System 1 I am not particularly proud of system 1 and I felt that it did an injustice to Ron Resch’s amazing project. I simply folded a piece of paper a couple of times and hoped for the best. How could someone devote so much time to folding paper? I just noted how the folds were making the paper raised and 3D. Nonetheless, I am proud of System 2 and System 3 and consider it a much better development from System 1. After class, I was inspired to take it further by coloring the shapes in. I had big ideas with keeping the paper in it’s natural raised shape (like in image 2). I wanted to paint them in coordinated colors. System 2 System 2 was the origination of my color wheel theme, which I used for my final blackspace and projection night sketch. I was inspired by Grace’s System 1 project that focused on folded paper and color. It made me think about which colors complement each other and how colors can be a system. I felt that my system 1 did not go as far as Ron Resch’s did. I did not have as much time to sit and figure out different rules for my paper folding. I wish that I did because the different variations would have been really interesting. Rather than folding the paper further I decided to go off of my end result from system 1. The folds I had created resulted in triangular shapes, which reminded me of color wheel cones. So, I grabbed a box of colored pencils and began coloring each triangle fold. The triangular outlines along the edges were primary colors. The next row of outlines were the mixes of the primary colors. The next row were the mixes of the secondary, creating the tertiary colors. I did this for about 6 sheets of paper. This resulted in different variations. I thought it would be easier to color each triangular outline. However, I found myself forgetting my own rules or not having the correct colored pencils. The next time I do this I would also not use colored pencils since they did not show as brightly as I wanted them to. Time was also a constraint. I set my project up about 4 hours before I had to leave my apartment. I thought that this would be an ample amount of time to finish up even more than 6 pieces of paper. However, I noticed that time was running out and I rushed the coloring process – which made the colors look too light. The chance of my error was high since I was working quickly towards the end. I wasn’t able to find certain colors and became frazzled. I think of myself as a processing sketch. I wrote the code for myself in the beginning (the rules of coloring and folding) but I was still subject to errors because of my state of mind and environment. System 3 Here are some images showing the progression of images I used for system 3. My initial goal was to take our in-class glitch code further and turn it into a system. I wanted to also incorporate parts of my conference project along the lines of digital influencers and corporate capitalism. I had recently read some articles about Elon Musk and the future of Tesla which prompted my to try and distort his face. I wasn’t too happy with the way it looked with Musk, mostly because I could not grasp how to utilize the glitch code with his face. I decided to use the original image during our in-class glitch code. The Kim Kardashian crying face is one of my favorite memes/cultural icons. Kim Kardashian is someone who is famous for being a businesswoman. Despite not being an actress or musician, she is incredibly famous and takes space in much of the media. The media that Kim Kardashian dominates gives me a sort of escapism from our capitalist culture. The thought of working 9 to 5 and sometimes even later, regardless of whether it’s a field I love or not, is almost soulless and tiring. It’s no wonder that people (including myself) find solace in the media and other trivial things that do not produce intellectual thought. Adorno labeled the media we use as a distraction as the culture industry, which was my system 3’s original name. I had fun playing around with glitch code. Especially, with adding polygons and watching their actions around the glitch art. However, after showing it in class I wondered if using Kim Kardashian’s face was trivial. So, I coded Pre-Frontal. Pre-Frontal has an iridescent background with a larger glitch bar going vertically down the sketch. I chose to keep the polygons and thought it was interesting as the polygons collided with the glitch bar and created a rainbow effect. Furthermore, I added a frame count to create different rules for the ways polygons come into the sketch. I titled this “Pre-Frontal” because it is a part of the brain that moderates social behavior. Social behavior is oftentimes dominated by the media and political elites.
My system 3 consists of various shapes created at random, with the center of each shape connected to one “main” shape via a line. As the shapes move around and collide with each other, they are then sent in other random directions based on where they collided. The shapes collide with each other as well as the borders or “walls” of the sketch. When a shape collides with the wall, it takes on a new shape each time. With every collision, the shape’s velocity increases a small amount, so with given time the sketch will eventually lose control and move incredibly fast. Based on these guidelines I had written down, I feel my take on System 3 is successful. System 3 was very difficult for me to start. I knew I was required to make the system self-evolving, but I had no clue as to how to incorporate that idea. I went back to earlier systems we created in class together, and I was very interested in our early Polygon System. I loved the idea of generating new shapes and setting guidelines for their creation. I saw a lot of potential in using polygons in a self-evolving system, so I went back to the code of creating a polygon class. Once I was able to generate random polygons, I was very interested in the idea of collision and how that could transform the system into a self-evolving one. Collision was extremely difficult. The Processing website has an example of two circles colliding with each other and the walls of the sketch. I was able to gather bits and pieces from their example code to allow my Polygons to detect collision. Once collision detection was complete, it was just a matter of how I wanted to present the sketch. The lines I added were created by accident and without an idea in mind, but I really liked how they looked. They allowed the polygons to become connected and provided the sketch with unity. When the sketch picks up speed, it adds a whole new dynamic rather than just watching a bunch of shapes bounce around. It allows the viewer to keep track of certain shapes and their trajectories. There is a small interactive feature I implemented as a precaution to a problem I ran into a lot earlier. Before altering the velocity and distance within the code, a lot of shapes would get stuck in the four corners of the window. They’d just infinitely bounce back and forth between one wall, then the other. Just in case it kept happening, I added keyPressed features that would slightly shift the x and y coordinates of the shapes via the arrow keys. I would have liked to incorporate more interactivity and qualities of a self-evolving system, such as more changes of color and perhaps utilize time as well. This system shows how simple ideas can lead to complex phenomena. At first a simple collision of polygons turns into a wild and rapid frenzy on screen.
princess_me.png is my attempt to make an infinite glitch system with a picture of a princess. Infinite in this case meant that the system doesn’t end. When trying to program the system, i kept getting this screen. I realize after several attempts that failed at making one, but inadvertently created another. Because the computer will try to execute the program regardless of the failure state, it had become infinite. My work feels connected to work done in class so far with Moyna’s “Astrophobia” and the other blackspace’s pieces. With the possible exception of one or two, they all felt infinitely repeatable regardless of the viewer’s presence. I feel this way because they will change regardless of a viewer’s presence: the piece living in the space of imagination and conjecture. I would, retroactively, connect my work with Bas Jan and his relationship with the concept of artistic failure. Although I have been frustrated with feeling failure before, I am tempted to almost masochistically create more failure for myself.
My system glitches live stream video from the computer’s web cam. The project was a direct response to a glitch code developed in class that altered pixels of a given image. Since then I was determined to create a similar effect that could interact with the environment by means of video. Due to my interest in urban design and architecture I saw my system as a potential for sparking interaction in the built environment. I consider this project a breakthrough my understanding and experience with systems. The desired outcome was a result of a complete randomness. Since i didn’t know how to achieve the goal of creating a video glitch program, I kept pasting and deleting code from my processing windows. At some point of the journey in loosing control, the system surprised me and presented itself with a result. I created several versions of the system, altering the values of pixel modification in the for loop. As a result, the first system gently mutates the pixels, creating a sort of pulsating grain, as presented in the screen shots. The second version is abstract and multiples the colors of the web cam input and translates it into constantly moving lines. Each line is a response and evolution of the environment. The system evolves this way endlessly. Last version of the system is the most surprising since it builds on the input from the last running of the program before closing. The lower part of the image is the capture of the previous run while the top is similar to the first version of the system. My system demonstrates a list of conditions developed during class. It embodies a set of relationship between the live-stream image and the output of the program. Is a process of constant motion. It is also self-evolving or self-adapting since it makes autonomous decisions and builds on the input to present unexpected results. The system has rules and boundaries defined by the processing code. It exists indecently from the observer and if not stopped, can go on infinitely.
Name these 3 paintings. Watch my system. Now name them again. For system 3, I decided to glitch three famous artworks. These artworks can be recognised worldwide and by all no matter ones prior art history knowledge. Whether one knows the title, or just the artists name, or even just that these works are significant in someway, they are known and recognisable. By deciding to glitch these famous paintings, I am reverting how they are usually seen and am stripping them of the characteristics that made them famous in the first place. The glitching process causes the colours to be the most important feature of the works rather than the symbols, signs, meaning and the figures involved. This system also becomes a commentary on the traditional view of painting and of the sacredness of the artists hand as well as appropriation. All of these three works are held in the most important art or religious institutions on the world, they have no numerical value instead their importance and value lies in the historical significance of the works but also with the artist. Placing such traditional paintings in a technological setting also is a commentary on what art is can be considered to be today and how the role of painting in the 21st century has shifted dramatically, although these works still hold great power. I think out of all the systems I have created this semester, this one ticks most of the boxes for the classes definition of a system and the characteristics it has to have. I think this system “uses simple rules to produce complex results” as when learning this system in class, I had no idea that the code would cause those results. My system 3 is also self evolving (our two favourite words) and it can exist independent of the observer. Creating this system was often based on chance. Changing the numbers whilst creating each individual system on processing I was able to manipulate the result; how fast the original work disappeared to be unrecognisable, how long the colours would move for, which direction the work would flow off the screen etc. I just chose random numbers to begin with before understanding the function of each and how it effected the result. When working with processing, this was the system that I most enjoyed learning in class so I thought that doing a glitch for my last system made sense. Over the course of the semester I have enjoyed creating both digital and hand made systems. I found the digital systems easier in their relationship to what our class defined as a system, however they were much more difficult to create in terms of the processing program as I had never tried anything like it before. Overall I think my coding skills have improved (well they didn’t exist prior) but by succeeding in this, I have surprised myself.