27.1.17: Collaging; concept development


Conceptualising and Schematising

Pinning up research and images, discussing the connections, collaging, overviewing our concept, streamlining, refocusing, expressing our first conceptual collage ideas through our chosen modalities of the arthropod and sisonophore (?).

Research and images from yesterday’s research:

 (See ’25-26.2.17: MotionBuilder, preliminary research’ post for citations)


(Nour, G. Chun, H. 2017)

The sections I focused on:

(Nour, G. 2017)

I wanted to maintain a flow throughout the images, yet contrast it with the idea of an altered reality. As if when you have intrusive thoughts and anxiety, your reality changes around you in terms of what is territory and what is the intruder.

(Helen added the girl at the end, which I thought was really clever, in blending the environment and the “identity”).

Complete conceptual collaged panoramas:


Based on the idea of the mind – thought processes, altered reality/perception, synapses and neuroses in the brain, surrealism and primitive forms. We were all pretty happy with this panorama, thought it conveyed a good flow throughout.

Notes made when collaging:

(Nour, G. 2017)

Modality qualities:

(Nour, G. 2017)

After a group discussion of our two chosen modalities with Holger, the arthropod and siphonophore, we created a second panorama based on their movement in relation to our concept. We used paint to convey the flow of the siphonophore and pencils for the arthropod.


We had a discussion with Chris at the end of our lesson where we were advised to streamline our concept a little – and mostly just have a message/reason for our concept. What do we want viewers to take from our animation?

We went over all our ideas again, what we liked most in terms of estuary (and territory/intruder), and looked into new ideas like the connection between body and mind, and Jack extrapolated the idea of the emotional vs rational mind. We were all pretty pleased with that concept as it didn’t stray too far from the research we’d already done but was a lot clearer in terms of a goal within the brief. It also fit nicely within the the contrast between arthropod and siphonophore, and territory and intruder.

That night I wrote out a very word-y overview of our discussions and conclusion:

“Our concept explores the fluctuation between the rational and emotional mind. Our estuary focuses on the ebb and flow of water currents as they combine and divide from and to different river paths. The rational and emotional mind is concurrent, intertwined, but separate and working on separate axes. An experience will be considered territory or intruder depending on which mind is taking priority. External stimuli affects and influences the mind towards a certain state. One can change between emotional and rational states of mind, but it is a slower, more specific, targeted approach. This emulates the movement of estuaries where the freshwater adjusts to become salt water.”

Helen wrote a much better worded theoretical stance for Monday’s presentation too:

“The Estuary represents a space where nature paradoxically displays its strength and it’s vulnerability within the ever-changing framework of state. The Estuary is the meeting place of the two. We will be approaching the concept of Estuary by analyzing the human emotional and rational state of mind and whether these states are diametrically opposing or whether they indeed meet and merge in an estuarial space.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s