MA Visual Arts Course 2008-10

TUTORIAL REPORT & FEEDBACK FORM

Student to complete this and email to tutor or place a copy in the staff mailbox within one week of a tutorial / feedback request

Pathway:

MADA

Name: Takolwan May Promjiem                                                      Date: 07/07/10

Issues discussed/Subject:

- Final pieces

- exhibition details

- Processing issues

- project development

- confirming dates for handing in work

- ppd

- blog progress

Comments/Notes

-          better understanding of goals

-          better understanding of structuring workflow

-          clearly defined and understood dates of handing in work

-          assured guidance of direction the project is to develop into

Name of Tutor: Andrew Stiff

Sign:   Takolwan may Promjiem                                                      Date: 22/06/10

Realise the Project Proposal and prepare towards final exhibition:

http://visuallythinkingsemiotics.wordpress.com/2010/07/05/1w962w46-untitled-2/

http://visuallythinkingsemiotics.wordpress.com/2010/07/05/1w952w45-untitled-1/

http://visuallythinkingsemiotics.wordpress.com/2010/06/29/1w862w36-tutorial-session-22062010/

http://visuallythinkingsemiotics.wordpress.com/2010/05/30/1w832w33-untitled-1-2-work-in-progress/

The realisation stage came quite late for the project. I had concepts in my head but wasn’t too sure how i was going to piece it all together and which programme to best use. The work in progress post identified to me what needed to be done and what i wanted to achieve. The tutorial session with andy helped me to define and pinpoint what needed to be done and the posts titled “untitled 1″ and “untitled 2″ allowed me to define my pieces in a clearer perspective so that both i, myself, knew what i was trying to achieve and also what i was expecting to deliver to the user/audience.

i chose these 4 entries to evidence this learning outcome as it shows the progress of the realisation of the pieces. it shows myself defining my pieces; reflecting on them with andy and discussing them and then breaking each piece down and showing both the advantages and disadvantages that occurred in the creation of the pieces; along with testing results.

Present a resolved body of creative practice that has evidenced the systematic enhancement of your knowledge and understanding:

http://visuallythinkingsemiotics.wordpress.com/2010/01/17/1w692w19-decode-decoded/

I chose this entry because the decode exhibition allowed me to see what was possible with my work and with Processing. It highlighted for me what was possible and also how audience interaction played an important role within digital media and it also showed me the communication process that occurs between viewer and piece when in a given space.

http://visuallythinkingsemiotics.wordpress.com/2010/07/04/1w922w42-matthijs-munnik/

I chose this entry because without Matthijs assistance, I would have been lost. It is more an entry for myself that after this MA is completed, i will come back to this post and try to do each guideline as pointed out by Matthijs so that i can finally accomplish what i initially wanted to do… create Untitled 2 in Processing as opposed to Max/Jitter.

http://visuallythinkingsemiotics.wordpress.com/2010/03/03/1w802w30-i-think-survey-up-finally/

I chose this entry as conducting the survey and finding and analysing the outcome had a good impact on my work. it allowed me to make sure that i was going in the correct direction and also to see what both my users and target audience wanted to see and also how they see. i felt the outcome of the survey influential during the creation and testing process of my works.

http://visuallythinkingsemiotics.wordpress.com/2010/05/31/1w842w34-flash-in-progress/

this entry is chosen as it shows my development stage. it shows the inital testing of an actual physical piece and also what i derived from it after managing to sort out the code to get it to work. it may seem like a simple entry and a simple task but for me, it was the starting point to Untitled 1.

Analyse and reflect coherently upon your own practice and others through your presentation at the programmed symposium forming a synthesis of your practice-based research:

http://susanmort.wordpress.com/page/7/

I choose this because i commented directly to susan regarding her work and hope that it has helped move her project in the direction she wanted to see it move in.

http://visuallythinkingsemiotics.wordpress.com/2010/07/04/1w882w38-symposium-outcomes/

This is chosen as it is regarding my symposium and the responses that i recieved as well as the answers that i gave to the queries. I found it an interesting experience to have a response back from the half-way completed work. luckily the group were supportive with my work and i felt i was able to relate my practical practise to the theory behind it and it made sense to everyone. I wanted the work to be a complete whole and not separated into unit 1, research essay, project propsal etc. I wanted all the elements within this course to flow from one another.. like a journey and therefore i wanted to ensure that all the theory and work that resulted to the final pieces were culminations of the work that had occurred throughout the 2 years.

Summarise your overall progress and formulate a constructive plan for continuing Personal and Professional Development:

http://visuallythinkingsemiotics.wordpress.com/2010/07/04/1w882w38-symposium-outcomes/

This is chosen as it’s a complete summary of my work as well as my future endeavours in terms of collaborating with other organisations to further explore disability design as a whole and not so that it’s centralised on one specific topic – ie this project.

http://visuallythinkingsemiotics.wordpress.com/2010/05/30/1w82-2w32-exhibition-chaos/

I chose this because it has my viewpoints on art and that it is a subjective matter.

http://visuallythinkingsemiotics.wordpress.com/2010/03/02/1w78-2w78-digital-digital-i-am-all-about-the-digital/

This is chosen because i feel that i am part of the wider digital realm and as a designer within this realm, it is part of my duty to push the boundaries and to keep things fresh and innovative.

Future endeavours would entail to continue to learn Processing and Max and further explore the avenues related to these programs. I’d also like to explore Optical Flow which i stumbled upon during my research for blob detection. I’d also like to be able to create some more works that entail live webcam feed via Flash and to see if there are any possibilities to merge Processing/Max/Jitter and Flash together.

It’d also be good to keep collaborating with the online MA group as I feel we’re all supportive of each other’s work and there is a diversity of skills that would make for an interesting collaboration.

Who knows what the future holds.. there are literally no limits to the digital world

The piece consists of 24 static dots that are placed on a grid format and projected. The user will use their hand to cast over the dots and at each placement where their hand is cast; the relevant music track is played.

Initially I wanted the user to see their own shadow in black and white behind the grid but then i felt that this was too intrusive and beyond what the crux of the piece was.

The piece is a direct response to Rodger’s convergence model and a homage, you can say, to john cages’ 4:33 piece where the user was the composer although there was a score written out already.

the wall and user interact and as all the dots look similar, the user has to be able to utilise the wall and “communicate” with it in order to obtain an understanding as to what sounds relate to which dot. this back and forth is reminiscent of rodger’s model.

The ability for the user to compose their own song is reminiscent of Cages’ 4:33 as the user is utilising the sound around them to create their own music. the samples are supplied but it is up to them to create the piece.

The initial problems with creating the piece is that i couldn’t create it in processing. I had to turn to Max. With limited time, i only came out with a basic creation that hopefully will be extended after the completion of the MA so that it looks more interesting visually.

upon Rabhia’s comment regarding the piece when it is not interacted with, i created a swarm affect and wanted this to switch between the grid section when the piece detects interaction. However, i couldnt find a patch that would allow me to flip between the interacted/non-interacted state and felt that as time was running out, the essential part was to get the grid up and runnign and working.

the other problem was the colour detection. I tried to get the grid to detect black shadows but it could only manage to detect the colour red. therefore, i had to work with this and have now given the user a red glove from which they can use to interact with the wall.

i hope the setup will work and that users find it fun and interesting.

i tested the piece with a few friends and their responses demonstrated that they were engaged with the wall and after exploring the various sounds it could make, they became aware of rhythm and beats and trying to line up the sounds.

The samples on the grid are made up of bass, drums, melody and mixed instrumentals. i didn’t get time to loop the tracks properly so there is a cut between each loop playback. in a way i liked this missing gap as it would mean the user would have to concentrate more on trying to line up the beats properly together.

let’s hope it comes across that way lol

I wanted to create a piece that was a direct translation of the music itself. Therefore to do this I chose to use the Sound computeSpectrum code that is available in the later versions of Flash.

I asked Winston to supply me with the different instrumental tracks for the song Puzzle. He sent me over the bass, guitar, drums, strings, vocals and piano parts to the song; as well as the song itself with all the parts complete.

I decided to divide up the song as i wanted each circle to represent each instrumental part. I wanted the user to be able to visualise each part and see how they interact with each other.

Below the circles, I wanted to show the frequency of the music to denote the “volume” of the piece to the user as this is what would be one of the main elements that were missing to them.

Here is the outcome of the piece:

During the making of the piece, I tested the use of 1 circle juxtaposed with 1 line and how this would work out. The response from testing subjects was that it was too confusing and they didn’t understand the concept.

here is one of the tests:

http://www.pixelwires.com/piece2.swf

why circles and lines? because that’s what musical notes are constructed of mainly.

“

The Dot:

“The dot is an abstract concept, which indicates precise tertainty the locality of a junction, a meaning, an intersection etc. in graphic terms the dot or point is a materialised area, recognizable by the human eye. a dot seldom appears as an individual element but generally takes it meaning from a relationship with another sign. the geometric dot comes to symbolize the expression of centre.

The line:

the eye at first draws a line to represent the shortest distance between two points and is able to visualize crossovers only on further consideration. a juxtaposition of dots simlates a line, inviting completion. on this basis we could say that every linear expression consists of a dot set into motion.

humans have always moved on the horizontal plane. for this reason their optical capacity is mainly direced laterally . as a result of age-old inherited exertions we find that our field of vision is much more extensive in the horizontal dimension than in the vertical.

( signs and symbols: their design and meaning – adrian frutiger)

“

therefore based on the above deciphering of shapes and symbols, i decided to play around with the layout of the dots and lines that i wanted to incorporate into my works.

I decided to emphasize the dots and minimise the lines only to relate to completeness. I wanted the dots to pulsate to represent rhythm, beats and the lines to reflect frequency. We’re all used to seeing graphic equalizers and i wanted to relate my work to that but without using blocks as i didnt feel these were representative of the way music is presented on a musical score.

musical notes are basically circles. they sit on a stave which is constructed of 5 lines. the placement of the dots relates to their representative sound and the note on which it is played on a particular instrument. the tail of the note ( the line extending from the circle upwards or downwards) doesnt really relate to the note sound itself. it is merely an indication of the duration at which that note is held. therefore my emphasis was drawn mainly to circles primarily and lines as a secondary element.

I played around with the placement of the dots and lines on a blank canvas. their size, their distance apart, the overlapping and the horizontal and vertical layout of the shapes within the space of the page.

The space of the page was to represent the display screen that the shapes would be presented on.

I found that, true to the research, it was more natural to read the dots in a horizontal plane. it was also interesting to see the visual conveyance the shapes had depending upon their placement and the overlapping nature didnt seem natural to the eye.

i wanted the shapes to be as natural to the user as much as possible. this was so that they can easily “visually read” the dots so that their eye dances up and down the screen as though it were a part of the music.

Why? Because I was running out of time and I knew that no matter how much perseverence i did with it; i wouldnt be able to figure it out because i seriously suck big time at code.

So i chose to look at Max MSP as an alternative. I had slightly under 2 weeks to figure it out and try to get my act together. I have friends who are sound engineers and they’d always told me from the start I should do Max instead of Processing as it’s more “sound related” but I figured it’s more a sound-friendly programme as opposed to an actual programme that’s for design. basically put, i chose processing because it seemed to relate more to visuals whereas Max, after reading the wiki ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_(software) ) seemed to be for people who emphasis was on sound.

fair enough my work is related to sound but the crux of the matter is that it was a visual translation of sound that I wanted to experiment with.  the sound, to me, was secondary in a way to the visuals.

Anyway, i went along with it and to my surprise it was wayyyy easier than processing. The code was already there. The tutorials were there. I was advised by friends to check out Jitter and OpenGL as they’d have tutorials on what i wanted to do so i could piece it together.

And I managed to make it

it took a lot of work.. trust me.. i wont lie that there weren’t nights where i’d chain-smoked 3 cigarettes whilst having tears streaming down my face.. but it was nice to know that there were tutorials out there that showed that what i wanted to do was actually possible. Non of this Optical Flow malarky that looked like i needed a PHD in nuclear engineering physics or some complex high-level MIT degree before i could even start to code! lol.

so.. for those of you who are interested.. i found the Max site a big help and the tutorials a bigger help! I downloaded and installed the programme which you can try for 30 days.

http://cycling74.com/

It has pretty much everything i needed to get started and the trickier bits i needed to call my friends to help me out with. I have to say a big thank you to my friends for all their help! i couldn’t have finished the work without them! they were on hand at stupid hours of the night/morning to correct my patches and objects.. it’s good to have you guys in my life!

his work was similar to what i was trying to accomplish with my work. So i managed to find his email address on his portfolio website and I contacted him to ask him questions about his piece and if he could give me some advice.

Here is the email trail:

Hi Matthijs,

My name is May. I saw your colour aquarium and was interested to know how you created that?
sorry to be sending you random emails. i’m basically an MA student and i’ve just learnt Processing but what i’m trying to make is beyond any info that i can find in books.

basically what i want to make is similar to your colour aquarium. i want lots of dots to float around on the screen and each dot has a different musical instrument sample attached to it. when the user stands in front of the screen, when their shadow “hits” a certain dot, the music of that dot will play.

so simply put, the body of the user is the composer of the music.

but my deadline for the MA project is in 2 weeks and i’m still struggling to find any info on webcam interaction with Processing. everything uses mouse
please can you help me?! any info on what libraries etc. to use would be really really appreciated

Here is his response:

Hey,

Thanks, yea I can give you some pointers

But thank you, Matthijs, for helping me in my hour of need. I hope one day that I can accomplish your guidance and fulfil it to the best of my ability. For now, I’ll have to put it on hold. i hope one day soon i’ll be able to create the installation piece as was originally intended.. in Processing and i hope it will look as amazing as your Colour Aquarium work

anyway, i digress. the book is great! it taught me what i needed to get started and there were lots of examples and exercises.
The book is this and they also have a website too:

http://www.learningprocessing.com/

So after reading it, i thought i’d take a look at some examples from openprocessing.com it’s a great site that shows you what other people out there are doing with Processing.

I took a look at some examples and the code source and tried to play around with it. The only problem started when I wanted to change the mouse interactivity to blob detection. I had no idea how that was done and I tried to Google for it under many guises of different names this so-called blob detection could be termed.

I failed. I found Optical Flow and Gesture and Activity Recognition Toolkit (GART) and some other things which, as much as they looked amazing and cool to try to learn as a future endeavour, it was not really what i needed for the project.

So what did i do? I had to go back to Vimeo and do a search through that. I read some more on Processing in the hope of finding something and I also posted up on the Processing.org forum again.

I was at a complete lost.

So I decided to take a look at Max MSP as an alternative.

The survey that I conducted on Survey Monkey was collaborated and analysed. It turned out that outcomes were as I expected but it was also good to ensure that what I had been researching and the results that I had accummulated through all the reading were pointing in the right direction.

The only downfall is that I would’ve liked for a wider response from people with hearing impairments as the majority of responses were from people with no hearing disabilities.

I was extremely pleased with the open questions where people were able to express their opinions on. The level of intelligence that I received through the responses were interesting and diverse. It goes to show that not only do people care enough to take time out to complete the survey; but that they gave truthful and insightful responses that were of use to me.

I was pleased to have recieved at least 1 response from a fully deaf person. I was also pleased that i had managed to open and introduce the video link of the sound pattern to at least one person who appreciated it in and was thankful to have been shown the video

It’s always interesting to find out that as diverse the internet is; there are always areas that are undiscovered and the power of “mouth-of-word” never ceases to amaze me ^^

may_unit_2_essay

Here it is in a downloadable pdf format:

http://www.pixelwires.com/may_unit_2_essay.pdf