The history of vision can be reconstructed on the basis of (visual) artistic inventions, examinations and especially the use of new image types. From the diary of Albrecht Dürer to László Moholy-Nagy's book, vision in motion there are a lot of examples where one find artists in search of new kind of views. Image making in its experimental form derives not only from new sensations in the visual field, but also creates new exercises for eye/mind/visual cognition.

The experiences during the course of the evolutionary (hi)story of new media tools created new type of interface(s) between history and its human recognition. From Alberti's window-picture definition to the Microsoft windows, the direct link is the need for a non-moving gaze. The discovery, development and standardization of movie picures radically changed not only our habits but also the ways of image-making and thus our entire concept and perspective of the world. Naturally, this process started earlier than the discovery was announced and it is also true that the changes did not become apparent immediately.

It took several years of research, especially within the fields of experimental film and video whose consciously used media resulted in the present situation, i.e. that today the instrumental features and possible uses of the moving image function as some kind of knowledge that is known to all of us. This process eventually established the foundations of a non-linear, interactive, virtual media world, which has already even reached beyond the borders of its earlier described and further analyzed limits. Within the period between the late 1910s and early 1980s a radical shift occured in both the concept of perspective as well as in image-making techniques.

A parallel in the history of image-making could be drawn with the period of the Renaissance if we want to understand the relevance of these changes by means of an analogy. While there and then fixed perspective and that of the picture world beyond an open window encouraged the eye-sight directed toward the easel painting to find more similarities between the image and the world (which was even more emphasized by the growing interest of painterly practice to gradually adjust an exact reconstruction of space to visual experience), in the recent past our concept of time went through similar changes. Before the time of movie pictures it would not have made much sense to render more detail about time to the image than the date of creation - most often it was sufficient to know whether a given piece was old or new. Cinematography has radically changed this attitude. It became more important to know how long a video piece or a TV broadcast was than details about their "size".

The duration of a film must be viewed in relation to real-time experience and it is not only important for reasons of time-measurement or a comparison of real time relations and the time of representation.

The length of a film also has its own rules, by which an efficient technique of setting limits to time was created despite that earlier it was believed to be impossible. Even if this did not make the definition of time easier it opened possibilities of its manipulation and analysis. Our notion of time is similar to the extent of knowledge we are able to depict and construct space making it more tangible and transparent by means of perspective. The limits to our ability to understand time are similar to the extent to whi h we are able to depict and construct space-making it more tangible and transparent through the use of perspective.In the case of audio-visual media, especially in linear-narrative films and videos, the concept of a central-perspective timeline was initiated recently. Time flows always in the same forward direction, with the same speed between two fixed points (i.e. the beginning and end of the given movie), and within this anything can happen: to quote Dürer again "we are free to take a view through the "canvas-window"-that is through projection. The gaze always rests on the point in front of it -the center - and this same point, meanwhile, wanders through the whole film along the horizon of projection, thus drawing a horizon of meaning while the film winds out. This wandering point, i.e. the point of sight is followed by the two eyes while the head is motionless. (For monocular perspective one eye would be enough). It constructs the istoria as the plot was once called by L.B. Alberti, which is the depicted scene in the central perspective of the picture. The image is ready when time is over, the lights are switched on and the empty canvas appears in front of us. Projection is not a space phenomenon: it can only be taken home as a memorial of time. from Perspectives exhibition, Budapest