We’re talk­ing about the philis­o­phy of time and how it re­lates to the im­age.

Pale blue dot Seen from about 6 bil­lion kilo­me­ters (3.7 bil­lion miles), Earth ap­pears as a tiny dot within the dark­ness of deep space. Commons

Voyager One (1996) when it was four bil­lion miles from earth.

A much more re­cent im­age:

80 Trillion Pixel mosaic of earth 80 Trillion Pixel mosaic of earth detail The mo­saic of im­ages was taken by the Sentinel-2 satel­lites, op­er­ated by the European Space Agency (ESA). It has 80 Trillion pix­els. Source

Blue marble from the 1970s The Blue Marble, taken on December 7, 1972 by the crew of the Apollo 17. Commons

One of these is a medium for­mat pho­to­graph (70mm), the other is a dig­i­tal com­pos­ite.

McLuhan (1964): Understanding Media

Our eletic ex­ten­sions of our­selves sim­ply by-pass space and time, and cre­ate prob­lems of hu­man in­volve­ment and or­gan­i­sa­tion of which there is no pre­cen­dent.

Voyager of course has the golden record. Carl Saegan and oth­ers de­cided put to­gether the in­for­ma­tion that went on the golden record, which can be viewed on­line. In A Pale Blue Dot, the pixel is the fun­da­men­tal unit of dig­i­tal im­agery. A con­stituent build­ing block of the im­age.

[A zoomed in view of a pixel]

RGB lights make up a pixel, pix­els are grouped into blocks which are grouped into macro blocks.

With dig­i­tal com­pres­sion, each frame you’re look­ing at is com­pos­ited in some way from what came be­fore and af­ter it. It’s an in­ter­est­ing tech­no­log­i­cal process, but also raises ques­tions about the na­ture of im­age/​time.

What, then, is time? If no one asks me, I know; If I ant to ex­plain it to some­one who aasks me, I do not know/

Edmund Husserl (1928): The Phenomenolegy of Internal Time-Consciousness

A now is al­ways and es­sen­tially the edge-point of an in­ter­val of time

Philosphers dis­tin­guish be­tween clock time and pure du­ra­tion/​lived ex­pe­ri­ence

The clock Christian Marclay (2010), The Clock. Tate, art­crit­i­cal

This moves reg­u­larly in clock-time, but all around these times.

Einstein Bern clock­tower anec­dote: If you move away from the clock­tower at the speed of light, it looks like it’s stopped.

Instant mes­sag­ing is re­lated to this (somehow). Inventions like the steam train change our un­der­stand­ing of time. Of course the only rea­son time zones ex­ist is train travel.

What is now? Is it a mo­ment? Is it an in­ter­val be­tween mo­ments?

Hegel: Phenomenology of Spirit (1807)

… we see that the Now is just this: To be no more just when it is.

Hey! This page con­tains em­bed­ded con­tent from Youtube, who might use cook­ies and other tech­nolo­gies to track you. To view this con­tent, click Allow Youtube con­tent.

Chris Marker (1963): La Jetee

The in­ter­est­ing thing abotu this is that the en­tire film is made from pho­tographs, with the cam­era movign around the im­ages. A kind of mov­ing im­age vi­sual es­say com­posed from still im­ages. The plot is a sci­ence fic­tion story where the pro­tag­o­nist sees a fu­ture ver­sion of him­self dy­ing at an air­port, trav­els back and forth to pre­vent WW3 etc.

Plays on our tem­po­ral un­der­stand­ing of how nar­ra­tive works.

Andre Bazin (1960): The on­tol­ogy of the pho­to­graphic im­age

The pho­to­graphic im­age is the ob­ject it­self, the ob­ject freed from the con­di­tion of time and space that gov­ern it… pho­tog­ra­phy does not cre­ate eter­nity, as art does, it em­balms time.. for the first time the im­age of things is like­wise the im­age of their du­ra­tion

Unlike other art forms, pho­tog­ra­phy does­n’t cre­ate eter­nity but em­balms time, hold time within it that is fun­da­men­tally dif­fer­ent to other kinds of art.

The pho­to­graph is (arguably) an in­dex­i­cal im­age (see also Catrin Morgan), while other im­ages are icons.

Hey! This page con­tains em­bed­ded con­tent from Youtube, who might use cook­ies and other tech­nolo­gies to track you. To view this con­tent, click Allow Youtube con­tent.

The Lumière Brothers (1895): Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat

The cin­e­mato­graph is an in­ven­tion with­out a fu­ture

Cinema in its in­dex­i­cal form only re­ally lasts for 100 years from the 1890s to the 1990s, when CGI im­ages start to ap­pear.

Cubitt (2005): The cin­ema ef­fect

The mov­ing im­age moves. But where does that move­ment come from? .. What then is it to speak to speak of a” mov­ing im­age, con­structed from thou­san­nds of con­stituent im­ages? In what sense is it an im­age? … When is the ob­ject of cin­ema? When, in­deed, is the mov­ing im­age?

Film mak­ers on the ques­tion:

Werner Nekes (1977): Whatever hap­pens be­tween the pic­tures

Every change from one frame to the next is a mon­tage

$$\frac{Pixel}{Earth} = \frac{Frame}{Film}$$

Peter Kubelka (1967):

It’s be­tween frames where cin­ema speaks

Rudolf Arnheim (1933): Film as Art talks about film as an im­per­cep­ti­ble mon­tage.

$$\frac{Moment}{Time} = \frac{Frame}{Film}$$

These peo­ple all think about move­ment in its small­est part / com­po­nent. Others look at it from the other end - talk­ing more about du­ra­tion.

Hey! This page con­tains em­bed­ded con­tent from Youtube, who might use cook­ies and other tech­nolo­gies to track you. To view this con­tent, click Allow Youtube con­tent.

Tarkovsky (1979): Railroad se­quence from Stalker.

Based on Roadside Picknick

Tarkovsky says he wants time and du­ra­tion to be re­vealed, as if the whole film is shot in one take. The film is about du­ra­tion in many dif­fer­ent ways. The film switches to colour once the char­ac­ters get to the zone.

In those days there were of course tech­ni­cal lim­i­ta­tions on shot length, now you can stream for­ever.

Tarkovsky also wrote a lot.

Sculpting in Time (1989):

… we could def­nine [cinema] as sculpt­ing in time. Just as a csculp­tor takes a limp of mar­ble, an, in­wardly con­scious of the fea­ture of his fin­ished piece

Jackie Heatfield (2006): Resisting Taxonomy:

[cinema is] is a synas­thetic, sen­su­ous, ex­pe­ri­en­tial, live, time-based thing, pres­ence is cen­tral to its be­com­ing. A sin­gle mo­ment, never to be re­peated, and in its com­plete form it eill res­onate on­liy in the menoru of tis au­di­ence. How does this work gt writ­ten into his­tory? How does an his­to­riean map this per­cep­tual in­tan­gi­ble lan­guage?

Timelapse also ex­pands on the mo­ment.

Emily Richardson (2008): Cobra Mist

Traces of mil­i­tary his­tory in this land­scape. Much of what took place there is still un­der the se­crets act.

Contrast this film with Tarkovsky. Both run at the same frame rate, but they ex­pand and con­tract time in dif­fer­ent ways.

Muybridge animal movement Eadweard J. Muybridge (1887): Woman Jumping, Running Straight High Jump: Plate 156 from Animal Locomotion. MoMA

Etienne-Jules Maray (1882): Flying Pelican

Even a sin­gle pho­to­graph (through ex­po­sure time) con­tains a dif­fer­ent amount of time - mo­ment lay­erd on top of each other.

Henri Bergson (1907): Creative Evolution:

What is real is the con­tin­ual change of form: form is only a snap­shot view of a tran­si­tion… out per­cep­tion man­ages to so­lid­ify into dis­con­tin­n­u­ous im­ages the flu­id­ity of the real

We imag­ine re­al­ity to be made up of dis­tinct mo­ments, but thats oonly an ef­fect of our per­cep­tion

Norman McLaren (1968): Pas De Deux on how a per­for­mance and its record­ing work to­gether.

Laura Mulvey (2006): Death 24x a Second:

Fundamental, and ir­rec­on­cil­able, op­po­si­tion be­tween still­ness and move­ment that re­ver­ber­ates across the aes­thetic of cin­e­mas.

Talks about the en­gage­ment of time the view has changes with dig­i­tal me­dia. Rather than see­ing a whole film in the cin­ema, we look at clips, rewind, have two things open at the same time etc.

Sugomoto: Cinema Dome is a whole film in one photo - again time em­balmed in the pho­to­graph. Lots of peo­ple have ex­plored of how dig­i­tal im­ages (above) work on the viewer.

Zbig Rybczynski (1975): New Book

This starts to ex­plore mul­ti­ple times hap­pen­ing at the same time - the same story hap­pen­ing on 9 screens at the same time. [Timecode] (2000) is the Hollywood ver­sion of this - four cam­eras in a sin­gle shot show­ing the same story, some­times show­ing the same scene, other times di­verg­ing.

Tango (1980)

McLuhan (again) in The Language of new me­dia:

Spatial mon­tage rep­re­sents an al­ter­na­tive to tra­di­tional cin­e­matic tem­po­ral mon­tage, re­plac­ing its tra­di­tional se­quen­tial mode with a spa­tial one. the logic re­place­ment charc­ter­sitic to cin­ema, gives way to the logic of ad­di­tion and co­ex­is­tence. time be­comes spa­tial­ized, dis­trib­uted over the sur­face of the screen

This an­tic­i­pates mul­ti­ple win­dows, screens we’re used to to­day.

Manovich con­tin­ues:

[cinema is] .. no longer a n in­cdex­ial me­dia tech­nol­ogy, but, rather, a sub-genre of paint­ing… the mu­ta­bil­ity f dig­i­tal data mpars the value of cin­ema record­ings as doc­u­ments of re­al­lity.. dig­i­tal cin­ema is a par­tic­u­lar case of an­i­ma­tion

[Suky Best (2011): Alwyn Park Houe]

Compare to Manovich: How does the dig­i­tal im­age re­late to re­al­ity?

Tal Rosner (2008): *Without You

Zygmunt Bauman (2000): Liquid Modernity:

There are rea­sons to con­sider flu­id­ity or liq­uid­ity as fit­ting metaphors when we wish to grasp the na­ture of the pre­sent, in many ways novel phase in the his­tory of moder­nity.

Plato, Cratylus:

Socrates: Heraclitus says some­where that everything gives way and noth­ing stands fast’ and, liken­ing the things that are to the flow­ing of a river’

Gareth Polmeer (2011): Sea

1080 1x1920 videos played to­gether. Each video is a pan across a sea scape. Different times in the same frame, ex­pe­ri­ence of time and its rep­re­sen­ta­tion, na­ture of the digi­tial im­age (made up of lines, con­tin­u­ous flow of time be­cause com­pres­sion).

Hegel (1832): Science of Logic:

Something moves, not be­cause at one mo­ment it is here and at an­other there, but be­cuase at one and the same mo­ment it is here and not here, be­cause in this here’, it at once is and is not … mo­tion is ex­is­tent con­tra­dic­tion it­self.

Steina Vasulka (2000): Warp Steina Vasulka (2000): Warp. Source

Slit-Scan pho­tog­ra­phy is a process where slices of the im­age are taken across time.

C-Trend Woody Vasulka (1974): C-Trend. Source

This is a video be­ing mod­i­fied by ana­logue syn­the­sizer hard­ware.

Suddenly mon­tage be­comes about ma­nip­u­la­tion of data as much as im­ages.

Tom Gunning (2012): Moving away from the Index: Cinema and the Impression of Reality

If cin­ema should be ap­proached should be as an­i­ma­tion, then cin­e­matic mo­tion rather tahn pho­to­graphic im­agery be­comes pri­mary.