Glitch Art and the cinematic articulation of the ‘shot’: the convergence of datamoshing with the long take

References

• Barnett, D. 2008. Movement as Meaning in Experimental Film. New York: Rodopi.
   Google Scholar
• Bazin, A. 2009. “‘Ontology of the Photographic Image’; ‘Editing Prohibited’.” In What is Cinema?, edited by Timothy Barnard, 3–12. Montreal: Caboose.
   Google Scholar
• Betancourt, M. 2016. Beyond Spatial Montage: Windowing, or the Cinematic Displacement of Time, Motion and Space. New York: Focal Press.
   Google Scholar
• Betancourt, M. 2019. Ideologies of the Real in Title Sequences, Motion Graphics and Cinema. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bogdan, C. 2002. The Semiotics of Visual Languages. Boulder: East European Monographs.
   Google Scholar
• Bolter, J., and R. Grusin. 2000. Remediation: Understanding New Media. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brakhage, S. 1963. “Metaphors on Vision.” Film Culture 30.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, S. 2011. “Introduction.” In Synthesis: Processing and Collaboration, 4–8. San Diego: The Gallery@Calit2.
   Google Scholar
• Burch, N. 1982. “Narrative/Diegesis—Thresholds, Limits.” Screen 23 (2): 16–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavell, S. 1979. The World Viewed: Reflections on the Ontology of Film. Enlarged ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Child, A. 2005. This Is Called Moving: A Critical Poetics of Film. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cloninger, C. 2011. “GltchLnguistx: The Machine in the Ghosts / Static Trapped in the Mouths.” In Glitch Reader(ror), edited by Nick Briz, Evan Meaney, Rosa Menkman, William Robertson, Jon Satrom, and Jessica Westbrook, 23–42. Unsorted Books.
   Google Scholar
• Collado, E., and C. Vassard. Summer 2009. “Cinema Now Wants a Body, or The Politics of the Red Carpet.” Experimental Conversations 4.
   Google Scholar
• “Columbia Records Symphony Series: Piano solo played by Mary Hallock” Columbia Graphophone Company, A6136, 1920.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, D. 1996. A History of Narrative Film. 3rd ed. New York: Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Deren, M. 1946. An Anagram of Ideas on Art, Form and Film. Yonkers: Alican Bookshop Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dulac, G. 2018. Germaine Dulac: Writings on Cinema (1919–1937). Edited by Prosper Hillairet, Translated by Scott Hammen. Paris: Paris Experimental.
   Google Scholar
• Eco, U. 1979. A Theory of Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eco, U. 1994. The Limits of Interpretation. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eco, U. 1997. Kant and the Platypus. New York: Harcourt Brace.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenstein, S. 1949. Film Form. Translated by Jay Leyda. New York: HBJ.
   Google Scholar
• Fielding, R. 1984. The Technique of Special Effects Cinematography. Oxford: Focal Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fielding, R. 1985. The Technique of Special Effects Cinematography. New York: Focal Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gaudreault, A., and P. Marion. 2012. Kinematic Turn: Film in the Digital Era and Its Ten Problems. Translated by Timothy Barnard. Montreal: Caboose Books.
   Google Scholar
• Gunning, T. 2008. “What’s the Point of an Index? or, Faking Photographs.” In Still Moving: Between Cinema and Photography, edited by Karen Beckman and Jean Ma, 23–40. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hanhardt, J. 1976. “The Medium Viewed: The American Avant-Garde Film.” In A History of the American Avant-Garde Cinema, 19–48. New York: American Federation of the Arts.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, M. 2006. New Philosophy for New Media. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, B. Summer, 1972. “The Structure of Bazin’s Thought.” Film Quarterly 25 (4): 18–27.
   Google Scholar
• Knowles, K. 2011. “Analog Obsolescence and the ‘Death of Cinema’ Debate: The Case of Experimental Film.” MiT7 Conference, May, Cambridge, MA. Accessed October 16, 2020. http://web.mit.edu/comm-forum/legacy/mit7/papers/Knowles_analog_obsolescence.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• “Kodachrome Color Motion Picture Test no. III,” filmed at Paragon Studios in Fort Lee, New Jersey in 1922.
   Google Scholar
• Kubelka, P. 1978. “The Theory of Metrical Film.” In The Avant-Garde Film: A Reader of Theory and Criticism, edited by P. Adams Sitney, 139–159. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Larkin, B. 2004. “Degraded Images, Distorted Sounds: Nigerian Video and the Infrastructure of Piracy.” Public Culture 16 (2): 289–314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lotman, J. 1976. Semiotics of Cinema. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
   Google Scholar
• Manovich, L. 2001. The Language of New Media. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meagher, J. 1949. RCA Television Pict-O-Guide: An Aid to TV Troubleshooting, Volume 1. Harrison, NJ: Radio Corporation of America, Tube Department.
   Google Scholar
• Meden, J. 2021. Scratches and Glitches: Observation on Preserving and Exhibiting Cinema in the Early 21st Century. Vienna: Österreichisches Filmmuseum.
   Google Scholar
• Menkman, Rosa. 2011. Network Notebooks 4: The Glitch Moment(um). Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures.
   Google Scholar
• Mitry, J. 2000. Semiotics and the Analysis of Film. Translated by Christopher King. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.
   Google Scholar
• Murch, W. 1995. In the Blink of an Eye: A Perspective on Film Editing. Los Angeles: Silman James Press.
   Google Scholar
• Piaget, J. 1947. La psychologie de l’intelligence. Paris: A. Cohn.
   Google Scholar
• Rebentisch, J. 2012. Aesthetics of Installation Art. Berlin: Sternberg Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ruttmann, W. 1989. “Maleri mit Zeit.” In The German Avant-Garde Film of the 1920s, edited by Angelika Leitner, and Uwe Nitschke, 102–105. Munich: Goethe Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Sharits, P. 2014. “Words Per Page.” In Paul Sharits, edited by Susanne Pfeffer. London: Koenig Books.
   Google Scholar
• Shaviro, S. 2010. Post Cinematic Affect. Washington: Zero Books.
   Google Scholar
• Sherman, Tom. 2008. “Vernacular Video.” In INC Reader #4: Video Vortex Reader—Responses to YouTube, edited by Geert Lovink, and Sabine Niederer, 161–168. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures.
   Google Scholar
• Small, E. 1994. Direct Theory: Experimental Film/Video as a Major Genre. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Temkin, D. January, 2014. “Glitch && Human-Computer Interaction.” Non-Object Oriented Art 1 (1).
   Google Scholar
• “The Kodak Moment” can be viewed in its entirety online at https://vimeo.com/73802758.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, K. 1988. Breaking the Glass Armor. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• “Trick Pictures: How Strange Effects in Moving Photographs are Produced” 1899. The Phonoscope: A Monthly Journal Devoted to Scientific and Amusement Inventions Appertaining to Sound and Sight vol. III, no. 7 (July, 1899).
   Google Scholar
• Vardac, A. 1949. Stage to Screen. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zinman, G. 2015. “Getting Messy: Chance and Glitch in Contemporary Video Art.” In Abstract Video: The Moving Image in Contemporary Art, edited by Gabrielle Jennings, 107. Oakland: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar