The Future of the Moving Image

Symposium:


Session Title:

  • Imaging Capabilities of the Future

Presentation Title:

  • The Future of the Moving Image

Presenter(s):



Abstract:

  • Panel: Imaging Capabilities of the Future

    Keywords: Resolution, Frame Rate, Dynamic Range, Electronic Digital Cinematography

    Whilst at the Universities of Bristol and the West of England, in collaboration with BBC R&D, I have been responsible for the production of the first higher dynamic range, higher resolution and higher frame rate experiments to measure which combination of these developing parameters of image capture and display best engages the audience. What is essentially happening here is the mapping of the capabilities of imagining equipment to the sensory levels of the eye/brain pathway. But what do the expanding parameters of the digitally captured moving image mean to the viewer and how will this affect future patterns of production, consumption and understanding of moving images?

    At UoB, initial experiments were carried out to see what level of immersion 3D footage produced in relation to 2D. These tests showed that the particular kind of 3D used (binocular stereopsis) was only 7% more immersive than regular 2D. Worldwide the audience has expressed its dissatisfaction with this form, innately realising that it is a form of sensory trick. We now have greater enhancements to our computational abilities that allow us to uplevel the parameters we are testing, and more importantly, this increase in itself speaks of what is to come. Our tests have revealed the creation of a sense of depth, without sensory tricks. We have to ask, if currently a camera captures light but is also now being re-conceptualised as being capable of capturing spatial relationships and delivering meaningful data to produce models of environments – must that capacity then be tied to the existing Cartesian grids of bitmap displays, or can we look forward to truly navigable image-space? If so, what might this mean to the idea of ‘interface’ or ‘tool’ that controls our experience in this space? Might this also have to change so as to be unrecognisable as it moves further from hand and eye, touch or gesture, to become an extension of mind? This presentation will finally ask: might the design of that experience change the nature of aesthetics out of all recognition?

    Full text (PDF) p. 413-416

Venue(s):


Category: