I cannot decide if this is video or photography anyone want to help me out?
FINA-S 300 Video Art
9/30/11
9/28/11
Comment on blog
This is a very interesting work. I never thought of art and science as the way Malina had thought of it, but it makes perfect sense. Also, experimentation is a great way to discover new art forms, where one uses whatever one wishes to use. It make sme think of all the times that I wanted to make an outrageous piece of art (whether for myself or for class) and founf materials in places I never thought possible.
I like the phrase "simulation of the unknown" when Dietrich refers to the use of computers in art. This makes me think that art will never follow a certain form, that there will always be new types out there and new techniques to explore.
I like the phrase "simulation of the unknown" when Dietrich refers to the use of computers in art. This makes me think that art will never follow a certain form, that there will always be new types out there and new techniques to explore.
Jernigan comment
I used to sketch all the time as a kid, always working on something, and then I started messing with some computer programs. I really enjoyed the computer for its ability to easily duplicate things and provide guides to assure symmetrical compositions. Woody Vasulka said that he shares the creative process of is work with a machine, his computer, and his explorations with it. I do as well. I still draw on paper sometimes, but with the programs/technology available in the digital area you can do things that are viable in ourcommunication based world.
Our reading tells us that Vasulkas combination of art and computing revealed a finiteness in conjuction to mans image making capabilities. Everyday in some area, technology is becoming capable of revealing our inability to keep up with it. Computers can do many things fasterthan us, and we are adapting with it. Vasulka is said to have approached his machine as a symbiosis. I think that more and more of us, especially digital natives, feel the same.
Our reading tells us that Vasulkas combination of art and computing revealed a finiteness in conjuction to mans image making capabilities. Everyday in some area, technology is becoming capable of revealing our inability to keep up with it. Computers can do many things fasterthan us, and we are adapting with it. Vasulka is said to have approached his machine as a symbiosis. I think that more and more of us, especially digital natives, feel the same.
My comment to the article we were to read
every time i tried to comment, i was taken to a page saying an error had occured, something about cookie support, and becuase i didn't want to be counted off, i figured the only way i could comment was through a post, so, here's my comment to our reading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, so, to be perfectly honest, this is the 2nd time i'm writing this because my comp flickered from a poweroutage and so i'm going to try my best to remember what it was i previously wrote. Ahem (clears mental throat)
So, this article was horribly confusing and yet made sense. I couldn't get through it without taking several breaks else risking my eyes crossing and blurring, and i also couldn't get through it without my trusty dictionary close to my hand. The techical jargon alone was what probably made it hard for me to follow to a certain extent, but i think i get the main idea, so here I go. But first, i need to sidetrack slightly.
I'm in a History of Photography class right now, and one of the main things we keep hitting upon as we slowly move forward in time as the camera was developed, is how people argued whether photography could be considered art or not. There were those that argued that because images were created by a technical means, a machine constructed through science, it couldn't possibly be considered art because art is something created by the soul and then put onto a 2D plane. Of course, then you have the other side of people arguing that it photography IS art because it isn't about the camera, it's about the image and what the photographer was trying to capture in the image (or something like that).
I can't help but feel that this article is basically an argument that it's now the computer's turn to fight for the right to be termed 'art'.
Something that caught my eye and i really liked was at the beginning of the article, where it spoke of how Milan viewed art and science as being on the same level, that science was simply a journey of knowledge, and art was a journey of the senses. Well, it this is true, then surely art can be created by anything, even mechanical means, right?
As i see it, art isn't something just made with an afterthought. It's an extenal expression of an internal moment, or feeling. Art is what someone created from a moment when they were struck with inspiration and felt the overwhelming urge to bring it to life in a physical realm so that it could be seen not just inside by one person, but that it could be viewed by others and give them a chance to feel what someone else felt, or thought, or dreamed, imagined, wished, etc.
Now, the computer is a machine. It's technical, it's science, but it was created out of a need for something wished or imagined, and that flows with my opinion of how art is made, so the way i see it, computers are most certainly a form of art of themselves, so they must be capable of MAKING art too. People express themselves through different means, whether it be paint and paper, or flashing lights and weird noises generated from a machine.
Art isn't something insignificant. Even a toddler putting his handprint on a piece of paper is usually overjoyed by such a simple mark on a cut down tree that's been pulped and pummeled into a flat line of substance. Art is confusing, sometimes hard to understand, sometimes breathtaking and sometimes terrifying, but so long as someone can feel something from it, then in my opinion it is art. It is what it is.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, so, to be perfectly honest, this is the 2nd time i'm writing this because my comp flickered from a poweroutage and so i'm going to try my best to remember what it was i previously wrote. Ahem (clears mental throat)
So, this article was horribly confusing and yet made sense. I couldn't get through it without taking several breaks else risking my eyes crossing and blurring, and i also couldn't get through it without my trusty dictionary close to my hand. The techical jargon alone was what probably made it hard for me to follow to a certain extent, but i think i get the main idea, so here I go. But first, i need to sidetrack slightly.
I'm in a History of Photography class right now, and one of the main things we keep hitting upon as we slowly move forward in time as the camera was developed, is how people argued whether photography could be considered art or not. There were those that argued that because images were created by a technical means, a machine constructed through science, it couldn't possibly be considered art because art is something created by the soul and then put onto a 2D plane. Of course, then you have the other side of people arguing that it photography IS art because it isn't about the camera, it's about the image and what the photographer was trying to capture in the image (or something like that).
I can't help but feel that this article is basically an argument that it's now the computer's turn to fight for the right to be termed 'art'.
Something that caught my eye and i really liked was at the beginning of the article, where it spoke of how Milan viewed art and science as being on the same level, that science was simply a journey of knowledge, and art was a journey of the senses. Well, it this is true, then surely art can be created by anything, even mechanical means, right?
As i see it, art isn't something just made with an afterthought. It's an extenal expression of an internal moment, or feeling. Art is what someone created from a moment when they were struck with inspiration and felt the overwhelming urge to bring it to life in a physical realm so that it could be seen not just inside by one person, but that it could be viewed by others and give them a chance to feel what someone else felt, or thought, or dreamed, imagined, wished, etc.
Now, the computer is a machine. It's technical, it's science, but it was created out of a need for something wished or imagined, and that flows with my opinion of how art is made, so the way i see it, computers are most certainly a form of art of themselves, so they must be capable of MAKING art too. People express themselves through different means, whether it be paint and paper, or flashing lights and weird noises generated from a machine.
Art isn't something insignificant. Even a toddler putting his handprint on a piece of paper is usually overjoyed by such a simple mark on a cut down tree that's been pulped and pummeled into a flat line of substance. Art is confusing, sometimes hard to understand, sometimes breathtaking and sometimes terrifying, but so long as someone can feel something from it, then in my opinion it is art. It is what it is.
9/26/11
Art from brain activity
My friend sent me this link for a website detailing how scientists have been able to transform brain activity into moving images.
http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/09/24/scientists_turn_brain_activity_into_moving_images.html
http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/09/24/scientists_turn_brain_activity_into_moving_images.html
IMAGE PROCESSING: New Ways of Seeing
Your assignment is to produce three image-processing explorations. These explorations are due on Oct. 3rd (20 points). You are to explore layering filters upon the moving image and taking notes of their visual vocabularies and relationships they hold with your footage. Post your three explorations on the blog (Via Vimeo) before class on the 3rd (all in one video please), you are to pick your favorite from the three and extend it into a larger video piece (2-3min).
This is the start of Assignment 2 (100 Points): Extend one of your favorite image processing techniques you discovered into a finished video (2-3min.) piece DUE Oct. 10th. To go along with these explorations and the finished piece or pieces is an artist statement, sketches, and notes. These are required to accompany the final piece(s). It is required to record within the notes the filters that you used, and the stacking order of them for each image or video (I will accept screen shots of filters). Observe how the filter changes the image. Does it allow you to see the image in a new way? How does the process or filter conceptually balance with the images you process? It is extremely important to find that balance. Make sure you think of a thought provoking title. Work submitted without any of the above criteria will be docked one letter grade on the assignment. You will have in class time to work on this Sept. 28th & Oct. 5th. In this time you need to be showing me your work in progress. Those who fail to show me work in progress and discuss with me their ideas be docked one letter grade. All material must be posted to the blog before class on the 10th & a full-res AVI. file must be turned in that day. We will critique on the 10th and part of the 12th if needed.
9/23/11
Sketch Book CHECK>>>This Coming Week
I will be collecting your sketchbooks/notes that you have been taking for these past four weeks, on Wed. the 28th, for a preliminary check before I grade them for Mid-Terms. See syllabus for more details of sketchbook. If you have any questions email me or post comments on this blogpost.
9/22/11
Signal Processing | Video Synthesis | Image Processing (+Reading)
A Rough Guide to Analog Video Synthesis:
READ this ARTICLE and comment on It within the comment section on this post for (20 Points): The Computer: A Tool for Thought-Experiments <<<< PDF: ONLY read the 1. Physical-Sensual-Mental 315-318 pg. and Machine Vision: Looking Through Machine Eyes 321-322 pg. Comments should be posted by WED. Sept. 28th. Come to class ready to discuss. (If everyone doesn't post a comment of quality, there will be a Quiz on the 28th TESTING topics in the reading.)
MORE - WATCH ALL OF THESE:
Sums & Difference by Gary Hill
Devils Circuit by Ito Takashi
Form Data Form by Jason Bernagozzi
C-Trend by Woody Vasulka
Black or White by Marisa Olson
BEATLES ELECTRONIQUES by Nam June Paik
READ this ARTICLE and comment on It within the comment section on this post for (20 Points): The Computer: A Tool for Thought-Experiments <<<< PDF: ONLY read the 1. Physical-Sensual-Mental 315-318 pg. and Machine Vision: Looking Through Machine Eyes 321-322 pg. Comments should be posted by WED. Sept. 28th. Come to class ready to discuss. (If everyone doesn't post a comment of quality, there will be a Quiz on the 28th TESTING topics in the reading.)
MORE - WATCH ALL OF THESE:
Sums & Difference by Gary Hill
Devils Circuit by Ito Takashi
Form Data Form by Jason Bernagozzi
C-Trend by Woody Vasulka
Black or White by Marisa Olson
BEATLES ELECTRONIQUES by Nam June Paik
Coming From Behind
Sorry there's no audio, i was having enough trouble just trying to get the video to show up on vimeo so i could get the embed info so i could put this on the blog!
9/21/11
The Johnny Cash Project
Taken from Youtube, this is a very interesting collaborative piece comprised of single frames sent in from people all over the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)