Author: es4515

MONAD – Eva Solo – Marcela

The experience of creating MONAD allowed me to apply the newly developed concept of ‘interaction’ into art, to an extent far out of my previously formed comfort zone. Reflecting back on my initial understanding of ‘interaction’, I had assumed it was a synonym of ‘communication’ and meant something along the lines of input = output. Throughout the duration of this course, I was able to recognise the value of creating an experience for the user with depth of meaning, as this element is precisely what evokes an emotional response from the audience. I had previously lacked the experience of an audience interacting with my creations, thus I had assumed my ‘work’ is done once the final touches where added to the projects. Gaining the understanding of the connection between the art and the audience, through hand-on practice, is the aspect that has transformed my outlook on the process of design and development, and has highlighted MONAD as a milestone in my personal development as an aspiring creator.  Through this reflection, I will recognise the design thinking process, the production, as well as the reasoning why MONAD has had such a significant impact on my self-realisation.

INSPIRATION

The evolution of MONAD began with a question to self: “What experience do I want to create for my audience?”. The previous default mode has always been: What can I create? The differentiation at my starting point acknowledges two key elements that I drew my attention to: The Experience and The Audience. I want to evoke emotion, I want my audience to raise questions. From this point I had, on a technical level acknowledged the following: I will be using my learnt skills from this course (Arduino&Processing) in the creation of an art experience that engulfs the user’s senses of vision and hearing, with the added element of meaningful message translation (that, for those open to it, will not only raise questions of self, but their surrounding environment also). This brief outline alined with my understanding of ‘interactivity’, as I focused on the stimulation of one’s mind through challenging their understanding of existentialist questions, while prioritising evoking a feeling of ‘comfort’ through my experience as this atmosphere would make one’s mind more open and susceptible to new ideas. The user would not only be interacting with my project on a physical (touch) level, but will also be provoked to respond to a situation they have no previous experience in. 

PILOT

To me, Art represents a story; a story of the creator’s feeling, a story of an experience, a story of understanding. I chose to tell a story on my current reflection on life. For one, I rarely share my views on the world with the public as they tend to be labeled as ‘far-reach’, or ‘not-(though societal lens)-realistic. Using interactive creating as a medium to have these conversations with the general public was an incentive to launch the project, despite the position of vulnerability that sharing core-beliefs may bring. I had reconfirmed for myself that whatever the response is towards the piece (or the concept as a whole) was going to be, positive/confusion/criticism/ even misunderstanding, – was going to be valid, because I don’t doubt myself (thus criticism on my views would not personally affect me), and my aim is to provoke an emotional response (and based on this factor I can evaluate the success of my interactive experience, as I want to spark curiosity for audience to ask questions). 

CONCEPTIOLIZING

Choosing such a complex and broad topic required for me to actually define how I understand the circulation of life, society, environment, and everything in-between. After this was completed, I began extracting points I want to share for the purpose of bringing a new perspective to a person with a fully stable understanding of their current state. I had realised how fast-pace the global world is, and how little time most society citizens take to communicate and respond to themselves, their true desires, their true intentions. From this line of thinking it would be assumed that the individual has formed an understanding of self, and even if this is true, not many of us take the time to think how we formed to be who we are. Yes, we acknowledge that our past experiences, cultural backgrounds, and the extent of opportunity has situationally developed the current self, but is that who we actually are? 

A Monad is the smallest unit in scientific terms, “an elementary individual substance that reflects the order of the world and from which material properties are derived” in the philosophy sphere, and represents the ‘one’s self’ in my production. I chose this concept, as I believe each one of us is the fundamental centre point to our own personal-interpretation of the world. In simple words, each one of us – is the centre of our own universe, and as much as it is important to be a global citizen for the betterment of the world, it is equally as important to take great care of your immediate environment as it is the ‘location’ that directly affects you on an every-moment bases. My Monad, the physical sculpture, is the representation of the user, or the concept of ‘an individual’ in our society. The visual projection onto the piece, is the representation of ‘our environment’. The audio-curatorial is the source translating the message (and was later developed into the sculpture directly addressing the user). As I finally conceptualised the technicalities, I formed a strong sense of what exactly I was aiming to evoke from the experience and could start building.

DESIGN

SCULPTURE

The sculpture, being the focal point of the experience and the metaphorical “you”, was built with the intent of being viewed from all 360 degree angles and thus was built on a rotating glass-table surface. As I decided to provoke the some-what radical (*reference based on feedback) idea of a person being a reflection of their environment, I chose to use reflective mirror surfaces to symbolise this aspect. Although I am throwing this idea out as a radical-truth, my point is not to convince you of its validity, nor is it demonstrate my full devotion to it’s ideas, – the point is for the user to question their own understanding of these concepts. The mirror surfaces were layered on top of cardboard- as this material in my project embodies the core of ones physical being in its construction phase. The wire webs guzzling from the cardboard- are too a signifier of ‘in progress development’. I constructed MONAD layer by layer, starting from the ‘skeleton’ (*What was presented in user testing), building with on-top with materials such as wire, cardboard, reflective surfaces, digitally fabricated laser cut elements (metaphor for collecting experiences and growing from them), and forming the shape with intent: in the middle hidden cave (the heart, the core, the soul – whatever your interpretation suggests the concept of consciousness/ the deeper-self) – this section was constructed by aligning six mirror surfaces in a formation that followed the reflection from one surface to the next – a continuous reflection representing the hidden gem that’s beneath  the surface level. This area is still highly visible, yet requires closer physical distance and attentive viewing. Another aesthetic element I focused on was the ‘front / back’ representation. From the front MONAD is symmetrical, clean, showing their best self to the public, yet the cardboard peeking through the back is bringing attention to the fact that we are all at a constant development, no one is perfect, and as simple as that sounds, we need to be reminded of these things with the influx of social media affects on mental health for my generation. As I built the piece, I was asking myself in every-step how the audience will be impacted by my choices. This heavy interrogation was the factor allowing me to understand that I must add handles for the piece to be movable. The handle design was essential in signifying their availability for usage to the audience, as art usually has a ‘do not touch’ sign close by.  I chose a monochromatic theme for the colour pallet, and tried to execute it to my best extent, as I was aware of the array of colours I wanted to project on-top and did not want to create an overwhelming visual aesthetic. The size was also a variable I experimented with and had decided on the parameters best suitable for the dramatic effect I was trying to evoke:  60 cm – diameter of foundation surface, 40 cm – approximate diameter of focal piece (varied through levels), 60 cm – heigh of sculpture. While all of the inspiration was motivating me to create, I realised I wanted the audience to feel this rush of excitement and thus knew I had to allow them to create something of their own in this experience also. The mirror surfaces were reflecting the projection and created light interaction on the walls around it. From this I began planning the display arrangements and how I could incorporate the users creating their own visuals while engulfed in the experience.  

UserTesting video

VISUAL PROJECTION

I began this stage of the process by coding my own animation in Processing. I will note here: This is the part of the production that was unsuccessful in achieving to my desired aesthetic appeal. My sketches were not visually stimulating enough and made me source online for alternative options. Jumping forward to post-reflection, I would most absolutely tackle this part to be my own animation from start to finish, and wish I had more flexibility on what was being displayed. My choice of the DeepDream video captures meaning, as the randomly generated morphing of colours and patters is a great representation of an abstract concept of ‘surroundings’. Many users would ask ‘Was that a dog I just saw?’ or ‘Was that a man’s face?’, I would explain DeepDream and follow up with a ‘you see what you want to see, you attach your own meaning to the visual queues’.  

AUDIO-CURITORIAL

The audio-track was the element that contributed to the ‘evoking of emotion’ in a great extent. I first wanted to provide directions for the user the move the sculpture, or direct their eyes, but as I recorded the improv text, I realised the affect I could extract by switching my point of view to MONAD being the speaker. This realisation followed me creating the appropriate setting in my room, placing the pod-cast microphone on a chair in the middle, and embodying this creation I was making to have a voice, to have a flair, to have character. I then chose my favourite section- 2:20 duration (I experimented with lengths from 30seconds to 4 minutes, and around 2 minutes was the sweet-spot which could maintain focus, translate the message, yet was concise in its delivery). The tone of voice was also something I tested based on a few variations, and chose the tract that sounded calm, collected, confident, at-times condescending, and direct. The editorial process consisted of layering static noise on top of the narration, and altering the sound levels for a coherent and captivating track. The detail in sound fluctuation asserted the element of headphones to be essential in indulging in the full experience, as all background-drone noise would be canceled out. 

INTEGRATION

Although I developed all of the elements simultaneously, their integration with each other was the final stage of the experience production. At first I was pairing the visuals and the audio, till I came to the conclusion that the sculpture and the animation —- thus the user’s ability to create a light visual — could be experienced separately, since the audio- curatorial seemingly came out intense. As I considered my audience, I did not have a particular target group in mind, but I had noticed (as stated above) that I had created an experience for someone with a fully developed understanding of the world, and I did not want to limit the population that could view my work. A button that would trigger the audio-tour for those sure of their desire to indulge in the full ride, while the animation is running on loop for others, such as children, to still be able to experience the production (just without the philosophical questions). I used Processing to import the DeepDream animation on the full screen, Arduino Serial-Communication to allow the button input to be translated to Audio Play function to the headphones. 

I have painted these as inspiration for my code, which helped me source DeepDream as an alternative.

AUDIANCE (FABRICATION&PRODUCTION)

I was fortunate enough to have three test runs, where people were able to interact with MONAD and give feedback. Above all, this part of the learning opportunity has been the most enriching. I was able to see my creation at three different stages of production, and how that impacted the response. I will briefly touch on the first two-trails, and the factors that contributed to the third-showing being a success on my personal-criteria for this project.

From the first two viewings I had noted the effect of the audio, and the curiosity of the wall reflections. Focusing in on these elements and the overall display aesthetic, I was able to showcase my piece precisely how I had envisioned it for the IMA SHOW.

The placement of the projector (as well as the aesthetic of the projector) was something I had not devoted attention to till it was brought to my attention during Class Presentation. Altering this element with the addition of a portable LED projector, that could be moulded from the side of the table, truly changed the experience I was creating. In preparation of the show I spend a little over an hour purely focusing the the angels and distance of the projector. This preparation allowed me to achieve the visual wall reflections that I had envisioned to be intentional. 

During the show I had a large pool of people interacting with my project, differentiating in age, cultural background, and from my assumption in understanding of life. The most notable response I recorded was the moment the audio-tract would finish, and the user slowly reached to take the headphones off. For those who seemed to not just hear, but listen, the audio provoked an a response. How am I so confided in saying this? Well, their eyes said far more than words would express. It was very touching to see people being affected by my efforts. Those who I identified as listeners (as a creator standing 5 feet away from the user, it is evident how intrigued and how willing they are to interact, if at all), almost all after putting down the headphones approached me with questions. The conversations I was having during the show reminded me why I am a creator in the first place – which is interesting to consider as I’ve never had an experience as such before. With some, we discussed the physical layout: A Sir, who introduced himself as an Art teacher, and I conversed on the topic of symmetry and the rotation. He had noted how my explained symbols added to the meaning of the sculpture. Another man, who was a fan of Deep Dream productions, and I discussed how I captured the ‘abstract’ surroundings through this medium. We were having this conversation as a little girl (5-8 years of age) was turning MONAD at a constant speed looking at the wall visuals (for over 2-3 minutes), the man and I were able to reflect on another person interacting with the sculpture, and here I acknowledged how the addition of the button was allowing this experience to happen. I fairly enjoyed explaining my concepts to people who do not relate a single bit. As I explained the concept in more detail to a group of 5 people, a lady was quick to intervene “YOUR understanding”- with presenting something as such I chose my words very carefully and to note responses of defence once again flashed me back to my initial production stages and how I craved to get such a vast scale of differentiating responses. I saw how kids interacted with the sculpture – most of the attention focused on the wall reflections. Those who share the love of art asked questions, and seemed very curious to learn more. For some that came into the experience with a positive attitude, but placed the headphones down with confusion – I hope I spared something, anything, I hope they felt even if the conceptual understanding was not fully formed. From my production outline, the ending of the IMA show checked the last box: Did I evoke an emotional response? To which, I had gathered a whole bunch of responses, not two alike, but all very meaningful additions to my personal feedback analysis. 

AFTER-MATH

The assets I had collected from the show wall visuals are currently being edited as a continuation of MONAD’s production. I documented photos and videos, which I will attach in raw form, and am digitally altering them in Adobe Photoshop. 

The changes I would implement for this to be a full running experience would start with a private viewing room. This would further push the user outside of the comfort zone as there are new familiarities to ‘save’ you from around, thus drawing your full focus into the experience. With the new space, I would of course test out the projection direction and would want to experiment with its expect from a projection screening downwards from above. As I mentioned, I would also made full creative control of the animated story. This production, although extremely enriching to make, and very fulfilling in response, is most defiantly in its newborn stages. I am now envisioning raising the height of the piece, thus having more surface area to reflect the user made wall visuals. 

It is fairly difficult to try to summarise this production concisely and in detail, as this project was much more than an assignment. I was able to incorporate what I learned in the course into my passion, and create something I am proud of. This creation sparked conversations with people on deep topics without any ice-breakers, and enriched my view on the world and society. I had begun this project with the intent of exploring my understanding of this life and through the ability to share it with an audience I did precisely that – leant about people’s behaviour, spoke to them about feelings and emotions, and even retained new information that has since developed my ever so changing outlook on the universe. The possibilities for creating an interactive experience are not limited to input = output. This creation communicated with the audience, and thus they wanted to communicate with me, which above all signals that my interactive endeavour was successful for the personal development of my one-self.

(most of the videos were too long to upload, but I managed to attach some of my favourite snippets from the Show)

IMG_9319.TRIM 2

IMG_9316.TRIM 3

IMG_9409.TRIM

Thank you to our IMA Community for inspiring, supporting, and flourishing my journey, this has been undeniably the most fulfilling creation I have developed yet.

In today’s recitation I was experimenting with live video recordings and their visual manipulation based on Arduino input. In class this week we were able to explore some of the filters that Processing can apply on videos, and I was fairly intrigued. The freedom of choice for this recitation allowed me to further see how I can manipulate video and user input.  I actually think this relates to the topic of AI image training, as I am fascinated with DeepDream. This semester I have been heavily researching and exploring the world of AI Art, and digital image recognition as well as random generative art. Levin’s article is very encouraging to read for beginners in the world of the Digital Creating, as it breaks down the basis of interactivity and its obtainability. The text highlighted some of the main aspects I was able to answer for myself through the duration of exploring ‘interactivity’ : intent is important – the ability to conceptualise with a purpose will allow for a better end product; technology is the quickly growing future foundation for all other systems – thus it is important for my generation to fully take advantage of the inventions; constantly brainstorm – this aspect is more abstract, but the exploration of interactive projects and user input has enriched my development process as I always consider for as many possible outcomes as I can realise, and then try to push myself to think of a few more. IMA has taught me diligence in my work ethic, and that most of the time it will take a few times till you’ll be able to achieve exactly what you envision. But the most important thing I was able to learn is that, regardless of the outcome, the process of creating is the most enriching experience, and learning to accept and adapt from one experience/creation to the next –  that is when you truly utilise the ability to learn from yourself. 

Technology in, and with Art is a beautiful advancement we are at the bridge of witnessing. I personally really enjoy viewing generative art, which is achieved by a particular trained model producing a visual output based on some pre-determinate perimeters. In a sense, I would go as far as saying that is spontaneous ; – although what is the criteria for being able to be spontaneous? can a non-live ‘thing’ be spontaneous? This is another tunnels I wonder in when considering art and the computer, and more specifically art that is created with limited human input. When I consider the extent of value the technology was able to be for me, in a form of a tool while I create – I can truly grasp how new these concepts are in retrospect to the historic timeline. I think this niche is something I am going to continue to explore, as its potential for inspiration currently seems infinite – isn’t it like every day we hear about new technological advances that are going to change the future! .. I also think it will have big influences on the art movements, and the way our time will be represented in terms of visual creations. *and of course not just visual, but audible,  interactive, etc.

In this recitation I decided to attend the Serial- Communication session to refresh my knowledge on sending information from Arduino to Processing. I was pervasively struggling to understand the sequence of events that needed to be followed to get the result on the screen. I realised my mistake was the inability to locate the correct ports, thus my code couldn’t be tested. I used the printArray(Serial.list()); to locate the correct port from the list and was able to continue. As the potentiometers are more than familiar in setup with all of our practice, the first step was simple to follow: making the location of the ellipses on the screen adjustable with the two potentiometers. We also added a button, and I was testing how processing could receive the output value if (valueFromArduino == 1)   if I used serialWright, instead of println(). I had to switch the jumper cabels a few times to locate the correct legs for power, ground, and connection. While working with the button in this recitation, I am beginning to consider the integration of this function into my final project, as it could be the receiving end of the input from the user initiating the experience.

Since I am planning to have a video looping as the projection onto the sculpture, I would like some sort of an indicator of when the audio should start playing. A button would work very well for this purpose as it could be located right by the headset, with some sort of instructions to push when ready to start the audio curatorial. 

I have began building the code for my final setup, which includes the audio and the video files being called in one sketch. The audio will begin when the button is pushed, but I want to achieve the result of the video looping uninterruptedly. I was able to get this to work on a separate sketch: 

import processing.video.*;
Movie myMovie;

void setup() {
fullScreen();
myMovie = new Movie(this, “deep.mov”);
myMovie.loop();
}

void draw() {
image(myMovie, 0, 0);
}

void movieEvent(Movie m) {
m.read();
}

I am currently struggling in combining the two medias into one fluid experience. My issues always arise on the Arduino side, I will reach out for some help before presentation day. The Workshop was very helpful in regards to my final project progression!!