/images/sf-default.png

Richard O’sullivan - The other image

5:15, 2008, Video Art
 
When we look at video, the act of perception can involve several other images apart from - and perhaps quite different to - the one we directly ‘see’ for ourselves.
The other image attempts to isolate some of the different images that lead through to a moment of perception, and seeks to bring them into dramatic conflict.
A tiny surveillance camera has been attached to a ceiling fan that rotates at high speed above the body of the artist in a dimly lit room. The camera transmits wirelessly to a camcorder (resulting in interference on the image). In post-production, the images have been freeze-framed, or slowed down to 30 percent of normal speed, and edited together with material running at its original speed.
The resulting video can be installed, or shown theatrically. In the final piece, the full-speed footage presents a kaleidoscopic arc of light, while the freeze-frames show distorted images of the artist’s body and indicate the image as it ‘actually’ is on the image-track. We witness the stark difference between the image as perceived in the brain/eyes of the viewer, and the image as it was captured by the camera.
The work asks the viewer to reconcile his or her perceptual sense with the intellectual knowledge of the ‘actual’ nature of the image. It offers a hallucinogenic visual experience, and striking images suggestive of despair or madness.
The piece can be installed on a monitor or using a projector, or may be shown on a cinema screen with other works.

DirectorRichard O’sullivanCameraRichard O’sullivan
 

CountryUnited KingdomEdition2008 Screenings‘i’m still your worst nightmare’, arnolfini gallery, bristol, uk, april 2008
occupy my time (solo show), clapham picture house, london, august 2008
abstracta, rome, sept 2008 (in a sequence of films by richard o’sullivan that will open the festival).
milkbar film festival, san francisco, sept 2008
 

< overview

Interview

 
Who is Richard O’Sullivan?

I’ve been wondering about that myself. I suppose an artist in new media, filmmaker, and university lecturer.


Your film is about?

This film is about perception - the contrast between the recorded image, and the image in the eye-brain, the ‘other’ image.


How did you start with film, and do you have an educational background in art or film?

I made home videos as a teenager. After that, I did a BA in Literature and Film Studies at the University of Warwick, and also spent a lot of time writing screenplays.
At U.C.L.A. Film School I eventually understood the kind of films I really wanted to make, mainly thanks to my supportive mentor Marina Goldovskaya. I gained an M.F.A. In Film Directing/ Production at the School. After graduating, I started showing my work in festivals and exhibiting in art galleries.


Could you explain how you work, what themes or concepts and what is important to you?

I make films that explore visual perception like ’The Other Image’, and I also make landscape videos, which explore the textures and meanings of place. Quite often a video piece will integrate these two themes.


Where do you get your ideas or influences from?

Most often, I draw on my own experiences for ideas - the places I go, the walks I take, the things I see or conversations I have.
My projects usually begin when I discover a landscape with some significant visual quality or meaning. As I begin to film this place, the material itself suggests some problem or strategy that will determine how and what I shoot. Sometimes I’ll research the history or significance of the place as I shoot, and this also informs the production. By the end, the piece is coherent, but the process is organic.
I’ve been influenced a lot by experimental cinema by people like Stan Brackage. Bill Viola has also had a big effect on my work. And certainly various ideas from film and cultural theory have influenced me a great deal.


How does the title relate to the work, and how do you find a fitting title?

’The Other Image’ is the image that exists only in that place between the eye and the brain. It’s the perceived image, which differs from the recorded image that exists as information, as zeros and ones, on the tape or DVD. Thus it is the ’other’ image, and not the one which actually ’exists’ - a ghost image, a phantom of the brain.


How does content relate to the form of your work?

Sometimes the form of the work is the ‘content’. This is true of ‘The Other Image’. The visual style of the work, and the way the piece has been put together, constitute its subject and meaning as much as anything that is portrayed in the image (the ’content’).


How important is sound in film, and if you use sounds, do you create your own or use existing?

As my approach to video is broadly a documentary approach, I use the production sound in my video works. I usually mix the sound track. Some of my videos have an interesting use of sound and use the sudden absence/ presence of sound.


How do you finance your projects (by yourself, sponsors or subsidy)?

I finance a lot of my films myself. Sometimes the main investment is just time, in large quantities. I’m not sure if this approach will be possible in future because the films are getting more complex.


Nowadays everyone with the right equipment can create videoart, good, bad or ugly?

In some ways, the question implies that better work - or a higher proportion of quality work - was produced when access to equipment was limited, but is that true? Is it true that, when access to equipment was more rare, the few people able to make video art were producing more good work?
I think that people should have the same access to video as a medium as they do to paint and canvas. I can’t imagine why access to the medium could be considered a bad thing.
And while production may be democratized (strangely thanks to market forces and the R+D of Sony, Panasonic et al), exhibition and funding remain the preserve of the few, especially in Britain. In my country, those privileges generally belong to a small number of artists selected from a handful of London art schools.


Video broadcasting platforms on the internet, why or why not?

As the author of a work, you sometimes worry about your work. Where is it being watched, who’s watching it, how are they understanding it, and is it being treated properly? Those are the disadvantage of net broadcasting.


In what category would you place your work; cinema or art. And is there a difference between those?

I associate my work more with art. I think this is because of the experience it offers to the audience, which is more distant, intellectual and aesthetic or formal. The experience of watching my work is closer to that of viewing art than watching a movie.


How important is the reaction to your film by the audience?

Sometimes the specific way that the audience responds to one of my videos constitutes the meaning of the piece. As a result, it is important to me that the audience reacts in very specific ways.
In terms of giving the audience some specific kinds of visual or dramatic pleasure, however, I am much less concerned. The world is already full of films and TV programs that give people those kinds of pleasure. My aim as an artist is to get the audience to perceive briefly in some new way, or to understand something about their forms of perception.
I try not to think about critical reaction to the work. Of course it is nice when people say the work is good. But aiming to achieve that hinders the creative process. And besides, people have been wrong about one or two artists over the years.


What is your next project about?

I’m working on a couple of longer landscape works. One is called ‘Fragments of the Los Angeles River’. I’m also finishing a number of short works that use the same technology and techniques that I used in ‘The Other Image’. I’m excited about the future.
 

< overview
 
< Artists interviews