In my last post I touched upon what I hope to get from engaging with a technological artwork. I noted:

"My favourite digital art projects are ones in which technology is de-mystified (or mystified in wonderful way which draws attention to just how dependent we have become on it).

I love it when I come away from an art work:

a) thinking (hopefully in a new way about a technology);
b) thinking I would like to try and make something like that, and
c) thinking I now have some idea of how to go about doing it myself."

I thought it would be fun to track through an example of my 'abc of thinking' in a live example. So here goes...

One of the many things that I have been enjoying over the last two weeks is 'Web 2.0 :The Machine is Us/ing Us' (I even embedded it in my personal blog over at 'betwixt and between'). It is kind of easy to be sniffy about the use of the expression 'Web 2.0' but that quibble aside, I think this piece is excellent ( and I have already shown it to group of students). I like the economy of this video. Michael Wesch provides a semester's worth of provocations (points to discuss?) in just over four minutes. I also enjoyed the way in which the commentary is interlaced into html in one section (like easter-eggs in lines of code).

As you can see, I found myself 'thinking'. I found myself scouring the net for commentary. For example, there is an interesting post by Jess Laccetti . I also found myself thinking 'I would like to try and make something like that'.

I got lucky yesterday because I stumbled across an interview with Prof. Wesch on John Battelle's Searchblog . One of the interesting nuggets tucked away in the comments to this interview is the software, camstudio - used by Wesch to make the screencasts he includes in his video. Now I appreciate that it takes more than just access to software to produce something as elegant as 'The Machine is Us/ing Us' but I can't help thinking that one of the steps on that road is to be able to have a go! Camstudio is released under a GPL licence so that it is effectively free. It is also downloadable. It runs on windows, however, which is good for my home use but not good for the daytime if you work in a Mac-centric department.

It was at this point that I realized that I needed a search term - 'screencasting' or 'screen capture' perhaps so that I could find equivalent software for the Mac. I happened upon a couple of useful blog postings and I was already spoilt for choice. I also had a 'search term' with which to approach the more technically-inclined members of my department. I have often found that it is best to research an issue first so that I can refine my question to the extent that it can be answered in a meaningful way. Suggestions I got back from this 'wetware' search included - Seminar and iShowU . I have yet to try any of these (so please do not consider this a recommendation). However, I am going to try something soon.

I guess the activity described above is the process I was trying to summarize in my last post!

Love City Presentation at IOCT, DMU - Feb 1st 2007

Love City Presentation at IOCT, DMU - Feb 1st 2007
Originally uploaded by gavinandrewstewart.

I went to an interesting presentation at the IOCT at De Montfort University last week (http://www.ioct.dmu.ac.uk/). The presentation was given by Matt Watkins of Active Ingredients and featured two recent art projects involving ‘matters of the heart’.

The first project Matt introduced was called 'Ere Be Dragons' (http://www.i-am-ai.net/erebedragons/intro.htm). This project was of interest, to me at least, because it did not use a traditional WIMPs interface. Instead, it used the users’ heart-rate and their location in a street-setting as its primary modes of interaction (for those of you who are interested in this stuff, the project website notes that it used the following technologies: - HP IPAQ Pocket PC h2210, GPS, Sciencescope Heart Rate Monitor, Mobile Bristol Client and Sensor Bus GPRS). I found the use of vital signs rather intriguing and it reminded me (in a rather lateral sort of a way) of the Breathing Wall by Kate Pullinger et al. - http://www.thebreathingwall.com/ (which monitors the participant’s breathing). In his video record, Matt showed users (he called them ‘players’ I think) puffing their way around the streets of Nottingham/Berlin with the Pocket PC thrust out in front of them. Matt noted that in this kind of augmented experience “the world bleeds into the digital experience”. The users certainly appeared to be enjoying themselves, noting with glee the emergence of digital trees etc on their screens. However, I couldn’t help wondering whether the user might not also end up bleeding due to a real world experience, as they seemed be interested in the digital box to the exclusion of the cars and trucks passing by them.

Matt also introduced the forthcoming ‘Love City’ project, which will be launched for Valentine’s Day 2007 (http://www.lovecity.tv/). This game is billed as an urban ménage a trois (always a good expression to have on your blog). It is a SMS text message-based game that will encourage users to make links via their mobile phones with fellow players in the cities of Nottingham, Leicester and Derby in the UK. I rather liked the simplicity of this idea. However, a number of audience members expressed concern about the possibility of abuses with this system (I think ‘virtual stalking’ was one of the problems mentioned). Matt reassured the audience by explaining that the system protected sensitive personal data (with a user number) and was fully moderated by a human operator.

The change of technology from ‘Ere Be Dragons’ to ‘Love City’ also interested me; because it pointed to the fact that the Active Ingredients team had made a decision to reach a wider audience by embracing a ‘more widely available’ technology. This has a particular resonance for me, mainly because one of the many things that I am wrestling with at the moment is the feeling that the use of unusual or bespoke technologies can, in the wrong circumstance, act as a barrier to the participation of a wider public.

It is not that I think that the use of 'exotic' kit within my practice is bad idea per sec (Let’s face it – it could take weeks to define what is and is not ‘exotic’ in any given instance – user demographics? context? moment in history? number of pints consumed?). In fact, I am intrigued by novel interfaces and I am always suitably grateful when hard working artists and technologists slave on into the night to lash together a prototype. I also love playing with strange stuff at conferences and exhibitions. Futhermore, I am also envious of any technological ingenuity. However, it is sometimes possible for the EQUIPMENT to overshadow the artwork. Similarly, exotic kit can be expensive, which can involve one in all sorts of issues that can complicate the development of an artwork.

My favourite digital art projects are ones in which technology is de-mystified (or mystified in wonderful way which draws attention to just how dependent we have become on it).

I love it when I come away from an art work:

a) thinking (hopefully in a new way about a technology);
b) thinking I would like to try and make something like that, and
c) thinking I now have some idea of how to go about doing it myself.

Exoteric Digital Art? Reflexive Digital Art? Accessible Digital Art?

I guess I am, therefore, striving toward an approach that lifts the bonnet on the technology whilst also providing an affective experience. It might be that the technical data is on a supporting website – but I still want to be in a position that I can provide this kind of information. I guess this is why I am happiest working on projects where I can post my code.

Does Artist = Educator?

I enjoyed hearing about ‘Love City’ and its use of SMS technology. However, I also felt a certain sense of disappointment as I still feel excluded (by my own ignorance more than anything else) from the proprietary technology of the mobile phone company that underpins this project. I am not sure how it would be possible for artists or big companies to be more open about these kinds of details without impinging on intellectual property. I am also unsure about the vehicle for delivering such details as I am sure other members of the audience at the IOCT might have found the tech spec bit uninteresting.

Does Art = Open?

There is still so much to decide!