Low Residency day 2

Group tutorial with Charlotte, Vivian and Dwa. Donald Takeshita-Guy was the artist supporting us.
Nice to meet the other students and see their works and hear about their projects.
I presented my work and talked about what to make for the Final show. I got a good response and some few advice; trying to focus on the good dreams just to see if there will be any changing, looking at Sarah Fanelli and Ilya & Emilia Kabakov.
Afterwards, I looked up Sara Fanelli and realized that I have one of her books at home 😉

Book presentation in the Lecture Theater at Camberwell
Denise Haywrysio’s “Spotlight project”. She had been working on this project for years. We saw the original book and a 20 minutes long film sequence. It started when she found an old casting book on a flea market. The books contain black and with pictures of actresses from the middle of last century.

Denise starts cutting out the faces, it makes interesting forms, patterns and funny words in the negative space of the faces. She had an idea of removing the faces were as liberate them.

According to the sound she was inspired by Kurt Schwitters. A voice read the randomly cut text in fast and slow speed, sometimes it’s understandable and sometimes not, it strengthens the mysterious expression.

The whole project was really nice and had an attractive impact on me; something hid and forgot insisted to be present.

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, 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.


Tutorial 1

Resume of the tutorial with Jonathan
Date October 11th.
Topics: My proposal and my blog

One of my concerns was about not having an overall “Working Title.” My proposal idea from my study application seems far away, and it feels unnaturally and uncomfortable to be that concrete with a title right now. Jonathan suggested that it might be better, focus on the making itself, the cinematic language and sound. Playing around – jump into the working cyclical: question – plan – action – observe – reflect. That will be my process for maybe half a year and thereby I will come to an idea for my MA project.
The working title for my proposal will for now be like my drawing below.
We talked about Len Lye, Eisenstein, Hans Richter, John Akomfrah, about the montage style they are/were using.
According to my blog; Jonathan recommended me not to use a Page as a log but instead make a regular blog post. It is much easier to navigate around blog post than a long list of daily updatings. Blog post is better than pages to get overview later on.
Jonathan liked my writing about the John Akomfrah exhibition. That is the way to follow combined with my working process.