YouTube - terms of use... well, I am not known to take video footage (have the function on my digital camera...but have not yet used it) nor am I likely to post any video on YouTube, whatever it should be... So, on going to the Terms of Use page on YouTube, I am not too enthusiastic about reading through all of the guff.... in fact, this page is even further deterrent for me to post video to the net! Why do they have to make it so long and convoluted?
Flickr - terms of use - click on "terms of use" at bottom of linked page. Once again - a small thesis to plow through. In cost / benefit analysis the cost of reading this is certainly not outweighed by what I might perceive as benefits in doing so... At this stage, I have no photos that I wish to upload to Flickr, but when I do see the need to do so, I know exactly where to find the "terms of use" and know that these must be read and understood and agreed to before uploading images.
I am feeling less inclined to actually READ these as I have spent about 4 hours already on this weeks blogging tasks and really think that is plenty enough!!! I have neglected my painting project all day in order to do this!!! So, that's it - time to stop and think about sea weed!!!
By the way - tomorrow... or in less than 3 hours, I turn 30... yes, wow... no longer in my twenties, stressful.... must become a responsible adult over night... cannot see that happening!!!
Oh dear!!!
Ciao!!!
Friday, April 11, 2008
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Copyright - Keir Smith, Oh so criminal
Oh so criminal by Keir Smith. I watched this 5 times! In particular, I found the sampling of music complex, clever and highly effective. The film is an interesting and attention grabbing approach as a response to Australia's recent (2005) examination of copyright exceptions. It definitely provokes thought and discussion about copyright and issues associated.
Apparently this work is "illegal". However, assuming Australian copyright law is similar to NZ, I think he can safely get away with it:
Looking at "fair use":
- the purpose of this work is NOT for commercial gain
- the work is compiled as a 'criticism' which is apparently allowed under 'fair dealing' - the POINT of the work is about copyright and exceptions
- he has copied EXPLICITLY and is not claiming authenticity - in fact he uses clear text statements acknowledging the infringements he is making and inviting people to contest
- the segments he has copied are all very short (likely to fall within the proportions allowed by the act)
- I doubt the work has effect on the market value of any of the copied material - none of the material is degraded in anyway (none that I can detect)
- As for price - well that point defeats the purpose of the film in the first place. If he had purchased the rights to use the material then the point of the film would no longer be valid!
It is a tricky one. Peculiar and awkward to rule judgment largely because of the nature of the idea expressed in Keir's work - that being about copyright itself.
Copyright law is intended to protect the EXPRESSION of ideas. Keir Smith is actually EXPRESSING quite a unique idea, totally separate from the material he has copied to make up his film. The content of the copied material, i.e. the expressions of other people's ideas, in this work is actually COMPLETELY irrelevant to Keir's idea... so therefore, I do not consider this film illegal.
The digital age brings with it a number of associated copyright issues that need to be addressed or accommodated. I agree with both suggestions made in the written statement (go to link). Firstly, there is a need for a degree of open-endedness and assessment of each case specifically; as in this example, copyright issues are not always particularly black and white and a closer more careful assessment may be required (downside - this could be costly in both $ and time). Secondly, I also agree that some of the specific exceptions could be reviewed and amended to become more appropriate to copying issues of the digital age.
Apparently this work is "illegal". However, assuming Australian copyright law is similar to NZ, I think he can safely get away with it:
Looking at "fair use":
- the purpose of this work is NOT for commercial gain
- the work is compiled as a 'criticism' which is apparently allowed under 'fair dealing' - the POINT of the work is about copyright and exceptions
- he has copied EXPLICITLY and is not claiming authenticity - in fact he uses clear text statements acknowledging the infringements he is making and inviting people to contest
- the segments he has copied are all very short (likely to fall within the proportions allowed by the act)
- I doubt the work has effect on the market value of any of the copied material - none of the material is degraded in anyway (none that I can detect)
- As for price - well that point defeats the purpose of the film in the first place. If he had purchased the rights to use the material then the point of the film would no longer be valid!
It is a tricky one. Peculiar and awkward to rule judgment largely because of the nature of the idea expressed in Keir's work - that being about copyright itself.
Copyright law is intended to protect the EXPRESSION of ideas. Keir Smith is actually EXPRESSING quite a unique idea, totally separate from the material he has copied to make up his film. The content of the copied material, i.e. the expressions of other people's ideas, in this work is actually COMPLETELY irrelevant to Keir's idea... so therefore, I do not consider this film illegal.
The digital age brings with it a number of associated copyright issues that need to be addressed or accommodated. I agree with both suggestions made in the written statement (go to link). Firstly, there is a need for a degree of open-endedness and assessment of each case specifically; as in this example, copyright issues are not always particularly black and white and a closer more careful assessment may be required (downside - this could be costly in both $ and time). Secondly, I also agree that some of the specific exceptions could be reviewed and amended to become more appropriate to copying issues of the digital age.
Copyright - 12 Monkeys - Universal Studios and Lebbeus Woods
Wow!!! YES Totally a copy (check it out), and compared with the above music case, this case looks to me as MORE than just unconscious copy. The similarities between the picture drawn by Lebbeus Woods and the chair in 12 Monkeys go right to the fine detail - most notably the chair itself - its form, colour and detail and its positioning in the room on a vertical rail, the structure of the room and the qualities of the materials from which the floor and walls appear to be made (for details, go to the above link).
I had never know of this case and to think that it was ruled by the judge that this was indeed a copyright infringement and that Universal Studios would have to pull the movie and remove these chair scenes, that's HUGE!!! I think Lebbeus Woods was most within rights and reason to have pursued this case and correctly won. It was pretty big of him to see the lighter side and take a settlement instead!!! (Wow, I hope some big corporate copies me - so I can generously take a settlement payment!!!).
So, what copyright infringement happened with Devil's Advocate?
I had never know of this case and to think that it was ruled by the judge that this was indeed a copyright infringement and that Universal Studios would have to pull the movie and remove these chair scenes, that's HUGE!!! I think Lebbeus Woods was most within rights and reason to have pursued this case and correctly won. It was pretty big of him to see the lighter side and take a settlement instead!!! (Wow, I hope some big corporate copies me - so I can generously take a settlement payment!!!).
So, what copyright infringement happened with Devil's Advocate?
Copyright - Bright Tunes Music Corp. v. Harrisongs Music, Ltd.
Click here for the link.
Very interesting! I consider myself to be pretty in to music - I listen to music most of the day (radio or CD), collect CDs, am interested in a range of music genres and eras... I have heard songs that struck me as having greater similarity than "He's so fine" and "My sweet Lord".... at least on first hearing.
Okay - so the greatest similarity is the melody... here's my scoring (5 exactly the same, 1 not alike in any way):
*MELODY 4.5 Yes, agreed - motifs in the melody are actually the same, however, the entire track is not the same in its melodic organisation.
*HARMONY/CHORDAL STRUCTURE 2 Hmmm... in terms of instrumental I find hard to isolate these - would really need to see them written down.... but yes there are singing girls for vocal harmony in both, but the lyrics and notes that they sing are, at least to me, totally different as is the timing that they join in, in relation to the melody.
RHYTHM 2 In "He's so fine" the beat is clearly emphasised from the beginning of the track - on the 2nd and 4th beat of the 4/4 timing - it then breaks in to an almost reggae type rhythm for the mid section (especially with what sounds like xylophone in the percussion). In "My Sweet Lord" the rhythm is set by the acoustic guitar for the the first half and the emphasis is more on the 1st and 3rd beat over this section. Half way through the track the percussion is brought in and the pace picks up a little and the 2nd and 4th beat are emphasised... So, a wee similarity here but then, how many other tracks in the world have this beat?
TEMPO: 2 and then 3 To explain - "He's so fine" is pretty fast from the beginning, "My Sweet Lord" begins much slower, then picks up pace with introduction of percussion, however, still not as fast paced as "He's so fine".
LYRICS: 2 and then 1 The only vague similarity is that Harrison is talking about "really want to be with you" and "I really want to know you"... and the Chiffons sing about "wish he were mine" and "to be held in his arms" ... but one is a man speaking to the Lord and the other is a woman expressing carnal desires!!! Not the same!!! As the track continues and Harrison's chorus sing a "Hare Krishna" "Gurur Sakshaat" "Parabrahma" "Tasmayi Shree" etc... the lyrics are not the same!!!
INSTRUMENTS: 2 Pretty much only as similar as any two bands when compared - guitar and drums feature in both. However, "He's so fine" is predominated by the piano for chords and melody where as this is done by acoustic guitar in "My sweet Lord". "He's so fine" has additional instruments like and xylophone? and shaker, the drums sound different as well.
IN addition - "My sweet Lord" has a lead-guitar rif that features in introduction and through the track which is totally unique to this track and nothing similar appears in "He's so fine".
Here's what I think - Harrison's melody is, on closer listening, strikingly similar... agreed. I agree with the suggestion that it was UNCONSCIOUSLY copied... After all, is how many songs would they have been exposed to and have influence their music subconsciously at each composition?! There are only 13 notes to play with, and plenty of commonly used chord sequences, there is bound to be some melodic overlap between composers at some time. To me, the tracks are so different in many ways other than the melody, that one has to really sit, listen and carefully analyse in order to appreciate that the similarity in melody is more than just vague.
I am not sure how harsh the penalty was, but feel, while it is necessary to enforce and uphold the law as an example to others to take more care with copyright, I would personally be a bit lenient / gentle with the penalties for this!
Like I said earlier, I can think of a number of more strikingly similar tracks that I would have issue with if I wrote the original!!
Very interesting! I consider myself to be pretty in to music - I listen to music most of the day (radio or CD), collect CDs, am interested in a range of music genres and eras... I have heard songs that struck me as having greater similarity than "He's so fine" and "My sweet Lord".... at least on first hearing.
Okay - so the greatest similarity is the melody... here's my scoring (5 exactly the same, 1 not alike in any way):
*MELODY 4.5 Yes, agreed - motifs in the melody are actually the same, however, the entire track is not the same in its melodic organisation.
*HARMONY/CHORDAL STRUCTURE 2 Hmmm... in terms of instrumental I find hard to isolate these - would really need to see them written down.... but yes there are singing girls for vocal harmony in both, but the lyrics and notes that they sing are, at least to me, totally different as is the timing that they join in, in relation to the melody.
RHYTHM 2 In "He's so fine" the beat is clearly emphasised from the beginning of the track - on the 2nd and 4th beat of the 4/4 timing - it then breaks in to an almost reggae type rhythm for the mid section (especially with what sounds like xylophone in the percussion). In "My Sweet Lord" the rhythm is set by the acoustic guitar for the the first half and the emphasis is more on the 1st and 3rd beat over this section. Half way through the track the percussion is brought in and the pace picks up a little and the 2nd and 4th beat are emphasised... So, a wee similarity here but then, how many other tracks in the world have this beat?
TEMPO: 2 and then 3 To explain - "He's so fine" is pretty fast from the beginning, "My Sweet Lord" begins much slower, then picks up pace with introduction of percussion, however, still not as fast paced as "He's so fine".
LYRICS: 2 and then 1 The only vague similarity is that Harrison is talking about "really want to be with you" and "I really want to know you"... and the Chiffons sing about "wish he were mine" and "to be held in his arms" ... but one is a man speaking to the Lord and the other is a woman expressing carnal desires!!! Not the same!!! As the track continues and Harrison's chorus sing a "Hare Krishna" "Gurur Sakshaat" "Parabrahma" "Tasmayi Shree" etc... the lyrics are not the same!!!
INSTRUMENTS: 2 Pretty much only as similar as any two bands when compared - guitar and drums feature in both. However, "He's so fine" is predominated by the piano for chords and melody where as this is done by acoustic guitar in "My sweet Lord". "He's so fine" has additional instruments like and xylophone? and shaker, the drums sound different as well.
IN addition - "My sweet Lord" has a lead-guitar rif that features in introduction and through the track which is totally unique to this track and nothing similar appears in "He's so fine".
Here's what I think - Harrison's melody is, on closer listening, strikingly similar... agreed. I agree with the suggestion that it was UNCONSCIOUSLY copied... After all, is how many songs would they have been exposed to and have influence their music subconsciously at each composition?! There are only 13 notes to play with, and plenty of commonly used chord sequences, there is bound to be some melodic overlap between composers at some time. To me, the tracks are so different in many ways other than the melody, that one has to really sit, listen and carefully analyse in order to appreciate that the similarity in melody is more than just vague.
I am not sure how harsh the penalty was, but feel, while it is necessary to enforce and uphold the law as an example to others to take more care with copyright, I would personally be a bit lenient / gentle with the penalties for this!
Like I said earlier, I can think of a number of more strikingly similar tracks that I would have issue with if I wrote the original!!
Copyright Law - some thoughts!
Well, this is a domain that I really know little about nor have much experience with other than abiding by the notices by the photocopiers!!!
Fascinating stuff - I had not realised that copyright applies immediately when an idea is expressed (recorded, written, filmed etc)... so, that means, now that I have selected my copyright licence, anyone who actually uses my material without attribution and/or derivatives is actually breaking the law!!!
I listened to the podcast (go to the wiki to get the link) where Richard Niven, Solicitor and Copyright manager, discusses copyright law (I hope I have adequately referenced here?). Very interesting! I personally make the choice to BUY CDs rather than burn or download. I personally don't think it fair to cheat the system in this way - after all its the musicians that really stand to lose if no one actually pays for their creations... however, I must confess... and I am feeling awkward to admit this in a public forum.... I DO own an MP3 player on to which I put my fave tracks from the CDs I OWN! I had not realised that this was not strictly legal, however, feel comforted that this was discussed as being awkward... afterall, that would mean the MP3 players as devices are actually illegal - they require the user to break the law (how else would you get MP3 files - legally?)... weird. Interested also to hear that this is likely to change (or has done???) with the review of copyright law (please see the aforementioned reference). It sounds like this form of "format shifting" so long as you own a copy of the CD (and retain it) will be permitted.
Interesting too, that taping a TV programme to watch later (if you can not be there to watch it when aired) is only legal if the copied form is kept only as long as reasonably necessary...i.e. delete or tape over once watched!
And how much responsibility will be put on the Internet Service Providers? will the 'P' soon stand for 'Police'? - that is really changing the role of the ISP and putting a huge onus on them to keep the law in check....
Its all a wee bit scarey - mostly in that I feel still slightly unsure about the law and nervous to put a foot wrong... well at least I know that my intentions are not for commercial gain, I do not plan to degrade anybody else's work, or claim it as my own, and any copying will be only for myself and personal education purposes... so, so long as I attribute the author / artist and stay within the copyright act in terms of % of works copied, I should be okay.... however, its THIS BLOG that makes me nervous....
Fascinating stuff - I had not realised that copyright applies immediately when an idea is expressed (recorded, written, filmed etc)... so, that means, now that I have selected my copyright licence, anyone who actually uses my material without attribution and/or derivatives is actually breaking the law!!!
I listened to the podcast (go to the wiki to get the link) where Richard Niven, Solicitor and Copyright manager, discusses copyright law (I hope I have adequately referenced here?). Very interesting! I personally make the choice to BUY CDs rather than burn or download. I personally don't think it fair to cheat the system in this way - after all its the musicians that really stand to lose if no one actually pays for their creations... however, I must confess... and I am feeling awkward to admit this in a public forum.... I DO own an MP3 player on to which I put my fave tracks from the CDs I OWN! I had not realised that this was not strictly legal, however, feel comforted that this was discussed as being awkward... afterall, that would mean the MP3 players as devices are actually illegal - they require the user to break the law (how else would you get MP3 files - legally?)... weird. Interested also to hear that this is likely to change (or has done???) with the review of copyright law (please see the aforementioned reference). It sounds like this form of "format shifting" so long as you own a copy of the CD (and retain it) will be permitted.
Interesting too, that taping a TV programme to watch later (if you can not be there to watch it when aired) is only legal if the copied form is kept only as long as reasonably necessary...i.e. delete or tape over once watched!
And how much responsibility will be put on the Internet Service Providers? will the 'P' soon stand for 'Police'? - that is really changing the role of the ISP and putting a huge onus on them to keep the law in check....
Its all a wee bit scarey - mostly in that I feel still slightly unsure about the law and nervous to put a foot wrong... well at least I know that my intentions are not for commercial gain, I do not plan to degrade anybody else's work, or claim it as my own, and any copying will be only for myself and personal education purposes... so, so long as I attribute the author / artist and stay within the copyright act in terms of % of works copied, I should be okay.... however, its THIS BLOG that makes me nervous....
Copyright - My Licence BY-NC-ND
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 New Zealand License.
There you have it - you can quote me, borrow my images, link to me etc - so long as you reference me!!! If you are not sure, then contact me personally!!!
Cheers!!
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
My First Exhibition
Well, not really! But anyway, here is the poster I have designed with photoshop (a first) to advertise my ficticious exhibition... Read that... FICTICIOUS!!!
I.e. DO NOT TURN UP AT MY HOUSE unless you come with Baileys!!!! (In that case you are always welcome!).
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Fragile Ladders 1 - Collage
This is my visual interpretation of a piece of music by New Zealand based group Pitch Black titled Fragile Ladders......I have selected images (largely from newspaper) that indicate structure - scaffolding, maps, tide-chart, skeleton, snow-covered trees...
I have overlaid this with an organic-like yet chicken-wire type pastel form which is intented to tie the structural aspects together and indicate the tone and flow of the piece.
Hope you like it!!!
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Blue Oyster Gallery - The Grad Show
Well, how do I respond to this without sounding completely ignorant... Please forgive the uneducated!!!
It was friday afternoon, Feb 22. I took myself on a wee art-trip. First stop - Dunedin Public Art Gallery. Fell in love with the work of Elizabeth Thomson and Sigmar Polke... Second stop - Blue Oyster Gallery.... It was a warm afternoon, but as soon as I stepped into the gallery and straight into the installation, I felt oddly cold and ill-at-ease. Cardboard boxes, that looked to me as either the shelters of homeless people, or the aftermath of war. Inside the shelters were TV screens playing pictures of fires burning...on the wall, a projected film of just the upper face of what looked to me like middle-eastern woman. I guess this could confirm my initial recognition of the set up to represent ravages of war???? though, I am not sure. The noise was loud and discomforting that I was urged to move through to the next section of the gallery. Perhaps I should have studied the TV screens and projected images for longer (to try to work out the message), but the atmosphere drove me on. I am therefore not a hundred percent sure of the meaning of this installation, however can be sure that it had a strong emotional impact. I have a suspicion that this was the intended outcome.
Thinking I had made it to safety in the next section of the gallery, I came upon 3 TV monitors all showing women, in varying levels of distress. I donned the headphones of one - a teenage girl was recounting a misunderstanding and fall out with a friend. She was in tears and pretty distressed looking. My uncomfortable feeling was not leaving me!!! I looked at the next monitor and read the subtitles for some time. A woman, from middle east?, looking less disturbed than the first, was telling the story of her gang-rape. I was amazed and saddened at how she spoke so calmly, like the event itself had stolen all zest from her spirit... her story totally trivialised that of the distressed teen... I was now feeling less uncomfortable and more ill... I was the only one there and the low ceiling and dim lighting was making me feel increasingly claustrophobic. I quickly left via the lower gallery and unfortunately had only a cursory glance at the exhibition of work therein... I just needed to get out.
So, was the Grad Show a success? Well, if the intent was to move people to the edge (and beyond) of their comfort, to shock and to disturb one's sense of scale of misfortune and hardship... then it was most definitely. Did I enjoy the experience? Sorry, but no, not in the slightest. I felt like a small child who thinks s/he has woken in the night and is making their way down the hall to the bathroom, only to find they have woken into a nightmare!!!
I think I would like to revisit with a tour-guide to explain it a little more to me....
It was friday afternoon, Feb 22. I took myself on a wee art-trip. First stop - Dunedin Public Art Gallery. Fell in love with the work of Elizabeth Thomson and Sigmar Polke... Second stop - Blue Oyster Gallery.... It was a warm afternoon, but as soon as I stepped into the gallery and straight into the installation, I felt oddly cold and ill-at-ease. Cardboard boxes, that looked to me as either the shelters of homeless people, or the aftermath of war. Inside the shelters were TV screens playing pictures of fires burning...on the wall, a projected film of just the upper face of what looked to me like middle-eastern woman. I guess this could confirm my initial recognition of the set up to represent ravages of war???? though, I am not sure. The noise was loud and discomforting that I was urged to move through to the next section of the gallery. Perhaps I should have studied the TV screens and projected images for longer (to try to work out the message), but the atmosphere drove me on. I am therefore not a hundred percent sure of the meaning of this installation, however can be sure that it had a strong emotional impact. I have a suspicion that this was the intended outcome.
Thinking I had made it to safety in the next section of the gallery, I came upon 3 TV monitors all showing women, in varying levels of distress. I donned the headphones of one - a teenage girl was recounting a misunderstanding and fall out with a friend. She was in tears and pretty distressed looking. My uncomfortable feeling was not leaving me!!! I looked at the next monitor and read the subtitles for some time. A woman, from middle east?, looking less disturbed than the first, was telling the story of her gang-rape. I was amazed and saddened at how she spoke so calmly, like the event itself had stolen all zest from her spirit... her story totally trivialised that of the distressed teen... I was now feeling less uncomfortable and more ill... I was the only one there and the low ceiling and dim lighting was making me feel increasingly claustrophobic. I quickly left via the lower gallery and unfortunately had only a cursory glance at the exhibition of work therein... I just needed to get out.
So, was the Grad Show a success? Well, if the intent was to move people to the edge (and beyond) of their comfort, to shock and to disturb one's sense of scale of misfortune and hardship... then it was most definitely. Did I enjoy the experience? Sorry, but no, not in the slightest. I felt like a small child who thinks s/he has woken in the night and is making their way down the hall to the bathroom, only to find they have woken into a nightmare!!!
I think I would like to revisit with a tour-guide to explain it a little more to me....
Liminal Engagement
In Painting class last week, Michael Greaves talked to me about my work. He actually attributed to it a much deeper (and really thought provoking) meaning than I had actually originally intended (for which I am gratedful!!!). In fact he used a term that I (rather embarrassingly) admit I have never heard before. "Liminal". He talked about my subject matter (the wall and stairs at St Clair) as being a liminal space, a frontier or threshold. The upward angle draws the viewer into the page and up the stairs (is inviting) as well as giving the viewing platform the appearance of a speaker's podium for a large-scale public gathering. Michael felt the painting created a number of questions: where do the stairs go? what is up there? why is the viewer being invited up? who belongs on the podium? what does the wall keep in / or keep out? He talked to me a little about liminal space - a place which is not dwelt in or lived in, only passed through. Through which people move to get from one place to another. Threshold. This has really appealed to me and has opened the door to a host of potential ideas for me to explore.
My initial step was to look up liminal in the dictionary!!! In summary - liminal is pertaining to the threshold of physiological and psychological response.
My next step was to search the net for this word in conjunction with 'art' and I discovered this site: http://www.liminality.org/about/whatisliminality/
An enlightening and interesting read (I have printed a copy - its 8 pages!!!).
Through a search of images under "attribution licence" in Flickr, I came across a number of images of clearly the same installation work, titled "Liminal Engagement", interested in both the appearance and title of the installation, I then google searched "Liminal Engagement" and found a youtube clip about this particular work. Engagement... I like that. The viewer becomes participant.... is invited (drawn) to engage with the installation in the liminal space... the installation work itself can be seen as a liminal space, a series of arches / a canopy / a cave/ mountans / seafoam / the fence at a ballpark... a threshold. I really enjoyed viewing this... hope you do too!!!
My initial step was to look up liminal in the dictionary!!! In summary - liminal is pertaining to the threshold of physiological and psychological response.
My next step was to search the net for this word in conjunction with 'art' and I discovered this site: http://www.liminality.org/about/whatisliminality/
An enlightening and interesting read (I have printed a copy - its 8 pages!!!).
Through a search of images under "attribution licence" in Flickr, I came across a number of images of clearly the same installation work, titled "Liminal Engagement", interested in both the appearance and title of the installation, I then google searched "Liminal Engagement" and found a youtube clip about this particular work. Engagement... I like that. The viewer becomes participant.... is invited (drawn) to engage with the installation in the liminal space... the installation work itself can be seen as a liminal space, a series of arches / a canopy / a cave/ mountans / seafoam / the fence at a ballpark... a threshold. I really enjoyed viewing this... hope you do too!!!
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Interpretation of Graphical Score
Hmmm... interesting. I am not so sure that wee Sofia is actually conscious of the claims that are made about her musical ability. Intriguing to watch, nonetheless. Looking at the graphical score itself, I wonder if Sofia too was responsible for them as well? Talented child!!! Must be the name.... titter..titter!!!
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Music Inspired Graphic
Artist Felipe SkroskiIn Drawing, we are looking at sound-art and graphical scores, i.e. different visual methods by which a sound sequence (or music) may be portrayed / represented. I am currently attempting to produce sound notations in development of a graphical score for a piece of music by Pitch Black, titled "Fragile Ladders" which is on their latest album titled "Rude Mechanicals". I have found that I keep returning to certain motifs that almost certainly arise from having learnt to read traditional musical scores. In particular, I keep moving across the page from left to right as if space on page represents time in a linear fashion and using height (up the page) to relate to pitch - almost as if there is an invisible treble and base clef and the lines of a musical score already underlying my blank page. Perhaps this is acceptable, however I feel the need (desire) to shift away from these traditional approaches and perhaps experiment with time and pitch in other ways.
I discovered the above graphic in a search of images under "attribution licence" in Flickr, by Felipe Skroski (click on link above):
"A poster with graphic style inspired in Curitiba´s eletronic music movement. In english vida means life. This is a time line that starts in a born and finishes in death (from up to down)."
Time in this image does not move from left to right but top down and not even in a straight line. There are curves, kinks, periods of relative sameness and order as well as many changes in direction - such is the path of life. Height on page does not appear to correspond to pitch either, rather pitch seems to be indicated through colour and perhaps intensity of sound by thickness of line. There is a main thread that carries through the whole image, however, numerous additional lines and shapes that appear to interact and have important (even path-changing) relationships with the main line- perhaps these are parents and family, friends, relationships....etc.
This image, while relatively simple, I feel says a lot to me and has provided me with new ideas about the way a graphical score maybe constructed.
Let me know what you think of it!!!
Bookmarking
Hmmmm... as it still seems I am denied entry to the Windows Live page, I am not able to check out the favourites/bookmarking system.
Today, I have been introduced to del.icio.us. Very self-explanatory and easy to use. Super handy that it is not computer dependent (always racking my brains to think of web addresses when I am away from my home computer) and pretty cool that it is socially networked. I like it and will definitely be using it from now on!
Today, I have been introduced to del.icio.us. Very self-explanatory and easy to use. Super handy that it is not computer dependent (always racking my brains to think of web addresses when I am away from my home computer) and pretty cool that it is socially networked. I like it and will definitely be using it from now on!
What do I think about tagging?
Tagging? or street art? Where is the division between the two here? Possibly another grey-area, like music/sound.
Personally, I really distain the defacement of other peoples' property. Tagging is vandalism and is destructive, self-centred and RUDE!!! However, (call me a hypocrit) I really would LOVE to see more street-art out there. By street-art, I am meaning the sneaky, cheeky, often thought provoking art (stencil or freehand) that pops up in various places around town, as well as graffiti art that brings to life otherwise dreary, grey, industrial /city walls... (e.g. the cool graffiti down on the walls of the Leith under the fourth-street bridge). I think its great!!!... But tagging, the scrawl of a signature as a way to mark territory, is under another category, or 'tag'...i.e. 'vandalism'...
I was fully being facetious with that above response. I realise the question relates to the type of category tags on blogs and on 'favourites' / 'bookmarks'. Pretty handy, I think. In this case, a blog response on 'tagging' could be under the tag 'categorisation' or 'street-art' or, as I feel, 'vandalism'. The usefulness of the 'tag' system of categorising is highlighted here - it helps to eliminate confusion where there could be a number of possible interpretations of content or content key-words.
Also very handy for both the blogger and the bloggee (is that the right term for someone who reads a blog???). Tagging helps the blogger to organise his/her log and the reader to quickly select and go to the appropriate entry. A win-win...yippeee!!!
Categories I envisage using:
Digital Literacy 1; Social; Surfing; Painting; Ponder This!
I imagine categories will arise as blog entries are written.
Now, what DO I tag this entry?
Personally, I really distain the defacement of other peoples' property. Tagging is vandalism and is destructive, self-centred and RUDE!!! However, (call me a hypocrit) I really would LOVE to see more street-art out there. By street-art, I am meaning the sneaky, cheeky, often thought provoking art (stencil or freehand) that pops up in various places around town, as well as graffiti art that brings to life otherwise dreary, grey, industrial /city walls... (e.g. the cool graffiti down on the walls of the Leith under the fourth-street bridge). I think its great!!!... But tagging, the scrawl of a signature as a way to mark territory, is under another category, or 'tag'...i.e. 'vandalism'...
I was fully being facetious with that above response. I realise the question relates to the type of category tags on blogs and on 'favourites' / 'bookmarks'. Pretty handy, I think. In this case, a blog response on 'tagging' could be under the tag 'categorisation' or 'street-art' or, as I feel, 'vandalism'. The usefulness of the 'tag' system of categorising is highlighted here - it helps to eliminate confusion where there could be a number of possible interpretations of content or content key-words.
Also very handy for both the blogger and the bloggee (is that the right term for someone who reads a blog???). Tagging helps the blogger to organise his/her log and the reader to quickly select and go to the appropriate entry. A win-win...yippeee!!!
Categories I envisage using:
Digital Literacy 1; Social; Surfing; Painting; Ponder This!
I imagine categories will arise as blog entries are written.
Now, what DO I tag this entry?
Noise Blog!
Hi,
Just checked out the following blog, found under the window:scene category (tag) 'noise'. Having just come from a very ...interesting... sound experience in Drawing, I felt it was pretty relevant.
http://window.org.nz/search/label/noise
Powersound at Te Tuhi...Sound art? or Music? The objects of sound used at this gig are referred to as instruments. Made of a 'bridge of wires at various tensions, with pickups for amplification' sure sounds like a description of a familiar instrument...but what did it SOUND like?
Sound as an artform : well there is the generally appreciated category music - with melody, harmony, rhythm and perhaps lyrics, and then there is 'sound-art'... A realm which I have, before today, never actually given more than a cursory glance (whats the audio-version of 'glance'??) (and perhaps a raised eyebrow at what sounded just weird).
But now i am curious -at what point are the two delineated? What is 'music' and what is simply 'sound' (or 'noise')?
Enlighten me...
Just checked out the following blog, found under the window:scene category (tag) 'noise'. Having just come from a very ...interesting... sound experience in Drawing, I felt it was pretty relevant.
http://window.org.nz/search/label/noise
Powersound at Te Tuhi...Sound art? or Music? The objects of sound used at this gig are referred to as instruments. Made of a 'bridge of wires at various tensions, with pickups for amplification' sure sounds like a description of a familiar instrument...but what did it SOUND like?
Sound as an artform : well there is the generally appreciated category music - with melody, harmony, rhythm and perhaps lyrics, and then there is 'sound-art'... A realm which I have, before today, never actually given more than a cursory glance (whats the audio-version of 'glance'??) (and perhaps a raised eyebrow at what sounded just weird).
But now i am curious -at what point are the two delineated? What is 'music' and what is simply 'sound' (or 'noise')?
Enlighten me...
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Play-Doh Bunnies!!!
Follow this link below and watch the making of the Play-Doh Bunny advert.
http://bravia.sony.eu/bravia.html
Absolutely amazing!!!
Interesting that once, not that many years ago, we may have been shown a digital image (or digitally enhanced image) that challenged the laws of nature. Our response would be to gasp and wonder "Is that real? how did they DO that?"...and then it would be revealed; digifiddling.
Now, we see the Play-Doh Bunny add (I have asked around and all of those surveyed drew the same conclusion) and presume "ah, that must be a computer animation" and so, it seems reasonable; after all there are THOUSANDS of coloured bunnies leaping all over down-town New York, that then merge into a great purple ball, then huge play-doh wave etc etc so, of course its digital animation! Very cool add, but the most spectacular revelation comes in watching the making-of... those bunnies are REAL!!! Whats more, each and every bunny must have half a dozen or so replicas of itself in different stages of the bunny-jump... and at each movement transition, a person has to run in and swap greenbunny1 for greenbunny2, yellowbunny4 for yellowbunny5 etc. ... and the final 30 ft redbunny.... is REALLY THERE!!!
WOW!!!
http://bravia.sony.eu/bravia.html
Absolutely amazing!!!
Interesting that once, not that many years ago, we may have been shown a digital image (or digitally enhanced image) that challenged the laws of nature. Our response would be to gasp and wonder "Is that real? how did they DO that?"...and then it would be revealed; digifiddling.
Now, we see the Play-Doh Bunny add (I have asked around and all of those surveyed drew the same conclusion) and presume "ah, that must be a computer animation" and so, it seems reasonable; after all there are THOUSANDS of coloured bunnies leaping all over down-town New York, that then merge into a great purple ball, then huge play-doh wave etc etc so, of course its digital animation! Very cool add, but the most spectacular revelation comes in watching the making-of... those bunnies are REAL!!! Whats more, each and every bunny must have half a dozen or so replicas of itself in different stages of the bunny-jump... and at each movement transition, a person has to run in and swap greenbunny1 for greenbunny2, yellowbunny4 for yellowbunny5 etc. ... and the final 30 ft redbunny.... is REALLY THERE!!!
WOW!!!
What I think about computers...
Hmmm... as useful as the user perceives, I think! For a techno-phobe attempting reformation, computers still make me slightly nervous: the ever evolving black-box of infinite information and possibility... However, the more I learn, the more I feel inclined to make use of them and the more they actually seem necessary.
There is still an element of the "big-brother" fear that soon I will be personally micro-chipped and watched (policed) 24/7... but perhaps this is a wee way off still.
There is still an element of the "big-brother" fear that soon I will be personally micro-chipped and watched (policed) 24/7... but perhaps this is a wee way off still.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
