After the pitching in class without any unnecessary artefacts (eg. slideshows), I took the presentation to a more direct approach which comes with the tradeoff of “flavourless” meaning if this was meant for investors this won’t go well. However, since I’m dealing with people who are not looking directly at wealth gain, I decided to take the more honest approach. I chose to not use a cheat-sheet that apparently everyone but me used it, so that I am more than a reading machine, because I mean if I am to read a block of texts I might as well just read it myself, hence there is no point of having a presentation (by the way, this also applies to slideshow with slide contain more than 20 words that are not quotes).

Usually I’m not one for long speech of something that could’ve been explained in a few sentences, so I’ll continue that “style” here. (eg. making Coke not so much of a potion made of 90% sugar, but a day-to-day drink)

That aside, the pitchforking was…well half successful and half unsuccessful, I made the main points fairly “clear”, but too scattered which creates a few clouds in the air due to not confident in presenting. The idea of using the sense of speed (Method) is delivered, however, the “Meaning” was not, the judges sees my works (I think) as not methodologically creative with a meaning that isn’t exactly clear to understand without textual/vocal explanations (hence failed attempt).

So the direction that were suggested are to “try to use/experiment different methods to potentially declare the meaning more effectively” which I added to the pervious post “M4A3 – The Pitch”. From that I figured that I was too tunnel vision for the subject which limited me into thinking that I have to time-laps everything for task 4 without realising that using difference might help me achieve my goal more clearly or purposefully.

After the pitching, I looked at others works (Especially those who came after me), and found something rather outstanding. Sometimes I see the judges puts more thoughts into their project then they do, which is ironic no matter how anyone look at it, specifically those ones that do the basic of basic works to just pass the subject/task. (No offence to them, but nevertheless it buggers me a ton).

After the refinement from “M4A3 – Refinement”, I figured my theme for Task 4 (M4A4) will be “To further explore the difference between humanity and nature” and/or “Have we really separated ourself from nature”. This is a continuation from the questions from Task 2 (M4A2) where the focus was mostly on visual elements, to answer these 2 new questions, I will explore the matter not only by increasing the speed but rather slowing. As for the video I used for the quote on quote pitching, it’s in the recent post “M4A3 – Refinement”

The slowing portion will work in a very different way as oppose to fastening. This can be explained by numbers, lets say the speed of humanity is 10 meanwhile nature is 2, the effect of time-laps is 2x and slow-mo is 0.5x. The result is very simple as below.

Humanity (Time-laps): 10 x 2 = 20
Humanity (Slow-mo): 10 x 0.5 = 5
Humanity (Difference): 20 – 5 = 15
Nature (Time-laps): 2 x 2 = 4
Nature (Slow-mo): 2 x 0.5 = 1
Nature (Difference): 4 – 1 = 3

As we can see from the (difference), Humanity reacts to a simple manipulation of speed much more than Nature do, the difference (In scale) between Humanity and Nature remains the same, while with the greater the magnifier the easier it is for the audience to notice the difference as seen in my pervious time-laps experiments. As for how I will get the slow-mo portion work, I’ll be using iPhone due to my camera isn’t made for slow-mo. Yes, you heard me right, an iPhone, incase you haven’t noticed already, there is a misconception of using “better” equipment, no matter how far the technologies have developed, if the content is meaningless, those fancy equipments are nothing more than a “burden to budgets” or “waste of resource”. The advantage the iPhone provides me is obviously the mobility and budget since I already own it (Which will otherwise be ridiculous).

With all those being said or written, to put it in a simpler form, my main focus in Task 4 will be “Difference between Humanity and Nature”

I took quite a bit of inspiration from a Taiwanese graphic novel (#childhood_memory #Still_own_a_copy_myself) “Turn Right, Turn Left” or “A Chance of Sunshine” (After translated to English) from Jimmy Liao. Where the novel talks about how people lives so close to each other in the city, meanwhile have minimal communication and the need of a chance encounter to start one. The novel often feature mysterious creatures in the background to creates a sense of mysteries surrounding the world, often time rabbits. Highly recommended!!!

While this may not be much of a refinement, but more of a reassembling the pieces, including works from years back when I started doing time-laps.

By clamping the 4 pieces together, I noticed/realised that the buildings that we human made will eventually becomes or maybe already is a part of nature in a world where we don’t exist as human anymore. The speed difference between the human element is multiplied under the effect of time-laps as expected. This depicts the nature of how we human are typically rapidly developed only to die down fairly quickly not long after, meanwhile nature is much slower in development but typically have a much longer lifespan/duration.

PS: The pitchfork was just a tiny joke for me to remember what this is about, instead of the standard “The Pitch” I prefer something like “The Pitchfork returns” or “The Complete Pitchfork Act II” adding a bit of life to these 1/0s.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2NKca8wTnlBS09BUmZtUmNYNXM

Experiment 3

Changed to the use of a slower time-laps by decreasing the time gap between shots from 15 sec to 4 sec, this increases the speed of the movement not by too much but just enough to notice that nature (In this case, the clouds) does move and changes quite a bit over 2 hours.

Experiment 2 (Side)
50,000 by 18,880 pixels. Before any explanation, the question here is “Does the 2 triangles line up each other?”

PS: Recommended to download an view offline due to the file size.

By adding a dot in between, it was suppose to make it easier to judge if the 2 triangles lines up, however, instead of providing that, it makes us to doubt if they lines up. The massive size is to create a bigger negative space to distract the audience.