vladmir's work

I enjoyed vladmir's viewmaster work. It was unique and reminded me of the Mickey Mouse one that I had as a kid...it made me wish I still had it. Not only was the pictures/listening to the cd interesting, but the packaging was unique and very nicely done. My favorite ones were the cockroach one (even though I don't like to look at cockroaches) and the deer one. I like the music and the fact that it was black and white. Having us go through the third disc of that one (I think) constantly as the train was coming really worked well. I think that this is a promising choice of media for her. I think she could benefit if she made some for kids and made them educational and then they could be in the classroom. She is really dedicated and I just really like the whole concept. I realized as we were about to view another story that this is good for all ages, probably from age five and up. This is an artist whose future work I would be interested in viewing.

war-torn

I found some similarities between Laura Marks' letters from Beirut and Chantal Akerman's notes on D'est. Both tell of countries/areas affected by war, about maybe a decade or so apart. I thought of Marks' easier to relate to, even though there were at times I seemed to be unfamiliar with what she was talking about or referring to. I liked how she balanced the topic of what was going on over there militarily and how people back home could help and the topic about what socializing was like over there for her and the people around her. I think the letters made me realize that I don't have a lot of knowledge of what is going on over there. When thinking about the fights in the Middle East, I usually just think of Iraq and Iran (when talking about fighting over there presently). I didn't feel like Akerman's notes were as well developed as Marks' letters; and maybe that's because there were just notes, as opposed to letters--usually people make their letters more detailed and structured than their notes.

camera obscura

I found the camera obscura piece to be rather interesting. I have read about them in the past (in my art books) and never got the chance to see one. Even though I read about them and saw diagrams, I was still a little confused when I first stepped into the piece. I wasn't sure what the camera was doing in the corner. When I first saw the wall with the images, I didn't understand what I was seeing. I knew the image was supposed to be upside-down, but maybe I forgot when I stepped in there. I found it really interesting when people walked outside and you saw them upside down. I was thinking that would be interesting to see, and after the lecture, I got to see that. I also got to see a motorcycle go past, which was interesting, as it was different than all the cars that went past. I wish I had gotten to see a bus as well.

From the diagrams of camera obscuras I've seen, there is just one upside-down image; however in this piece, the artist put about 4 or 5 next to each other so the image filled the whole wall. Sometimes as a car went past, you could see it in two of the images (or frames I guess you could call them) at once as the car went along.

This seems like art more than film, but I guess because the images move (for example cars and people), it is also like film. The diagrams I saw just showed nature (like trees and stuff) so that stuff would have been more still; I hadn't known that you could have moving images as well...this changes the whole experience.

I think I first understood the image as I looked to the top. Then I could make out the bike racks and parking meters...if you look straight at the street and the cars, you may be a little more confused. So that's what I would do differently if I ever went into one again...try to look a the top (or bottom or some edge) first.

I thought the outside of the camera obscura (in the building) looked like it was under constuction or something.

I liked the artwork the artist showed us on the computer...I liked the clouds moving past on the three planes.

audio

Audio--or lack of--can really hurt a piece. It can make the piece less of a success. Two examples we saw in class were the one where the artist took all the information from the day on his computer and just let it play. The sound was very annoying. The images were interesting though and I was glad when Carl finally let the piece play on mute. I wanted to walk out of there as the sound was playing. The other piece was the one with the rolling footage of the woman. The loud repetitive sound wasn't too bad, but seemed too loud and took away from the visual part of the work. It sounded like being in a factory. The fact that that piece's visual images seemed to pause shortly with the sound as it rolled along was distracting. I wonder why some people make the choices they do about their sound in the work they do...it seems some would be better off with different sound or no sound.