Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Artist's Statement
My piece simply titled "Falling" shows the process of me falling in two different situations. The first image tells the story of me waking up and falling out of bed and then proceeding with my morning routine. The second image shows me supposedly walking to class or the library, but at the top of the stairs (for one reason or another) i lose my balance and fall all the way back down. Each process of both these actions is part of the image so that you can see the stages of 'falling'. This piece doesn't carry too much meaning, but showcases the interesting positions humans assume when they are not in full control of their bodies or acting off instinct. Specifically the mid air shot, and the regaining composure on the chair as well as the whole set of rolling down the stairs. I just find it entertaining how absurd we can look sometimes.
You Tube on the Boob Tube - Wired Magazine.
First of all, i love this guy's method of writing. It sounds as if i'm sitting on a couch with a computer near by and my friends scattered about the room making remarks and speeches on the crazy workings of our society. Also, i love the puns: "descartes before the horse" - lame no doubt, but gives the author a bit more credibility (in my opinion) that he could make an educated pun.
Truth be told, i never thought of YouTube as tearing down or 'exploding' the old ideas of television. I mean, i still use my TV to watch shows...when i can. If i can't well i used to be able to watch them in 3 or so installments on youtube. Once youtube hit it big companies began to sue because their property was being broadcast commercial free. Well now if i miss an episode of the Office i'll either go find it on NBC.com, or if i'm feeling the need to spend a few bucks, buy it on itunes. This may not be directly connected to the boom of youtube but it has definitely been aided by its explosion and its promotion of web based viewing.
Hardware is even beginning to adapt. My family recently invested in what is called a 'slingbox' in a sense it acts like a youtube for your home cable, satellite, or tivo recievers. My dad can log on to the slingbox located on top of our home tivo and watch a golf tournament he tivoed from that afternoon while he is sitting in the on call room in the hospital or in an airport or hotel. I have been able to access it and watch The Office when i missed an episode. Its extremely convienent and only recently been introduced, i would say, because of the success of youtube and such sights as NBC, Fox, and Comedy Central (to name a few) who place their shows online.
Is this scary? I think so, even though as a consumer i promote it. This media obbsession provides ours of destraction and brain meltingly stupid entertainment. Sure these can be used to promote learning, art, etc... but more often than not, they just give a stage for copycats, self promoting fools, and the already substantial U.S. media system.
The New Yorker - Damn Spam
I've never thought of spam as 'Free Speech', but the type of spam i get can barely be considered speech. I can understand the computer advertisement as being protected, its almost like a billboard. Its simple, Polite, Grammatically correct. The stuff i get is barely intelligible.
Wow, thats a lot of spam. I would agree though, any limitation on the number of content of emails would seem to violate free speech. I think we'll just have to learn to live with it. Now the spiderbots and viruses that make spaming easier, thats definitely illegal so i have no problem ridding the web of those, but how? I have no idea.
Commercial Break - wired?
In my opinion, Chevy's idea was a bad one. First of all they shouldn't have had a completely open way to view ever uploading. Of course malignant entries would be submitted. If they controlled what entries showed up on the website they could pick the good ones and it wouldn't have been a huge problem. Also the idea of pre made clips is nice, but if thats all the users had to work with, thats barely interaction. Converse, though they had substantially fewer entries, handled their ads correctly (in my opinion).
The idea of user made ads is intriguing. Some times i enjoy them, but still a good superbowl ad just can't be beat. If i want to see something the guy down the street made i'll go to youtube. If i'm going to have to watch commercials i want them to be 'good'.
Lonelygirl15 - Wired Magazine
I went to the Lonelygirl site and watched some of the videos. Maybe it was just that i didn't want to start homework, but i was sucked in. It was so simple and seemed extremely plausible. Sure this 16ish year old girl could set up a video blog. Even her mentioning Hawking and the other physicist seem realistic enough because she spoke about them in simple enough language that she didn't seem too smart for her age and personality. In short, the facade was extremely believable and i can understand why so many people were sucked into the 'show'.
If the this seemingly completely realistic cosmos can be created, does that mean it should be massed produced as THE 'web medium' I'm not sure. I believe that the web is definitely a huge medium, but not necessarily in the fashion of Lonelygirl. Not that Lonelygirl is, in itself, bad, but that the web allows for so much freedom i would hate to see hundreds of Lonelygirl copycats. Maybe just the aspect of audience participation could be spread across web films, but the idea of this created but believed reality i fear would have the same affect on the web as 'reality tv' did on television. The web allows more freedom than any other medium, and i think that should be the key to web films, creativity. Red vs. Blue promoted the art of "Machinima" to a wide audience (video games serving as the tool of film making). The many popular Flash based videos of the early 2000s and 2004 especially with "our land" were huge hits. Innovation i think is key to the web film, not necessarily interaction.
First of all, i love this guy's method of writing. It sounds as if i'm sitting on a couch with a computer near by and my friends scattered about the room making remarks and speeches on the crazy workings of our society. Also, i love the puns: "descartes before the horse" - lame no doubt, but gives the author a bit more credibility (in my opinion) that he could make an educated pun.
Truth be told, i never thought of YouTube as tearing down or 'exploding' the old ideas of television. I mean, i still use my TV to watch shows...when i can. If i can't well i used to be able to watch them in 3 or so installments on youtube. Once youtube hit it big companies began to sue because their property was being broadcast commercial free. Well now if i miss an episode of the Office i'll either go find it on NBC.com, or if i'm feeling the need to spend a few bucks, buy it on itunes. This may not be directly connected to the boom of youtube but it has definitely been aided by its explosion and its promotion of web based viewing.
Hardware is even beginning to adapt. My family recently invested in what is called a 'slingbox' in a sense it acts like a youtube for your home cable, satellite, or tivo recievers. My dad can log on to the slingbox located on top of our home tivo and watch a golf tournament he tivoed from that afternoon while he is sitting in the on call room in the hospital or in an airport or hotel. I have been able to access it and watch The Office when i missed an episode. Its extremely convienent and only recently been introduced, i would say, because of the success of youtube and such sights as NBC, Fox, and Comedy Central (to name a few) who place their shows online.
Is this scary? I think so, even though as a consumer i promote it. This media obbsession provides ours of destraction and brain meltingly stupid entertainment. Sure these can be used to promote learning, art, etc... but more often than not, they just give a stage for copycats, self promoting fools, and the already substantial U.S. media system.
The New Yorker - Damn Spam
I've never thought of spam as 'Free Speech', but the type of spam i get can barely be considered speech. I can understand the computer advertisement as being protected, its almost like a billboard. Its simple, Polite, Grammatically correct. The stuff i get is barely intelligible.
Wow, thats a lot of spam. I would agree though, any limitation on the number of content of emails would seem to violate free speech. I think we'll just have to learn to live with it. Now the spiderbots and viruses that make spaming easier, thats definitely illegal so i have no problem ridding the web of those, but how? I have no idea.
Commercial Break - wired?
In my opinion, Chevy's idea was a bad one. First of all they shouldn't have had a completely open way to view ever uploading. Of course malignant entries would be submitted. If they controlled what entries showed up on the website they could pick the good ones and it wouldn't have been a huge problem. Also the idea of pre made clips is nice, but if thats all the users had to work with, thats barely interaction. Converse, though they had substantially fewer entries, handled their ads correctly (in my opinion).
The idea of user made ads is intriguing. Some times i enjoy them, but still a good superbowl ad just can't be beat. If i want to see something the guy down the street made i'll go to youtube. If i'm going to have to watch commercials i want them to be 'good'.
Lonelygirl15 - Wired Magazine
I went to the Lonelygirl site and watched some of the videos. Maybe it was just that i didn't want to start homework, but i was sucked in. It was so simple and seemed extremely plausible. Sure this 16ish year old girl could set up a video blog. Even her mentioning Hawking and the other physicist seem realistic enough because she spoke about them in simple enough language that she didn't seem too smart for her age and personality. In short, the facade was extremely believable and i can understand why so many people were sucked into the 'show'.
If the this seemingly completely realistic cosmos can be created, does that mean it should be massed produced as THE 'web medium' I'm not sure. I believe that the web is definitely a huge medium, but not necessarily in the fashion of Lonelygirl. Not that Lonelygirl is, in itself, bad, but that the web allows for so much freedom i would hate to see hundreds of Lonelygirl copycats. Maybe just the aspect of audience participation could be spread across web films, but the idea of this created but believed reality i fear would have the same affect on the web as 'reality tv' did on television. The web allows more freedom than any other medium, and i think that should be the key to web films, creativity. Red vs. Blue promoted the art of "Machinima" to a wide audience (video games serving as the tool of film making). The many popular Flash based videos of the early 2000s and 2004 especially with "our land" were huge hits. Innovation i think is key to the web film, not necessarily interaction.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
