On December 15, 2011 I am excited to be co-hosting the 2nd Annual Galvanize Gala in support of the Gray Area Foundation of the Arts.

This event is the first gala we will be hosting from our new location at the Warfield Theater. A vital source of funding for the Gray Area Foundation, Galvanize allows us to support our year-round exhibitions, events, workshops, panels and lectures focusing on digital culture at the intersection of art, science, technology, and society. Gray Area has grown in the last two years to be a focal point of the media arts community in San Francisco, so I urge you to attend if you find the technological arts worthwhile.

Here are just some of the things Gray Area has produced this year:

Exhibitions

Future/Canvas 2: The Emerging Medium of iPad Art
TRANSMUTATIONS: Sound, Data, and Mechanics
Zimoun: Solo Exhibition
Milieux Sonores: Sound and Imaginary Space
SENSEable Cities: Exploring Urban Futures

Educational

Arduino 101
Visualizing and Mapping Data
Buildling Augmented Reality Apps with Layar
Real-time Video Manipulation in Quartz Composer
Digital Cartography, Interactive Mapping, and Data Visualization
Summer of Smart Mayoral Forums
Cinema Speakeasy
Introduction to Touch Designer for Projection Mapping
Dr. Hubert Burda on the Digital Wunderkammer
Atom(tm) / Senor Coconut Live!
Sound Research Meetups
Introduction to openFrameworks
Max for Live Hack Night
Immersive Audio Environments for Composition and Simulation
Game Based Learning Salon
Breakneck Prototyping with Microsoft Pure Data and Kinect
You get the idea….

Celebrate GAFFTA’s newly minted residency in San Francisco’s historic Warfield Building at the 2nd Annual Galvanize Benefit Gala. The evening will bring together GAFFTA’s entrepreneurial and creative communities for an upscale rock concert, dinner and art auction at the Warfield Theatre. Join hundreds of creative and sexy Silicon Valley and Bay Area digerati, young professionals, financiers, entrepreneurs and artists to support the talent, and artistry, of today’s cutting edge technologists.

Date: December 15th, 2011
Time: 7:30 — 10:30pm
Venue: The Warfield Theater
982 Market St at Taylor
San Francisco, CA 94102

Agenda
7:30pm Doors
7:30 — 8:00 Registration, Dinner
8:00 — 8:15 Opening Remarks
8:15 — 9:00 ELEW and Garibaldi
9:00 — 9:15 Auction of Garibaldi Paintings
9:15 — 10:30 Eclectic Method Live A/V

Event Features
3 hours total, evening event
table service for 8-18: $2,500 — $25,000
general admission for 1: $60 — $1,000
21+, concession stands for artist & sponsor schwag, silent auction, tiered seating

Contact us: If you have any questions or require additional information about sponsorship, (415) 843-1423 or email support(at)gaffta(dot)org

My services are normally sought when something doesn’t work. While I am far from the only person active in this niche, I have been blessed with being able to collaborate with many contemporary artists, musicians, cultural and technology workers. I’ve worked to create scores of pieces, a majority of them uncredited. This in itself isn’t a huge problem for me (my focus remains the work), but coupled with the “Artist?” question it does call for some definition of what the role of an artist working on technological collaborations is and ought to be.

I like to say I develop culture, because culture is really the something which is ideally created as a byproduct of any project that I do. However, the most succinct way apparent to describe my occupations is by saying I work in technology for arts. Even this is vague. The issue is that it takes such a diverse skill-set to complete a immersive or interactive installation or event that easy classifications for the functions involved are elusive. Also the interested parties are always shifting, I may be collaborating with an institution, other artist or organization.

I am most captivated by the way technology impacts cultural culture and catalyzes new aesthetics. I think it makes sense to use the tools available today to create these works because new technology begets new art. As I view most cultural history through the lens of technological development it is clear that we base most of our metaphors on the world and how we live based on what the most advanced technologies we have at the time are. So, it makes sense to work within this milieu. The tools and technologies involved only interest me insofar as they catalyze new aesthetics.

There seems to be a distinction that bears the weight of history between “time-based” and “static” arts, although this line is far from solid. For the traditional visual arts (painting, sculpture, basket weaving) the mantle of “artist” is usually synonymous with both the inspiration and implementation of the final work. I posit that these practitioners were historically celebrated first for their mastery of technique; for someone with no learned context for a work the first impression is always a sense of awe at the sheer technical difficulty of realizing a work that is either photorealistic, unwieldy or otherwise artificial. Conversely the lack of this quality is the reason that many don’t “get” many kinds of contemporary art. It turns out they never understood any art to begin with, they were just impressed by the superficial complexity of the craft.

However the production of time based arts (music, theater, dance, performance arts) grew to be so complex that a division of labor quickly developed. Clearly in, say, an orchestral production, the composer, conductor and instrumentalists deserve a higher billing than their supporting personnel. But, what of the instrument makers? Certainly those that make and refine the tools of sound creation have merited an equal footing, but yet they are known only esoterically. What of the concert hall designer?

While it seems simple to decide the relative artistry of all those involved, I would argue that media arts are both of a different nature entirely and imbalanced in regards to perception on what constitutes an artist. The relationship between a creative collaborators turns out to be extremely complex and can never really be partitioned into “conceptual artist” and “technician”. If we know anything about music performance it is that the performer lends vast interpretation and variation to a composer’s work. In one sense the relationship is absurd; who would think of being a painter that didn’t know how to use a paintbrush? But this is exactly what a collaborator in charge of technology is expected to do… have a mastery of technique in the use of a wide range of arts technology sufficient to realize a project to high aesthetic standards.

Another angle to consider this issue from is that of limitations. Usually when initially consulting on a project the first question I’m asked is some variant of “can we do X”. Ironically, the worst answer is “we can do anything you want” (the real answer entirely depends on budget). Michaelngelo famously commented on how the form was in the stone all the time, he just had to free it. However, it is equally as true to say that Michaelangelo set limitations on the potential of the stone. How do we know what these limitations are in a computational art work? It takes virtuosity and skill to intuit such things. So it appears that the distinction of artistry relies upon curatorial and creative control of the material. But, in the same vein as a performer, it is clear that those that perform the creative act are inexorable from the creative act itself.

So what then is the cultural fate of the creative technologist, the artistic collaborator, the event producer? Where is public celebration of the curator? I have no answers, but as the nature of art changes so too will the view of those that create it.

Logistics

Date: Tuesday, September 27th
Times: 6:30pm – 9:00pm
Cost: Free with registration on Eventbrite!
Location: GAFFTA, 998 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94102

Overview

As digital technology advances at breakneck speed, Images are circulating quicker than ever before. But what is the status of the image in the digital era? We are joined by German art historian Dr. Hubert Burda for an examination of the “iconic turn” that our culture is undergoing.

A pioneer of the media industry will be presenting a concise history of images and how they function today in our digital world. Burda traces the connection between perspectival painting and the television, demonstrating how the image requires a frame, which in turn requires a material vehicle that in our era has become a non-material vehicle with its own formal parameters. Burda shows how images have always been linked to portability, but now migrate to an unprecedented degree, so that anyone with a personal device can globally disseminate, say, footage from a concert via Youtube.

Cycling ’74 (the developers of MaxMSP) recently posted an interview with audio/visual composer Tarik Barri discussing his collaboration with Robert Henke (a.k.a Monolake) for the RML Cinechamber. Called Fundamental Forces, this work was remarkable on a number of levels both for its processes and product. Having been in the room for the development of this piece there are a number of insights that I think are worth adding to the conversation about the creation of technologically ambitious virtual worlds and electronic art in general. I think this work was exceptional in a number of respects that it addressed some “fundamental” problems in electronic art production, archival and performance and so is worth exploring further.

The first thing to note is that both artists are extremely accomplished and brilliant independently, who have refined their working methods and tools to a point that they can be extremely prolific using both broad strokes and later fine grained control to polish a work. Both should be particularly noted for putting massive development effort into their own working environments; Robert being in the core development team behind the venerable Ableton Live software suite, and Tarik single-handedly creating his own intimidatingly powerful and flexible 3d visual composing tool, Versum (built with the media toolkit and visual programming language MaxMSP).

An introduction to Versum:

Even with their considerable skill and custom toolset Robert and Tarik had a monumental task ahead of them when the set out to create a work for the CineChamber. Like any complex system there are a number of limitations in processing headroom, options for control and in this case a severe time restriction for the development of the work. For the Club Transmediale presentations we had a non-stop month of residencies prior to the festival dedicated to the development of new material. All three groups who participated in the residency (Signal, Monolake + Tarik Barri, Deadbeat + Lillivan) had only a week each to develop both a 20 minute re-playable audio/visual “module” and a 40 minute live set. The artists all used drastically different approaches and produced an incredible amount of work, but Fundamental Forces was the only work that was completed in anything near a exhibition ready state. I think part of the reason for its success was because of its working methods. The theme of CTM ’11, “Live?”, focused directly on these questions of live vs. recorded performance, and Fundamental Forces is a outstanding case study.

The senario as described by Tarik:

The real problem was that the CineChamber doesn’t have any gaps between the screens, so any slight timing differences between them would immediately and easily be seen. So this implied that I would have to seriously think about accurate ways of time syncing. I discussed possible solutions with Robert Henke and he had some nice ideas, but I didn’t go there since I couldn’t obtain enough computers to pull this off. I only had the possibility of making use of RML’s single supercomputer, which handles all of the 10 projections. So to make sure I would get the most out of the CineChamber setup, without totally overloading the CPU or sacrificing frame rate or resolution, I decided to use Versum in a non-real time way and render everything in full resolution at 30fps. These projections combined, formed one big panoramic surround window, through which the audience could see the Versum universe all around them in 360 degrees.

Basically the real brilliance here was to use a classic technique of media production, the control path. By having a separate control data system inside Versum, Tarik was able to use a multi-pass production process to allow Robert and himself to work in parallel, and to bring a live performance feel to his work. This tactic has been used in audio and video production programs since time immemorial, the first implementation coming to mind is in MUSIC I-V by Max Mathews. The basic idea is to have a separate data and recording path for all input controller data that can then be replayed at a slower rate to coincide with a processor intensive render process.

Fundamental Forces rehearsals:

By separating themselves during the development of the piece Robert and Tarik were able to make significant headway independently, while ensuring that their work would link together at the end to form a cohesive whole. The basic process went something like this; Robert would do a rough mix of some tracks with the basic forms, beat and time arcs mostly set. Tarik could then listen to this and set up a world of 3d objects, transformations and camera movements that reinforced and responded to this soundtrack.  In the interest of time he rendered this composition into a low resolution single or multi-screen composition quickly, which Robert watched to make further refinements and adjustments to his music.

Because all of Tarik’s camera and controller movements were recorded, the entire video composition could be recreated with an arbitrary number of screen viewports at any resolution at a later time. This coincided with Robert’s Live set, his controller movements and mix were also captured. The process allowed the content to be hocketed back and forth between the two artists, creating tighter integration among the parts, but allowing independent work at different times. Also, the data recording process in both the sound and video setups made it possible to play along and compose the performance with live gestures.

This gave the final composition the feeling of a live performance even though the CTM version was largely pre-rendered. While this is a worthwhile goal in itself, such a working process also future proofs the composition in a large way. The actual composition is not so much what was seen on the screens on the CineChamber, it was an abstracted set of data and processes that could be rendered to any kind of format. One could imagine Fundamental Forces on any arrangement of screens and speakers, from single screen/monaural to dome/wavefront. In this sense it was very much analogous to music notation … a composition is deeper than any single performance and can be performed in a variety of circumstances. This structure also makes it open to interpretation, in theory two more artists could pick up this piece and create a derivative version that maintained affinity with the original, but built upon it.

These issues, interpretation, archival and re-performance are some of the biggest issues facing our culture right now in terms of electronic art. As we worth through the issues it is vital to take a look at works such as Fundamental Forces that light a path forward.

Fundamental Forces live performance:

Hot Spots: Mapping Anxious Sites of Projection
SFAI Café – 800 Chestnut St., San Francisco
Tuesday 26 April 7:30-9:30 pm

The Salon brings together practitioners and scholars involved in the global possibilities for projection, video, and 3D mapping. With a focus on current events, recent uprisings and natural disasters, mapping will be explored as a political, social and cultural activity capable of localizing ideologies as much as providing access to space outside of them.

Bassel Safadi (via Skype from Syria): software developer, 3D technical director – open source development – latest work includes: 3D photo realistic reconstruction of old city of Palmyra (Syria), real time visualization, development of a web-programming framework (i.e., aikiframework) http://www.aikiframework.org

Barry Threw : global developer of cultural projects involving cultural ecology, interactive media, immersive environments – currently supports surround cinema with Recombinant Media Labs – produces interactive media with Obscura Digital – free culture projects with Fabricatorz. http://www.barrythrew.com

Karl Nelson : dual degree candidate at SFAI – MA thesis on the expanding vocabulary of video mapping platform – currently uses pico projectors and small sculptural objects to create subtle vignettes of urban life.