Thanks for holding on fellow readers! For our fifth installment, we present The One Second Film. This project, the brainchild of Nirvan Mullick, allows anyone to participate in the production of an actual film. The film is still in production and will consist of a one second of footage followed by 90 minutes of credits that will show the names of all contributors and footage of the making of the project. Any net proceeds will be donated to charity. (For full disclosure, Five Questions has donated $2.25 to the cause and is listed as an associate producer.) There are many celebrities involved with the project like Stephen Colbert, Secret Agent 007, and Ryan from The Office. For just three dollars you can even get above our favorite interrupter on the list. We were intrigued and wanted to find out more so without further ado:
1. What would you say is the origin of the 1 Second Film concept?
I was at CalArts studying Experimental Animation when I started this project. I wanted to see how much could happen in one-second of animation if everyone in my school worked together in lots of little ways. That idea for micro-collaboration has grown since I graduated, and new online tools have allowed the idea to keep growing. Going even further back, the underlying concept is an idea of small, 'perfect moments' - an idea I stumbled onto 15 years ago while reading Sartre's 'Nausea'. This is the idea that got me to start thinking about the power of small moments, and experimenting with animation. As I continued doing animation, I kept thinking about that idea, and started looking for ways to compress a lot into a little. That's when I started to think about making a one-second film.
2. What has been, in your opinion, the biggest surprise so far during
the project?
I'm just surprised that so many people have supported this weird idea. There are over 13,000 people participating in 84 countries, including some of my favorite filmmakers, from Spike Jonze to Michel Gondry.
3. Judging by the website, the plan for the project seems ambitious.
With the five phase plan, how do you plan on deciding which future
organizations to support?
It will be a combination of feedback from our community of participants, as well as feedback from the Board of Directors. The basic idea is to create large-scale art projects that bring people together in a creative way, and to use these projects as platforms for discussing various social issues. The organizations that get supported will be related to the themes of the various projects.
4. Are there other projects that The Collaboration Foundation, the
overseeing organization for The 1 Second Film, planned for community
education and outreach?
Yes. We have a lot of plans for outreach, but still need to build capacity to carry them out. The 1 Second Film is providing the vehicle for starting to bring people together while building the website that will empower our community to participate in the future projects.
5. In addition to donations, what are some other ways that producers
can contribute to the project?
There are lots of ways people can help, aside from donating. Everyone who joins becomes a crew member, and gets a Special Thanks in the movie. Each crew member then gets a Profile and a Studio Page with tools to participate more. Crew Members can invite friends and get a Publicist credit if a friend joins. They can also upload promo videos and photos to appear in our making of documentary, and join groups to help is various ways. The site gives members participation points for helping, and has deep reporting, so you can really see the impact each member is having. We're still experimenting with collaborative tools as we go.
As for becoming a producer, crew members can now pool together, and invite folks to donate toward a common credit. If you chip in to move another producer up, you become that producer's 'benefactor', which is kind of cool. For instance, several of our crew members have chipped in to become Michael Cera's benefactor.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Monday, January 11, 2010
Conversation: the Fourth
Thanks for your patience, Fellow Readers. For our fourth installment, we asked a few questions (ok, five) to multifaceted artist Jorge Colombo. Mr. Colombo is an acclaimed photographer and filmmaker, but is most recently known for his series of magazine covers for The New Yorker made completely with the Brushes app on the iPhone. Animations showing his process are available at the New Yorker website here. His prints of his sketches can also be found at his artist page at 20x200.com.
1. I was very impressed with your series done with the Sketches app for the iPhone. New York and San Francisco have been the settings so far, are there other locales that you have in mind for this series?
Anywhere I go, really. I just haven't travelled that much since I started this project. There is stuff done in Vermont, in Connecticut, in Utah, in Las Vegas, some nice ones in San Francisco, but that's about it. I look forward to trying new locations this year, home and abroad. They don't have to be famous places, either: it's just as interesting to capture the uniqueness of some spot on the map no one has ever heard of.
2. How do you go about collecting images for a series? Do you start with a theme in mind and then create or do you view the images you've made and group them afterward?
A lot of art is not planned, wouldn't you agree? People do it, THEN they figure out what they were actually trying to say. Your question mentions "themes" and "series." One could see those as an artificial roping of pieces into corrals. But that is important to me, since I see individual works as words on a phrase, and believe that the right group/sequence can yield a more interesting phrase or poem. It's a matter of looking at your own work with the eye of a curator or an editor, if you are so inclined. To answer your question, in my case I do the grouping afterward.
3. I have noticed that, most notably in your photos, that use of light or the lack thereof seems to be an integral part of the subject. What are the differences that you see in using natural light such as in daytime outdoor shots as opposed to artificial light in the studio such as your Glow series?
In my case, it's always about adopting some sort of voluntary handicap and seeing how I can get away with it. Outdoors lighting can be very random (unless you control it off-camera with reflectors or strobes, none of which I use) but I have fun trying to making it work, rather than devising a winning environment. As for the Glow images, they are shot with a very inadequate light source, a fluorescent lightbox, problematic enough to be stimulating. (And creating just enough areas of mystery.) I wouldn't hold my approach as ideal, I'd advise others to learn and use correct, time-tried ways to do things. But I get more fullfilment from an inconvenient approach. Hey, I've been drawing NYC on a 3" x 2" screen for an year now.
4. Your short films are fascinating, they capture everyday life in such an interesting way. Are there any plans for long format movies as well?
Only if I manage to make them with the same casualness and lightweight setup of my short pieces. (I invariably use a point-and-shoot photo camera for my movies.) Movies fascinate me; the monumental logistics behind most features, not so much. It's an issue of conventioned team scale. One assumes a painting is done by an artist working solo, a song can often be crafted by a whole band, a movie requires a streetful of trailers with an army inside... But it doesn't always have to be like that! There is room in the world for poems created by a collective -- or for some filmmakers working as alone as a novelist.
5. I recently watched Manhattan for the first time. Watching that first sequence of scenes made me wonder why it took me so long to see it. It was truly a visual love letter to Gotham. I now have a better understanding of the inspirations behind your iPhone Sketches series. What are some other films or works of art that serve as inspiration for you?
The Woody Allen/Gordon Willis opening for "Manhattan" is just one way to approach the city. Cassavetes, for one, wasn't that impressed. The accuracy of a portrait lies more than often in the eye of the beholder. But those images managed to catch me at the right time and leave a mark. Behind my NYC drawings is also the influence of the great wandering photographers: Berenice Abbott, Walker Evans, Robert Frank, Raymond Depardon (but also more recent ones, such as Martin Parr or Paulo Nozolino or Todd Hido.) There's also a bunch of graphic novel artists, all of them European and most of them from the 70s/80s: Tardi, Denis, Loustal, Avril, Dupuy-Berberian, Mariscal, Javier de Juan, all of them with a very strong sense of location. And, of course, countless movies.
1. I was very impressed with your series done with the Sketches app for the iPhone. New York and San Francisco have been the settings so far, are there other locales that you have in mind for this series?
Anywhere I go, really. I just haven't travelled that much since I started this project. There is stuff done in Vermont, in Connecticut, in Utah, in Las Vegas, some nice ones in San Francisco, but that's about it. I look forward to trying new locations this year, home and abroad. They don't have to be famous places, either: it's just as interesting to capture the uniqueness of some spot on the map no one has ever heard of.
2. How do you go about collecting images for a series? Do you start with a theme in mind and then create or do you view the images you've made and group them afterward?
A lot of art is not planned, wouldn't you agree? People do it, THEN they figure out what they were actually trying to say. Your question mentions "themes" and "series." One could see those as an artificial roping of pieces into corrals. But that is important to me, since I see individual works as words on a phrase, and believe that the right group/sequence can yield a more interesting phrase or poem. It's a matter of looking at your own work with the eye of a curator or an editor, if you are so inclined. To answer your question, in my case I do the grouping afterward.
3. I have noticed that, most notably in your photos, that use of light or the lack thereof seems to be an integral part of the subject. What are the differences that you see in using natural light such as in daytime outdoor shots as opposed to artificial light in the studio such as your Glow series?
In my case, it's always about adopting some sort of voluntary handicap and seeing how I can get away with it. Outdoors lighting can be very random (unless you control it off-camera with reflectors or strobes, none of which I use) but I have fun trying to making it work, rather than devising a winning environment. As for the Glow images, they are shot with a very inadequate light source, a fluorescent lightbox, problematic enough to be stimulating. (And creating just enough areas of mystery.) I wouldn't hold my approach as ideal, I'd advise others to learn and use correct, time-tried ways to do things. But I get more fullfilment from an inconvenient approach. Hey, I've been drawing NYC on a 3" x 2" screen for an year now.
4. Your short films are fascinating, they capture everyday life in such an interesting way. Are there any plans for long format movies as well?
Only if I manage to make them with the same casualness and lightweight setup of my short pieces. (I invariably use a point-and-shoot photo camera for my movies.) Movies fascinate me; the monumental logistics behind most features, not so much. It's an issue of conventioned team scale. One assumes a painting is done by an artist working solo, a song can often be crafted by a whole band, a movie requires a streetful of trailers with an army inside... But it doesn't always have to be like that! There is room in the world for poems created by a collective -- or for some filmmakers working as alone as a novelist.
5. I recently watched Manhattan for the first time. Watching that first sequence of scenes made me wonder why it took me so long to see it. It was truly a visual love letter to Gotham. I now have a better understanding of the inspirations behind your iPhone Sketches series. What are some other films or works of art that serve as inspiration for you?
The Woody Allen/Gordon Willis opening for "Manhattan" is just one way to approach the city. Cassavetes, for one, wasn't that impressed. The accuracy of a portrait lies more than often in the eye of the beholder. But those images managed to catch me at the right time and leave a mark. Behind my NYC drawings is also the influence of the great wandering photographers: Berenice Abbott, Walker Evans, Robert Frank, Raymond Depardon (but also more recent ones, such as Martin Parr or Paulo Nozolino or Todd Hido.) There's also a bunch of graphic novel artists, all of them European and most of them from the 70s/80s: Tardi, Denis, Loustal, Avril, Dupuy-Berberian, Mariscal, Javier de Juan, all of them with a very strong sense of location. And, of course, countless movies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
