Sticky Postings
By fabric | ch
-----
As we continue to lack a decent search engine on this blog and as we don't use a "tag cloud" ... This post could help navigate through the updated content on | rblg (as of 09.2023), via all its tags!
FIND BELOW ALL THE TAGS THAT CAN BE USED TO NAVIGATE IN THE CONTENTS OF | RBLG BLOG:
(to be seen just below if you're navigating on the blog's html pages or here for rss readers)
--
Note that we had to hit the "pause" button on our reblogging activities a while ago (mainly because we ran out of time, but also because we received complaints from a major image stock company about some images that were displayed on | rblg, an activity that we felt was still "fair use" - we've never made any money or advertised on this site).
Nevertheless, we continue to publish from time to time information on the activities of fabric | ch, or content directly related to its work (documentation).
Friday, February 09. 2024
Note: as part of a year-long preliminary research into digital exhibitions, we teamed up with the Nam June Paik Art Center (South Korea) - and their incredible collection and archive of Nam June Paik's works -, as well as ECAL/University of Art and Design Lausanne, to deliver initial thoughts and proofs of concept.
Late last year saw the publication of Mnemosyne, a book on "History and Research in Arts and Design" (ed. Davide Fornari, published by ECAL/University of Art and Design Lausanne (HES-SO)).
In this context, I had the chance to be in conversation with NJPAC curator Sang Ae Park about this joint research. Among other topics, we discussed the unrealized piece – at the time – "Symphony for 20 rooms" (1961) by Nam June Paik as a potential inspiration for "remote" exhibitions, at home.
This discussion gave ground to the paper "A Symphony for Nam June Paik, Digitally" (below), while this preliminary research is likely to continue in the form of a longer-term research.
-----
By Patrick Keller
Wednesday, November 30. 2022
Thursday, November 22. 2018
Note: open since last September and seen here and there, this exhibition at the Withney about the uses of rules and code in art. It follows a similar exhibition - and historical as well - this year at the MOMA, Thinking Machines. This certainly demonstrates an increasing desire and interest in the historization of six decades - five in the context of this show - of "art & technologies" (not yet "design & technologies", while "architecture and digital" was done at the CCA).
Those six decades remained almost under the radar for long and there will be obviously a lot of work to do to write this epic!
Interesting in the context of the Whitney exhibition are the many sub-topics developed:
- Rule, Instruction, Algorithm: Ideas as Form /
- Rule, Instruction, Algorithm: Generative Measures /
- Rule, Instruction, Algorithm: Collapsing Instruction and Form /
- Signal, Sequence, Resolution: Image Resequenced /
- Signal, Sequence, Resolution: Liberating the Signal /
- Signal, Sequence, Resolution: Realities Encoded /
- Augmented Reality: Tamiko Thiel
Via Whitney Museum of American Art
-----
.jpg)
Programmed: Rules, Codes, and Choreographies in Art, 1965–2018 establishes connections between works of art based on instructions, spanning over fifty years of conceptual, video, and computational art. The pieces in the exhibition are all “programmed” using instructions, sets of rules, and code, but they also address the use of programming in their creation. The exhibition links two strands of artistic exploration: the first examines the program as instructions, rules, and algorithms with a focus on conceptual art practices and their emphasis on ideas as the driving force behind the art; the second strand engages with the use of instructions and algorithms to manipulate the TV program, its apparatus, and signals or image sequences. Featuring works drawn from the Whitney’s collection, Programmed looks back at predecessors of computational art and shows how the ideas addressed in those earlier works have evolved in contemporary artistic practices. At a time when our world is increasingly driven by automated systems, Programmed traces how rules and instructions in art have both responded to and been shaped by technologies, resulting in profound changes to our image culture.
The exhibition is organized by Christiane Paul, Adjunct Curator of Digital Art, and Carol Mancusi-Ungaro, Melva Bucksbaum Associate Director for Conservation and Research, with Clémence White, curatorial assistant.
Monday, August 13. 2018
Note: just after archiving the MOMA exhibition on | rblg, here comes a small post by Eliza Pertigkiozoglou about the Architecture Machine Group at MIT, same period somehow. This groundbreaking architecture teaching unit and research experience that then led to the MIT Media Lab (Beatriz Colomina spoke about it in its research about design teaching and "Radical Pedagogies" - we spoke about it already on | rblg in the context of a book about the Black Mountain College).
The post details Urban 5, one of the first project the group developed that was supposed to help (anybody) develop an architecture project, in an interactive way. This story is also very well explained and detailed by Orit Halpern in the recent book by CCA: When is the Digital in Architecture?
Also some intersting posts about Max Bense, Christopher Alexander, Cedric Price and Gordon Pask on the same Medium account.
Via Medium
-----
By Eliza Pertigkiozoglou
URBAN 5’s overlay and the IBM 2250 model 1 cathode ray-tube used for URBAN 5 (source: openarchitectures.com)
Nicholas Negroponte (1943) founded in 1967, together with Leon Groisser, the Architecture Machine Group (Arch Mac) at MIT, which later in 1985 transformed to MIT Media Lab. Negroponte’s vision was an architecture machine that would turn the design process into a dialogue, altering the traditional human-machine dynamics. His approach was significantly influenced by recent discussion on artificial intelligence, cybernetics, conversation theory, technologies for learning, sketch recognition and representation. Arch Mac laboratory combined architecture, engineering and computing to develop architectural applications and artificially intelligent interfaces that question the design process and the role of its actors.
The Architecture Machine’s computer and interface installation (source:radical-pedagogies.com)
Urban 5 was the first research project of the lab developed in 1973, as an improved version of Urban 2. Interestingly, in his book “Architecture Machine” Negroponte explains, evaluate and criticize Urban5, contemplating on the successes and insufficiencies of the program that aimed to serve as a “toy” for experimentation rather than a tool to handle real design problems. It was “a system that could monitor design procedures” and not design tool by itself. As explained in the book, Urban’s 5 original goal was to “study the desirability and feasibility of conversing with a machine about environmental design project… using the computer as an objective mirror of the user’s own design criteria and form decisions; reflecting formed from a larger information base than the user’s personal experience”.
Urban 5 communicated with the architect-user first by giving him instructions, then by learning from him and eventually by dialoguing with him. Two languages were employed for that communication: graphic language and English language. The graphic language was using the abstract representation of cubes (nouns). The English language was text appearing on the screen (verbs). The cubes could be added incrementally and had qualities, such as sunlight, visual and acoustical privacy, which could be explicitly assigned by the user or implicitly by the machine. When the user was first introduced to the software, the software was providing instructions. Then the user could could explicitly assign criteria or generate forms graphically in different contexts. What Negroponte called context was defined by mode, which referred to different display modes that allow the designer different kinds of operations. For example, in the TOPO mode the architect can manipulate topography in plan, while in the DRAW mode he/she can manipulate the viewing mode and the physical elements. In the final stage of this human-machine relationship there was a dialogue between designer and the computer :when there was an inconsistency between the assigned criteria and the generated form, the computer informed the architect and he/she could choose the next step: ignore, postpone, and alter the criterion or the form.
Source: The Architecture Machine, Negroponte
Negreponte’s criticism give an insight of Arch Mac’s explorations, goals and self-reflection on the research project. To Negroponte, Urban 5 insufficiency was summarized in four main points. First, it was based on assumptions of the design process that can be denuded: architecture is additive(accumulation of cubes), labels are symbols and design is non-deterministic. Also, it offered specific and predetermined design services. Although different combinations could produce numerous results, they were still finite. The designer has always to decide what should be the next step in the cross-reference between the contexts/modes, without any suggestion or feedback from the computer. Last point of his criticism was that Urban 5 interacts with only one designer and the interaction is strictly mediated through “a meager selection of communication artifacts”, meaning the keyboard and the screen. The medium and the language itself.
Although Urban 5 is a simple program with limited options, the points that are addressed are basically the constraints of current CAD programs. This is, up to an extent, expected, given the medium and the language frames the interaction between man and the machine.“The world view of culture is limited by the structure of the language which that culture uses.”(Whorf, 1956) The world view of a machine is similarly marked by linguistic structure”(1). Nevertheless, it seems that Negroponte’s and Arch Mac explorations were ahead of their time, offered an insight in human-machine design interactions, suggesting “true dialogue”. “Urban 5 suggests an evolutionary system, an intelligent system — but, in itself , is none of them”(2).
References:
(1),(2): Quotes of Negroponte from “The Architecture Machine” book -see below
-Negroponte Nicholas, The Architecture Machine: Towards a more human environment, MIT Press, 1970
- Wright Steenson Molly, Architectures of Information:Christofer Alexander, Cedric Price and Nicholas Negroponte & MIT’s Architecture Machine Group, Phd Thesis, Princeton, April 2014
https://openarchitectures.com/2011/10/27/an-interview-with-nicholas-negroponte/
Friday, July 13. 2018
Note: following the exhibition Thinking Machines: Art and Design in the Computer Age, 1959–1989 until last April at MOMA, images of the show appeared on the museum's website, with many references to projects. After Archeology of the Digital at CCA in Montreal between 2013-17, this is another good contribution to the history of the field and to the intricate relations between art, design, architecture and computing.
How cultural fields contributed to the shaping of this "mass stacked media" that is now built upon the combinations of computing machines, networks, interfaces, services, data, data centers, people, crowds, etc. is certainly largely underestimated.
Literature start to emerge, but it will take time to uncover what remained "out of the radars" for a very long period. They acted in fact as some sort of "avant-garde", not well estimated or identified enough, even by specialized institutions and at a time when the name "avant-garde" almost became a "s-word"... or was considered "dead".
Unfortunately, no publication seems to have been published in relation to the exhibition, on the contrary to the one at CCA, which is accompanied by two well documented books.
Via MOMA
-----
Thinking Machines: Art and Design in the Computer Age, 1959–1989
November 13, 2017–April 8, 2018 | The Museum of Modern Art
Drawn primarily from MoMA's collection, Thinking Machines: Art and Design in the Computer Age, 1959–1989 brings artworks produced using computers and computational thinking together with notable examples of computer and component design. The exhibition reveals how artists, architects, and designers operating at the vanguard of art and technology deployed computing as a means to reconsider artistic production. The artists featured in Thinking Machines exploited the potential of emerging technologies by inventing systems wholesale or by partnering with institutions and corporations that provided access to cutting-edge machines. They channeled the promise of computing into kinetic sculpture, plotter drawing, computer animation, and video installation. Photographers and architects likewise recognized these technologies' capacity to reconfigure human communities and the built environment.
Thinking Machines includes works by John Cage and Lejaren Hiller, Waldemar Cordeiro, Charles Csuri, Richard Hamilton, Alison Knowles, Beryl Korot, Vera Molnár, Cedric Price, and Stan VanDerBeek, alongside computers designed by Tamiko Thiel and others at Thinking Machines Corporation, IBM, Olivetti, and Apple Computer. The exhibition combines artworks, design objects, and architectural proposals to trace how computers transformed aesthetics and hierarchies, revealing how these thinking machines reshaped art making, working life, and social connections.
Organized by Sean Anderson, Associate Curator, Department of Architecture and Design, and Giampaolo Bianconi, Curatorial Assistant, Department of Media and Performance Art.
-
More images HERE.
Saturday, February 17. 2018
Note: a few pictures from fabric | ch retrospective at #EphemeralKunsthalleLausanne (disused factory Mayer & Soutter, nearby Lausanne in Renens).
The exhibition is being set up in the context of the production of a monographic book and is still open today (Saturday 17.02, 5.00-8.00 pm)!
By fabric | ch
-----
-
All images Ch. Guignard.
Sunday, December 14. 2014
Via iiclouds.org
-----
The third workshop we ran in the frame of I&IC with our guest researcher Matthew Plummer-Fernandez (Goldsmiths University) and the 2nd & 3rd year students (Ba) in Media & Interaction Design (ECAL) ended last Friday (| rblg note: on the 21st of Nov.) with interesting results. The workshop focused on small situated computing technologies that could collect, aggregate and/or “manipulate” data in automated ways (bots) and which would certainly need to heavily rely on cloud technologies due to their low storage and computing capacities. So to say “networked data objects” that will soon become very common, thanks to cheap new small computing devices (i.e. Raspberry Pis for diy applications) or sensors (i.e. Arduino, etc.) The title of the workshop was “Botcave”, which objective was explained by Matthew in a previous post.
The choice of this context of work was defined accordingly to our overall research objective, even though we knew that it wouldn’t address directly the “cloud computing” apparatus — something we learned to be a difficult approachduring the second workshop –, but that it would nonetheless question its interfaces and the way we experience the whole service. Especially the evolution of this apparatus through new types of everyday interactions and data generation.
Matthew Plummer-Fernandez (#Algopop) during the final presentation at the end of the research workshop.
Through this workshop, Matthew and the students definitely raised the following points and questions:
1° Small situated technologies that will soon spread everywhere will become heavy users of cloud based computing and data storage, as they have low storage and computing capacities. While they might just use and manipulate existing data (like some of the workshop projects — i.e. #Good vs. #Evil or Moody Printer) they will altogether and mainly also contribute to produce extra large additional quantities of them (i.e. Robinson Miner). Yet, the amount of meaningful data to be “pushed” and “treated” in the cloud remains a big question mark, as there will be (too) huge amounts of such data –Lucien will probably post something later about this subject: “fog computing“–, this might end up with the need for interdisciplinary teams to rethink cloud architectures.
2° Stored data are becoming “alive” or significant only when “manipulated”. It can be done by “analog users” of course, but in general it is now rather operated by rules and algorithms of different sorts (in the frame of this workshop: automated bots). Are these rules “situated” as well and possibly context aware (context intelligent) –i.e.Robinson Miner? Or are they somehow more abstract and located anywhere in the cloud? Both?
3° These “Networked Data Objects” (and soon “Network Data Everything”) will contribute to “babelize” users interactions and interfaces in all directions, paving the way for new types of combinations and experiences (creolization processes) — i.e. The Beast, The Like Hotline, Simon Coins, The Wifi Cracker could be considered as starting phases of such processes–. Cloud interfaces and computing will then become everyday “things” and when at “house”, new domestic objects with which we’ll have totally different interactions (this last point must still be discussed though as domesticity might not exist anymore according to Space Caviar).
Moody Printer – (Alexia Léchot, Benjamin Botros)
Moody Printer remains a basic conceptual proposal at this stage, where a hacked printer, connected to a Raspberry Pi that stays hidden (it would be located inside the printer), has access to weather information. Similarly to human beings, its “mood” can be affected by such inputs following some basic rules (good – bad, hot – cold, sunny – cloudy -rainy, etc.) The automated process then search for Google images according to its defined “mood” (direct link between “mood”, weather conditions and exhaustive list of words) and then autonomously start to print them.
A different kind of printer combined with weather monitoring.
The Beast – (Nicolas Nahornyj)
Top: Nicolas Nahornyj is presenting his project to the assembly. Bottom: the laptop and “the beast”.
The Beast is a device that asks to be fed with money at random times… It is your new laptop companion. To calm it down for a while, you must insert a coin in the slot provided for that purpose. If you don’t comply, not only will it continue to ask for money in a more frequent basis, but it will also randomly pick up an image that lie around on your hard drive, post it on a popular social network (i.e. Facebook, Pinterest, etc.) and then erase this image on your local disk. Slowly, The Beast will remove all images from your hard drive and post them online…
A different kind of slot machine combined with private files stealing.
Robinson – (Anne-Sophie Bazard, Jonas Lacôte, Pierre-Xavier Puissant)
Top: Pierre-Xavier Puissant is looking at the autonomous “minecrafting” of his bot. Bottom: the proposed bot container that take on the idea of cubic construction. It could be placed in your garden, in one of your room, then in your fridge, etc.
Robinson automates the procedural construction of MineCraft environments. To do so, the bot uses local weather information that is monitored by a weather sensor located inside the cubic box, attached to a Raspberry Pi located within the box as well. This sensor is looking for changes in temperature, humidity, etc. that then serve to change the building blocks and rules of constructions inside MineCraft (put your cube inside your fridge and it will start to build icy blocks, put it in a wet environment and it will construct with grass, etc.)
A different kind of thermometer combined with a construction game.
Note: Matthew Plummer-Fernandez also produced two (auto)MineCraft bots during the week of workshop. The first one is building environment according to fluctuations in the course of different market indexes while the second one is trying to build “shapes” to escape this first envirnment. These two bots are downloadable from theGithub repository that was realized during the workshop.
#Good vs. #Evil – (Maxime Castelli)
Top: a transformed car racing game. Bottom: a race is going on between two Twitter hashtags, materialized by two cars.
#Good vs. #Evil is a quite straightforward project. It is also a hack of an existing two racing cars game. Yet in this case, the bot is counting iterations of two hashtags on Twitter: #Good and #Evil. At each new iteration of one or the other word, the device gives an electric input to its associated car. The result is a slow and perpetual race car between “good” and “evil” through their online hashtags iterations.
A different kind of data visualization combined with racing cars.
The “Like” Hotline – (Mylène Dreyer, Caroline Buttet, Guillaume Cerdeira)
Top: Caroline Buttet and Mylène Dreyer are explaining their project. The screen of the laptop, which is a Facebook account is beamed on the left outer part of the image. Bottom: Caroline Buttet is using a hacked phone to “like” pages.
The “Like” Hotline is proposing to hack a regular phone and install a hotline bot on it. Connected to its online Facebook account that follows a few personalities and the posts they are making, the bot ask questions to the interlocutor which can then be answered by using the keypad on the phone. After navigating through a few choices, the bot hotline help you like a post on the social network.
A different kind of hotline combined with a social network.
Simoncoin – (Romain Cazier)
Top: Romain Cazier introducing its “coin” project. Bottom: the device combines an old “Simon” memory game with the production of digital coins.
Simoncoin was unfortunately not finished at the end of the week of workshop but was thought out in force details that would be too long to explain in this short presentation. Yet the main idea was to use the game logic of Simon to generate coins. In a parallel to the Bitcoins that are harder and harder to mill, Simon Coins are also more and more difficult to generate due to the game logic.
Another different kind of money combined with a memory game.
The Wifi Cracker – (Bastien Girshig, Martin Hertig)
Top: Bastien Girshig and Martin Hertig (left of Matthew Plummer-Fernandez) presenting. Middle and Bottom: the wifi password cracker slowly diplays the letters of the wifi password.
The Wifi Cracker is an object that you can independently leave in a space. It furtively looks a little bit like a clock, but it won’t display the time. Instead, it will look for available wifi networks in the area and start try to find their protected password (Bastien and Martin found a ready made process for that). The bot will test all possible combinations and it will take time. Once the device will have found the working password, it will use its round display to transmit the password. Letter by letter and slowly as well.
A different kind of cookoo clock combined with a password cracker.
Acknowledgments:
Lots of thanks to Matthew Plummer-Fernandez for its involvement and great workshop direction; Lucien Langton for its involvment, technical digging into Raspberry Pis, pictures and documentation; Nicolas Nova and Charles Chalas (from HEAD) so as Christophe Guignard, Christian Babski and Alain Bellet for taking part or helping during the final presentation. A special thanks to the students from ECAL involved in the project and the energy they’ve put into it: Anne-Sophie Bazard, Benjamin Botros, Maxime Castelli, Romain Cazier, Guillaume Cerdeira, Mylène Dreyer, Bastien Girshig, Jonas Lacôte, Alexia Léchot, Nicolas Nahornyj, Pierre-Xavier Puissant.
From left to right: Bastien Girshig, Martin Hertig (The Wifi Cracker project), Nicolas Nova, Matthew Plummer-Fernandez (#Algopop), a “mystery girl”, Christian Babski (in the background), Patrick Keller, Sebastian Vargas, Pierre Xavier-Puissant (Robinson Miner), Alain Bellet and Lucien Langton (taking the pictures…) during the final presentation on Friday.
Friday, September 05. 2014
A little bit of irony about skeuomorphism by Studio Moniker in their video for the "office of the future". It looks like the real offices of Google though, according to the many pictures that have populated the web about their offices interior design... I hope Google glasses don't make you see the world that way btw.
Via Moniker
-----
"In a world where workspaces need to be generic in order to accommodate multiple activities, Moniker and LRvH introduce skeuomorphism for the workspace.
Jump to synchronize the office floor with the kind of work you are doing!"
So, do you believe that Google employees are jumping too to synchronize their working space?
|
