay close attention to the environment around us. From the reading,  Carlin displays researchers thoughts on capturing a river stream. One researcher (Researcher D), describes the river like the ocean, as it is “unknowable” (Carlin, 2018) due to our inability to stay out there too long or we will die. This concept accurately displays what we are trying to express in our media artefact, and what we hope to explore. We will test these ideas by going to the extreme and really trying to push the boundaries of these limits.
2. What feedback did you get on these ideas and how might you incorporate that into your project?Some feedback that as given to us was mostly ideas on how to express this concept for the final submission. We were given lots of great ideas, including going on the Yarra River and filming it almost never ending stream in order to capture the limits that we can see. This is something that we may interact with, as water seems to be the central concept to show this limitation of capturing environments using media. For our tests, we will further explore what we can see through the lens of a camera and go from there in terms of creating a concrete design to show these limits.

Reference:

Carlin, D. (2018) Fieldwork, Sydney Review of Books. Available at: https://sydneyreviewofbooks.com/fieldwork/. (Accessed: 17 July 2019).