Category: Uncategorized

clox-Body

Hello ! So, I wasn't able to implement my idea yet for Wednesday, but I want to reflect a bit on what I was trying to make and the hurdles I encountered along the way:

For this project I was thinking about the following things:

  • the gaze of the camera and its relationship to power when it is paired with motion tracking and visual classification software (how are bodies, through visual software and hardware simplified or amplified in data?)
  • the relationship between the gaze of the camera and the gaze of the subject it is viewing (especially in facial tracking) and the tension of power between the two

Thinking of that I want to (and will) create a program that only allows us to see/read something (i.e. an image, text) "clearly" (not blurry) if we squint. We squint when something we see is too bright, and too small (or when we need corrective lenses)--squinting makes us aware of the limits of our eyes when confronted with certain aspects of the material world.

Another limit I came across: the face tracking templates couldn't see the difference between the resting state of my eyes and when they were squinting (mathematically, it was tricky to define a reliable threshold delineating when my eyes (let alone anyone's eyes) were squinting)--I kind of like to think that the face tracker was "squinting"  at my "squinting" eyes.

I then worked with Golan to make a custom classifier that would differentiate between my "resting face" and my "squinting face," but the implementation of this technique went over my head.

I will try to get this up and working with some additional help.

Some thoughts on how this interaction between camera, motion tracking and the subject could exist in the world at large:

I think it would be interesting to see this idea implemented as a method to see images online, especially graphic images. What if "sensitive" images could only be seen "clearly" (in their full resolution) if we squinted at them. The effort of squinting (a lot of facial muscles are involved) reminds us that seeing is an active, bodily function--we aren't just observers, we are witnesses.

 

meh-Body

Link to p5js: https://editor.p5js.org/meij_who/sketches/yhAr76fDF

Inspiration from one of the earliest sci-fi film A Trip To The Moon(1902). The idea started with me accidentally found out how to create scratchy film effect, so I decided to do something that feels like stop-motion film. I initially used the distance from upper lip to lower lip to detect the mouth opening, and it can become less accurate as I move farther from the screen. Therefore, for detecting eye blinking, I compare the current eye height and eye height of the previous frame to get a more accurate blinking result. I also try to figure out the math in creating concentric circles with the rotation of the head, but the face sometimes goes out of the circles. If more time is given, I will scale the size of the facial features according to my distance from the camera, and add rotation to the face to make it more realistic. It will also be nice if i can create a projectile motion for the spaceship to land on the right eye of the moon:)

(A fun little music video I made for The Distance To The Moon by L CON)

 

rysun-LookingOutwards03

Looking Outwards #3

Kimchi and Chips, Light Barrier (2014), Convex mirrors, projection, scanning

I am very intrigued by how Kimchi and Chips managed to create floating three-dimensional objects which traverse space and time by meticulously calibrating beams of light. The piece is able to create three-dimensional animations and depict a variety of shapes. The lights achieve a holographic effect, and some of the animations are reminiscent of nebulae and supernovae. Creating a mirage of three-dimensional objects is something I would personally be very interested in making, as they are immersive.

Link to Project: https://kimchiandchips.com/works/lightbarrier/

Video:

ilovit-Reading03

Struggling with a new technology or medium, figuring out how to make it do what I want is not my favorite part of the artistic process (not that I dislike this part). I like most the part where it comes together into something interesting. I'm more comfortable working in spaces where I'm confidant in my abilities. This means that I naturally tend towards already established spaces, away from technological novelty.

Just because the focus is on making something interesting rather than only playing with new forms, doesn't mean it always becomes what Michael Naimark calls last word art. What makes a piece seem interesting might just be its novelty. You never know until time passes whether you were actually making something to last, or if it was only interesting because it was new. Being the first to do something has its only kind of legacy, but only if that thing amounts to something on its own.

lsh-Reading03

As technology advances we will always be bombarded by a series of novel use cases of technology for art. Exploring the new and novel is not inherently wrong, but it is worth considering the reason for any goals of pioneering a medium. Kyle McDonald had an interesting critique on the need to claim first or define an incremental change as groundbreaking.

There is an undeniable ego to artists proclaiming themselves as pioneers. Importantly, many of the First & Last authors mentioned in the article have a deep understanding of the history of their medium, which likely contributed to their understanding of a possible future and novelty.

I would hope the goal of this exploration is in order to find new ways to connect with those interacting with art. Marshall McLuhan has discussed the importance of medium, and it is possible that these new mediums of work will help a series of artists connect in a way we never expected.

vikz-Reading-03

"First Word Art" and "Last Word Art" are both terms that I have been exposed to before, and my general stance that I continue to take is that both can be considered as "true art". I strongly disagree with the stance that "first word art" is not considered art, because I do not believe that mastery has to take place in order for a piece to be considered "art". Rather, I believe in that art can take an exploratory nature and serve as a catalyst for other movements and/or works; to me, this sort of effect serves an even greater purpose.

I believe my interests lie more so within the realm of "first word art". Rather than create the "ultimate" perfected piece and/or artwork of a certain sort of style, I much rather enjoy exploring new concepts that may inspire and provoke others. I enjoy seeing the possibility of extension and further exploration that could ensue after my work, rather than my actual final work, at times.

Although we aspire to make things of lasting importance, many times our creations do not age well. Many times, this could be a result of not designing and/or creating for the future without future-design thinking in mind. From a design standpoint, Jamais Cascio's three main critiques for designing for the future can be applied here: 1) Does my scenario and/or product focus only on technological advances and miss the day-to-day of everyday life, 2) Does my scenario assume everything will work and miss the possible failures and unintended uses and 3) Does my scenario only focus on the dominant classes and ignore the broader impacts of society? When considering future works incorporating novel technology, we can often fail to consider our work these lenses, consequently failing in creating things of endurance and longevity.

 

meh-Reading03

I agree with the essay that a lot of art actually lie between first word art and last word art and the boundary between the two should not be clearly defined. Art are always built upon the ideas of each other, directly or indirectly, while originality still exists, so I tend to not define myself in the spectrum. Similarly, the development of technology should not be classified into first word art or last word art. Therefore,to respond to the idea that technologically novel works don't always age well, I believe that even though the work itself might fall out of trend very soon due to its experimental nature, it still provides valuable experience to the successors to learn from, which actually extends its lifespan into the culture/trend rather than shortens it. Culture is not created by one single pioneer work but anyone who are influenced by the precedents in the field and passes down the influence to others through their own works.

szh-Reading03

I think my interests are located in between both first word and last word art. I'm intrigued by the possibilities that new media art can offer -- first word art -- but the ways I want to use new media have been experimented before and I enjoy being able to use what others have discovered. My interested center around technologies that already exist in our culture and seeing what more we can do with them. Technologies can shape our culture the same way that culture can shape technologies; the perspective that we have towards it affects the possibilities and usages we see that technology offers.

Being able to create / invent a way of thinking that can leave a mark in our culture/society is certainly appealing, but I feel as though, especially in today's world, creating something that is entirely novel is difficult and near impossible. I think that we mostly are able to take what has previously been create and see them in new lights, give them new perspectives. It's this sort of reasoning that makes me feel like I am in the middle of the spectrum between first and last word art because I want to be able to use what has already be discovered and experimented with before but give it a twist, make it my own.

szh-Interruptions

Observations:

  1. The artwork is square with a border from the edge of the frame to the cluster of lines.
  2. The lines are are short and are all the same size.
  3. There are many lines in clusters that are spread about half of the lines' length.
  4. There are "holes" within the clusters of lines. These holes seem to be at most the area of 5 lines length. Generally they are smaller.
  5. The way that the lines seem to be clustered is mostly vertical or up to a 45 degree angle. Some are more (almost vertical), but not as many.
  6. The lines overlap slightly but for the most part, seem to be given its own space (side to side). There is slightly overlap row to row (this is rather consistent).
  7. Sometimes, observation 5 is flipped, so that most lines are horizontal rather than vertical.
  8.  Around the hole, there is less overlap between the lines and more lines are simply "floating" (not touching anything else).
  9. The gaps are at odd shapes ranging from more rectangular to small tiny circles. Other gaps are just larger spaces in between each overlap of the lines. The gaps in its entirety only compensates for a small percentage of the canvas.
  10. Some of the lines are repetitively at the same angle (side to side).

Code

At first the result I made looked like the image below, but I felt as though my scatter of the lines weren't as long / random (?) as Molnar's. I increased the scale factor my lines, and when drawing them, I also added a factor to increase the scale as its drawn. Making the lines look the way I want was particularly hard, especially since I had the most struggle with finding a way to rotate the lines (since rotate() in p5.js turns the entire canvas, and not just the lines I'm looking at).

For the actual interruption, I used Perlin noise to achieve the effect you see above. Overall, this assignment was really interesting to see how I can achieve the look of this project, trying to figure it out piece by piece.

 

 

vingu – Reading 02

Question 1A. Something you like which exhibits effective complexity.  Where does your selection sit between total order and total randomness.

Snake scales are closer to total order. A snake morph is a genetic mutation that makes a snake look different than commonly expected (visual indicators). Some morphs can be predicted since most follow the punnet square rule (ie dominant, recessive, het). However, not all morphs are consistent/can be predicted since they can be spread out across different genes and we don't know which gene causes which morph. Hence, there are many combinations (python has like 100+ morphs). Some morphs can have repeated patterns, random blobs, scaleless snakes.

The blacktailed cribo is a simple example, but other snakes have many many morphs that can be hard to predict. Most morphs are discovered by people breeding snakes, so a lot of morphs have not been discovered yet.

false water cobra

hypomelanistic false water cobra

lavender false water cobra

Question 1B.  Problem of Authenticity.

The argument is that if the computer expresses itself that the artist can not anticipate, does it's randomness still qualify for the artist's expression? I believe that it is still the artist's expression. The artist created the code and system for the computer to execute.I see computers as a tool for randomization and computation  (like how paint, pens, etc are tools).