Chapter 6 Activity #1 :
Chapter 6 Activity #2 :
Chapter 6 Activity #3:
Chapter 6 Activity #4:
Chapter 6 Activity #5:
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Project 3 | Interactive System
For Project 3 I have decided to use my thesis as its basis. My thesis itself, is interactive with the viewer in that they enter the space and it is moving around them. The movement is not triggered or effected by the viewers existence however, with the use of video I'd like to take the movement within my thesis outside of the actual project, and project it within the Mutable White Cube. For two of the three story boards I would like to record the interior of the space moving, and then shoot the interior not moving. In all three ideas I would like to have the viewers presence, whether it be their movement or the noise within the MWC that will trigger another effect with in the video. I have not decided if I'd like to use audio that increases in volume or if I would like to increase the frame rate or alter the color of the video, based on the movement of the viewer. Eitherway, I will be using Isadora to alter the video.
Storyboard 1:
Storyboard 2:
Storyboard 3:
Storyboard 1:
Storyboard 2:
Storyboard 3:
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Interactive New Media Artists
1. Camille Utterback
http://www.camilleutterback.com/
2. Golan Levin
http://www.flong.com/
3. Daniel Rozin
http://www.smoothware.com/danny/
4. Bill Viola
http://www.billviola.com/
5. Sabrina Raaf
http://www.raaf.org/
http://www.camilleutterback.com/
2. Golan Levin
http://www.flong.com/
3. Daniel Rozin
http://www.smoothware.com/danny/
4. Bill Viola
http://www.billviola.com/
5. Sabrina Raaf
http://www.raaf.org/
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Whitney Biennial| 2010
I atteneded the Whitney Biennial, titled 2010. I was surprised at the number of New Media artists presented in the biennial. One of the artists to stickout the most was Kate Gilmore. She is a New York based artist, whose work is more about the process and documentation of her performances, than the final outcome of the video. She works in themes of struggle, displacement and female identity. In her performances she makes self-constructed obstacles that she needs to get out of or conquer. Her piece in the Whitney Biennial was Standing Here, in which she built a column of drywall, that she had to get herself out of by kicking and punching through the walls. Another aspect of the video is her attire, which consists of heels and a skirt, contradictory to the actions shes performing. Her video performances are performed and only shot once, leaving the outcome of the video upto fate. The video itself is a metaphor for the conflicts and obstacles women face today.
I like Kate Gilmore's piece because her content is something i find myself thinking about often. I also like how she presents not only the video, but the actual column thats in the video. It brings an element of reality to the video by having the column there also.
In general, i was unimpressed with the new media artists chosen for the Whitney Biennial. Many of the videos seemed stale, and lacked content that really drew me in. If i had to chose, i liked the more abstract films, as opposed to the documentary films because they allowed for my own interpretation.
I like Kate Gilmore's piece because her content is something i find myself thinking about often. I also like how she presents not only the video, but the actual column thats in the video. It brings an element of reality to the video by having the column there also.
In general, i was unimpressed with the new media artists chosen for the Whitney Biennial. Many of the videos seemed stale, and lacked content that really drew me in. If i had to chose, i liked the more abstract films, as opposed to the documentary films because they allowed for my own interpretation.
Marina Abramovic| The Artist Is Present
I visited the MOMA on Thursday March 18th, 2010. I have never been to the MOMA before, and was pleasantly surprised. I went to attend the Marina Abramovic : The Artist is Present exhibition. On the first floor of the MOMA, was her live performance, which i was not expecting. The artist herself was seated at a table, in a taped off section, where audience members were invited to join her at the table and sit for aslong as they wished. I was unaware at the time that the person sitting at the table, was an audience member and not a performer. Abramovic will perform this piece, everyday untill the exhibition ends, all the while it being videotaped with a live video stream.
After experiencing the 6th floor retrospective of her work, i found that "New Media" was not used directly in her work, but more for documentation purposes. The use of video in presenting, previously performed works was effective in showing the viewers her older work. However, i do feel that the first hand experience of some of the pieces is lost when being viewed through a video camera. Technically they were presented well, some on televisions and some projected onto the wall. The first room you entered had a lot of noise and a few videos projected on to the walls, which was slightly overwhelming. I had a hard time focusing on one thing.
As for the entire retrospective I was much more interested in her live performers that were reenacting her older performances. Before visiting the show, i was unaware that the performers attended a trainging session to prepare, because they would be doing this for 7 hours a day for three months and it can be physically draining on a person. After seeing the Marina Abramovic: The artist is Present, I have a new found respect for performance artists.
After experiencing the 6th floor retrospective of her work, i found that "New Media" was not used directly in her work, but more for documentation purposes. The use of video in presenting, previously performed works was effective in showing the viewers her older work. However, i do feel that the first hand experience of some of the pieces is lost when being viewed through a video camera. Technically they were presented well, some on televisions and some projected onto the wall. The first room you entered had a lot of noise and a few videos projected on to the walls, which was slightly overwhelming. I had a hard time focusing on one thing.
As for the entire retrospective I was much more interested in her live performers that were reenacting her older performances. Before visiting the show, i was unaware that the performers attended a trainging session to prepare, because they would be doing this for 7 hours a day for three months and it can be physically draining on a person. After seeing the Marina Abramovic: The artist is Present, I have a new found respect for performance artists.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Article 1 from http://www.rhizome.org
Fashion Forward
At first glance, it would seem that wearable computing and traditional craft operate in distinctly different realms of cultural production. However, Leah Buechley, a University of Colorado at Boulder PhD student working with the Craft Technology Group, bridges this gap by taking a homemade approach to the use of computation in clothing or jewelery. The LilyPad Arduino Kit allows for the construction of simple, but aesthetically innovative, computational jewelery made out of the environmentally responsive open source platform known as Arduino. According to Buechley's site, the LilyPad is "designed to empower novices to work with electronic textiles. Using the kit, you can build your own soft interactive clothing." Along with the necessary tools, the kit also includes a highly instructive tutorial that will provide those without a strong background in technology with the know-how to build their own arduino and apply it to their projects. Leah Buechley will lead a lesson on the LilyPad Arduino at Mediamatic's Designing Wearable Hybrids workshop from February 19-21 at Mediamatic, Amsterdam. - Gene McHugh
Article 2 from http://www.rhizome.org
Civilization 2.0
When introducing digital art to an unfamiliar audience, every piece becomes a manifesto of its own – it simultaneously informs, provokes and educates the viewer. When East London gallery SEVENTEEN put up "Intentional Computing", Paul B. Davis’ first ever solo show in 2007, this was precisely the challenge it faced. In Britain’s oddly conservative art scene, the show acted as a demonstration of the infinite possibilities and theorization of digital creativity. A brief retrospective of one of London’s most adventurous galleries brings out the problems such artists face as well as the complexities technology- savvy audiences are learning to incorporate into their viewing experience.
“Much of the work we began to show at SEVENTEEN was at first alien to people in London,” says Paul Pieroni, co-curator of SEVENTEEN, who had been a fan of Davis’ work with the collective, BEIGE, for years: “I liked the fact that it takes technology not on face value, but in terms of its place within a more diffuse contemporary culture.” "Intentional Computing" featured some of Davis’ NES hacks, as well as glitchy, pixelated videos, reminiscent of the artist’s early encounters with technology. It also raised debates about issues of commodity and reclamation. By quoting recurring parts of his technological environment past and present, including the computer games (Nintendo et al) of his youth, Davis was rejuvenating a practice innovated by major pop artists such as Eduardo Paolozzi’s work in the early 50s as well as his later mosaics, or Richard Hamilton’s famous collages.
“Paul’s work was both pop and highly theorized. I loved it,” Pieroni recalls, it also “left people scratching their heads.” SEVENTEEN went on to show more and more technology-based work, featuring the likes of John Michael Boling and Javier Morales, Eric Fensler, Charles Broskoski, Oliver Laric – as well as regular contributions by Paul B. Davis. “We’re definitely not a new media gallery”, Pieroni insists, “I don’t even like the term new media, it’s patronizing - to many people, there is nothing new about computers.” ‘Geeky gadgetry’ or rather, technology for the sake of technology, is not a sufficient artistic credo: rather, the gallery seeks artists who utilize digital tools-at-hand to make social critiques and talk about life, that is, “our lives in the era we might now call Civilization 2.0.” Technology is an undeniable force in today’s society, which is why SEVENTEEN’s new-media-based shows are never referred to as such: “It’s just art. We tried to avoid ghettoizing the work, and incorporate it with traditional media. It’s a matter of integration,” says Pieroni. On this quest to illuminate today’s tech-centric realities, every digitally-inclined show at SEVENTEEN seems to serve a slightly different purpose – covering new territory with each progressive show.
“We like what you eat” was the title of the gallery’s offering for Spring 2008. It served as a humorous investigation into the video-making practices of a number of North-American artists. This includes the aforementioned Paul B. Davis, Eric Fensler, John Michael Boling and Javier Morales. It presents a series of videos, highlighting the appropriation of mass entertainment media enabled by the glut of material available on the internet.
Like earlier video artists such as Robert Filliou, Steina and Woody Vasulka and even more so Nam June Paik, the ever-increasing presence of technology is tamed through the distortion and appropriation of the pre-existing mainstream. Yet while many of the earlier artists warned their audience against the power of technology, such as The Medium is the Medium (1969) or Filliou’s L’Esclave (1978) video, today’s stance shows a clear evolution. Moving away from a binary between screen and viewer, this generation embraces our highly technologized everyday; it utilizes distorted data to blur lines between art, technology, science – warped technology becomes a means of communicating, or rather allegorizing a societal critique. For example, Davis’ piece BYOBB (Bring your own Bobby Brown) juxtaposes current, glitchy video art with 80s DIY reference. It provides an unclassifiable piece of work that doesn’t single out a specific audience, and henceforth protests against the ostracization of new media art, or rather of any mode of creation as an insular category.
Fittingly, this show inaugurated SEVENTEEN’s newly converted basement space. This soon became a favored stage for various new media artist communities - an aspect of the art that had always appealed to Pieroni. “I like the fact that many of these guys are friends. It feels like a micro-movement. Like an old-fashioned art movement of ‘community’, only with everyone wearing day-glo shell-suits, living in warehouses called ‘ Camp Gay’ like some members of BEIGE in the early days and spending all their time online or fiddling with obsolete technology,” Pieroni states. The notion of a parallel, creative community, busy distorting the massive influx of information is a theme recurrent to the gallery. The group show "The Steve Guttenberg Galaxy" in Fall 2008, further maps out the digital movement: it featured once again the previous show’s Eric Fensler, Paul B. Davis, John Michael Boling and Javier Morales, but also included Berlin-based Oliver Laric, New Yorker Charles Broskoski, and British Richard John Jones. Through a self-derisory pun between the inventor of the printing press Johannes Gutenberg (1400-1468) and eighties actor Steve Guttenberg (b.1958), the show highlighted the ‘entertainment as culture’ we live in, whilst confirming the existence of a transnational, underground microcosm interfering with its means of transmission.
The presence of Oliver Laric the following month, with a show featuring three of his video works, 50 50 2008, ↓ ↑, and Touch My Body (Green Screen Version) presented a second generation of new media artists according to Pieroni, explaining, “Oliver feels like a child of BEIGE, that he is walking on the ground Cory Arcangel and Paul B. Davis laid out for him.” Touch My Body (Green Screen Version) eliminated everything in Mariah Carey’s music video except the chanteuse herself, replacing the background with a green screen. Once uploaded to the internet, users were able to freely remix the video, resulting in some curious and entertaining recycling of the original clip. This sort of crowd-sourcing aesthetic was also apparent in 50 50 2008, a bricolaged-sing-along video of anonymous people chanting to one of 50 Cents’ hits. Laric perfects a technique that had been drafted by his predecessors: “This is a kind of YouTube modernism, dedicated to refining a specific idea or medium to its ultimate point” explains Pieroni. By using two identifiable pop references, it addresses itself to a new audience acclimated to a YouTube interface, and thus highlights the rapidly evolving, ephemeral nature of new media art. The immediate accessibility the site provides allows an unprecedented amalgam of content - from mainstream pop to obscure references – and is a product of Laric’s generation more than Davis’. This infinite database, evenly formatted to a short clip format, disrupts a cultural hierarchy and thus blurs lines between audience groups.
This theme of temporality is further explored in the show "Define your terms (or Kanye West fucked up my show)", Paul B. Davis’ second show at SEVENTEEN. There, the artist acknowledges a forced evolution, after seeing mainstream rapper Kanye West’s latest video, using similar pixilated effects –which Davis had planned on using in his upcoming show. This, to quote the artist, had indeed fucked up his intended show. This moment of truth represents the quintessential Derridean realization, that one is never able to escape the system one seeks to criticize. Therein lies the double bind that traps new media artists and forces them to continuously question what they are doing. “The very language I was using to critique pop content from the outside was now itself a mainstream cultural reference,” Davis commented at that time. This seemingly difficult situation is, it could be argued, the condition for reflection and renewal. And there is more. Beyond the obviously technologically-involved shows, SEVENTEEN promotes an approach to curation informed by new media practices. Take, for example the show "We would like to thank the curators who wish to remain anonymous" from April 2008. Here curatorial practice is presented as a performance in itself, as presentation is as important as the art works that are shown, something that is frequently forgotten in museum shows but that the gallery wanted to highlight. Furthermore, the title might be an immediate reference to the internet’s debates over anonymity and authorship.
In other words, these references highlight the fact that the internet imposes rules and affects basic norms that inevitably trickle into every day life. “Call it the googlification of everything,” says Pieroni. “We are not consciously reproducing or challenging forms of viewing,” he says, “it just happens that during the Noughties, the internet has served as the catalyst for a massive shift in the way we do everything.” By operating within a non-new-media specific framework, SEVENTEEN is contributing to the acceptance of new technologies within the art world, by larger audiences. As Pieroni put it “The internet is a speculative opportunity. I like artists who exploit this opportunity.”
Alice Pfeiffer is a writer interested in artful matters and the future in general. Pfeiffer graduated last year from the London School of Economics with a Masters in Gender and Media Studies. She writes for the global edition of the New York Times, and she is a contributor to Interview and Dazed and Confused. Prior to this, she worked as an editorial assistant for Paperback, and wrote food reviews for Time Out UK. She generally likes anything involving robots or pastries.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Related Articles
In reading for my Senior Art Seminar course, I came across a few articles that over-lapped with New Media.
What Are Humans for? Art in the Age of Post-Human Development by Ando Arike
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1577239?&Search=yes&term=ando&term=arike&list=hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoAdvancedSearch%3Fq0%3Dando%2Barike%26f0%3Dall%26c0%3DAND%26q1%3D%26f1%3Dall%26c1%3DAND%26q2%3D%26f2%3Dall%26c2%3DAND%26q3%3D%26f3%3Dall%26wc%3Don%26Search%3DSearch%26sd%3D%26ed%3D%26la%3D%26jo%3D&item=1&ttl=9&returnArticleService=showArticle
The other article was Origins of Virtualism; An interview with Frank Popper by Joseph Nechvatal
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4134477?&Search=yes&term=Nechvatal&term=Joseph&list=hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3DJoseph%2BNechvatal%2B%26gw%3Djtx%26prq%3D%2528ando%2Barike%2529%26Search%3DSearch%26hp%3D25%26wc%3Don&item=4&ttl=48&returnArticleService=showArticle
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Jeremy Wade | There is no end to more.
As part of New Media, we were required to attend a performance at the Experimental Media and Performing Arts Center in Albany, NY. I don't think myself, and the group I was with were ready for what we were about to experience.
It was a small theatre, with stadium seating and a small center stage. The backdrop of the stage was minimal, but interestingly shaped. Also on stage was a small, white house, resembling Snoopy's home. The performance began with a voice projecting through the speakers, and a small man standing, his back turned to us, hunched over on stage. What unfolded over the next 45 minutes was confusing, multi-sensory and slightly disturbing.
As an artist, who does not practice performance art, i could appreciate the interpretive dancer's ability to perform onstage. He had great muscle/body control and looked very well rehearsed. However, having surround sound audio at the same time as an interpretive dancer, it made it difficult to focus on one thing. I was unable to comprehend the audio because i was too distracted by the interpretive dancing. There were particular movements that looked like they were mimicking the audio, but the dancer generally looked like he was under the influence of some heavy drugs.
After watching the entire show, i found some themes/critiques amongst the chaos of the performance.
1. Consumerism
2. Mass Media
3. Pop Culture
4. Symbolism
The list could go on, but initially we thought this was a commentary on japanese culture, however the themes and images are common in mainstream America also.
As far as relating this to New Media, it was interesting to see how the artists married video,audio and performance. In the beginning we assumed we were attending a performance about animae and japanese culture, however we assumed wrong.
http://www.empac.rpi.edu/events/2010/spring/wade/
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
New Media | Reading Response 1
After several attempts, I was successful in printing Lev Manovich's, The Language of New Media Prologue . The first paragraph gave me insight as to what it was going to take to read, and understand this article. A highlighter with margin notes.
The first word that i came across was Esperanto.
What?
Manovich used it to state how the "...computer fulfills the promise of cinema as a visual Esperanto..." The definition of this foreign word according to www.Dictionary.com is:
–noun
an artificial language invented in 1887 by L. L. Zamenhof (1859–1917), a Polish physician and philologist, and intended for international use. It is based on word roots common to the major European languages.
As for the actual prologue, I found it raised many interesting ideas about the nostalgic qualities of cinema compared to the ever-advancing computer technology. As for the "10 Key principles of New Media" I am not quite sure if I've nailed them directly on the head.
10 Key principles of New Media
1.In contrast to computer interface, Cinema is unique in that everyone can "understand it" but not everyone can "speak it" (It being the production of films.)
2.In contrast to viewing video through computers, directly viewing film is unique in that the point of view of the filmmaker is a key element/subject in creating the film.
3.Putting film on computers takes away from the possibilities of montage in the actual film reel. (What used to be manual labor in editing film, became a simple click of the mouse in creating effects.)
4. Film has the power to create false identities, whether it be in a person, place or object.
5. With the power of a mobile camera, the viewers are able to "obtain a close-up of any object..." [172]
6. Combining images in film allows us reject societies demand for a "universal equality of things".
7. Modernization allowed us to combine "different physical locations...within a single magazine spread of film newsreel; now they meet within a single electronic screen"[173-174] which is not necessarily negative because "Synthetic computer-generated imagery is not an inferior representation of our reality, but a realistic representation of a different reality."[202]
8.With New Media, "it is possible to turn "effects" into a meaningful artistic language." Which "new media designers and artists still have to learn-how to merge database and narrative into a new form." [243]
9. New media "aims to go beyond simple human navigation through physical space." [275-276]
10. "The loop gave birth not only to cinema but also to computer programming."
I found it really difficult to name just 10 Principles of New Media, but more or less found this prologue to be a tribute to film and cinema. It explained the beginning of film and how it has paved the way for computer technology in avant-garde film.
This article could be compared to Keith Hoyt's quote:
"You need to learn to walk before you can run"
The first word that i came across was Esperanto.
What?
Manovich used it to state how the "...computer fulfills the promise of cinema as a visual Esperanto..." The definition of this foreign word according to www.Dictionary.com is:
–noun
an artificial language invented in 1887 by L. L. Zamenhof (1859–1917), a Polish physician and philologist, and intended for international use. It is based on word roots common to the major European languages.
As for the actual prologue, I found it raised many interesting ideas about the nostalgic qualities of cinema compared to the ever-advancing computer technology. As for the "10 Key principles of New Media" I am not quite sure if I've nailed them directly on the head.
10 Key principles of New Media
1.In contrast to computer interface, Cinema is unique in that everyone can "understand it" but not everyone can "speak it" (It being the production of films.)
2.In contrast to viewing video through computers, directly viewing film is unique in that the point of view of the filmmaker is a key element/subject in creating the film.
3.Putting film on computers takes away from the possibilities of montage in the actual film reel. (What used to be manual labor in editing film, became a simple click of the mouse in creating effects.)
4. Film has the power to create false identities, whether it be in a person, place or object.
5. With the power of a mobile camera, the viewers are able to "obtain a close-up of any object..." [172]
6. Combining images in film allows us reject societies demand for a "universal equality of things".
7. Modernization allowed us to combine "different physical locations...within a single magazine spread of film newsreel; now they meet within a single electronic screen"[173-174] which is not necessarily negative because "Synthetic computer-generated imagery is not an inferior representation of our reality, but a realistic representation of a different reality."[202]
8.With New Media, "it is possible to turn "effects" into a meaningful artistic language." Which "new media designers and artists still have to learn-how to merge database and narrative into a new form." [243]
9. New media "aims to go beyond simple human navigation through physical space." [275-276]
10. "The loop gave birth not only to cinema but also to computer programming."
I found it really difficult to name just 10 Principles of New Media, but more or less found this prologue to be a tribute to film and cinema. It explained the beginning of film and how it has paved the way for computer technology in avant-garde film.
This article could be compared to Keith Hoyt's quote:
"You need to learn to walk before you can run"
Phase 1.
Hello New Media Blog.
I am really looking forward to this course on "New Media". It would be accurate to say i am technologically-UN-advanced, so this course will pose many challenges. This will be an interesting semester, of discovering new technology, patience and software, with minimal mental breakdowns!
I am really looking forward to this course on "New Media". It would be accurate to say i am technologically-UN-advanced, so this course will pose many challenges. This will be an interesting semester, of discovering new technology, patience and software, with minimal mental breakdowns!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
