Rose Lowder discusses her experience of working as both and artist and within the film industry . . . with no intention of working in film – but then in the 1960s she saw experimental films in London – then she started notice things, that for example in the film, The Famous Present,  a composed image of several frames are nevertheless seen by the eye as a composite – whole – simultaneous image.Frustrated at the technical set up of the film where a bad musician who can play lots of instruments is given the – over a great one who can only play one instrument (economic reasons) and the tension between the editor and the director –  film being a product of highly mechanised and hierachical process that had a lot of ‘norms’ – industry requirements and a regulated the structure.RL resisted making money through the commercial art market.Instead she worked on a series of graphic experimentations that related to the experimental film she’d seen. These became a set of perception base experiments. For example, making holes into 16mm films - if you draw a line and punch a hole in every frame you will see a line broken with a hole. . .if you draw the line and punch a hole every other frame – you see a steady line with a hole in front of it – if you punch the hole every 3 frames the line becomes much stronger and the whole doesn’t break the line – if you punch the hole every 4 frames . . .the line starts move flexibly in front of and behind the line – it is an illusion.Fascinated by the ideas that the physical of reality of the film in relation to what is seen on the screen – and the dis-juncture between the two – she decided to film ‘reality’. Her work plays on the tension between the subject – the media as an articulator – the figurative, illustrative and graphic elements of film.She shows us her note books – dense, ordered graphs representing time and space – a self-constructed notataion model for describing a method of making film where she literally carves up space with a camera held still and cutting between location and shot according to a predetermined score.     Filming aspects of reality that alter the way the film works – she uses the example of a water wheel – where as the wheel turned the water caught the light of the sun which over-exposed the film . . . within the film industry light levels should not change across a scene – through showing the physical effect of the subject upon the media Rose was attempting to move into a deeper dialogue with the ‘real’ subject. She was fascinated by the tension between the graphic; photographic and figurative aspects of film. What I find most interesting is the rigour of her approach. She created a series of static camera based films – which used the model of a musical score – she’s mark in space a series of focus points in the distance – then she would prepare a framework which would identify how long the camera would move between each of the points. No zoom! Deliberately avoiding scrolling movement. She became a composer using juxtapositions between temporal and spatial dimension. Projected in the same order in the same way that they were filmed. She shows her notebooks – which look like a cros between Russian Constructivist drawings, Sol le Witt plans and a computer users manual. Using images in the way that we have traditionally notated sound or the internal rhythm of poetry. Key words that she returns to are the American photographer of great American landscapes Edward Weston – the lens does not reveal the subject significantly of its own accord;  Rhythm is not arithmetic – John Cage. Peter Gidal – Theory of Structure – Form is meant as formal operation – not as composition and Malcolm le Grice – in Abstract Film and Beyond – that predetermined choice – process – subjective decisions can overtake the content – and become the content. It strikes me as a very interesting mix of ‘fathers’ – A photographer who would camp out for nights until he had taken the perfect shot – highly carefully composed photographs, a musician who used the score to back the real time experience of the world onto itself, Peter Gidal, son of the photographer who again took photographs of almost panoramic landscapes where the undulations of the terrain are posed in tension to the slick surface of the photograph. Rose’s compositional experiments are physical: conceptual plays between real time and real space in relation to spatial and temporal perceptions. And yet, it is telling of something of her love of materials that her real time editing process means that the highly (self)controlled process she uses means that mistakes and glitches are caught an remain within the final works. Rose has been a major influence to many artists  - the deference in the room is notable. She is asked: You barely talk about the camera, we see cinema as an optical thing  . . .  the question is however that the editing becomes the way of creating the illusion? . . .RL answers: Being a woman – they wouldn’t let you have a camera – almost impossible to get hold of a camera – but you were allowed in the cutting room. She is asked about the content she films – which is often striking and can be read in a number of ways. She answers: She choose the subject of her film 10 bouquets is of 10 organic farms – ecological reasons. . .  that humans are destroying the universe and that the people she films are doing what they are doing to change that situation – she chose them because they seemed to be highly motivated to make significant change.It strikes me that there is a interesting trajectory in Lowder’s work from the traditions of landscape photography with its composition, mapping of space, defining of territories and her material interests in film as an object – to be tracked, managed and manipulated….. that is both linear and straight – but which alters through the speed at which it is observed.