> Doesn't this depend first on what you are trying to accomplish? If your i=
ntentions are journalistic then fidelity of circumstance is required and th=
ings should be as they are. If your intent is to create a work of art then =
by definition it has a point of view and thus is edited from its inception=
. A soundscape without anthrophony, by whatever means, is a perfectly good =
goal if that's what you elected to do. In any case truthfulness in intent i=
s, I think, what's important. Today we can embed metadata. When I have mani=
pulated something in some way, I detail that in a note.
Very good point. I might say that even journalistic intent edits for conten=
t to convey a point of view. Intent though really strikes a chord. Basicall=
y, the recordist can do whatever he/she pleases with regards to manipulatio=
n and annotation for whatever goal they see fit. The act of recording itsel=
f is a manipulation. And art most certainly involves communication and expr=
ession first, not necessarily fidelity of representation.
Sometimes manipulation is implied, like in blockbuster movies. I think here=
the audience knows what's going on to some extent - "Avatar" or "Harry Pot=
ter" is very clearly fantasy (to most adults). I am not sure that this is t=
he case with nature sound and field recording, regardless of intent. I am a=
lso not sure that it should be :)
Related to intent is outcome. Is what was intended achieved? Is it even mea=
surable, or does it even matter?
Purposeful minimization of anthrophony in nature soundscapes is a shared/gr=
oup aesthetic that to seems to extend beyond personal choice or intent. Whe=
n I began recording, this was a given - it is what you must do to be a natu=
re recordist (unspoken but implied). The absence of man defines the genre a=
nd defines the topics of discussions on this list. Together we have created=
and elevated a body of work that removes the presence of man by any means =
necessary: 1000-2000 hours in the field, careful spectral editing, time col=
lapsed compositing, etc...
Many of us on the list, including myself, have a very strong affinity to bi=
ophony and soundscapes in general. The "natural" ambience of a space. Its p=
art art, part documentation, a sprinkle of science. I just often question w=
hy man is purposely and almost universally excluded when he so deeply shape=
s it's current state.
On a related topic, Martyn's work has begun to incorporate man as a player =
- though not necessarily related to his nature soundscapes. This thread of =
activism is very refreshing!
> I've been working on a project for several years, cataloguing and editing=
of videos of primates. The audio is often very bad: talk in several langua=
ges; crunching feet; not-so-distant cars; the recordist breathing; camera s=
traps whacking against the tripod. Since my intention here is for the viewe=
r to see the animals and not a documentary on the recording of the video, I=
sample, cut and paste audio to create a background that's "authentic" if n=
ot perfectly truthful and, as far as possible, is without humans. With my o=
wn video, I usually record long audio passages in the field so that I have =
a sound track to fall back on when I edit the video.
> Marc
Thanks for this perspective. I indeed appreciate this editing as an audienc=
e member. It conveys alot more meaning that the unedited work, which I woul=
d probably be distracted by the noises and handling.
|