Test of the bowl projection:
OVERALL: The whole installation was most effective when all the objects were being projected onto at the same time. I felt that visually it looked most like a system, and therefore a mental process. The installation looked like a living system as a whole with independent units communicating with each other and having different roles.
What worked well: The 'drop of news data' worked well, its projection on the matte surface of paper absorbed well the colours and movement of the animation. The fall of the pieces of collage was effective and the way they moved through the bowls worked well. The claymation was effective as expected and previously experimented with. The paint really did have the 'fire' effect. The paper fish coming out of the green screened plasticine was very effective and I will use that again.
What didn't work so well (to be improved): The reflective surface of the bowl, the 'gloss' porcelain surface didn't show up the details of the collage.
BOWL 1: I need to animate the clay movement again so that the detail is smoother. The collage movement needs to be improved.
BOWL 2: Need to fix the contrast and colour of the claymation. Need to fix the movement of the collage and integrate it better with the claymation. Bowl needs to have flatter edges.
Overall: Try painting inside of bowls with matte white paint and film it. modify Gregs sounds to match the timing.
Friday 30th: RUN THROUGH test of all the animation done so far. WITHOUT the 'chaos' and the grittiness of the mind which will be added by bowl 4 (the melting pot).
NOTES of how to improve:
the installation takes a long time to set up- need to take this into consideration if I want to set up somewhere new.
The background projections are nice in moderation.
Sound doesn't really match the animation, I will record more sounds that do and try to live it up with Gregs sound design.
Objects going up the paper add to the non flat screen, sculptural aspect of the installation which I want to lean into.
The paint adds to the textural messiness, which I think is lacking, so I will add more paint.
Every single time I project it's different, which is nice. I like that it is a mixture of sculpture, performance and animation. Performance in the way that it can't be recreated.
I want to add more live action movement or pixilation, the more recognisable texture are really effective.
More things coming down the drip. Doesn't always have to go through the 'machine', our minds filter our information constantly.
More strings
Bowl 4:
My intention for the animation in B4 was to take the animations from all the other bowls and edit it together using distortions in AE. and then edit it together to reflect a crescendo of accumulated imagery and data until the bowl gets really dirty. As I started the process of doing this I realised I didn't know what I wanted the bowl to be at rest/ in the background. I didn't want it to be blank or a similar texture to the other bowls so I started to think about maybe pixilating a texture. I thought about several different textures but Food seemed the most appropriate, it being a malleable texture that can leave a visceral effect and is effective in creating the itchy messiness of chaotic thoughts. The decision to use spaghetti pasta made sense because I'd already planned to replace string tape with tagliatelle to make the bowls communicating with each other make sense and fit it into the more domestic setting of the kitchen, but I also liked the idea of paper collage and paint being literally tangled up in something to mean thoughts that are festering.
FULL RUN THROUGH:
After laying out and filming the installation in ECA, I felt like something wasn't right about the set up. The Animations were being projected in the bowls and surfaces in a location that didn't make sense for them to be in.
The idea behind the project being to investigate how we use screens, and the flow of data and sensory information that flows and accumulates in our minds on a daily basis. The installation itself shows how our sensory experience of our data intake is so individual. Each person watching and experiencing the installation isn't looking at the same part at the same time or from the same point of view. And this is very familiar to us, personal and domestic, as our minds are constantly processing the pour of data.
Having the installation in the dark blank room of the stop motion bay took away the idea of the daily domestic thought process. The empty space took away some of the meaning behind the project.
The bowls and surfaces changed into abstract shapes without the context of the sink, and in turn the animation became more abstract, instead of them joining together to form a large intertwined communicating 'mind'.
Lost texture: knowing what the object was being projected onto instead of seeing circles of animation, gave the installation more texture, blurring the lines between screen and off- screen. but without being able to see what the objects being projected onto and see them within their context, the visual contrast wasn't there.
It was also less fixed within our own lives.
PROJECTING IN MY OWN SINK AT HOME:
Filming installation: For me the installation itself is my final film, rather than the filmed version I am submitting.
I am aware that when I film the installation I have to make decisions on what you can see and what you can't. As I film I am aware that I am showing the audience one point of view. In the physical space, you can walk around the installation, watch it several time from different angles and have the freedom to guide your own eye. Each individual won't have the same experience of the installation and that demonstrates the individual 'bubble' of sensory experience we each live in.
I will have large shots that doesn't direct the viewers eye
and close shots that direct the eye
Comments