Comments on: The Evolution of Technology and Expression http://www.rmsp.com/blog/2010/06/18/the-evolution-of-technology-and-expression/ Fri, 29 Aug 2014 09:38:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.2 By: Alexia Plourd http://www.rmsp.com/blog/2010/06/18/the-evolution-of-technology-and-expression/#comment-61574 Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:31:39 +0000 http://blog.rmsp.com/?p=635#comment-61574 What¡¦s Taking place i am new to this, I stumbled upon this I’ve discovered It positively useful and it has helped me out loads. I am hoping to give a contribution & help other users like its aided me. Good job.

]]>
By: Mel http://www.rmsp.com/blog/2010/06/18/the-evolution-of-technology-and-expression/#comment-478 Thu, 24 Jun 2010 04:39:14 +0000 http://blog.rmsp.com/?p=635#comment-478 Wasn’t it Michelangelo who said he simply chips away (subtracts) the stone that isn’t necessary…?

I’m still muddling through this in my mind, biased because I don’t do video, but can certainly appreciate the power of each means to communicate a story. Computer technology has reduced any bright line separating the two media to a grey smudge but I guess my thinking isn’t about tools per se. It’s about intent. Your point about senses is a good one in that video (when created this way) adds aural stimulation to visual without seeming contrived, whereas a still presentation with audio would (not the Muzak in galleries but intentional audio for a collection). Depending on my desired presentation I might choose one means over the other, just as I might chose to paint on a photo to enhance a particular element.

Probably what I’m waving my arms around about is the feeling of forced collision I’m getting as a photographer, that “photography” as a craft now must include “videography” to be whole. It’s the synthesis of the two I’m rebelling against, I guess. Be great to hear more perspectives on this.

]]>
By: marcy http://www.rmsp.com/blog/2010/06/18/the-evolution-of-technology-and-expression/#comment-468 Wed, 23 Jun 2010 17:54:33 +0000 http://blog.rmsp.com/?p=635#comment-468 Hey there Mel,
I think your comparisons are a little bit of a stretch. Painters, sculptors and glassblowers use entirely different tools physically. A video camera and a still camera are much closer in their relationship technically. Also, the former (painting, sculpting, and glassblowing) are what I would, in general, consider to be ‘additive arts,’ whereas both video and photography are ‘subtractive arts.’ There is an enormous difference, I agree, between video and still photography and I don’t believe that the power of a still image will ever go away. In fact, I think that its power will ultimately strengthen as video becomes more prevalent in society. I do believe, however, that if one is open to learning new things, that I would not hesitate to explore what options can be discovered with recording motion. I consider it as an expansion of your tool box. Just as some photographers see better in black and white than they do in color, some photographers will see better in stills than they do in motion. What I find really exciting is that you don’t have to choose. You may find yourself in the middle of a pristine landscape and a majestic still photograph depicting the vastness of place and a sense of quiet might be what you want to share with your audience. In another moment, you may find yourself sitting beside a beautiful flowing river and your experience of sitting there is heightened by the sound of the water and perhaps the sound of a bird with an unique call. Or you may be able to record a fawn wading in an eddy in the river. The point is that you now have access to communicating more effectively which senses you are looking to arouse in your audience. I always appreciate your input Mel. Keep it coming!

]]>
By: Mel http://www.rmsp.com/blog/2010/06/18/the-evolution-of-technology-and-expression/#comment-466 Wed, 23 Jun 2010 16:39:16 +0000 http://blog.rmsp.com/?p=635#comment-466 Marcy,
Why is it that photography must be merged with video? I don’t hear painters or sculptors or glass blowers discussing how to embrace this technology in their fields other than as an educational tool. Is it because these two technologies appear to be so related? Is it just the visual aspect of both? I feel still photography and video are two different crafts intended to present the world in different, although seemingly similar, ways. Stills give me a reason to think about an image, contemplate the reason it was created and build an understanding in my mind of what I’m really seeing. Video mostly seems to tell me what I’m seeing and attempts to interpret the scene for me; useful for a documentary or educational tool but for other images not leaving me time to think.

]]>
By: bill rugen http://www.rmsp.com/blog/2010/06/18/the-evolution-of-technology-and-expression/#comment-432 Mon, 21 Jun 2010 17:54:56 +0000 http://blog.rmsp.com/?p=635#comment-432 great vids. i thought athena’s was especially beautiful. nice use of the still every now makes a great anchor point.

]]>