Final project:

projects.hannahbrasier.com/student-work/untangling

To initially observe the rhythms of our chosen environment(s); waterfall, river and beach, was a familiar task following the previous work/ assignments in this studio. Throughout this observation, I found our open-ended approach to releasing predispositions and letting our eyes wander to be successful. Upon visiting Trentham Falls I found myself no longer ‘trying to impose’ (Carlin, 2018) any expectations of what I should see, and instead focused on ‘looking and listening beyond myself’ (Carlin, 2018) in an effort of both my conscious focus and perhaps newly acquired subconscious noticing tendencies.  On the contrary, this open-ended nature of observation coupled with our focus on limitlessness and entanglement, did also create restrictions within our work. Specifically, as our inquiry was rather abstract and broad, it was difficult to know which aspects to hone our observations in on. In environments as large and multilayered as waterfalls and beaches, how do you depict this scale without simultaneously reducing it? How do we observe and listen to the stories of an environment when stories are so innately ‘complex and sophisticated language machines’ (Miles, Weidle, Brasier, Lessard, 2018, pg. 302). This seems to be a timeless struggle faced by many creatives.

To reflect on capturing the rhythms of our environments, I found the collaborative nature of this project to work successfully – as we had three differing locations along with three people filming, in turn creating three unique perspectives. Particularly I found the similarities and differences among; colour scheme, lighting, sound, surroundings, speed/ flow of water etc. between the footage to create an engaging embodiment of the ideas of density and ‘entangled complexity of the world” (Miles, Weidle, Brasier, Lessard, 2018. pg. 203) that we wanted to capture. Although in discussing the filming itself, the most problematic aspect would have to be the limitations in equipment and inability to physically position oneself in the water that we encountered in trying to emphasise closeness so literally. When filming at the waterfall, I was mostly restricted to the viewing platform, with the base of the waterfall blocked off for safety reasons, limiting my ability to capture extreme close ups. As water itself is quite dangerous, let alone the rocks and cliffs surrounding it – an ideal filming process may include resources such as GoPros, drones, divers or cameras on boats.

Finally, in the act of sensing the rhythms of our water based environments, I found selecting the medium of Korsakow to exhibit our work to be the most successful aspect. Considering the programs allowances for an individual journey through an array of footage, it is a simple yet effective way to ‘make space for careful perception and for sustained contemplation’ (MacDonald, 2007, pg. 231 in Lam, 2015, pg. 10). More problematically on the other hand, the layout and size of the footage in Korskakow will be considerably smaller than a standard  linear short film full screen sizing. This reduction in size may reduce the audiences observation and attention to detail. Consequently, this may be limiting in the sensing of intricacies of the rhythms and overall feeling of closeness and immersion we have attempted to capture.

As a whole, I am quite content with the observing, capturing and sensing of rhythms that cohesively composed our final project – inclusive of all success’ and problems along the way. The process itself proved to be an engaging exploration of abstract concepts visualised through media making, and I look forward to further entangling this process in an exhibition setting.

References: 

1. Carlin, D. (2018) Fieldwork, Sydney Review of Books. 
2. Lam, S., 2015. It’s About Time: Slow Aesthetics in Experimental Ecocinema and Nature Cam Videos, in: Luca, T. de (Ed.), Slow Cinema. Edinburgh University Press, pp. 207–218. 
3. Miles, A., Weidle, F., Brasier, H., Lessard, B., 2018. From Critical Distance to Critical Intimacy: Interactive Documentary and Relational Media, in: Cammaer, G., Fitzpatrick, B., Lessard, B. (Eds.), Critical Distance in Documentary Media. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp. 301–319.
4. Macdonald, Scott (2007), ‘James Benning’s 13 Lakes and TEN SKIES, and the Culture of Distraction’, in Barbara Pichler and Claudia Slanar (eds), James Benning (Vienna: Österreichisches Filmmuseum :SYNEMA–Gesellschaft für Film und Medien, vol. 6, pp. 218–31.

In terms of presenting a physical rough cut this week, our group unfortunately had little to account for. Namely due to the affordances of Korsakow, as we underestimated the time consuming nature of converting clips to MP4 and other assorted complications. Optimistically, it has been a valuable learning experience for future projects.

Despite these complications, there is a strong sense of direction maintained within our project. After gathering the footage from our three natural locations and proposing our exhibition set up, there is a recognisable structure comparable with ‘Slow Cinema’ and ‘Ecocinema’ (Lam, 2015, pg. 207). A structure in which viewers who consume this media may ‘carry these experiences outwards into the world as more conscientious environmental stewards’ (Lam, 2015, pg. 209). 

After presenting to the class this week, and further explaining our progress in place of the tangible rough cut, we received useful feedback on the ideas of life spans/ duration of clips in Korsakow. In the context of exploring limitless within our project, we were asked if limiting the time of clips would be best suited – particularly in a continuous exhibition space. If we had limited land clips and infinite water clips, would we then be imposing a hierarchy and reducing the limitlessness? This is a valuable perspective that we intend to further explore moving forward.

(Pictured: Still shot from Trentham Falls)

References: Lam, S., 2015. It’s About Time: Slow Aesthetics in Experimental Ecocinema and Nature Cam Videos, in: Luca, T. de (Ed.), Slow Cinema. Edinburgh University Press, pp. 207–218. 

Through exploring various scholarly articles and creative works, I found it highly worthwhile to identify those that were somehow related to our final project – as I was able to further my understandings and visualise a more polished form.

In selecting those to present to my group, I found Boothe’s scholarly exploration of the act of perceiving an environment to be rather interesting. Boothe’s description of the attributing factors of ‘physical properties, formal information, and functional significance’ (Boothe, 2002, pg. 56) that shape one’s relationship with an environment will be useful to consider when presenting our water environments to an audience. Useful in the sense that we remember our impositions as media makers are not always universal, as everyone consumes media differently. As for creative works, Heygum’s short film Waves presented an intimate tale of salt water and healing entangled as one. I particularly appreciate Maria’s powerfully articulate description of the ocean as a place in which ‘”there’s this tranquility that descends on me”. Further, I found Heygum’s stills of the ocean to allow for a calm, closeness that I’d love to replicate through our final work.

The feedback most applicable in moving forward with this assignment would definitely be the question of “If we would show the ocean in a negative light aswell?” in response to the positivity associated with the creative work I showed. This is a worthwhile point that we hadn’t realised earlier – If water is unknowable, isn’t it also dangerous and scary?

(Pictured: Still from 'Waves - A Portrait of Maria á Heygum')

References:

1. Boothe, Ronald G., 2002. Chapter 3 – The Perceptual Environment: What Is Out There to Be Perceived? in: Perception of the Visual Environment. Pages 55-86. 1st Ed. 2002. ed. New York 
2. Heiðrik á Heygum, 2010. Waves – A Portrait of Maria á Heygum https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Skew7cgkW9w&t=335s

Moving forward with our concept of entanglement and limitlessness explored through water, our group began to outline the necessary steps towards creating and exhibiting a final piece of media. As for deciding on the format of our work, we recognised the possible tension/ difficulty between capturing an intended sense of entanglement whilst maintaining structure. As often, stories told through media can ‘struggle to account for… the entangled complexity of the world because of the inherent need to be linear, sequential, and ordered.’ (Miles, Wiedle, Brasier, Lessard, 2018, p. 302). 

Considering this, our plans to use Korsakow in presenting our project work well, as optimistically this will allow for more depth and user engagement compared to a linear short film. On the other hand, our initial plans to film in square orientation are not working as well as intended – as we will need to either reframe all the footage in Premiere or purchase an app to achieve this. In light of this, we will be exploring landscape filming as a more accessible alternative.

Continuing with Korsakow, Hannah’s feedback to explore the ‘lifespan’ of shots is an interesting idea to follow up on. This could allow us to create a further entangled relationship between land and water, and consequently highlight the limitlessness of water through an infinite existence.

(Pictured: Korsakow layout planning)

References: Miles, A., Weidle, F., Brasier, H., Lessard, B., 2018. From Critical Distance to Critical Intimacy: Interactive Documentary and Relational Media, in: Cammaer, G., Fitzpatrick, B., Lessard, B. (Eds.), Critical Distance in Documentary Media. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp. 301–319.

In the initial stages of this assignment, our group had an abundance of ideas and possibilities on how we could further explore entanglement – specifically the tension between closeness and limitlessness within an environment. Through exploring this, I intend to enact a practice of ‘looking and listening beyond myself’ (Carlin, 2018) in an attempt to create media that enhances natural, intricate rhythms rather than imposing superficial ones.

Following further brainstorming, we discovered a clear connection between our interest in limitlessness entanglement and the sea/ large bodies of water alike. As an environment, the sea is endlessly intertwined with dynamic rhythms, which we can often get close to although never fully grasp. Metaphoric for much of the human experience, the sea is ‘unknowable’ (Carlin, 2018) – this is a concept I am eager to delve deeper into through media making.

After articulating our ideas to the class, there were various points of feedback to explore including; presenting alternative bodies of water (ocean, lake, river) and filming from inside a boat on a river for a different point of view. Every idea seemed dynamic and engaging in it’s own way, even the bizarre ones – perhaps especially the bizarre ones, as I venture ‘beyond myself’ (Carlin, 2018) and my comfort zone in this assignment.

(Pictured: Initial project brainstorming)

References: Carlin, D. (2018) Fieldwork, Sydney Review of Books.