2nd Assessment Lecture and Tutorial Reflections

16 03 2008

A. Andy Stiff


B. Paul Coldwell


C. Mike Faulkner


D. Jonathan Kearney and Gary Woodley


E. Barbara Rauch


Jonathan Kearney and Gary Woodley

16 03 2008

Had a cross-course tutorial on DIGITAL ENVIRONMENTS with Jonathan and Gary.

Jonathan gave some good advice. He mentioned that with collaborations, you also have to find what is similar between the two, a sort of union of sorts. He mentioned that with his marriage, there are some choices that are not open to him, but these choices make him more of himself.


Jonathan Kearney

Gary took the opposite perspective. Stressing on the necessity to show the differences between us. He mentioned several collaborations that broke up, and after that, the artists have to pick up the pieces. Sort of like find out which part of them was which. He said how basically in collaboration, one may lose one’s personal identity.

Gary Woodley
720 dpi archival print size A2, 2004.

I personally feel that it is about finding the link between the two. Perhaps where Mosh and I are similar, but at the same time, how we are different. In a way, I want to speak about this PARADOX. The paradox of relationships. How different we are and yet, how similar. How independent we are and yet also how we also need each other. Definitely, I do not want to go down that road of picking up the pieces and losing my identity, but at the same time, I also do not just want to have two artists exhibiting work beside each other. Perhaps there is a more intuitive way to go about it.


Mosh and I talked and basically came up with the idea of the feedback loop with two screens that will be interpreted individually. But since it is a feedback loop, whatever change I do to mine will automatically affect his and vice-versa. Perhaps this may be the solution.

Barbara Rauch

16 03 2008


Handscapes, Barbara Rauch

Had a tutorial with Barbara Rauch and it went very well. She gave some suggestions for our project:

1. Simplicity. We have to choose something simple and strong regarding the transformations of the images from screen to screen if we are going to make a final work.

2. Show our experiments. We can use a dvd or a blog to show our experiments and how these interactions can differ by using different filters. Perhaps we can show this through a VIRTUAL LAB.

3. Use the digital medium to capture CONSCIOUSNESS. She said the mind does not have the capacity to look upon consciousness, but through this medium we can achieve it.


4. Check out these theoreticians and practitioners: John Jones, Bruce Nauman, Gary Hill, Oron Catts, Susan Trangmar, Laura Marks, Julia Scherr, Elena Cologni

5. In our final proposal, express how THE VIEWER IS THE SUBJECT.

6. Get viewer feedback. Can be done through papers, interviews, case studies.

7. Ask ourselves: WHAT DO WE REALLY WANT THE VIEWER TO EXPERIENCE? What do they get out of it? This plus the viewer feedback will inform our choices for the final piece. Also ask ourselves: WHY ARE WE DOING INTERACTIVE WORK? Why not a film?

8. Check the following URLS:

Oron Catts and Ionat Zurr  http://www.symbiotica.uwa.edu.au/welcome/about_us
Jennifer Willett, at Uquam Montreal
Elena Cologni  http://www.elenacologni.com/
Mark Hansen in Aberdeen April 25.  http://www.abdn.ac.uk/modernthought/recoded/

Actually checked out the sites and found the work of Oron Catts to be absolutely amazing. He deals with Bio-art as seen below. This piece is called victimless leather where they grow their own leather from organisms gathered from research labs. This is a coat without seams. It’s both disturbing and amazing at the same time. It makes one think about why we have to kill when we can now create.


Mosh and I started to discuss all that we had seen and talk about and we realized that we really have to question WHAT IT IS WE REALLY WANT TO SAY. Sometimes I get lost in all the technology and I forget that to make the work truly powerful, it must come from something clear and precise. This is what we are currently reflecting on now: WHAT IS THE MESSAGE? HOW DO WE SAY IT?

She also loved the idea of our exposing the cathode ray tubes. She said we’re on the right track and to keep on going. Let’s hope so:).

Mike Faulkner

15 03 2008


Mike Faulkner came to the studio to give us a presentation and to look at our work. He gave several tips regarding our work.

1. ECHOING – slow down one screen 90 percent, while the other stays at 100 percent. He mentioned that the reason we use double-triple-quadruple screens is to get a bigger space. So if we use a bigger space, we must do it meaningfully. And the idea is that one side echoes the other at a different speed. Another way we could also do this is to echo the sound from left to right, or to use the movement not only of image but of sound from one side to the other.

2. TIME – the idea of creating a panorama so show the movement of time. Doing this creates the illusion of space. By using just one video split into several screens, one can give this illusion of time moving from one space to another.

3. FRAME – Here he also mentioned framing. If one frames something as a square, one must ask, why a square? Why not a circle?

4. MUSIC – My sound reminded him of COLLEEN which he suggests i should check out.

4. SOFTWARE – He suggested playing with these software:


D-fuse D-Tonate




DVD STUDIO : Experiment with interactive menus. One can use various audio and video streams and to make multiple screens through the subtitles (tiff images). These can be animated as well. One can also play with different angles and audio (language setting)

AFTER EFFECTS MOTION and ILLUSTRATOR : To get experimental and 3d images. Once can also connect certain sounds to key frames. One can trigger opacity and color as well through this. One can draw a path using AE and create loops for interactivity.

STITCHER : Play with stitching different images together



FCP : Attach sound to image, then compose it like music.

VIMEO : hi-res youtube site

Paul Coldwell

15 03 2008


There’s something about leaving something and then coming back to it. Just read my notes on the lecture of Paul Coldwell at Camberwell and I realized it is one of the most profound lectures I have ever gone to in my life. As an artist, I feel that it is one of the most important experiences that one can ever have. It leaves a lasting taste that I feel I will bring with me as I continue forward.

He mentioned empathy as the most important thing an artist can do. The idea of stepping into another person’s shoes and allowing that experience to inform us. For the piece above, he created it about the second world war, and how one can never really be another person except to draw from one’s own personal experience. He tried to express what the media did not show. How the ordinary man experienced catastrophe. He created these digital prints and exhibited them with these sculptures below.


He used everyday objects, making them into these unusable sculptures that seem more like relics after a war. He said that he gained inspiration from newspapers, journals and artists such as Morandi.

He said that being an artist meant that one put an idea or a feeling into another form so that others can look at it and experience it. This task meant that it is about familiarizing oneself with everything, observing everything so that one can put it into words. So that one can express it.


Paul Coldwell (born 1958) ‘Case Studies’ UK 2002

Etching and blind embossing from a CAD. Printed and published by London Print Studio in an edition of 20.
Plate 17.8 x 23.7 cm

As artists, he said that we imbue something with meaning by the amount of concentration we put upon it. And the viewers, as they look upon the art, they try to decipher this meaning. It is all about putting order into the world, and by learning language, that is what we try to do as human beings. In a way, this is what art does. To put some sort of order or deeper understanding of a world that we can only begin to understand. This, as he said, is the artist’s role.

He mentioned that we must create out of some emotional response to something, an event, an experience, a person. And that we make these things with qualities in them: “a sensous-physical experience” as he calls it. He said that there must be a sensuality to an object of art. To forget philosophy really, because if you can’t hold someone’s attention for long enough, you’re dead.

He gave tips as well. He said that the scale of the work changes one’s experience of it. WE MUST BEAR IN MIND THE SCALE OF THE WORK, IT IS RELATIVE TO ITS MEANING.

He also advised to train oneself in looking at one’s work. How would this operate in the world? Where will it be?

Here are his tips:


2. TEST your work with friends and collegues

3. Know your work IN AND OUT


Things I must do with our own work:). And for future things to come!

Andy Stiff

24 01 2008

Tutorial Form 24 Jan 2008

Learned a lot from Andy today. Basically, that I’m taking on too much as a student rep, so he’ll be pulling Gary and Dom to work with me as a team for the final show coordination.

Another good point was to ask the question, ‘So what?’ about our work. Why would it be of any importance to anyone?

Another one was to HAVE FUN! Crazy from a tutor, but I suppose, I’d been getting a little too serious and we all know that does wonders for one’s creativity.

Realized also how perceptive Andy was. Thought maybe he had like psychic powers or something;). He actually read our current collaboration to a T. He said how I was trying to bounce off ideas with Mosh but basically Mosh was doing his own thing, going deep into his own project… (I had never told anyone this) and basically, how I have to keep on doing it til I get through. I think it will, I hope it will, especially because I’m getting quite frustrated. Mosh has a different process from mine (which in the end would be a really good thing) but is quite difficult honestly.

Man Woman, Paul Cava


He works with his hands…finding what he wants to say by doing it and tweaking it. I work differently. I write and I go deep into one particular idea, then I see the image.

We’re coming from opposite poles. Is this good? If we focus on the distinction, on the tension, it would be more honest. Things don’t always really fit, but somehow, there is a fluidity. I talked to him about it, and actually suggested that we begin to draw together. I’m willing to give it a shot. Something new. Something that does not need us to think. We’ll try it out.

Richard Osbourne

28 11 2007


Richard Osbourne gave us tutorials on our project, and it was one of the best focused discussions I’ve had. He even gave us a title for our work, “The Rules of the Game,” especially since we’ll be using the theories of Foucault for our framework.

The suggestions he gave us were:

Set up a number of rules for the collaboration…then break them.

To incorporate the idea of the Panopticon (the eye of power). This is about how we edit ourselves knowing that someone is watching us.

To watch The Rules of the Game by Renoir.


His idea was actually to post the rules when we do the installation. This is fabulous idea. As it reflects the unspoken code of relationships and how we break it and transform it.

Mosh and I decided to come up with the rules…much to discuss.

%d bloggers like this: