ent structures and the structures of the cultural landscape. I see a great quality in the playful and strangely abstract way images dissolve into each other in several of my filmic notations, but I also question sometimes whether or not the intention of the filmic notation is clear to the spectator, as a film can provoke different readings and understandings depending on the receiver. On the other hand, I found that the titles have helped to unfold both the abstractions and the intentions of the filmic notations. An aspect I hadn’t taken into consideration in the beginning, was the role of sound both in reality and on film. Onsite, sounds installs a sense of orientation, an idea of weather conditions and feelings of happiness, danger etc. The sounds are physically anchored to you and the specific place you are finding yourself. When editing a film, you work with visual layers and audio layers as two separate layers that can be pieced together in multiple ways. In the filmic notations / I see the forest emerge in the lee of the dike and /
I see encounters between reality and dreams in the ponds of the farmland I experiment with an outro in which the sounds of squeaking trees or rippling water from the canals is prolonged even after the visual narrative has ended. This can have a tremendous effect and points to another reason why including film in a landscape architectural process can be of great value, awakening yet another sense, the sense of the ear. Interestingly the soundscape from the first visit at Rødby Fjord in March and the second visit in June are considerably different and portray very opposite atmospheres. The sounds of winter and the sounds of summer, harsh wind and chirpy birds.
165
One of the most challenging aspects of the filmic process to me was how to make the jump from the filmic analysis to a strategic proposal. While editing was a powerful tool in expressing sensory interpretations of my landscape site, it was far more difficult to project those qualities into the presentation of the proposal. I have pointed out how the film can offer a tool to transfer a bodily experience, but ultimately, when working with landscape architectural proposals, the filmic explorations need to be supported by more traditional architectural presentation forms, such as plan drawings, diagrams and sections for clarity and precision. Furthermore, the filmic method is extremely time demanding and requires that you engage physically with your site, pointing out the challenges of working with film in professional architectural design offices and governmental institutions, where time is of the essence. This is perhaps where the filmic exploration falls short. However, going from registration and explorative drawings of the embodied experiences of sites, to making a concept and strategy out of it, is already a known difficult stage in design practice, using film or not. So, a constant intermediate state, working with explorative drawings and film while retaining close ties to the more conventional drawings used in communication with other parties involved in a project, is important. In the end I have gained insight into the powerful qualities of the filmic methodology in the perspective of future landscape architectural practice, and I would like to further explore and introduce it into my own practice, whether it seeks to answer a landscape architectural matter or it serves to unfold and communicate a sensuous landscape experiences to other landscape enthusiasts.
