Tutorial 6

Resume of the tutorial with Jonathan Kearney
Date: May 21. 2018
Topic: Status, work process and final show

I explain to Jonathan my consideration about Augmented Reality.
I tried to get into the software but realized that the learning curves were too steep for a quick process. My most important insight was that working in an unfamiliar software limits my creativity and I still have to develop; stories, animation, poem etc (expanding my pool of material including video).
It is to early to make limitations. I have to work more with sound, movement and editing. The next step could be AR, if I have the time before Final Show I will make some tests. My idea for the Final Show is video projecting.

Jonathan asked me about my feeling for the sound in the latest video sequence.
I decided not to use music, I have been focused on the no-sounds (pauses) I think there is something interesting going on in the breaks; not planned sound. For me it workes with the sound replacement, Jonathan agree he finds the intonations and the repetition interesting.
We talk about the Final show, where I want to make a kind of space by using two projectors, to create a small and a big screen. My intention is to make an interaction between the two screens. For the big video projecting I will make split screen it allows me to let different images complement each other, like the idea of montage.
The voice replacement test 5, opened my eyes to the power of repetition. In this test 3 persons say the same but not in sync. For me, it underlines the idea of dreams; dreams have a short duration, but the experience of a dream last longer, you carry the dream in your body sometimes for years.
According to my pool of elements, I took the decision that all my actors and speakers should be family members of me. The same genetic material in different ages an gender. Replacing voices, ages and gender are meant to show that the dreamer can be anybody; time and gender are floating. At the same time, they are the people around me – very practical.
Back to the final show; I have to think about the sound while having two projectors. Headphones make a deep sensation of the sound and video. Jonathan was drawn into a lot more, particularly where I play around with two voices. I have to consider how sound works. With headphones, I will have more control over what people hear.
I think I have all the material it is just a matter of editing and selection, so it can be two projections.
Jonathan: You can create multiple versions of this material, depending on the setting. The edit mood is very important, it can change its meaning in the process.
I talking about the amount of element and the words and how I work with the new and longer list of words. I made an alphabet, list, random list, the amount of letter list. I am aware of the effect the poem can have; from magic to a shopping list.
Jonathan talks about the list and the categories. I’m not sure if I should use words in my video works, it is taking to much focus.
Jonathan looks at the video with three masked persons. You are not sure if the masks are a physical thing or made in After Effect. Once again he mentioned how intense the feeling is by using headphones.
The words could also appear as a kind of breakers between the sequences, and not be a direct part of the different sequences.
I don’t have to show everything, the words could be part of the installation, could be just one sentence on the wall. Like giving hint from where it comes from.

If I got time Jonathan recommended me to make a test with AR, especially because Terrie offered me his help. It is another expression of my work another representing.

Tutorial 5

Resume of the tutorial with Jonathan Kearney
Date: February 2. 2017
Topic: What is going on now and what next.

I explained that I’m on my way coming back to the project, after a period with family problems. My way into the project is to start working with practice; painting, After Effect, sound recording. The last thing I did was experimenting with voice replacement.

I told Jonathan about my plan testing Argumented Reality, and my upcoming meeting with Nikolai Stausbøl, one of my former students who know a lot about AR.
My expectations of using AR are on a really simple level, and will not stand alone in my final show. I see a kind of mixed media; video projection, still images and AR. I want to make an experience where the elements (video, AR and stills) not dependent on each other. Therefore, I will experiment with video projection, AR and multiple screens. Testing what is the best expression form for my project.
Jonathan mentioned what I talked about last time; the idea of having a divided space with a fixed element, where the audiences see the space and then the extra layer from AR.
Hololenses has a narrow point of view, it is like having too small screens in front of your eyes. But AR is much more than Hololens.
Jonathan recomanded me to participate in the AR and VR workshop at the Low Residency.
I talked about AR project which has inspired me. Particularly one project, focusing on Syrian refugees through a kind of Pokémon Go concept. Two-dimensional figures in the real environment. My idea is having flat elements in a real world.
Jonathan thinks it is a great idea and it is consistent with my style. The subtle animation in the last blog post worked very well.

I reflect over the duration of the sequence. I expired that I have to give more time / longer duration. It is the big difference between art and motion graphic design.
Jonathan recomanded me to keep it simple, not let me go with the wauw-effect of the technology, but focusing on the dreamish mood.
I can make something around AR, prints, and video, I can make a straight video as well. As more, I make a body of work I can decide what to show. At the final show, I don’t have to show everything I did.

About a month ago I said: Keep it simple – do it fast. Make something and then reflect on it.

Jonathan: All your previous skills and ideas are just waiting – ready to explode. The last two posts are interesting and done really well, it is just the start of it.

We talked about the exhibition of Hans Op de Beeck
Hans Op de Beeck does not work with a narrative in his video installation, it is a space where you can put in any stories. The human hands change the illusion.
I want to make a space where people can make there own narrative/stories. Jonathan said that is the difference between a straight filmmaker (not all) and an artist. A filmmaker is trying to communicate a story. You are using moving images as your language not to communicate but to create space – to create a potential connection for other people to make the connection them self.

I talked about anit-interaction and that I want to find out if Hololens can read the eyes of the viewer, like eye tracking. If that’s possible, moving things away from the focusing eye, could be interesting. Like dreams, they are hard to capture, they easily disappear, but you have the feeling of the dream in your body.
Jonathan thinks that conceptually it’s a good idea but he doesn’t think the technology is not there yet. Maybe in combination with the technology behind eye-tracking.

I explained that I on my way setting up a meeting with an anthropologist who had worked with dreams – made dream sessions.

What next:
Looking forward to Low Residency

And still the same 🙂 :
My statement for Unit 2:
· More practice
· Take risks
· Make documentation on my blog.

What to do now:
· Investigating AR in theory and praxis
· Continue making dream images
· Stil researching the subject dreams in art and as a human experience.


Tutorial 4

Resume of the tutorial with Jonathan
Date: December 1st. 2017
Topic: Feedback from Unit 1, and whats next.

We talked about my consideration for the final project. Multiple screens, sound and movements are still on my mind. I’m started researching Augmented Reality (AR). Some years ago I saw an artist (Camille Scherrer) presenting an AR-project at Resonate in Belgrade (2013), it has been on my mind since then because of its simplicity and focuses on illustration.

We talked about technology; the possibility with new stuff and the value of cooperation with other people.
There is a lot of clever technical stuff going on according to AR, but a lot of it is empty there is a need for depth of content; a poetic level.
Jonathan mentioned that I have the potential here to do, with the depth of thinking behind my work, that I got the potential to do something interesting, particularly around AR. It is not about the technology but the content. He reminded me that I got a whole banc of material already and that I can create more sound and images.
We talked about my subject; dreams and surrealism fit well with the idea of an extra level of the reality like AR where other stuff is going on at the same time in the same space.
The obvious thing about AR is an installation where someone uses a kind of device like an iPhone, but there could be other ways of using AR, which I have to look at like if people can move them self physically around in a space, turning around and questioning what nature AR might look like. Jonathan encourages me to go and play with it to push it.

I got such a positive feedback from this tutorial and from Unit 1, I should be pleased, and I am pleased (I am too shy to write all superlatives) – I learned a lot about myself during Unit 1.

My statement for Unit 2:
· More practice
· Take risks
· Make documentation on my blog.

What to do now:
· Investigating AR in theory and praxis
· Continue making dream images
· Stil researching the subject dreams in art and as a human experience.

Tutorial: Research paper, 2. draft

Resume of the tutorial with Gareth Polmeer
Date October 4. 2017
Topic: The Research Paper, based on draft 2

Gareth found lots of interesting possibilities in the draft of my Research paper, but he mentions, more than one time, the limited space. I had to plan what kind of weight I give to questions about science and information theory and the anthropologist research and how much weight I give to the question about artworks artistic processes.
Gareth thinks the scientific, information theory and so forth gives a kind of explanatory framework to some of the stuff but is not necessarily the artist are doing; they are doing a different kind of things.
I talked about working process and the two artists. And that I started thinking about the anthropology method.
Gareth: It is now an editorial and structural perspective. What is realistic and practical to focus on now in the next three weeks. What will be the best to focus on from now on?

A research paper of this kind sometimes it isn’t so it comes to the definite conclusion it is to show a kind of critical examination of a set of questions. It is possible to conclude more questions in some aspect. But I have to bring different areas into the conversation or making some new kind of connection, ideas.

Gareth recommended me to look at the conclusion to see what will be the outcome. At the moment I got the way art could be understood in three ways.

Having the tutorial helped me to narrow the topic. I am stressed because of the limit time and the limit space.
It is time to stop taking in new topics; it is time to make it more simple – narrow the idea and make a working plan for the rest of the time left. Remember time to translate.

Tutorial: Research paper, 1. draft

Resume of the tutorial with Gareth Polmeer
Date: June 29. 2017
Topics: Abstract and first outcome

It was, in general, a release to talk with Gareth.
My subject for the research paper is still open, but I’m starting to narrow it down to something about the chance operation, control and, lack of control.
In keyword, my draft is about: coincidence, perception, information theory, chance operation, and AI
Gareth mentioned that there is a lot of interesting questions about the relationship between art and science in my first outcome.
He said that I am crossing into a much-debated field when I’m quoting Professor Zimmerman; the idea of speaking about the experience/perception in the kind of the language of information or terms of units of bits and bits this sorts of things are in themselves verily debated by philosophers and scientists. What we can infer from such a connection, and how intelligence works. One can speak about AI as having conciseness; it is related to the thing called the hard problem.
Gareth recomanded me to look at the journal called Leonardo; an American published journal, it’s a journal for the international society for art, science and technology. They publish articles by artist collaborating with scientists. He mentions that because there has been an increasing sense in which the arts and the sciences have come to be conflated in a sense – art and science are come to define itself in a very particular kind of way, it’s having a kind of domain over the art.

The question becomes about how I can make an experiment which connects natural scientist to an artistic question.
In the light of Karl Poppers (philosopher) idea of the function of science, it is hard to speak about that kind of things in relation to art, in the same kind of way.

How can I relate something like a controlled experiment to the contingency nature of artistic experience and something like that? I have to aware about linking the question up to an art question.

According to the information theory, I noticed a work of art made by Louise Nevelson I saw a few days ago. Gareth talked about Sol LeWitt; relating to developing process or questions about chance and contingency in the process and things like that. Artis like that could be interesting.

Gareth asked how far I was into the question about machine learning and creative AI, which I mention in the latest state of my notes.
I had heard two a lectures about AI; one was about AI and ethics; that we have to learn the computer ethic rules because they are on the way to take over the management of our society. The other one I heard had a title “Can AI be creative?” by John R. Smith, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center; it was about how technology can learn creativity. I asked can AI be/learn aesthetic?
Gareth noticed that Google the system that sort of generated images. Exactly what constitutes creativity in that respect. You have to import rules, to make a setup and the outcome will depend on the accuracy. And then there is all the other thing which aren’t things that can be variable input to computers, like emotion and embodied senses.

In the end, Gareth summarised that there is a very big question here but at the same time a couple of people, I mention, provided that I can focus on particular practices and a couple of particular theories. There is a lot of scopes, for it to be both a detail discussion but also still to stay reasonably within the limits of the 4-5 thousands of words, with some selected examples.


Tutorial 3

Resume of the tutorial with Jonathan
Date May 22.
Topics: How is my practice going and a little about the research paper

Status right now:
I’m still making dream images. After mid-point review, I started a dream-diary: quick ink drawings. I like the freshness, but I’m not sure about the purpose. Maybe the purpose is just doing it and get a good feeling.

I’m waiting for a second Processing output test from my colleague Stig. I made a new catalogue of elements and some adjustments, one week ago. In the meantime, I tried to animate one of the dream images, but get bored before even finished. There could be three reasons for that:
1. Working too slow in After Effect and on another level than I used to, years ago.
2. My idea for movement is too boring and obvious I’m too much in control.
3. I need another layer/element in the moving part.

We talked about sound, scale, space and multiple monitors/screens as new elements to the investigate. I feel it is the way to go right now; jump into a new field and not complicating things which are working fine (the images).
The installation Ouroboros I saw at Click Festival, inspired me – sound, several screens, space, etc. Sound is powerful I have to do a deeper research. I could also start working with my text experiments; a voice could be part of a soundscape.
I reflect on avoiding being too much in control in the creating moment, sometimes I better like the first fresh and rough sketches than the final solution.

We talked about an exhibition by William Kentridge I saw a few weeks ago, and my first impressions; playfulness, control – out of control, drawing as a part of the entire expression and not as an art object.
WK’s style/language has a feeling of random and chaos in contradiction to Michal Craig-Martin who seems to be much more in control. At last tutorial, Jonathan recommended me to read about Michael Craig-Martin, because he had been working the most of his career with a kind of catalogue from where he made sculptures, paintings, wall drawings, etc. I heard him in an interview, and it surprised me to hear him say: I don’t have a plan, I never have a plan I do what is coming next. Because looking at his work, you don’t get that feeling.
We talked a little about the Research Paper and in the light of that two artists and my MA project, the issue of control/lack of control could be a subject for my research paper.

Tutorial 2

Resume of the tutorial with Jonathan
Date March 30th.
Topics: How is it going and my reading

I had a tutorial talk on Skype with Jonathan. I told him that I’m right now having a good working process with the practical part of my project. The idea of making a bank of visual material, helps me to work freer, take chances, and it has changed my view of my Dream Images as final products to be an inspiration source and a base from where I can copy elements to new creations.
I have the feeling of reinvention myself, using part of my creativity I have not used since graduated as an illustrator many years ago now combined with knowledge and skills I worked with since that time.
We looked at Michael Craig-Martin’s works. He had during his art career collected his images and drawings, resampling it into new media and artworks. It inspired me a lot, and I will look more at his art practice.
We also looked at Cat Roisetter works (an artist Johnny Briggs recommended me to study when we had the group tutorial on Low-Residency).
I had concerns about reading; it takes me a long time to read, summarize, etc. I haven’t even found a form yet.
Jonathan recommended me to listen and see talks online. We talked about great institutions, like Tate, have channels, and a lot is available on youtube. I can find material online and at Conferences and quote directly on my blog as long as I source indicates my references.