Video Feedback – Lyricism in Patterns of Light a Basic Understanding of It Must Be Provi- 1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Video Feedback – Lyricism in Patterns of Light A basic understanding of it must be provi- 1. Video Feedback – ded before explaining what fascinates me, Discovery of Light Patterns I have been interested in optic seriality, repe- An Essay by Barbara Doser the opportunities it offers, and where it is ultimately taking me. titions and variations since my childhood. At the same time this will answer the ques- Noticing and observing abstract forms and tion I am asked constantly concerning what structures in motion, whether in overgrown Introduction kind of software is used to produce my gardens or the chaos in the skies, has never 1. Video Feedback – Discovery of Light Patterns mo ving images. My works have nothing to failed to delight me. 2. The Video-Feedback System and Its “Functional Strategy” do with computer animation as such. They 3. The Video-Feedback System as a Pattern Generator are generated by means of a video camera In 1993, while trying out my fi rst video 4. Processing Video-Feedback Material camera, I discovered the phenomenon of •Analyses in Terms of Time and Space and connected monitor, the former directed video feedback for myself. The camera, con- •Generation of Mutations at the latter. This produces a feedback pro- nected to the television set, was by chance •Generation of Patterns with Feedback Patterns cess that autogenerates abstract forms and fi lming its screen, and in this way a world of 5. Combining Moving Images and Sound structures in motion. For this reason, I also autogenerated abstract moving images that 6. Stills as Snapshots: Paintings and Printed Works term the video-feedback system a “pattern are dependent of devices themselves was 7. Digression – Video Feedback at the Birth of Video Art generator”. In this essay I examine my inter- revealed to me. •Early Use of Video Technology est in analyzing the resulting video-feed- •Video Feedback in Art during the 1960s and ’70s back material in terms of time and space I then began to work and experiment with •Artistic Experiments at TV Studios and developing it further both formally and this technology, though without refl ecting on •The Video-Feedback System as a Tool in Video Art conceptually so that “mutations” and “pat- its historical development in art. My fasci- •The History of Video as Technological History terns” are created. nation for the torrent of forms and the vast •Video-Feedback Aesthetic without Video Feedback Furthermore, I describe the role assigned potential of complex moving structures they •Video Feedback as a Contemporary Visual Event to sound, and then address the question offered, some of which were too fast for the 8. Conclusion of why still images of my art videos in the human eye to fully perceive, led to series of experiments. The intention was to cre- sense of snapshots are so important. When ate and manipulate the randomly generated adapted as paintings and printed works, Introduction moving images and control them according they represent an essential element of my An artwork must stand alone and have an viewer’s refl ections concerning the work in to my ideas. work with moving images. independent effect. It should not require question. The idea behind a work of art may An enormous pool of data comprising video- an introductory description or explanation, be altered for the recipient, possibly produ- feedback material has continued to grow as as that infl uences an individual’s reception cing an Aha! effect that should be given a In a digression I examine video feedback in and therefore the viewer’s personal enjoy- backseat to the initial impression; unfortu- the early years of video art in the US, in the ment of discovery, even depriving them of nately, this is not normally the case. There late 1960s. This section focuses on artists’ the chance to form their own opinion. In is a wide variety of reasons why this hap- work and events into the 1970s that are this case, and most others also: “The fi rst pens, but they involve the members of the relevant to my work in terms of thematic impression is the deepest.” audience as individuals and will not be dealt historical context. When the artist provides some sort of expla- with here. Noteworthy is the fact that, also in the US, nation, it is irrelevant with regard to the qua- abstract animation fi lm in the 1950s and lity of the work itself. Information relating to For this reason I do not provide descriptions ’60s produced visual results that in a way the artwork, regarding technique or histor- of my artworks, experimental art videos, anticipated the aesthetics of video feed- ical context in particular, can limit the vie- video and spatial installations, or paintings back. wer’s understanding to this context alone. and printed works in the following essay. A concluding jump into the present calls An artist’s interpretation of his or her work They must stand alone. attention to the fact that video feedback provides insight into the underlying thought I fi rstly explain the video-feedback tech- continues to exist and fascinate as a visu- process, which, of course, infl uences the nique, as it represents the basis of my work. al event. Video camera pointed at the monitor it is connected to 20 a result, the source of footage for my visuals that is manipulated in a vast variety of dif- ferent ways. I see abstract video-feedback forms in moti- on as a technical phenomenon with an orga- nic and only seemingly natural character and appearance. When observing feed- back processes I have a sense of witnessing something evolutionary, elementary taking place in a kind of temporal distension or compression, as both an analogy and con- The camera is rotated and zoomed toward the vanishing point trast to nature, and characterized by a lyri- does not reproduce any kind of reality, as it 2. The Video-Feedback System and Its and immediately sends its picture back to cism that moves me. is itself reality. “Functional Strategy” that same monitor. By means of the auto- This gives rise to my interest in analytical- The aesthetic of video-feedback images The video-feedback system involves a closed matic repetition of this process – the feed- ly observing and investigating the autogene- results from the method used to generate cycle between video camera and monitor in back process – these pictures are repro- rated formal and structural variety of video them at the event horizon of chaos. Pro- which information is “fed back” into itself. duced in superimpositions upon them- feedback. When doing so I remain in the duced are forms born of a plane or an ima- This can also be done using a cellphone selves. Successively smaller images of the abstract and non-representational fi eld. My ginary space that develop, evolve, rotate and with an integrated video camera connec- monitor are visible in a kind of tunnel lea- intention is to investigate motion as form and are renewed before disappearing. Forms in ted to a notebook computer. The important ding to the vanishing point. form as motion, analyze and comprehend motion and motion as form, chaotic cos- thing is that the electronic recording device This can be compared to the effect pro- the two in terms of time and space. This pro- moses full of spatial complexity and dynam- is pointed at the playback device to which duced by two mirrors set up directly across duces more than simply special insights into ic behavior. it is connected. Light, and not only ambient from each other, as in halls of mirrors. the dynamic processes in which structure is As they have no concrete content, their light, plays an important role. When the camera is rotated, the monitor is created, processes generated by feedback reception enjoys unlimited latitude that Video feedback can be regarded as the visu- fi lmed and shown rotating in the same way. between camera and monitor in connection leads to the construction of cognitive “rea- al equivalent of electronic audio feedback. The next ima ge that is captured and sent to with light; at the same time fascinating new lities” beyond conventional perception and Both are systems of fed-back information in the monitor is superimposed at the same visual subcosmoses are created. views – subjective mutations as correlates which a portion of the output signal is retur- angle as that of the camera’s rotation, over- When played back or reproduced, an elec- in the viewer’s mind. ned to the system’s input directly or in modi- lapping a portion of the previous image, an tronic moving image represents immaterial fi ed form, and input and output continuous- afterimage of which is still visible, and so light that exists for only a moment, a visu- The video-feedback system has in my opin- ly amplify each other.1 on. The effect produced is one of succes- al event playing out in an electronic visual ion both lyric and creative potential, and it The video camera fi lms the monitor it is sive partial additions in the direction of the space. Video feedback, on the other hand, also possesses potential infi nity. directed at, which is blank at that moment, rotation. Left: The camera is rotated and zoomed toward the vanishing point, and brightness and contrast on camera and monitor are altered. Middle: spatial dislocation within a defi ned circular area: chaos, camera angle of approximately 60°, zoom >1, the forms develop from the center outward. Right: detail of the center as an analysis in terms of space 1 This should be regarded as the defi nitive defi nition of video feedback, and it is the only one relevant to my work.