Stating/Showing

The presentation reflects the studio?

The acquisition of a space to make the film [in mind of how this space is to be re-construction in presentation].

Does the arena in which the film is made have to reflect the very arena that the film is then to be displayed? Or does all of the changeability in perspective etc. happen within the digital editing of the film. In other words does the camera [that which films] be inversely proportional in angle to which the projector is pointed? Or, does the camera face the tape head on, and then does the digital editing account for the changing in perspective?

[within the filming process there needs to be a delicate handling of the tape in order for there to be a smooth unwinding of the tape – this smooth unwinding will also be slowed down within the actual edit of the film as a whole]

previous and simpler films have been made [see images]. Confronting different coloured backgrounds, a difference in background colour may be used in the film other than white… In the previously made films there is an intervention of the hand [that of the artist/the maker/the doer]; however in the new film that is to be made, no hand will be present. Another device will therefore have to be crafted in order to unwind the tape, to give the illusion that it is unwinding itself….

?deifitcejbo semoceb neth egaugnal
A new portion of the blogging system:

How to make language an object through typing certain things backwards?

To first of all define the word ‘Stating’ and then to show the word itself as a possible object in space by typing the definition backwards; this will then help explain the reasoning behind the work that is being made. Defining the word stating is to perhaps distinguish its meaning, linguistically, from the word showing. Then there is a certain process that deals with how the act of defining can also be an act of representing. Therefore to represent something is to define it against something else; thus the duality of the pieces that are made. The objects that are made are that of archival references to certain understandings of something, and this something is usually an in depth look at an everyday occurrence, illusion, or object.

In this situation the everyday object is the electrical tape, the occurrence is it’s unwinding and application, and the illusion is its maintaining of size. The illusion of size of course depends on an application of measurement, which necessitates a concept of proportion and perspective.

Then there comes the complexities of recording occurrence. As an occurrence is ephemeral there will be a need to film its happening. Then there comes the problem of filming, as in the very actualities of making the film. In this there are inherent problems to do with perspective and a maintaining of proportion and such inherences are then reflected of course in the very way in which the film is presented.

The way in which the film is to be presented is where the appearance of the work then becomes scrutinised: it is this scrutiny that I am interested in and how certain illusionistic capabilities can render the very simple contents of the film as non-changing in its presented environment.

This idea comes from the stating/showing [http://www.rich-taylor.co.uk/systems2/stating_showing/systems_redwire_ci.htm] series in which I come up with an idea either in writing or in the form of a drawing or series of drawings. This idea runs from the logistical problems of projection and how this can be utilised and/or actualised as to represent something about the phenomena of perception within space. The work will have much to do with illusion. The drawings that are to be presented will be small and almost archival in scale, and will be framed. They will record the ongoing workings out of the installation process that in the end will result in the projection itself. The drawings will be mathematical in style and therefore analytical and technical in outlook, however their appearance will have more to do with the notion of illusion and how such a style in drawing emanates truth or indeed does not so. The drawings will be of my own workings-out as an artist, so therefore will be process driven and will most probably be wrong.

The projection itself will be of a simple film that is made of the rolling out of electrical tape from a straight on angle. In the actual film the tape will not reduce or enlarge in scale. However, after the film is made its appearance will be altered in preparation for the projection to be shown at a given angle against a wall. To deal with this angle and still present the tape as constant in scale there will be much adjustment mathematically to the actual film. All the adjustments that are to be made will be inversely proportional to the affects of the reality of the situation or presentation. Here I will be dealing with the problems and uses of perspective and how its illusions can be manipulated.

In the past I have presented other, more simple works, using the stating/showing method [http://redwireredwire.com/page42.htm]. I have exhibited an actual photocopied drawing using the proportioned properties of the A4 sketchbook and externalised the initial ideas that were presented within the pages. This photocopy was framed as an actual existing artwork. Also installed was an actual investigation into the space from the drawing [as instruction] whether it is wall based or ceiling or floor based.
What results is a relationship between the two. Furthermore, such a relationship then becomes questionable, as the realisation that is the installation within the space is inevitably changeable and is dependent on the given architecture. A question that comes from linguistic capabilities: what is stating and what is showing of the idea, and which comes first?