Do NOT watch these if you have photosensitive epilepsy.
August 15, 2020 9:14 PM Subscribe
The Flicker is a legendary 1966 experimental film by Tony Conrad that uses alternating black and white frames to produce digital stroboscopic effects. (The Flicker at archive.org)
Noisefields is a 1974 experimental video by Steina and Woody Vasulka that visualizes the deflected energy of an analog video signal. (Noisefields at archive.org)
Do not watch these if you have photosensitive epilepsy.
Noisefields is a 1974 experimental video by Steina and Woody Vasulka that visualizes the deflected energy of an analog video signal. (Noisefields at archive.org)
Do not watch these if you have photosensitive epilepsy.
I cant watch them at all.. Second link has a takedown notice, first is unavailable.
posted by Windopaene at 10:57 PM on August 15, 2020
posted by Windopaene at 10:57 PM on August 15, 2020
You're referring to the Internet Archive links? They're working for me. Anyone else having trouble?
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 11:18 PM on August 15, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 11:18 PM on August 15, 2020 [1 favorite]
The links are working for me. Thank you. I love flicker films. There is also Arnulf Rainer by Peter Kubelka. Original and recomposition.
Superbitmapping by Thorsten Fleisch is a more recent flicker film with a digital twist. Fleisch has made many more very flickery / stroboscopic films like Energie!, Picture Particles and Pattern Cognition.
posted by namagomi at 3:23 AM on August 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
Superbitmapping by Thorsten Fleisch is a more recent flicker film with a digital twist. Fleisch has made many more very flickery / stroboscopic films like Energie!, Picture Particles and Pattern Cognition.
posted by namagomi at 3:23 AM on August 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
If you want to find out if you have photosensitive epilepsy, watch these with a friend and a dose of Ativan on hand.
posted by atoxyl at 5:29 AM on August 16, 2020
posted by atoxyl at 5:29 AM on August 16, 2020
A quick description of the two based on 30 seconds skimming. Both sure look like epilepsy triggers to me and are also just intensely unpleasant, psychologically.
The Flicker is a screen full of white alternating with black, flickering between the two at rates between 1 and ?24? FPS. It has a soundtrack like a ratchet, an old film projector being run too fast, or sometimes a field of crickets. There are interesting modulations of pace through the 30 minutes.
Noisefields consists of a frame of solid color with a circle in black in the middle. Every frame alternates, with the alternates being frame black and circle colored. The colors vary over time. There's also a high frequency analog scanline noise overlaid on the color to give it an old TV-snow-like texture. The soundtrack is also intensely noisy and flickering with some vaguely harmonic tones being cycled through. 11 minutes.
It's remarkable how unsettling these both are to me. I think it's the soundtrack; I wonder with a calmer soundtrack if I'd adapt to the overriding flicker video and see something more soothing. I still feel a bit nauseous a few minutes after watching these.
posted by Nelson at 8:10 AM on August 16, 2020 [2 favorites]
The Flicker is a screen full of white alternating with black, flickering between the two at rates between 1 and ?24? FPS. It has a soundtrack like a ratchet, an old film projector being run too fast, or sometimes a field of crickets. There are interesting modulations of pace through the 30 minutes.
Noisefields consists of a frame of solid color with a circle in black in the middle. Every frame alternates, with the alternates being frame black and circle colored. The colors vary over time. There's also a high frequency analog scanline noise overlaid on the color to give it an old TV-snow-like texture. The soundtrack is also intensely noisy and flickering with some vaguely harmonic tones being cycled through. 11 minutes.
It's remarkable how unsettling these both are to me. I think it's the soundtrack; I wonder with a calmer soundtrack if I'd adapt to the overriding flicker video and see something more soothing. I still feel a bit nauseous a few minutes after watching these.
posted by Nelson at 8:10 AM on August 16, 2020 [2 favorites]
Leaving this here. (2 Charlton Heston films -- it flips between them every half second or so. Absolutely maddening and mesmerizing IMO)
posted by treepour at 11:28 AM on August 16, 2020 [2 favorites]
posted by treepour at 11:28 AM on August 16, 2020 [2 favorites]
There’s a terrible, fascinating (I’ve read it at least four times) novel called Flicker. I’ve somehow lost my copy. But it’s all about subliminal messaging in old films using these types of techniques. This is a super interesting topic, thanks.
posted by Night_owl at 11:52 AM on August 16, 2020
posted by Night_owl at 11:52 AM on August 16, 2020
The music video for Clock Dva's "The Hacker" (not my video, but I uploaded it) has a similar aesthetic.
posted by neckro23 at 12:32 PM on August 16, 2020
posted by neckro23 at 12:32 PM on August 16, 2020
This is cool but I can't watch these without getting the feeling that, with all the video compression artifice, I'm looking at the shadows on the wall of the cave rather than the actual thing that was made.
This is exactly right, at least when it comes to “The Flicker.” The video transfer is interesting in its own right, but watching it on a computer doesn’t get you close to what it’s like to see it projected on a screen in a big room. Putting it on a large TV screen might get you closer, but it’s still not the same.
Another film along these lines is Ernie Gehr’s “Serene Velocity.” You can see it online, but the video version is pretty terrible and barely hints at what a proper screening is like.
There’s a terrible, fascinating (I’ve read it at least four times) novel called Flicker.
That book is by Theodore Roszak, in case anyone’s interest is piqued!
posted by Mothlight at 1:22 PM on August 16, 2020 [1 favorite]
This is exactly right, at least when it comes to “The Flicker.” The video transfer is interesting in its own right, but watching it on a computer doesn’t get you close to what it’s like to see it projected on a screen in a big room. Putting it on a large TV screen might get you closer, but it’s still not the same.
Another film along these lines is Ernie Gehr’s “Serene Velocity.” You can see it online, but the video version is pretty terrible and barely hints at what a proper screening is like.
There’s a terrible, fascinating (I’ve read it at least four times) novel called Flicker.
That book is by Theodore Roszak, in case anyone’s interest is piqued!
posted by Mothlight at 1:22 PM on August 16, 2020 [1 favorite]
Re. digital artifacts: The movies probably compress really badly as well? My understanding is that digital video compression use what's similar between frames of a video to help compress it, but these alternating frames here will not be very similar at all.
posted by Harald74 at 10:29 PM on August 16, 2020
posted by Harald74 at 10:29 PM on August 16, 2020
« Older neuroatypicality in the workplace | The Asset Economy Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by glonous keming at 10:41 PM on August 15, 2020 [1 favorite]