Darkness Photographs???

[livemoa]

Belittles, but in what sense? I don't belittle him in a racial slur way, but I belittle his artistic intention which is too far ranging for what it accomplishes. The word "gimmick" usually refers to the idea of using a trick or a quirky thing of little value beyond catchiness to sell something.



Not sure about "vehicle" here, unless you mean a vehicle/tenor metaphor theory? All the resulting images looked the same in the displayed sample, hence my conclusion that the movie was irrelelvant. Cf. the art of Jim Campbell cited earlier as evidence of the opposite.



No, and I don't think "gay" should be an insult anyway. "Buddy" is just a colloquial way of address, like "sir" but more informal. Closer to pub talk arguments than to afternoon tea conversation.



Spelling error on my part: it's "doofus." From the Wikitionary: "(slang) A person with poor judgement and taste." See also boob, dolt, blockhead, lowbrow, oaf...

1) Belittles in that that to me gimmick is a cheap trick. The images of the movie theatre make reference to a range of ideas, predominate amongst these is the "white rectangle" of minimalist contemporary art. They also refer to information and sensory overload. Include in this references to Zen practice. I think he gets it right most of the time and his work, and especialy these, have great value.

2) Metaphor was probably the word I was grasping for, another word, unfortunately loaded with a more modern meaning is “conceit”. The movie was definitely not irrelevant to the image. If you look at the interview link I posted then you can see how different movies affected the final image. I have looked at the link that was posted for the Hitchcock averaged images and found that interesting, but not what was trying to be achieved with these images. Would be interested in finding out more about the technique.

3) Was being light hearted, so buddy is like mate back home which can be both friendly and thretining

4)I will leave alone seeing as you still seem think I am one

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

1) Belittles in that that to me gimmick is a cheap trick. The images of the movie theatre make reference to a range of ideas, predominate amongst these is the "white rectangle" of minimalist contemporary art. They also refer to information and sensory overload. Include in this references to Zen practice. I think he gets it right most of the time and his work, and especialy these, have great value.

Well yes, it IS a cheap trick to call the resulting white rectangle a "recording of an entire movie." I am definitely calling his concept a cheap trick.

4)I will leave alone seeing as you still seem think I am one

One builds an opinion quickly on a discussion when it starts on an angry note; sorry if that was not accurate.

 

[jstraw]

"Conceit" in the non-loaded sense is what came to my mind. Conceit as constructed premise requiring the viewer to buy-in with what Coleridge called "the willing suspension of disbelief..."

I think the white rectangle, signifying...among many other things, that so much information can be no information is a lovely image and metaphor. Using photography to convey this makes perfect sense to me.

To view the image simply as the object we call "photograph" and to dismiss the methodology as gimmickry is, in my view, reflective of very narrow thinking.

 

[livemoa]

Well yes, it IS a cheap trick to call the resulting white rectangle a "recording of an entire movie." I am definitely calling his concept a cheap trick.



One builds an opinion quickly on a discussion when it starts on an angry note; sorry if that was not accurate.

xx

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

I will restate it more clearly, it's not the white rectangle that is the problem, it's how you interpret it. Jstraw, your interpretation is a charitable, but valid one. It is an interesting metaphor that the accumulation of information amounts to noise and eventually to no information at all. That is perfectly smart and fruitful. The one interpretation I am against is the "conceptual" one that says that "an entire film is recorded" in this white canvas, and that's the one thing I don't buy. THAT is the gimmick.

 

[livemoa]

I think the white rectangle, signifying...among many other things, that so much information can be no information is a lovely image and metaphor. Using photography to convey this makes perfect sense to me.

...and links back to the post that started this thread, in a round about way, being the opposite of the black image in a black room…

Hmmmm, I might be getting an idea….. or not….

 

[livemoa]

I will restate it more clearly, it's not the white rectangle that is the problem, it's how you interpret it. Jstraw, your interpretation is a charitable, but valid one. It is an interesting metaphor that the accumulation of information amounts to noise and eventually to no information at all. That is perfectly smart and fruitful. The one interpretation I am against is the "conceptual" one that says that "an entire film is recorded" in this white canvas, and that's the one thing I don't buy. THAT is the gimmick.

OK, shall we leave it there?

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

OK, shall we leave it there?

Sure, the interest has probably waned for everybody. Oh well.

 

[jstraw]

I will restate it more clearly, it's not the white rectangle that is the problem, it's how you interpret it. Jstraw, your interpretation is a charitable, but valid one. It is an interesting metaphor that the accumulation of information amounts to noise and eventually to no information at all. That is perfectly smart and fruitful. The one interpretation I am against is the "conceptual" one that says that "an entire film is recorded" in this white canvas, and that's the one thing I don't buy. THAT is the gimmick.

I haven't read the artist's statement so I don't know whether or not "the entire film is recorded" is claimed or not. I do think it's relevant that the aperture is left open for the duration of the film.