|
Video 2 Flos Harmonicus VI Program Notes
The video imagery of Flos Harmonicus VI began with numerous sheets of 11”x14” photographic enlarging paper and standard black and white developing chemicals. (The process, which I call Light Painting, is described at the end of these notes.) I selected several exhibition prints from the hundreds of original solargraphic images I have made over the years, digitally photographed them (the originals are cameraless, filmless, paper positives), then imported them into video montaging software as still images. The presentation in this video is fairly straightforward; that is, simple zooming, cross-dissolving, and motion procedures were used to sequence the images. No further image-enhancements or video transformation techniques were employed, because I wanted the central relationship between the audio/visual media to be one of simple concurrence, with neither medium eclipsing the other. Nevertheless, the sound track for the video was made using General Midi instrument timbres, and was a realization of a 1972 composition of mine (originally for woodwind quintet) called Flos Harmonicus III. Essentially pulseless, the music is a montage of horizontally unfolding vertical sonorities patterned as a registral distribution of the four (tertian) triad types from functional tonality (major, minor, augmented, diminished), but deployed entirely without thematic reference or harmonic functionality. Therefore, the piece is timbrally driven rather than (chord) functionally motivated. And, as the title implies, I thought of the timbral montage as a kind of unfolding of equivalent, floral “blossoms”. Phil Winsor 2/24/2002 Light Painting Technique
It is problematical to find a classification for the images I call Light Paintings. There is no comfortable niche to conveniently categorize them, such as is the case for landscape, portraiture, documentary, journalistic, or other types of photography, manifestations that are labeled in accordance with the nature of the subject matter recorded though the camera lens. Moreover, some may argue that light paintings shouldn't be considered photographs at all, because they are not representational images optically captured and projected onto printing paper. Others find it more logical to include them in the category sometimes referred to as mixed media. At various times, in response to viewers' uneasiness about accepting light paintings as photographic art, I have called them Solargrams or Chemigrams. In a strict sense, neither description is wholly accurate, but each provides its own peculiar "handle" for thinking about the processes involved. The ordinary application of the term solargram is to images developed by placing objects on special light sensitive paper which develops-out through prolonged exposure to sunlight. And, the term chemigram refers to the staining or pigmentation process that occurs through the commingling and application of a wide range of chromogenic chemicals. The technique of light painting bears resemblance to the processes that produce solargrams and chemigrams, but it really begins where the other methods leave off. The factor distinguishing light paintings from the rest of photography is not the application of unusual, archaic, or esoteric processes in the production of photographic images; rather it is the absence of such techniques, accompanied by flagrant violation of the traditional darkroom image processing principles (which were devised to facilitate photography's role as a message-bearing medium). The raw materials are inexpensive and standard - artificial light, black and white enlarging paper, and conventional developing chemistry (Dektol, acid stop bath, and Kodafix). The processing procedures are not. In fact, most of them are anathema to the artist who makes Fine Prints (the only exception being archival final processing). But this rule breaking doesn't mean that technique and sensitive control are not required to produce interesting light paintings. On the contrary, it has taken me many more hours to learn to control (within the medium's limits) the natural inclinations of free light, paper and chemistry than to gain a modest mastery of projection printing techniques. Unlike latent images, recorded as negatives on photographic film through the camera lens, light paintings are direct positive tracings of flow processes and chemical/light interaction that take place over time - exposures (sometimes extended over numerous work sessions) that capture the intricacies of liquid dynamics. Sometimes they appear to resemble human, animal, or other representational forms; at other times they suggest surreal moonscapes/landscapes or nonfigurative abstract images. Chemically induced corrosion is the means by which conventional silver prints work their magic. Light painting technique seeks to harness the natural inclinations of the materials directly, through control and augmentation of the process, retarding and accelerating the chemical interactions according to the intentions of the artist. The act of creating a light painting is very like the process of improvising a musical composition. Future decisions are made based on serendipity, awareness of the path that has been taken and potentials paths to follow, and the desire to bring forth a striking image. I perform each light painting using a range of material-control techniques. First I select the paper quality, grade, and brand; then I begin the performance. Manipulation of flow speed/pattern, dipping, dripping, pulling, spraying, heating, sponging, light-flashing, masking via chemical build-up are a few of the methods I use. Sometimes I include exhausted chemical mixtures in addition to pure chemicals (four trays - the last with a fixer/developer mix). I don't try for specific abstract or representational results; I simply observe how materials are interacting and improvise moment-to-moment, making impromptu decisions as work progresses. Naturally, the editorial process is the most important, final stage - I discard many more images than I keep.
Phil Winsor 2001
|