![[working title]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_cKg1XxYmttQ/SmUiWkXZZhI/AAAAAAAAAo8/uUTo1239hP0/S1600-R/workbook1.jpg)
As somewhat of a carry on from my pop-up diorama experiment, I've been using images printed on transparency to play with spacial dimensions and layering. The result (which isn't very well captured by the photos) is quite interesting, almost ethereal, illusionary or even holographic-looking . In a way Cinema may also be thought of as an optical illusion. Through the rapid linking of individual images, we see one continuous movement. Motion is never actual, just simulated.
with a camera flash:
.jpg)
4 comments:
these are beautiful, are you going to photograph them or present them as objects? well they're not objects but i can't come up with a better word. I <3 them
thats the thing, i just don't know! i reckon the photos (of the objects) don't quite do it justice, but works with my study of collapsing time and space (like 2d to 3d then back to 2d). So i might just present both at the moment, and see what people think. Thanks! <3
I really enjoyed these too, and your comments really made me think about a couple of things.
Have you experimented with different/multiple light sources for these pieces? You mentioned their illusionary, almost holographic nature - the hologram image goes through several reflections during its construction before it is seen by the viewer.
I also thought about what happens between each layer of these objects - light waves collide, like the sea during a storm, but its not dynamic either - if the light sources stay the same, the sea is fixed. I guess I just find it interesting that between things there is a stormy ocean of light.
Finally, you mentioned that cinema gives the illusion of movement - In a sense, the universe itself gives the illusion of movement: At a fundamental level, space is discrete. It cannot be infinitely divided, and at a certain point the dimension of distance becomes meaningless. If you are so inclined, a google of the Planck length will reveal all.
I don't know why these pictures made me think of physics, but thanks and good work!
I love your insight into my work Corey, thanks :) I did indeed google Planck though I admit it was hard to get my head around, my quantum physics needs tuning :p
It is interesting what you say about the universe itself giving the illusion of movement, and I agree. Thoughout my work I am constantly comparing the photograph and moving image to understand their ability to depict reality or 'truth'. I do this mainly by looking at the way they each deal with time and space.
But if 'truth' is just a value of which we assign a certain degree of to something, and the existence of time itself is debatable, well, it all gets confusing right there. Its a loaded discussion, but exciting nevertheless.
Post a Comment