visu1311

Overall, I disliked the collage project because it’s simply something that I don’t think enough about. I don’t have the “abstract” mind that I feel is required for a successful collage. Thus, I went with what I knew, and that was a digital collage that had the feel of being its own image (something “magazine worthy” instead of “fine art worthy”, as was said during the critique).

I admired how abstract or well planned other collages looked, and it made me curious as to what their thought processes were for creating it. Instead of “thinking outside the box”, I confined myself to what I knew, and I think that was reflected in my collages. For me, I played it safe because I grew stubborn with physically cutting apart images that I was tired of anyway.

After hearing the critiques, I don’t think I really would have done anything differently. I don’t feel as though I would have been satisfied with any of the physical collages that I might have tried to do, so I still would have gone the digital route.

I found the video, The Way Things Go, to be very surprising in how well it was able to hold up for such a long time. Each action has a consequence on the next action, and yet they are all connected so well, and the precision and timing of each action that occurs is nearly flawless.

The chain reaction that is caused from the precise relationship of each object to the next is something that must have taken a very long time to perfect. Several variables must have gone into play, and they all had to connect in a way that could keep the chain going.

I especially liked how liquid chemicals and fire played such a large role in this. The one constant that seemed to recur throughout the reaction was that liquids could be counted on to go in a very specific direction and to carry a specific weight. As more liquid collided with the next object in the reaction, the pressure is what allowed the chain reaction to continue.

Gravity, though, probably had the largest role to play. Each action was connected through gravity, because each object’s weight could be counted on to have the same relationship to gravity over and over again, and this was critical to the entire chain reaction so that both cause and effect could take place.

Listening to David Blaine was stressful to me. I can’t imagine putting myself in the situations that he has been in. I kept asking myself how he could continue to do things like he did when most of his attempts were nearly fatal.

However, on a less perilous note, I can understand where he is coming from. The overarching themes of his presentation were sustainability and practice. To get to the point of holding his breath for 17 minutes, Blaine had to teach his mind and body to sustain his life for an extended period of time. Not only that, but to do so, he had to practice keeping his heart rate steady in a stressful environment.

Sustainability can go for pretty much anything. In my drawing class we have discussed how to sustain a drawing and an idea, and the same can be applied to projects in Visual Studies as well. Practicing sustainability is of course the easiest way to get there, to keep trying to reach that point where you know something has succeeded, or is finished.

I found this podcast to be very weird, but the topics discussed in the podcast are things that I’ve sometimes thought about, as well. Maybe I’ve watched a few too many episodes of The Big Bang Theory or Doctor Who, but I have always found the concept of time to be interesting. Likewise, I thought that several of the points of the podcast were also interesting.

I liked the idea that humanity is so fascinated with time because we have a strong desire to transcend it. Humanity is fascinated with the idea of time and with the idea of sustainability. Not only do we as people want to be sustainable, but we want our belongings, our material possessions, to come with us. Anything we become attached to becomes a burden to let go of.

Additionally, another major point that caught my attention was that time hates, destroys, and outlives (if it can be considered to have a life) anything that humans might create. I mean, this is fairly obvious if you look at anything that is worn or antique. The most prominent things that have been destroyed by time are architectural structures, like buildings. There are ruins all over the world leftover from early civilizations, and their evolution from what they used to be at their creation is not yet over. I remember finding an image a long time ago of a “graveyard” of cars in Belgium that were left behind when the world broke out into World War II (Chatillon car graveyard).

Below are the screen captures for importing my photos into Lightroom as Joe showed us to do. I have a screen capture of importing the photos I had thought of using for the final collages. There is also a screen capture of my imported scans, but none of them were actually used in the final collages; the scans were taken before I had settled on my collage “theme”.

©2015, Loren Gamez
Harmony 5 of 5
Digital collage, 8″ x 10″

Last of the five final collages that I created for this project, and this one played around with the idea of being on the inside of one of the portals. However, it can also be seen as though objects from the portal (in this instance, a window) are extending their reach across both destinations. One might look at the collage and see a bird that has flown into the portal and this is where it ended up, or this may look like the end of a journey back from the mysterious portal destination. I also liked matching the blurriness of the plant on the left to the original blurriness of the larger brick wall to give it a more seamless feel, as though the plant was there originally, even though it wasn’t.

Project 2 Screen Captures
Collage 1

©2015, Loren Gamez
Harmony 4 of 5
Digital collage, 10″ x 8″

Fourth of my five collages, this was actually the first collage that I began working on when I was playing around with my idea of “portals”. In this one, I like how the various sizes of the bricks creates a movement as if the portal had just opened and the bricks are falling inside. This collage was fun because I actually created the bricks out of various paving stones that I had cut out from the original image, and transformed them to make 3 sides of each brick visible instead of the top.

Collage 5

©2015, Loren Gamez
Harmony 3 of 5
Digital collage, 10″ x 8″

This was the third out of my digital collages that I was considering to use as the final collages. This collage, rather than a “portal” that leads to a different area, this collage acts as a more literal barrier between one setting and the next and creates a sense of transparency in a brick wall that we normally perceive as always being solid.

Collage 4

©2015, Loren Gamez
Harmony 2 of 5
Digital collage, 8″ x 10″

My second collage, and one of the two final collages that I used for my critique, this image also focuses on a portal, but has a different destination. In this collage, a sewer entry that one might pass by and ignore every day was turned into a “doorway” that might lead to a home.

Collage 3

©2015, Loren Gamez
Harmony 1 of 5
Digital collage, 10″ x 8″

This is my first collage, and one of the two final collages that I used for my critique. For my collages, I was interested in the idea of “portals”; a hidden place that could be hidden in plain sight in a mundane location like as a busy street such as South Congress. In this particular collage, the pavements on a walkway are the hidden site of a portal that leads to another part of the city.

Collage 2
Project 2 Screen Captures

I really enjoyed the film Memento. It was both confusing and captivating. The use of a split, reverse relation of time within the film’s storyline (half of the scenes leading up to the ending from the beginning, and half of them receding from the ending to the beginning) helps the viewers to see things through the main character’s point of view, as if they also only had an ability of seeing scenes in a short time period before things changed. It adds a sense of mystery that keeps the viewer interested until the resolution, or at least it did for me.

Additionally, the choice that was made in regard to the sequence of which scenes would go first was an interesting one that is unlike pretty much any other film I’ve seen. While it is split/reversed, the scenes don’t feel “choppy”, and viewers don’t really feel as though they’re missing anything. Instead, I felt as if I were putting together the same puzzle that the main character was putting together. There was an interactive feeling to the film which was unique and intriguing.

Lastly, the narrative of the film was also unique, as was the way it impacted the story overall. The main character was telling the story from two different time periods, although his reflection of events in the black/white scenes seemed to be the dominant story-telling method.

Not to be cliche, but I think I would definitely watch this film again, or have my friends watch it. As confusing as the story line can be to follow, and as frustrating as the main character’s struggling is to witness, the way that the film was constructed was really what captivated me and kept me watching it.

After hearing the critiques from all of the projects, there are three major things that I feel that I could have done differently for a stronger collection of images, in addition to smaller composition changes.

1) Visit South Congress more times. While I visited South Congress three times, I don’t feel that it was enough. I don’t think that I let myself really explore all of the little niches. As a naturally shy person, I think I just felt awkward taking pictures in a very public place; I’d much rather take the pictures at home or along a secluded nature trail. The hustle of the city just doesn’t interest me as much for photography.

2) Selected more images in my composition. I think I just felt very overwhelmed by the project and trying to relate my images to the Gestalt principles that I didn’t give myself enough time to enjoy the task of taking the pictures, and thus I felt limited in the images I could choose from in the final selection.

3) Take pictures as interesting subjects rather than subjects composed of Gestalt. I think I limited myself in general by trying to force the Gestalt principles onto my images, and I let that dominate what I saw through the camera. I didn’t take pictures for the sake of them having an interesting composition.

Additionally, the technical presentation of my images wasn’t the way that I had wanted it to be. Ideally, the images would have been seen horizontally, so that the viewers could see the continuity that united the images, instead of them being viewed vertically. I suppose my shy personality came into play here because I didn’t ask anybody if they knew of a way to make this possible in the blog. The image composition has been changed below to better reflect the continuity of the curve.

I really liked Dan Phillips’ talk. He had a lot to say, and I found it easy to agree with him. I also found it fascinating the way that he was able to recycle used home items to make something new and unique. This is similar to the art of collage, and the question of how harmony is created in an image.

In the way that Dan Phillips talked about repetition and patterns when he reuses materials in his homebuilding, photo collages use repetition and patterns to create new images themselves. In Phillips’ homebuilding, he often takes an object’s design and repeats it throughout the house (this is especially true for his Budweiser house). In photo collages, a single image can be ripped or cut into parts, and these parts can be reused as a whole in the new image, but in a different pattern than before, thus creating something new from something old.

Dan Phillips also discusses an interesting point that people act differently when they are alone than they are when they are surrounded by other people. In a way, photographs can be like this. A single photograph has a different effect than a collection of photographs. Furthermore, a piece of a photograph in a collage has a different effect than a whole, untorn photograph. Thus, the purpose of placement in a collage is almost always different than the purpose of a photo that is left alone. Both have their strong points and weaknesses, but they serve completely different purposes. I think this concept is one of the most interesting ones about artistic principles. There are certain expectations for photographs, and there are certain, different expectations for collages. And the purpose of these things, and the process of creation that leads to the final product, is the harmony created as a product of these expectations and the artists’ interpretations of those expectations.

Below are screen captures of my favorites folders, collections, different file extensions, and keywords in both Bridge and Lightroom, although Bridge was primarily used for the project.

Below are the images that I selected to use for my Gestalt project. These images focus on the Gestalt principles of continuity and repetition. I used the natural curvatures of the subjects to draw the viewers’ eyes from one side of the piece to the other. The use of the mosaic tiles, triangular stones, and metal rungs of the seat help to provide the eyes with a natural sense of movement and continuity, and they also provide repetition as a guiding force for said movement. Additionally, if these images were to be placed horizontally next to each other, the movement from left to right would still exist across the span of the images. [Link to screen captures]

©2015, Loren Gamez
Gestalt Project 1 of 3
Photograph

©2015, Loren Gamez
Gestalt Project 2 of 3
Photograph

©2015, Loren Gamez
Gestalt Project 3 of 3
Photograph

I’m going to be honest here. I listened to The Medium is the Message 3 times over the last week, and it still makes no sense to me. The background noise was distracting me from trying to listen to the words of the main speaker.

Part of me wonders if this is the point, but I hate trying to think of some abstract reason about how that’s the point, or the “message” of the podcast. Part of me says yes. Part of me feels as though this is the idea behind it. The idea is that we often try to focus on the intent rather than how something was made, and we often don’t appreciate what is simply in front of us.

But in the end, I feel as though I’m just pulling at straws. So I don’t know…maybe I was on to something. But I’m still at a loss of what that is.

However, the reading made some sense. The reading claims that the medium used to create something is just as important as the finished product. I believe that each medium has a different effect, and feel as though a scene that is painted is not the same as the exact scene drawn with pencils. Therefore, the intent of the artist to use paint rather than pencils is selected on the basis of what effect it will give. In my case, I find painted landscapes more appealing to my eyes than landscapes drawn in grayscale with pencils. This could be opposite for other people. But in either case, the artist had the final say and it is up to the viewer to decipher the intention of the work based on its medium and message.

Exploring the Gestalt principles in music is certainly something that I hadn’t thought about before listening to Spoon. However, once I did listen to the podcast and to the song (several times), it began to make sense how there are specific Gestalt principles that can be heavily applied to music.

Firstly, there was the element of repetition. The drummer, Jim Eno, points out that they played around with different types of music, but with each beat, there is a specific repetition to it. There is also a distinction between the repetition during the chorus and during other parts of the song. There are different types of music that get repeated at different parts, but in the end, it creates a sense of unity in the song because there is an overarching drumbeat continuous in the background.

Additionally, there is a sense of continuity in the song. While there are different types of music in the song, the transition from one beat from another is seamless, and doesn’t break up the song and cause the words or meaning of it to become lost.

I feel that these two Gestalt principles in general are what drive most forms of music to be considered art. We as humans are always looking for patterns, and repetition + continuity is a pattern that is, well, music to our ears.

I’ll admit it. I didn’t understand Stan Brakhage’s video at all. For at least the first three times I watched it. But then I started to ask myself why the video was 2 1/2 minutes long, why he would compose the images in that way, and why he titled the video “Stellar”.

I did a bit of Googling on Brakhage’s films when I was stumped the first time, and I found a wiki archive that listed several of the films he had done, and their lengths. To answer the last question first, I think there’s a point to why that particular video is nearly 2 1/2 minutes long. It tells a story. The film begins very slowly, and I believe this is a parallel to the beginning of time, or life. The span of time between images is long, as is the amount of time that you see any specific image. However, as it progresses, the time between images shortens and the images flash by faster than the viewer can keep up with. I think this parallel is a signal of how time progresses and seems to pass us by so quickly near the end that we do not take the time to enjoy the things we see.

Secondly, I was unsure how the video related at all to the Gestalt principles. The grouping of images seems random at first, but when I paid closer attention to ways that they could be categorized, I noticed that they had predominantly cool, dark colors. This of course is reflective of our perceptions of what the universe looks like beyond the atmosphere of the earth.

Additionally, the proximity of images changes. Like I mentioned before with time, the images seem more distant from each other in the beginning, but by the end of the video they are nearly split seconds apart.

Brakhage’s choice of composition still confuses me, and watching other videos of his doesn’t help, but I eventually opened my mind to the abstractedness of the work and was able to appreciate his unique creativity and composition.

I thought that Hara’s article gave some interesting insight to the evolution of design. She has an abstract idea that all design is descended from sticks and vessels, and that an eye for complex design is assumed to equal power. I found these two ideas to be quite interesting, although the idea that all design is descended from sticks and vessels to be a little far-fetched. But I do agree with Hara that we as humans have come to see people who are capable of creating complex designs as powerful, in a sense. We admire their skills because many of us are not capable of accomplishing something like that, and thus we hold them in higher esteem than the “normal” people around us.

Additionally, the article makes clear that design is essential to consumers of the “modern” society, to the economy. I also find this to be true. Who wants something that is simply generic over something with an attractive design to go with its usefulness?

And it makes another point that there are many types of design, some that go overlooked. It almost seems overwhelming to me just what the word ‘design’ encompasses, and how many styles there are. It’s a neat thought, though, that design is everything and everywhere, and it just depends on who uses it and for what purpose. It can vary depending on the time, on the country, and even on what is used to create the art (ie. a paintbrush and canvas versus a computer program).

Overall, the article enhances the idea that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”, or that a design depends on the designer. And there are many to choose from, take influence from, or stray away from to create something new and original. The possibilities, it seems, are endless.

I liked reading Daniel Pink’s article “High Concept, High Touch” because I feel as though he breaks down the everyday mind into parts, but also emphasizes how success is drawn from people who utilize both parts to create a cohesive whole. People who learn to balance their creativity with their intelligence can make a greater impact for their profession, and are able to work on a higher level.

Pink separates the left brain and the right brain and discusses how they are separately essential to a person’s abilities, but when they are used together, a phenomenal result occurs. Someone who is an “L-Directed” thinker can think logically, and are often seen as essential to the economy or work force. Being “L-Directed Thinking” is preferred in many businesses. However, people who are “R-Directed Thinking” are often overlooked and underestimated when it comes to their performance. Contrary to what many people think, the creative “R-Directed Thinking” people are just as essential because they are able to open their minds up to options that an “L-Directed Thinking” person might not see as logical, but are options worth trying. In fact, as Pink points out, there are studies that say that being an “R-Directed” thinker can sometimes be more influential in the present work force because of their innovative natures. Sure, it’s good to be able to think logically or calculate difficult sums, but being an enjoyable personality and to be innovative, as most “R-Directed Thinking” people tend to be, is just as important.

Another interesting point he makes is that a person’s IQ or SAT score has nothing to do with their performance in the work force. I find myself agreeing with this quite strongly. I know personally that some people are just not capable of performing well on a test, but they are quite intelligent individuals. Without delving into the controversial standardized test, I do believe that the criteria for a person’s success should be something other than a test score. I absolutely love Professor Sternberg’s “Rainbow Project”, because it does just this. It takes the “L-Directed Thinking” preference out of the equation and instead allows for the “R-Directed Thinking” personalities to shine and demonstrate their capabilities.

Lastly, I agree with Pink’s conclusion that “L-Directed Thinking” is necessarily, but it is not all that there is, and that we need to better understand the “R-Directed Thinking” to provide for a better whole, instead of settling for the better half.