Call for Papers


Video and painting:
parallel movements.
Artistic research into the
unstable condition
of the image

I use the term ‘screen-reliant’ as opposed to ‘screen-based’ to signal that a screen is a performative category. Almost anything — glass, architecture, three-dimensional objects, and so on — can function as a screen and thus as a connective interface to another (virtual) space. […] The screen, then, is a curiously ambivalent object — simultaneously a material entity and a virtual window; it is altogether an object which, when deployed in spatialized sculptural configurations, resists facile categorization.
— Kate Mondloch, Screens. Viewing Media, Installation Art, p.2

Alongside RIACT’s permanent concern with the need for a sensitive and up-to-date reflection on the aspects that bind or differentiate between artistic research and art production  – whether in an academic environment or on its margins – the Call for Papers for the journal’s upcoming issue focuses its thematic horizon on research dealing with the moving image within the image’s technical and expressive movement in the fields of painting and video (regardless of the emphasis on either media, assuming that the latent movement inhabiting the formal and plastic movement of an image is a common feature of painting and video).

The main idea is to develop research that questions and explores image modalities which are unceasingly and dynamically connected with other images and other moments-places; whether in productions that establish such a connection explicitly — something we spontaneously accept in the contexts of video – or in productions requiring indirect languages and the experiencing of movement’s inference, a feature which characterized painting in the past, for instance. 

By suspending the distinction between still image and moving image, essays for RIACT Nº3 are therefore challenged to provide original and sustained contributions in bridging the divide between the still-image and the flow-image, by presenting reflections that deal with the existence of a movement within another movement in both media.

Once we accept the possibility of a ceaseless oscillation between pictorial images and videographic images alike, we may adopt the following researching attitudes, separately or interconnected: (1) research rooted in artistic practice which is subsequently reflected upon by scrutinizing the concatenation and internal formation (subjective) of images, as it emerged from external forms and devices, on and on, thus enriching the creative processes of concrete images and the peculiar reflection that they trigger. (2) Or, conversely, artistic research stemming from the creation of images and the installation of pictorial or videographic devices, emphasizing the dynamism and interference of the created images in a given (material) space, whether through conventional supports and materials, or through other means that may provide an alternative to the notion of image-flux.

If our attention is directed toward videographic expression, in addition to the exploration of latent images that inhabit the plasticity of moving images, research will also be concerned with the artistic treatment of everything that exists between the source of material images and the spectators-participants in the art piece.

If, on the other hand, the research focuses on the dynamic connection of images within the field of painting, this can be spatialized as a painting-based installation, with the creation of different areas for pictorial intervention, suggesting differentiated times and paths to appropriate the pictorial flow-image.

Finally, if the option is to address the interpenetration of video and painting, with the creative articulation of different temporalities and parallel circuits of immersion for the spectators, the field will become even more heterogeneous, as Jihoon Kim suggests in the following quotation:

“A more significant impact of digital video on the creation of hybrid moving images that engender the coexistence of painting, photography, and film is temporal manipulation, in that it contributes to oscillation between stasis and motion. Indeed, the dissolution of stillness/movement boundaries dates back to analogue video.”
— Jihoon Kim, Between Film, Video, and the Digital, p.64

Important Dates for RIACT Number 3

Submission of an abstract with 2000 words (up to five images can be included at this stage) >

First stage review by the Scientific Committee according to standard double blind peer review procedures.


Communication of the reviewing process results to all candidates.


Submission of the final proposals (between 5000 and 7500 words).


Second stage review by the Scientific Committee according to standard double blind peer review procedures.


Communication of the reviewing process results to all candidates.


Changes made according to the Scientific Committee’s suggestions and the editor’s proofreading for publication.


Presentation of the RIACT Journal at an Artistic Research International Conference.

* The first stage of the peer review process is completely free of charges. However, if the proposals are accepted, the applicants pay a nominal fee of fifty (50) euros to FBAUL, to be used for the English translation of RIACT’s Editorial, Introduction, and other sections of the Journal.