Photography and Art 1

gujsmall dance

Terry Flaxton, Senior Research Fellow, Department of Drama: Theatre, Film, Television, Faculty of Art, University of Bristol

My research is an investigation of the changing nature of the moving image 1800 - Present to identify how the moving image functions within the human psyche. Though the movement of the moving image medium was invented around 1895, 1840 represents the beginning of its germination period where the photo-chemical still image was first captured, To give further context to the synchronisation of digital moving image capabilities with the human eye/brain pathway and its physiological capabilities, I extend my research back to 1300 with the invention of glass technology and early optics to give context to the forces that prompted artists to seek a ‘correct’ view of reality through devices such as the camera obscura and camera lucida.

My strategy to reveal an understanding of contemporary imaging utilizes practice as research methodology in 4 practice as research portfiolios, with the development of 5 others making 9 in total.

This PARP is written up as an Impact Case Study and therefore contains overlaps with other portfolios which will be removed for ref purposes when each PARP is offered in that form.

Practice as Research Portfolio 1: Experiences of Immediacy and the Environment

Around 304,000 people have seen this portfolio in public exhibition

With regard to the Impact of the continuous exhibition of In Other People's Skins a specific citation is that of an exhibition in the city of Xi'an, China, which attracted headlines in the Xi'an daily press which has a circulation of 6 million people: http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/chinareports.htm

Introduction

At the beginning of my 2007 3 year AHRC Creative Research Fellowship I formulated a 36 month Schedule to investigate my core research question:

‘In what ways will High Resolution Imaging change the work produced in the convergence of art and visual technologies and consequently, our experience of that work?’

To answer this question I formulated the idea of ‘Quantum Resolution’ which proposed that audience immersion would be felt with parcels of resolution increase rather than small incremental increases. I created 3 practice as research portfolios (PARP’s) as differing strategies to uncover the effects (if any) of increased resolution. These were a) to examine everyday moving images of the world, b) examine iconic moving images of the world and c) examine human portraiture and ideas around the human gaze. This work now leads on to another AHRC research project which will now seek to measure the immersive qualities of high resolution images.

In this first PARP I decided to investigate the way we depict ubiquitous objects in our lives. With regards to theories around the ubiquitous, rendering meaning dilute by thinkers such as Baudrillard and Virillio, that the singularity of an object could in fact overcome the process of dilution through ubiquitous depiction and repetition. Therefore I had to find a way to reveal the uniqueness of an object - and I decided to find ways to expose the iconic within the ubiquitous, so that the unique and potentially transcendent had more weight than the ubiquitous. Given the specificity of my research question I decided to find something that would speak about how increased resolution in a depiction of the object might say something more about how we experience that object.

This meant the creation of a moving image of an unmoving object, with sculptural overtones whilst it was being used in a way that has meaning to people, and if the behaviour of those that used that object were universal enough, then that would evoke and reveal experience of the object - even though what was really being experienced was a mediation of that object through its depiction whilst projected back on to itself.

Consequently I shot In Other People’s Skins, Dance Floor and Water Table (plus the Dinner Party and The Sum of Hands) to explore what would happen if I shot ubiquitous objects and then projected their simulacra back on to the originals. Each of thse works acts around the conceit of an element of the real world replicated in moving images then re-projected back onto wither the thing (a table) or an absence of a thing (the floor with dancers).

I kept many audience comment books from the different exhibitions which demonstrate the effect on the audience. For instance these comments were taken during the tour of 6 cathedrals of In other People’s Skins in 2008 (Bristol, GLoucester, Wells, Winchester, Worcester and Southwark):

'It was fantastic. It made us laugh and smile'. Winchester Cathedral
'It was strange and cool and good'. Emma Blake, 7, Bristol Cathedral
'A new frontier in the world of art'. Wells Cathedral
"It was great to see your piece as it is supposed to be seen. Interactivity in the best sense: perhaps the only meaningful sense at this point in history." From a fellow artist on seeing In Other People's Skins for the first time.
'A lovely moving feeling of the whole world'. Worcester Cathedral
'This truly brings all cultures together'. Gloucester Cathedral
'I don’t know what to say - it feels so special'. Southwark Cathedral
and finally one from the exhibition in Sweden:
'I enjoyed stepping into something so known by all of us, yet so unknown. A ceremony that we take part in everyday - and a tribute to being human and united to all human beings'. Vasteras Cathedral February 2010

so far comments from the 2010 New York exhibition have not been added

Of themselves these comments are of course anecdotal - yet they reflect the response of hundreds as recorded as comments in the many visitors books. http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/IOPSComments.htm

Given that the work itself is simply a projection on to a table and only interactive in the sense that the higher the resolution, the more relationship was generated between work and audience then simply working at different resolutions and recording longer times of engagement provided a reasonably dependable way of measuring success.
I had experimented previously with various resolutions until arriving at one that seemed to steep the audience in the work (going on the responses after that resolution had been arrived at), then emotional impact did in fact accompany higher resolutions and that in fact a quantum rise between known resolutions relating to early ‘acceptable web resolution’ (640 x 480)standard TV (720 x 576), American High Definition parameters (1280 x 720) and European High Definition parameters(1920 x 1080), achieved a degree of support for the hypothesis I began with.
At this time I was not aware of mirror neuron studies in neuroscience which seem to prove that within the hard wiring of the brain our empathetic response mechanism literally places us within other people’s experience as we too experience what they experience - at least in terms of the voltages that run through our synapses and the shared experience that generates (McGilchrist, The Master and His Emissary, Yale, August 2010). I am now working further in this practice as research protfolio, with this research in mind.

NB - if a direct link is not given below to an artefact or exhibition, most of my work can be found at: http://www.visualfields.co.uk/history0.htm

Posters, visitor comments and reports from Exhibitions: http://www.visualfields.co.uk/posters.htm

What follows should be taken as a whole and lists artefacts, exhibitions, journal articles, conference papers and online resources that support the research in this portfolio.

In this first PARP I created the following Artefacts to explore the research question through images of the immediate environment. Each artefact was manufactured at different levels of resolution and I recorded the times of audience immersion with different resolutions.

This was not a scientific study, but an arts study, therefore my method was not a strict laboratory controlled methodology, but rather an incidental recording which produced a basic understanding that as resolution increases, so audience engagement (measured through average time spent viewing an installation, doubled in accordance with squaring the resolution - -720 x 576 pixels obtained half the immersion time generated by 1280 x 720, which obtained half the immersion time generated by 1920 x 1080. Respectively these resolutions represent half k, 1k and 2k resolution, where k equals 1000 lnes resolution, and each area of resolution is respectively 4 times larger than the last in sequence. So for instance 4k is 4 times more resolution than 2k and 2k is 4 times more resolution that 1k. Having said that, there are many factors which condition a true resolution and if the Modular Transfer Function, of Contrast Sensitivity Function of the pathway of capture, production and display of an image is less than the beginning or end resolution, then the whole chain and therefore basic resolution of the chain will be less.

On an aesthetic level, these works could be described by techniques as worked out by the interpretative methodologies developed by the Frankfurt school, and this would certainly be more in accordance with standard Arts academic tradition, but newer neuro-scientific studies suggest that this form is no longer ‘fit for purpose’. I am currently developing ideas around what I am calling ‘Domain Theory’, which takes a stochastic view of art as delivered to the audience, which functionally seeks to circumlocute an evaluation of the effect of art on the audience, rather than the older interpretive form as developed by theorists using the Frankfurt Schools practices.

Artefacts

135918 Dance Floor, 2008 http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/NEDANCE.htm

135877 In Other People's Skins http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/IOPSVideo.htm

136428 The Dinner Party, 2008

135927 Water Table, 2008 http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/NEWATER.htm

135950 The Sum of Hands, High Resolution Digital Installation, Various, 2009. http://www.visualfields.co.uk/sumofhands.htm

These artefacts were exhibited at the following locations as installation works and comments books were kept to record audience response at seeing higher resolution images which were not then available for public view:

Exhibitions

136307 In Other People's Skins, The Cathedral of St John the Divine, New York, 07/06/10-07/11/10, 2010. http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/indexArt2.htm

136298 In Other People's Skins, Vasteras Cathedral, Sweden, 19/02/10-06/04/10, 2010. http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/indexArt2.htm

136316 In Other People's Skins, Walcott Gallery, Bath, 12/11/10-14/11/10, 2010. http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/indexArt2.htm

136302 In Other People's Skins, Xi'an Academy of FIne Art, 01/07/10-31/07/10, 2010. http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/chinareports.htm

136333 Time and Resolution: Experiments with High Resolution Imaging, P3 Gallery, London (University of Westminster), 07/12/10-21/12/10, 2010. http://www.visualfields.co.uk/P3exhibition.m4v

136301 In Other People's Skins, Fabricca del Vappore, Milan, 22/04/09-27/04/09, 2009. http://www.bestup.it/new/images/stories/home/Comunicato_FDV_inglese.pdf

136297 In Other People's Skins, Southwell Minster, 14/04/09-08/05/09, 2009. http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/indexArt2.htm

136411 In Other People's Skins, The Phoenix Arts Center, Galstonbury, 2009. http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/history0.htm

136339 A series of 4 HD installations over four days, Wickham Theatre, 22/09/08-26/09/08, 2008. http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/NE57.htm

136338 A series of 4 HD installations over three days, 18/09/08-20/09/08, 2008. http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/history0.htm

136295 In Other People's Skins, 6 Cathedrals & Bath Abbey, 07/02/08-16/05/08, 2008. http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/indexArt2.htm

136300 In Other People's Skins, St James Cavalier Center for the Arts, Malta, 01/10/08-31/10/08, 2008. http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/indexArt2.htm

136407 The Dinner Party, Phoenix Arts Centre, Glastonbury, 17/10/08-20/10/08, 2008. http://www.flaxton.btinternet.co.uk/history0.htm

The making of this work is charted in the following Article for a Professional Magazine:

136275 Flaxton, TR. 'Feeding the World', Showreel Magazine, (pp. 33-35), 2008.

The above exhibitions fueled critical reflection on the process of devising practical works to answer the core research question, it’s further exhibition and analysis of audience response, which I then presented in the following peer-reviewed articles:

Peer Reviewed Articles

Time and Resolution: Experiments in High Definition Image Making:
http://bristol.academia.edu/TerryFlaxton/Papers/128977/Time_and_Resolution_Experiments_in_high_definition_image_making
Published in the June 2009 issue of the Journal of Media Practice, Intellect

This then fueled further critical reflection on the process of devising practical works, their exhibition and analysis of audience response, critical reflection with text based peer-reviewed articles, which I then presented in the following conferences in a form that further reflected on the process of academic critical reflection.

Conference Papers

For the REF 2014 as academic outputs the following 2 Conferences and talks to research communities will be submitted:

136144 Flaxton, TR. 'New Understandings of the Mimetic and Diegetic in the Creation of Art', Xi'an Academiy of Fine Art, 2010. http://www.digitalartweeks.ethz.ch/web/DAW10/Trans-Art?action=browse

136155 Flaxton, TR. 'High Definition Aesthetics', University of Cardiff, Newport, 2008.

& I further refined my thinking and presented more emerging ideas in the following invited talks to Research Communities:

Invited Talks:

'Myth and Meaning in the Digital Age', Invited paper to research community ETH Zurich, 2010.

'High Definition Technologies and Aesthetics', Bergen Institute of Fine Art (Invited Paper to Research Community), 2009.

As an Impact study, the following conferences will be included where this work has been presented and discussed:

2012
• Presentation of research on the effects of increased dynamic range in motion imaging in relation to developing Domain Theory, Digital Aesthetics 3, Harris Museum, University of Central Lancashire, Preston October 2012, (to be published online at Academia.edu)
• Presentation of research on the effects of increased resolution in motion imaging, ISEA, Albuquerque, September 2012, (to be published online at Academia.edu)
• ‘‘Technology and the Act of Transmedial Creativity’ Keynote presentation and leading panel at Mix Conference on future of Digitality at Bath Spa July 2012 (to be published online at Academia.edu)
• ‘The Cinematographers Eye, The Academics Mind and the Artists Intuition’, University of Westminster, Exhibiting Video Conference 2012 (published online at Academia.edu)
2011
• ‘High Definition Imaging: the Paradox of Creativity within the Academy’ Watershed Media Center, Journal of Media Practice Symposium. (published on conference website and at Academia.edu)
• ‘Notes on the Developing Aesthetics of Digital Technology and its effects on Transmedial Disciplines’, University of Bristol, Technologies of Transmediality, (published online at Academia.edu)
• ‘The Mimetic and the Diegetic in the creation of Art’, Athens, 8th International Conference on Mass Communication (published online at Academia.edu)

2009
• ‘The Concept of Colour Space as seen from the Practitioners Standpoint’, Arnolfini, Bristol (published online at Academia.edu)