Archive for the 'residency' Category


tlc this time flyer

The Teaching & Learning Cinema invites you to “THIS TIME“, a film screening this Sunday, April 1st, 2007 6.30pm for a 7pm start at ˜Sydney”, Cleveland St (next to Fatima’s) (see
The screening follows along from a residency that Lucas Ihlein and Louise Curham have been doing in the majestic Track 12 at Performance Space’s new home at Carriageworks.
Continue reading ‘THIS TIME: TLC Screening at SYDNEY’

Mike L: notes from Long Film

long film image from mike L

A few folks who we invited to experience our private “screening” of Long Film for Ambient Light have begun to filter back with their thoughts after the event.

Mike and Deborah visited in its last half hour, late Saturday morning the 17th of March.

Mike sent us these thoughts: Continue reading ‘Mike L: notes from Long Film’

Flemo: notes from Long Film

lucas and flemo
[Lucas and Flemo about 9pm on Friday 16 March, photo by Peter Shaw taken from outside Track 12]

A few folks who we invited to experience our private “screening” of Long Film for Ambient Light have begun to filter back with their thoughts after the event. First cab off the rank is Flemo.

Thanks for the invite to say something, although – at this stage – I’m unsure I have anything to say except thanks for the invite to say something. I was serious, by the way, about the idea of a “natural screensaver.” As much as applications have progressed, screensavers are still about the most interesting things computers do. Arriving late at night (-or late for me, a confirmed father and nerd), didn’t seem to bear out the screen-saver intuition. Perhaps this would have been different were I to have come during the day. So what of the film(ing), as I saw it? The experience of being in the space seemed to have an almost-sedating effect on me: there was something chruch-like – simply in the size of the space, the darkness I found quietening (and provided a kind of ‘cover’: a way of being non-selfconsciously alone with other people present); there was, I think, a kind of alteration of time and space that I can’t quite describe… or perhaps I don’t have the patience, now
mindful of having to leave my computer and get somewhere else soon.
Continue reading ‘Flemo: notes from Long Film’

Long Film Dream

Long Film for Ambient Light related dream, 23 march 2007, 5.30am:
This bizarre dream popped up about 5 days after we did our experiment with Long Film. Talk about mental residue. Remember, all characters are fictional and their resemblance to any person living or dead etc…xx Lucas

We’re in New York and Anthony McCall is putting on a new show, including Long Film for Ambient Light. I’m in the gallery as LFFAL is being set up, it’s completely different from our understanding of the work. This version involves a long piece of perspex set into the wall high up towards the ceiling. On the perspex are printed representations of empty film frames. Behind the perspex film panel an area of wall has been removed, and light filters in from here. I ask Anthony where the light comes from – “the outside of the museum via the air conditioning duct,” she says. Yes, Anthony is a woman. A youngish one, too (although at the start of the dream she was a man, still quite young, and with a full head of hair, far more resembling McCall’s photos from the early 70s, than what I imagine he looks like now, balder and more statesmanlike in appearance.)
Continue reading ‘Long Film Dream’

Lucas: notes from Long Film for Ambient Light

16 march 2007

noon (written at 1.30pm)

I pressed go on the timer. Set it to 23 hours 59 minutes. But we still were setting up, so didn’t really take the moment to just be here. Kat was still vacuuming. The space felt clean and neat, there was a “coming into clarity” about the whole thing. But we weren’t quite there yet. I was aware of being slightly stressed with regards to this. Would have been better if we were ready in advance, but I was also quite amused that the film starts whether you are ready or not. In some sense, the film is kind of indifferent to my responses. It doesn’t care if I “attend” to it or not. On the other hand, the film needs me – without me, it is nothing. Maybe.
Continue reading ‘Lucas: notes from Long Film for Ambient Light’

Curham: Long Film for Ambient Light 2nd commentary

14:40 Ground of my body, quite high tension, I am noticing the ‘base’ settings hence the description ‘ground of my body’. Column thoughts [feedback sheet had columns, used by no one except me and Walty unwillingly]. Strange how use of someone else’s specificity is having the effect of making us be present in this here and how (McCall’s specificity of this work in 1975). Continue reading ‘Curham: Long Film for Ambient Light 2nd commentary’

Louise’s Commentary on Long Film for Ambient Light

12 pm Fri Mar 16 to 12 pm Sat Mar 17E-mail to Cynthia today with some thoughts on the Long Film:

The Long Film was a very intense experience – my head did very strange things. It was unrelentingly social which I found very, very difficult. The intensity of such focus on a single space over such a time span was intense in the
extreme. Interesting that the 24 hours McCall framed was darkness book ended by light.

My best discovery was a very clear mental image of the sun in the sky acting like a bellows creating these fluctuations in the room [so in the end for me, this is a landscape film, how curious!]

I found the light bulb almost intolerable, it came to invade the room, a ‘tense object’ as one visitor described it even in daylight. At night, it felt like an attack. There was a sense at about 1am of being in solitary confinement without the benefit of being alone. I sat outside the room for many hours there – still in the building but just outside, trying to keep myself calm and as present as possible.
Continue reading ‘Louise’s Commentary on Long Film for Ambient Light’

Louise: Expanded Cinema Residency March 10th

In doing the Expanded works in late 2003-4, my motivation was to see actually experience these pieces as reading on page, hard to really understand. Also motivated to do them to continue with performance aspect to SMIC events. I was thinking a lot about interactivity at the time – mostly because the buzz at COFA was around the interactive cinema research centre.
Continue reading ‘Louise: Expanded Cinema Residency March 10th’

Day 4 Commentary on 2′ 45″

Section 1.
Find problem in loss of lux in video iteration in projection. The film will end up black if we continue with the image in pos. Opt to use the negativising option in the video camera. Discuss lighting state. Try fluoro to increase light in room as video camera exposure level is very dark. Fluoro NG. Negativising image solves this darkness problem.

Section 2.
16mm is now titled ’55 Seconds’, video titled ‘6 Minutes’.
Issues: sound
Did Raban actuually record it or did he just speak it live so therefore he appears on camera speaking it. In the video, in standard use, it is present as a matter of course. it is a positive action to have no sound. Discussion Curham/Ihlein about sound [no evidence of Raban’s use – does not appear on the frame enlargements which show entire frames inc edge marks and sprockets. No discussion in Hamlyn’s ‘Film Art Phenomenon’. Thinking through difficulty for Raban and ‘liveness’ in the spirit of the work means it is unlikely he did record sound [since confirmed he did]. LC and LI decide to proceed with sound work in its own right. Curham interested in the effct of these iterations – have not actuually heard the related sound pieces – ‘I am sitting in a room’ … Lucier (although I think we listened to this at Kellerberin). So the sound is particularly separate in the film version.

Section 3.
Discussion about the title for the video piece. Discovering that proposed 4’33” evokes more than we wish (Cage too present). Discuss meditation, discuss time length, propose 6 minutes in title – dispense with ‘groovy’ addition (and Cage) by dropping the seconds. Places the emphasis of this piece squarely on the time. Use the egg timer to delimit 6 minutes. For LC, 6 minutes feels very long (pace of my life very fast).

Section 4.
Things that come to mind:
Today great engagement with the video piece where yesterday, the video felt like it did nothing to shape or sculpt the time and space in which we are operating where the film felt like it was carving out, delineating a chunk of space in the way that Breath seems to.

Moment of deflation in discussion about the difficulty of the film – implication – complication/difficulty of the film unnecessary, uninspiring. Many things unnecessarily hard, hard for no evident gain [greater thinking about the space].

Section 5.
McCall and thinking
– related actions – acquired Camera Obscura measurements
– viewed room at c. 8.30pm. Light still present, still light in sky. Evident in sitting, looking that the sky line, building sky line is very beautiful and takes us outside of this space. Not sure still what this is all about, what the meditation is all about.

[Dev for Curham art practice in this project – in film one cannot ‘practice’ per se. Musicians take themselves through the works of composers, they flesh these out and inhabit them as actors do with scripts. In drawing or painting, mimesis is a tool. In this attempt at mimesis, we are realising our own specific problems but we are finding this in our own bodies. We are mapping the actions of these artists onto our own bodies by doing these actions. What we are discovering is that … [thought not continued].

Change the behaviour, the rest will follow [trying on some new behaviours – so may be all the Curham work is about trying to find tools for change, catalysts for change]. So in following the behaviour, actually in a sense we work backwards from the object to create the logic for our approach and as we go, we are filling this out. So we have an image of the Raban piece but we do not actually have a method. We have some of his comment eg Live in Your Head but we do not have an actual set of instructions in the way that we did for Breath. We have informed imagined scenarios about how Raban did it. We have comment I think from Raban to LI that if he did it now, he would do it on video.

LI comments that negativising the image is okay because this is a standard video camera feature. LC unsure but the reality of making this piece using this form demands it. It is interesting here how the newer tech has to mimic the older tech – so the newer tech cannot in itself offer a solution to this problem, it can only solve the problem through direct mimesis of the older tech. Mystique surrounds the older tech – shrouded in the mists of time etc etc. However mystique is the actual recording on video for Curham. Exactly how is video working? So the signal is

time base
fluctuation on sensor, electrical particles – sensor registers binary/analogue of fluctuations/pulses/modulations of wave on tape
electrical pulse

Day 4 Thursday 8 March

Actions list
1: Officeworks for firewire
2: e-mail Australian Cinematographers Society re Auricon. Discover Auricon reputation is as sound-on-film camera manufactured from 1933- to 1990s so no necessary link to television. Seems very early to record sound on film. Also had mag head for pre-striped film as well as optical record head in camera (which all makes sense for television).
3. pack lunch
4. discover problems with Officeworks purchase, acquired USB instead of firewire, NG
5. Process film – problems in use of tank. Training revision in wind on to tank. Go through steps together, both go through all steps. Processing comes out okay. Also process some Bolex re-film – density okay, 9 min dev, 3rd use of dev, 72 hour old dev. Stock was Kodak neg 400ASA c 5-6 years old processed in LC29 mixed 19+1, then stop, Ilford fixer, wash c. 7 mins.
6. lunch
7. 16mm 2′ 45″ check out framings. Problem with tests. Today’s considered as iteration 1. Shoot this. Seems okay. Have to burn audio to CD for use tomorrow.
8. Commence video. Encounter problems in FCP skills. Break. Go to shops, sit in two parks. Find spider web holding up hibiscus. Encounter Trevor. Buy oranges and chocolate biscuits, find free books inc. 1993 Sydney street directory and illustrated infectious diseases. Come back.
9. Discussion about title for video version 2′ 45″.
10. Develop 16mm film. LI does this. All good except lid on tank jams and problems with stop bath. Exposure looks good. May be inadequately fixed. May be that fixer is exhausted by Curham during development of Bolex re-film colour neg.
11. Curham does drawing for Shaw
12. Text writing.