I was not a huge fan of the lecture today for Kathy Rose. I found it odd that she barley spoke about her work during the lecture, and did not mention concept or much about inspiration. her work has definatley evolved with the changing technology due to her early work dealing with hand drawn animation and her later work being extremely digital. I feel overall I would describe her work as vibrant, moving, and intentional. Due to the performance aspect being such an important part of her animations, she must make sure that everything is planned out. Like I had wondered before the lecture, she does plan out each part of the performance, but whether the movement or the animation comes first, all depends on the project, and changes constantly.
Her earlier work I found the most interesting due to the mixture of animation and dance, and the polished look due to the cohesiveness of the two. I did not know that she had dance experience which obviously inspired her work in the 80's. I feel the fact that she merged two art forms into one performance made her work very interesting. I find this body of work to be the most compelling because everything has to be planned out, yet the performance looks like an improvisation, due to her movements.
Rose's most recent work I was not as impressed with as her early work. I found it seemed too digital and the overall effect did not have the finessing that her earlier work did. The videos were awkward and became boring to watch. I also did not like many of the special effects because they did not seem to work well and the technical downfalls overshadowed the overall work. I wonder why she has not considered going back to less computerized approaches since those worked much better with her vision.
No comments:
Post a Comment