Friday, 21 November 2008
Thursday, 20 November 2008
Fischli und Weiss - Der Lauf der Dinge
"Your aim is to create a piece of work which will form a part of your developing practice, which is inspired by an aspect of the research undertaken into your given character or group."
I drew Fischli and Weiss. Knowing nothing about them, I began (began) my search at wikipedia where I discoverd that this swiss duo is most famous for their installation Der Lauf der Dinge (The Way Things Go). This installation follows the form of an intricate series of actions, in the spirit of Rube Goldberg: various causes and effects generate a long chain reaction:
Here is the work in its entirety:
With this project, Fischli and Weiss haven't really created anything new per se: Rube Goldberg first published his cartoons featuring humorously complicated devices in 1914.
Flame from lamp (A) catches on curtain (B) and fire department sends stream of water (C) through window. Dwarf (D) thinks it is raining and reaches for umbrella (E), pulling string (F) and lifting end of platform (G). Iron ball (H) falls and pulls string (I), causing hammer (J) to hit plate of glass (K). Crashof glass wakes up pup (L) and mother dog (M) rocks him to sleep in cradle (N), causing attached wooden hand (O) to move up and down along your back.
The popular Rube Goldberg machines have spawned thousands of real attempts at creating such complicated devices. The popular children's game "The Mousetrap" comes from the same idea, as does the early computer game "Incredible Machine."
Der Lauf der Dinge stands apart not only because of its scope - full 30 minute sequence utilizing all sorts of various materials - but also because of the various transitions of energy involved: gravitational, thermodynamic, chemical, centrifugal. All the traditional four elements are in some way or another utilized: Wind (through blowing air), Water, Fire and "Earth" (solid matter).
In addition, the objects within the sequence are divorced from their original purpose.
I drew Fischli and Weiss. Knowing nothing about them, I began (began) my search at wikipedia where I discoverd that this swiss duo is most famous for their installation Der Lauf der Dinge (The Way Things Go). This installation follows the form of an intricate series of actions, in the spirit of Rube Goldberg: various causes and effects generate a long chain reaction:
Here is the work in its entirety:
With this project, Fischli and Weiss haven't really created anything new per se: Rube Goldberg first published his cartoons featuring humorously complicated devices in 1914.
Flame from lamp (A) catches on curtain (B) and fire department sends stream of water (C) through window. Dwarf (D) thinks it is raining and reaches for umbrella (E), pulling string (F) and lifting end of platform (G). Iron ball (H) falls and pulls string (I), causing hammer (J) to hit plate of glass (K). Crashof glass wakes up pup (L) and mother dog (M) rocks him to sleep in cradle (N), causing attached wooden hand (O) to move up and down along your back.The popular Rube Goldberg machines have spawned thousands of real attempts at creating such complicated devices. The popular children's game "The Mousetrap" comes from the same idea, as does the early computer game "Incredible Machine."
Der Lauf der Dinge stands apart not only because of its scope - full 30 minute sequence utilizing all sorts of various materials - but also because of the various transitions of energy involved: gravitational, thermodynamic, chemical, centrifugal. All the traditional four elements are in some way or another utilized: Wind (through blowing air), Water, Fire and "Earth" (solid matter).
In addition, the objects within the sequence are divorced from their original purpose.
Brief 5 - The iPhone ringtone!
"Propose, design and make either an animated ringtone or a clock for the Apple iPhone"
I'm planning on making a ringtone template with clock-like qualities...
"Think about the caller, the receiver, sound and image, synesthesia, modularity, loops and customisation Conduct thorough secondary research to uncover previous art/design/sound projects to inspire you."
I had several ideas for the ringtone, including having pictures of people ringing various types of bells, the joke being that when the phone rings, the person rattles around the bell, instead of the other way around. But I realized then that someone had previously done "people ringing" so I scrapped that idea.
So now I'm thinking of creating little scenes with sprites that are associated with individual callers. My current idea is to present a dark urban back-alley sort of space, and instead of a ring, there will be loud noises that are associated with what you might hear late at night in a back alley: meowing cat, crying baby, car alarm, trash can lid falling, tv channels changing. Each noise is assigned a caller in your phone book. In addition, I am considering introducing qualities that indicate time passing, such as the changing of the sky's color, though I am still undecided.
For now, I am thinking only of this alleyway scene, but I imagine continuing with other sorts of urban scenes: a diner, a basketball court, etc.
For now, here is a moodboard that I put together, to show various inspirations for the dark city scene:
In addition, I made a "mood sketch" to show the basic composition and textural quality I am thinking of:
Accompanying each noise would be a small animation, plus the appearance of the person's name in an appropriate typeface (in this case, I thought of each letter being different, like a ransom note)
I'm planning on making a ringtone template with clock-like qualities...
"Think about the caller, the receiver, sound and image, synesthesia, modularity, loops and customisation Conduct thorough secondary research to uncover previous art/design/sound projects to inspire you."
I had several ideas for the ringtone, including having pictures of people ringing various types of bells, the joke being that when the phone rings, the person rattles around the bell, instead of the other way around. But I realized then that someone had previously done "people ringing" so I scrapped that idea.
So now I'm thinking of creating little scenes with sprites that are associated with individual callers. My current idea is to present a dark urban back-alley sort of space, and instead of a ring, there will be loud noises that are associated with what you might hear late at night in a back alley: meowing cat, crying baby, car alarm, trash can lid falling, tv channels changing. Each noise is assigned a caller in your phone book. In addition, I am considering introducing qualities that indicate time passing, such as the changing of the sky's color, though I am still undecided.
For now, I am thinking only of this alleyway scene, but I imagine continuing with other sorts of urban scenes: a diner, a basketball court, etc.
For now, here is a moodboard that I put together, to show various inspirations for the dark city scene:
In addition, I made a "mood sketch" to show the basic composition and textural quality I am thinking of:
Accompanying each noise would be a small animation, plus the appearance of the person's name in an appropriate typeface (in this case, I thought of each letter being different, like a ransom note)
Wednesday, 19 November 2008
"It's Alaska" in Review -OR- "How do you make a piece that expresses confusion but isn't confusing"
Well, my project is, for all intents and purposes, finished. Watch it below.
I am exhausted, so I will use these guiding questions formally for my reflection.
What did I actually achieve with this piece of work?
This piece was born out of studying how typography was treated in old trailers. Through observing various examples, I managed to recreate and reinterpret the way type looked and moved in various contexts. I managed to streamline my work-process and consequently became more comfortable with using After Effects. My final piece of work is, in spite of any narrative setbacks, in my opinion a fairly solid exercise in pastiche and style.
Which were the most difficult parts, and why?
It seemed the most difficult part was to find a balance between the audio and the visuals. The visual style did not initially add anything to the source material, an interview with a self-proclaimed alien abductee, because the source material was already ridiculous on its own. I was married to the idea of using these visuals as a jumping off point, and rather than start from scratch, I thought of using a Sarah Palin interview (one of my initial ideas for this project). Through the use of dated typography - influenced by anti-communist propaganda, sci-fi and horror films, and commercial suburban fantasies - I hoped to comment on Ms. Palin's old-fashioned views and the way she appeals to the sensationalist fears of those attempting to hold on to their American dream.
Which were the most straight-forward parts, and why?
I found the entire project fairly straight-forward, in the sense that technically I already had all the tools that I needed to execute the project. The only difference is the extent to which I pushed myself in terms of the shear quantity and complexity of material. I must admit that imitating the old styles was fairly easy, in the sense that I never lacked any motivation. I just kept adjusting various qualities to get that perfect "imperfect" look.
How well do I think I achieved the intended learning outcomes for this task?
I think I deviated from the intended learning outcome in the sense that as I further developed the piece, I was less focused on the typography, and more focused on the visual context. It is no coincidence that the part people responded to most is the map section, because it is the only one where I really deviated from my "rulebook" and played with the camera. I originally planned to play with the conventions more, but in hindsight find that "achieving the look" became more of a priority.
Where could I have improved my achievement? Why didn't I improve it at the time?
In terms of my stated achievement, there isn't a whole lot I would have done in terms of further imitating the style, save actually going out and filming things the old way. However, that would defeat the purpose of using new technology to emulate old technology. As I stated, the piece was successful as a pastiche, however, guided by the general response and the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, I recognize that there were failings in other areas.
What have I got out of doing this project?
Most of what I have learned, actually came the day I presented it... so... yesterday. The response did not quite match the feeling of swelling pride that I had upon completing it Monday night. It seemed that much of the humor, references and overall intention was over-shadowed by the sheer magnitude of disjointed imagery that I packed into the piece. The irony is that I approached this piece with the direct intention of it being just that: disjointed, random, strung together. However it's nature over-shadowed the intent, and it seemed that's what people were responding to most. It makes perfect sense looking back at it now.
I didn't storyboard this project in any linear fashion. Rather, I conceived of it as a series of "set pieces" which formed the primary skeleton: Narrow Maritime Border, Our Neighbors, and Putin Rears his Head. These were the first sequences I created and consequently the most successful. The rest of the piece essentially filled in the gaps. I didn't initially see this as a problem because I thought that my process, fragmented as it was, perfectly suited the effect that I was going for. This made perfect sense in the tunnel-vision of my creative "storm", but looking back I understand how this did not serve me very well.
(In my defense, however, I might also argue that some of the humor was lost on the audience simply because they weren't as emotionally invested in the subject matter as myself or my target audience.... but that is no excuse for bad planning!)
What worked least well for me and why?
There is a specific section which I thought was hilarious, but seemed to lose others. That would be the part where Palin defends herself and can't think of the word "mock". I wanted to show her losing her train of thought by tacking together lots of disjointed images, followed by film scrolling past a broken shutter, implying her train of thought breaking apart. However it seemed to confuse the viewers, and proved somewhat distracting.
With hindsight, how would I go about this project differently?
PLAN MORE! I made the excuse that I could get away without storyboarding because the piece wasn't supposed to look linear. Of course I shot myself in the foot because if you don't properly plan an arc for your piece, you lose your audience. Although I think I did conceive of certain sections carefully, others were inserted without as much consideration, and it shows. However I will also state that my creative decisions in placing things where they were followed the audio very carefully, and the audio's inherent confusion didn't particularly follow a clean narrative arc to begin with.
None-the-less, I acknowledge the need for more planning and storyboarding before diving into the actual making of the piece. By reversing that process I became extremely involved in the visual vernacular and gave less priority to the planning, perhaps losing sight of the final outcome.
I will admit that the irony is slightly frustrating: although I achieved my desired outcome of a visually confusing piece, I ended up with a visually confusing piece. Therefore the inferences I can make as to how I might make alterations range from "subtle changes to make it less confusing" to "total overhaul of the concept".
I will not be editing this piece any further. No-one, that I can recall, commented negatively on my aesthetic choices, or how I could have done any specific sections better. For this, and other reasons, I think the critique reflects the planning and conceptual process more than anything else. The best thing is to take what I have learned, and apply it constructively to my next piece.
Over and out.
I am exhausted, so I will use these guiding questions formally for my reflection.
What did I actually achieve with this piece of work?
This piece was born out of studying how typography was treated in old trailers. Through observing various examples, I managed to recreate and reinterpret the way type looked and moved in various contexts. I managed to streamline my work-process and consequently became more comfortable with using After Effects. My final piece of work is, in spite of any narrative setbacks, in my opinion a fairly solid exercise in pastiche and style.
Which were the most difficult parts, and why?
It seemed the most difficult part was to find a balance between the audio and the visuals. The visual style did not initially add anything to the source material, an interview with a self-proclaimed alien abductee, because the source material was already ridiculous on its own. I was married to the idea of using these visuals as a jumping off point, and rather than start from scratch, I thought of using a Sarah Palin interview (one of my initial ideas for this project). Through the use of dated typography - influenced by anti-communist propaganda, sci-fi and horror films, and commercial suburban fantasies - I hoped to comment on Ms. Palin's old-fashioned views and the way she appeals to the sensationalist fears of those attempting to hold on to their American dream.
Which were the most straight-forward parts, and why?
I found the entire project fairly straight-forward, in the sense that technically I already had all the tools that I needed to execute the project. The only difference is the extent to which I pushed myself in terms of the shear quantity and complexity of material. I must admit that imitating the old styles was fairly easy, in the sense that I never lacked any motivation. I just kept adjusting various qualities to get that perfect "imperfect" look.
How well do I think I achieved the intended learning outcomes for this task?
I think I deviated from the intended learning outcome in the sense that as I further developed the piece, I was less focused on the typography, and more focused on the visual context. It is no coincidence that the part people responded to most is the map section, because it is the only one where I really deviated from my "rulebook" and played with the camera. I originally planned to play with the conventions more, but in hindsight find that "achieving the look" became more of a priority.
Where could I have improved my achievement? Why didn't I improve it at the time?
In terms of my stated achievement, there isn't a whole lot I would have done in terms of further imitating the style, save actually going out and filming things the old way. However, that would defeat the purpose of using new technology to emulate old technology. As I stated, the piece was successful as a pastiche, however, guided by the general response and the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, I recognize that there were failings in other areas.
What have I got out of doing this project?
Most of what I have learned, actually came the day I presented it... so... yesterday. The response did not quite match the feeling of swelling pride that I had upon completing it Monday night. It seemed that much of the humor, references and overall intention was over-shadowed by the sheer magnitude of disjointed imagery that I packed into the piece. The irony is that I approached this piece with the direct intention of it being just that: disjointed, random, strung together. However it's nature over-shadowed the intent, and it seemed that's what people were responding to most. It makes perfect sense looking back at it now.
I didn't storyboard this project in any linear fashion. Rather, I conceived of it as a series of "set pieces" which formed the primary skeleton: Narrow Maritime Border, Our Neighbors, and Putin Rears his Head. These were the first sequences I created and consequently the most successful. The rest of the piece essentially filled in the gaps. I didn't initially see this as a problem because I thought that my process, fragmented as it was, perfectly suited the effect that I was going for. This made perfect sense in the tunnel-vision of my creative "storm", but looking back I understand how this did not serve me very well.
(In my defense, however, I might also argue that some of the humor was lost on the audience simply because they weren't as emotionally invested in the subject matter as myself or my target audience.... but that is no excuse for bad planning!)
What worked least well for me and why?
There is a specific section which I thought was hilarious, but seemed to lose others. That would be the part where Palin defends herself and can't think of the word "mock". I wanted to show her losing her train of thought by tacking together lots of disjointed images, followed by film scrolling past a broken shutter, implying her train of thought breaking apart. However it seemed to confuse the viewers, and proved somewhat distracting.
With hindsight, how would I go about this project differently?
PLAN MORE! I made the excuse that I could get away without storyboarding because the piece wasn't supposed to look linear. Of course I shot myself in the foot because if you don't properly plan an arc for your piece, you lose your audience. Although I think I did conceive of certain sections carefully, others were inserted without as much consideration, and it shows. However I will also state that my creative decisions in placing things where they were followed the audio very carefully, and the audio's inherent confusion didn't particularly follow a clean narrative arc to begin with.
None-the-less, I acknowledge the need for more planning and storyboarding before diving into the actual making of the piece. By reversing that process I became extremely involved in the visual vernacular and gave less priority to the planning, perhaps losing sight of the final outcome.
I will admit that the irony is slightly frustrating: although I achieved my desired outcome of a visually confusing piece, I ended up with a visually confusing piece. Therefore the inferences I can make as to how I might make alterations range from "subtle changes to make it less confusing" to "total overhaul of the concept".
I will not be editing this piece any further. No-one, that I can recall, commented negatively on my aesthetic choices, or how I could have done any specific sections better. For this, and other reasons, I think the critique reflects the planning and conceptual process more than anything else. The best thing is to take what I have learned, and apply it constructively to my next piece.
Over and out.
Tuesday, 11 November 2008
Weekend Update
I've got a fair amount of animation down on my Sarah Palin project. I have a bunch of sequences that I really like, however they aren't yet making a cohesive whole. Obviously it is missing major chunks in between, however I am not too worried. I conceived of this project as a series of set pieces rather than a continuous narrative, which I think serves the audio well. Palin's disjointed "stream" of thought lends itself well to different styles of animation, and I don't regret using a "set piece" style of planning as opposed to a more linear path. This has also allowed me to move past the block of "what's next?" and figure out how to link those scenes that I already have, ergo "I've got points A and C, now let's find B".
I have the opening battle plan.
I have the neighbors sequence.
I have Putin's rearing head.
Now, all I need are the final scene of Putin wreaking havoc on Alaska (see picture below) and the various trade missions, which I conceive as arrows pointing "back" and "forth" between Russia and Slaska on the map.
For Katie Couric's questions, I really want to have very simple title-plates that stand in contrast to the erratic movement that accompanies Sarah Palin's answers.
Enough chatter. Here is what I have so far.
NOTE: Obviously all of it is "In progress" but I put the note there to show scenes which haven't yet been inserted.
Sarah Palin 3 from Gabriel Aronson on Vimeo.
And here is my concept for the final scene (ignore the text, it belongs in the previous scene).
The lasers shooting out of his eyes will then sear away the film, and it will bubble and melt away.
I have the opening battle plan.
I have the neighbors sequence.
I have Putin's rearing head.
Now, all I need are the final scene of Putin wreaking havoc on Alaska (see picture below) and the various trade missions, which I conceive as arrows pointing "back" and "forth" between Russia and Slaska on the map.
For Katie Couric's questions, I really want to have very simple title-plates that stand in contrast to the erratic movement that accompanies Sarah Palin's answers.
Enough chatter. Here is what I have so far.
NOTE: Obviously all of it is "In progress" but I put the note there to show scenes which haven't yet been inserted.
Sarah Palin 3 from Gabriel Aronson on Vimeo.
And here is my concept for the final scene (ignore the text, it belongs in the previous scene).
The lasers shooting out of his eyes will then sear away the film, and it will bubble and melt away.
Friday, 7 November 2008
A Change of Plan
Most of the feedback I received after presenting to my class regarded the mismatch of the audio and video. Because the spoken content is so crazy to begin with, poking fun at it using sci-fie trailer movie titles didn't really add all that much to it. But I was married to the visual style. I considered using an interview with Tom Cruise, but aside from the fact that it had an awful soundtrack, it was still too crazy. The visual style wasn't making a statement.
Finally I decided to go with one of my original ideas to visually represent an interview with Sarah Palin despite the fact that I am ready to wash my hands of her presence on the political scene. I am aiming to animate a good portion of the audio from the clip below.
I decided to let myself go a little, concerning how much I stayed true to the style of 1950s movie titles. The concept is to illustrate her the ignorance and fear-mongering of her words by imitating war-propaganda/documentaries of the cold war in terms of the visual vernacular, and introducing a 3D element to represent a battle-map.
So far I've made 12 seconds worth. Took me a solid 6 hours!
A Very Narrow Maritime Border from Gabriel Aronson on Vimeo.
My aim is to use the crackling of the film to accentuate all her "ummms" and "errrrs".
In hindsight, LAND BOUNDARY should really be coming up from the ground. I just couldn't resist the cool fly-in effect.
Some sketches:
Finally I decided to go with one of my original ideas to visually represent an interview with Sarah Palin despite the fact that I am ready to wash my hands of her presence on the political scene. I am aiming to animate a good portion of the audio from the clip below.
I decided to let myself go a little, concerning how much I stayed true to the style of 1950s movie titles. The concept is to illustrate her the ignorance and fear-mongering of her words by imitating war-propaganda/documentaries of the cold war in terms of the visual vernacular, and introducing a 3D element to represent a battle-map.
So far I've made 12 seconds worth. Took me a solid 6 hours!
A Very Narrow Maritime Border from Gabriel Aronson on Vimeo.
My aim is to use the crackling of the film to accentuate all her "ummms" and "errrrs".
In hindsight, LAND BOUNDARY should really be coming up from the ground. I just couldn't resist the cool fly-in effect.
Some sketches:
Sunday, 2 November 2008
My Extra-Terrestrial Husband
Here is further development for my kinetic typography piece:
My Extra-Terrestrial Husband from Gabriel Aronson on Vimeo.
At the moment, I'm just experimenting with how closely I can replicate the experience of watching old projected footage. I added in some color using the colorama effect, and applied a subtle mesh warp to the entire project so that it looks like it was projected through an old lens or on an uneven surface. I also introduced the effect of the shutterspeed going all wonky, causing the picture to shift slightly. I did this by duplicating the composition (pre-color and mesh effects) aligning it off-screen and parenting it to my main composition. Then I could move the two around, and make it look like adjacent frames.
So far I am happy with what I know I am able to achieve looks-wise. Now I should perhaps do some actual storyboarding and proper development on the way the actual sequence will play out! And is there a way to use the elements that I have been playing with and "up-date them" or de-contextualize them? Would that be appropriate? Or am I just trying to imitate that specific style as closely as possible? How can the type better reflect what is being said?
Questions for the coming few days...
My Extra-Terrestrial Husband from Gabriel Aronson on Vimeo.
At the moment, I'm just experimenting with how closely I can replicate the experience of watching old projected footage. I added in some color using the colorama effect, and applied a subtle mesh warp to the entire project so that it looks like it was projected through an old lens or on an uneven surface. I also introduced the effect of the shutterspeed going all wonky, causing the picture to shift slightly. I did this by duplicating the composition (pre-color and mesh effects) aligning it off-screen and parenting it to my main composition. Then I could move the two around, and make it look like adjacent frames.
So far I am happy with what I know I am able to achieve looks-wise. Now I should perhaps do some actual storyboarding and proper development on the way the actual sequence will play out! And is there a way to use the elements that I have been playing with and "up-date them" or de-contextualize them? Would that be appropriate? Or am I just trying to imitate that specific style as closely as possible? How can the type better reflect what is being said?
Questions for the coming few days...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)