Questions about Creativity Assessment

about Creativity assessment, be recognized by the System, freedom of the artist and material approach

Although quantification of the creative process is delusive,  it is hard to escape from it nowadays. How to assess creativity is though, and highly subjective, thus should not to be trusted as a source for inspiration.

Should creativity aims for an academic success, that is a “delivery”, this creativity will be formatted in such a way that will fit external constraints determined in order to “please” a bureaucratic system. This is the time for the artist to choose whether or not to belong in the system, and be “recognized” or not by it.

My creative approach is coming from the material not from preconceived ideas, although as an artist researcher, I do have areas of investigation.  I would play with codes as I play with wire or wood, painting, or servo motors.  Exploring the material, understanding its limits and its powers, listening to its properties, I trust my right brain, my intuitions, to lead the left brain, the maker, to create and help my artistic quest. Which material or technology I should use and what it will lead me to build?  This holistic approach is antagonist to the process of looking for the material adapted to a predefined work.

Should this be assessed , it would have to be by the term of the project not during its processing , as a “clear” picture and  stop frame would be wrong and unfaithful to the final “product”. Although, recognition of the effort put in the work could and should be assessed.

Curators , galleries, art fairs, art advisors are “gates” , artists have to cross to get to their audience.  Artists send their artwork through those gates, wishing for a positive response. When permission is denied, they can choose to adapt their work to the gates or to go on generating other artworks which could get the granted permission to be shared with the public .

Alternatively , could I choose to not care about how the system will index me ? If the answer is yes, can I stay in this system? How strong , how careless should I be? Does it matter to fit?  How worth is it to surrender to the frame versus staying in an individual and lonely process? What is worth in my artistic making: processing or sharing? Is it linked to the ability to be self centered? or to a unshakeable faith in my artistic process? If there were no one to understand my art piece, here and now, would I stop being an artist?

Things about other Artists and installations

In term of inspiration, I am looking at Rebecca Horn and her machines with souls, Calder and  Tinguely for their kinetic installations, to Bruno Munari and his Movimento Arte Concreta, the Italian movement for concrete art and more recently at Christian Boltanski for his shadow sculptures.

and also reading Simanowski, R. 2011, Digital Art and Meaning Reading Kinetic Poetry, Text Machines, Mapping Art, and Interactive Installations and  Slater, C 2015, MIT Press Alien Agency Experimental Encounters with Art in the Making

I am also inspired by the creative process as exposed in Compelling Image: Mask Improvisation for Actor Training and Performance Paperback – 31 Oct 1996 by Sears Eldredge (Author)

Questions about framing the artistic process in academia

about Creativity assessment, be recognized by the System, freedom of the artist and material approach

“Prototype A  – Presentation for the MA continued development of your project so that it fully realises some of the features which you previously sketched out.(assessed) : 5%”

I developed mixed feelings about the compatibility between my artistic process and an academic frame. How to assess creativity is though, and highly subjective, thus not to be trusted as a source for inspiration.

Should creativity aims for an academic success, that is a “delivery”, this creativity will be formatted in such a way that will fit external constraints determined in order to “please” a bureaucratic system. Thus the importance of choosing to belong or not in the system, to be able to use it and be “recognized” by the system.

My creative approach is from the material not from preconceived ideas, although as an artist researcher, I do have a area of investigation.  For example,   play with codes and trust the focus from the right brain who will lead to create an algorithm which help my investigations . In my process, I trust my intuition, right brain again, about which material , equipment, technology I should use and finding out how to use it as opposed to try to create a predefined work and in the process creating an artwork for the purpose I was looking for.

Although, recognition of the effort put in the work could and should be assessed., while processing the work there is neither a  “clear” picture neither a stop frame faithful to the final “product”. Similarly,  is it relevant to judge a painting by it sketches ? I should be free to create my work at my own path.

 

This raises questions about my art practice. Could I choose to not care about how whatever system will index me ? If the answer is yes, can I stay in this systems? How strong , how careless should I be? Does it matter to fit?  How worth is it to surrender to the frame versus staying in an individual and lonely process? What is worth in the artistic making: processing or sharing?

Is it linked to the ability to be self centered and deaf to my environment?  or to a strong belief in my artistic process? If there were no one to understand my art piece, here and now, would I stop being an artist?

02/06/2018

  1. Script for a Network of Artefacts
  2. Coding
  3. Prototyping

 

Questions on where to start?

First iteration , where to start?

  •  how many type of artefacts for each set? which type of sensor, actuators : sound, light sensors, motors ….
  • mechanical interactions rather than serial interaction
  • more precise sketch with the mask in , working as a gate what is the link with the network of artefacts? how the mask activate the network?
  • look at this work for inspiration :

3D printing fabric exploration

3D printing ideas and download : https://www.myminifactory.com/

control the movment of a servo :

Worked :

motor A, continuous servo is activated by sound, holder A turn and stop. While turning, touch holder B which  in turn activate motor B , servo 180  ” nervous servo”. Using two arduinos.  

to do :

  • use only one arduino, stabilise the holders
  • test other fabrics for nervous servo, and elastic thread to fabric from servo, shibori technic to enclose artifacts
  • transfer to textile circuits with Attiny 85
  • add a sound producing ,  Speaker playing a short record
  • add EMF transmitter
  1. looking for a script for the network of artifacts
  2. Coding, knitted patterns 
  3. Prototyping ,knitting and actuators

 

Questions about objects sensing the world

Imagine Communication between objects through their tactile properties

sensors to the world (other machines, human and environment)

plan to use a spin drum on the top of the servo A. work with catch dreamer format as it spin, and automata spinner Robert Race, carousel toy , spin

Plan to encapsulate Two servo motors, A and B

  • Environment produce shadow/ sound/ light …… and trigger A
  • A motor on
  • A turn and hit B ( every time or randomly)
  • B motor on
  • B produce sound
  •  
<When Sensing EMF from electronic devices you have on you
 The nodes move A / Nodes = textile + SERVO   / Osc control  / Nodes  sound B , if no EMF>

<Building a matrix ( resisitive or capacitive) sensors > , in order to map touch by machines,  exchanging  OSC messages

Tutorial, inspirations

Questions about scripts

How to stage a

Network of artifacts????

 ChatBot exploration

  • <create a surrealist “conversation”between the nodes and with the nodes>
  • use the bibi dictionary as a base, binary system with letters , “Ho, He, BikEDa” , translated into shapes
    • code the binary letters, still to be done, shape equivalence bibiDico
    • http://www.graner.net/nicolas/nombres/bibibinaire.php
  • work with pattern making in processing , to create the “landscape” of the cell? 

 Embedded Signal

Signal can be embedded in an object by adding textured patterns or by modifying an object’s natural texture.This form of watermarking is currently employed to track sensitive or high-value machine parts and to identify containers carrying toxic or hazardous materials. Three-dimensional objects also raise the possibility of encoding signal by arranging artistic elements in space”

  • No one has trespassed the border, the nodes are “talking”/ interacting with each other.
  • Someone crossed the border, his face is snapshot by the LAO mask, the nodes stopped talking to each other, mirroring/ framing/hiding/revealing the human.
  • Human is crossing back, when he is out of the “view”, the nodes are “talking” again, they are talking about him, something about this human remains with the nodes to “talk” about.
  • inspiration : chinese whispers, 1 ,2 ,3 soleil, gossip, bid/offer and how news are spread across exchange markets and transformed into (non)tangible assets, lemurs and their group behaviour
  • border is a framing a door for accessing the nodes world , behind the screen, nodes , projecting their shadows on screen . on the order side the viewers trying to pass

 Secret conversations

UCCC : Ekman,U Ubiquitous Computing, Complexity and Culture, 2016 Edited by Ulrik Ekman, Jay David Bolter, Lily Díaz, Morten Søndergaard, Maria Engberg – Routledge, p125 Irene Mavrommati :  “Ubiquitous computing (Ubicomp ) are complex computing systems; they can also be understood as ecologies of artifacts, services, people, and infrastructure. Systems with such complexity can be approached as component-based systems. …Component based systems are independent systems with loose coupling of interchangeable parts, which communicate via interfaces.”

AmI : http://blog.teleplanglobe.no/ami-and-internet-of-things ,“The encrypted tunnels allow the private network to communicate privately over public networks.” “The way devices communicate, in a mesh network of devices”

 create a Network of artefacts , interacting with each others and with people
Slip in two groups, on two different locations

-When “alone”, the artefacts are moving accordingly to patterns generated by one algorithm and data previously collected, input/ parameters should include time and location
-When a presence is detected, new data are collected and new patterns, movement, sound or visual are generated, informations are processed , some of them shared to the viewer, so he could modify its input.
-The two groups will evolve to separate species after few iterations, even if they started identical

(Uncanny space).

– using the programming publish-suscribe concepts?

– artefacts moving accordingly to patterns generated by cellular automata algorithms ( ref simulating neural transmissions, synaptic caguama by Lozano-Hemmer)?  make them evolve with genetic algorithm ( the more people looking at them, ref Jessica Field)?

– repulsion / attraction systems, 10 prints, L systems, machine learning, MaxMSP , using OpenData to map to a visual. Use of OSC touch on my mobile to draw.artefacts mixing digital and analog making, embedded with sensors and OSC technology, talking to each other while receiving data from external input ( open data?)

 

  • algorithms to work on : GA, CA, particle systems,L system
  • technology for input : OSC touch , kinect,OpenData access, web Scraping
  • technology for output : machine learning, rasperry pi, 

draft scenario

  • Input is human , through sensors or data collecting. Output group 1 is visual- Output group 2 is sonic
  • If there is no input, the group 1 are drawing some shapes and machines of group 2 are reacting to the drawings by making sounds,
  • If there is some external input group 1 is taking the input and changes the patterns of its drawing , sending informations to the group 2,  having a private conversation between them . machine 2 output as sounds responding,
  • If the two groups have people , they count the people, the group with more people will have the possibility to evolve and/ or making more noise/ expanding drawings….

 the machine talks to each other in a foreign language

the machine talks to each other in a foreign language, we gave and forgot about it , they still talk this language< Check the ASCII control characters table from old teletype days>

 

<Define the Network of artefacts contolled via OSC touch?  Network is the Mask, its artefacts are the nodes>

 Listen to the Other via EMF

<the machines will feel the EMF on visitor ‘s body and react with sounds or visuals>

Question about Network characterization

Reviewing different ways for the characterization of the Network and first tests on how about telling a story with sensors and motors?

About Sensing and controlling the physical world with computers. O’Sullivan, D., & Igoe, T. (2004). Boston, MA: Thomson. interesting quotes about “lost” characters in ASCII table “Another point of confusion stems from the fact that the first 32 entries in the ASII table are control characters, like the “carriage return”( ASCII 13) and “line feed”( ASCII 10), are familiar to you from word processing. Some of them, like “bell”(ASII 7), are left over from the old teletype days. Sending these numbers can cause confusion in environments that can only interpret text characters becaue either nothing shos up, or you get a bunch of garbage characters( square, smiley faces, and other dingbat characters).p142

It is noticeable that the machines talk to each other in a foreign language, we gave and forgot about it , they still talk this language. How about checking the ASCII control characters table from old teletype days>?

Possibility to define the Network of artefacts controlled via OSC touch?  Network would be the Mask, its artifacts,  the nodes.

network projects its desire onto us- through its material affordances, AfNet

Artists references and approaches to the concept of Network and cybernetic behaviour :