Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Shredded Blogs
I typed the addresses of some of me and my friends blogs into http://www.potatoland.org/shredder/ and came up with these interesting "shredded" versions:
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
ONLINE IDENTITY: INTRODUCTION AND KEY ISSUES
WHAT IS IDENTITY? WHAT IS DIGITAL OR ONLINE IDENTITY? HOW IS IT DIFFERENT FROM "IN PERSON" IDENTITY?
PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE SHARING OF PERSONAL INFO
- One definition from the Concise Oxford English Dictionary for identity is: "the fact of being who or what a person or thing is, the characteristics determining this." More simply, one might say your identity is the answer to the question: "Who are you?"
- Digital or online identity is a portrayal of who you are in a digital or online format. Like any form of identity, this presents only a slice of who you really are, and in some ways allows a person to more carefully control what that presentation of identity is.
- With the ability to construct your online personas, questions are raised related to the intention behind how this representation is conveyed. Is an online identity a "true" identity or is it something inauthentic, simply constructed by the portrayer.
- "In sum, the selves that we have are composed of multiple identities and contradictory experiences. In late-modern society, it is almost impossible to have a fully unified, completed and coherent 'self'; rather, we all tend to have fleeting, multiple and contradictory selves" (Charles Cheung "Presentations of Self on Personal Homepages", p45)
PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE SHARING OF PERSONAL INFO
- Online identities can blur the line between what we traditionally think of as public vs. private information. It also can challenge comfort zones regarding what we might consider personal spheres.
- By placing your identity in a digital format instead of a living format, it places this information in a place that can potentially be used by others
- People can hide behind a constructed identity to harm others in ways they might not as their "real life" identities.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
What is art, videogames?
a) How does Adams define art? Do you agree with his definition?
According to Adams, art can be divided into categories like: literary arts, fine arts, and decorative arts. The line though between what is art and isn't is very blurry and can be complicated by things like architecture and things that are both creative and have a utilitarian aspect.
-art should have some moral values, games can be just an activity
-contains ideas, must have meanings
-if the focus is on how it's used--> less of an art
-if there are critics that review it as art
Drawing lines around what is art seems problematic to me since every boundary that can be drawn is sure to have exceptions. For example saying that art must be recognized as such by critics or by the public would exclude anything that an artist never shares with anyone else. Also saying that something with a utilitarian primary focus is not art might exclude interactive art that is meant to be used in some way. This could go on forever, but what's important is the point that for each qualification of what is not art there is bound to be something with the same characteristic that is art. What seems important to me in this question is the issue of intention. By this I mean if the creator of something intends to be art, then I think it can be.
b) According to Adams, what is needed for videogames to be considered as art?
-If a game has a narrative it can fall into the category of literary arts
-Exploration of aesthetic properties: plays around with issues of perspective, color, and other visual considerations that artists might consider when working with more traditional types of art
It seems like a lot of the arguments related to defining what is or isn't art in terms of video games comes down to the intention and attention of the creator. If the artist pays attention to visual and conceptual considerations in the way an artist would then the video game is pushed into the realm of art. Also it seems like one can say that when a person seeks out to create something as art (be it a video game or not) then it can be considered art, just not necessarily good art, or successful art I would add.
According to Adams, art can be divided into categories like: literary arts, fine arts, and decorative arts. The line though between what is art and isn't is very blurry and can be complicated by things like architecture and things that are both creative and have a utilitarian aspect.
-art should have some moral values, games can be just an activity
-contains ideas, must have meanings
-if the focus is on how it's used--> less of an art
-if there are critics that review it as art
Drawing lines around what is art seems problematic to me since every boundary that can be drawn is sure to have exceptions. For example saying that art must be recognized as such by critics or by the public would exclude anything that an artist never shares with anyone else. Also saying that something with a utilitarian primary focus is not art might exclude interactive art that is meant to be used in some way. This could go on forever, but what's important is the point that for each qualification of what is not art there is bound to be something with the same characteristic that is art. What seems important to me in this question is the issue of intention. By this I mean if the creator of something intends to be art, then I think it can be.
b) According to Adams, what is needed for videogames to be considered as art?
-If a game has a narrative it can fall into the category of literary arts
-Exploration of aesthetic properties: plays around with issues of perspective, color, and other visual considerations that artists might consider when working with more traditional types of art
It seems like a lot of the arguments related to defining what is or isn't art in terms of video games comes down to the intention and attention of the creator. If the artist pays attention to visual and conceptual considerations in the way an artist would then the video game is pushed into the realm of art. Also it seems like one can say that when a person seeks out to create something as art (be it a video game or not) then it can be considered art, just not necessarily good art, or successful art I would add.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Ethnics of Digital Gaming
a) According to the film, what are some pros and cons of playing video games for individuals and societies? PROS:
This is a difficult issue because government censorship can be a slippery slope resulting in more things banned than one would initially desire. However I feel that if enough hard evidence can be drawn to make connections between violent games and real life aggressive and dangerous behavior some government action should be taken for the general safety of the public.
I think what is most important is to inform people (especially parents) on these types of issues and helping them to differentiate on their own which games might be dangerous to use. Since perfect education on any topic seems impossible, the best solution may be some sort of government restrictions limiting the use of these types of games but not all together banning them. A rating system (I think some countries already have this?) like what we see with film seems like a good solution to this, only allowing people over 18 to purchase games with potentially harmful content.
d) Interview with classmates:
- Can be used as a recruiting method for the Military or other groups
- Can be used as an alternative therapeutic method for kids coping with disease, for example playing a game called "Remission" for a boy with Leukemia that treats him about issues such as chemotherapy treatment.
- Some arguments suggest that violent games can encourage similar behavior in the non-virtual world.
- Playing video games frequently goes against some of the basic things that we consider important in contemporary society such as live social interaction and also physical activity. Participating in these activities in a simulated reality is not a valid substitute.
- A brain study showed links between playing violent games and aggressive brain activity, though not necessarily actual aggressive actions.
- In one case, a boy who had only handled a gun once in real life but had significant experience shooting to kill in the virtual world had not only nearly perfect accuracy but also showed a level of desensitization in his ability to shoot his victims in the face.
This is a difficult issue because government censorship can be a slippery slope resulting in more things banned than one would initially desire. However I feel that if enough hard evidence can be drawn to make connections between violent games and real life aggressive and dangerous behavior some government action should be taken for the general safety of the public.
I think what is most important is to inform people (especially parents) on these types of issues and helping them to differentiate on their own which games might be dangerous to use. Since perfect education on any topic seems impossible, the best solution may be some sort of government restrictions limiting the use of these types of games but not all together banning them. A rating system (I think some countries already have this?) like what we see with film seems like a good solution to this, only allowing people over 18 to purchase games with potentially harmful content.
d) Interview with classmates:
- Name: Penny
- Game: The Sims
- Why do you like it? You can control the people, and you can have things that you can't have in real life, for example pets. Also you can make yourself look however you want to look, you can change your face or your hair easily if you don't like what you have to start with.
- Does this game encourage any ways of thinking or behavior that you find questionable or worrying? It might make people respect real life less and not appreciate the life they have or the things they have in it as much.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
mouchette.com
This site strikes me as very peculiar and kind of disturbing. The girl seems to be a constructed identity and the site in general seems to be creepily ambiguous. The site also seems to go out of its way to touch on controversial and disturbing subject matter. Something else left ambiguous is the purpose or motivation behind the site. The space for the viewer's interaction with the site through sending e-mails or posting comments seems to be a sort of request for the viewers of the site to try and answer those ambiguities themselves through contemplation as she draws them in.
The biggest question to me is why would a person want to engage with this site? What about it draws people in? The graphics and overall design are very dated and the construction of the site is confusing and difficult in terms of navigation. This again makes me ask what is the creator of this site hoping to achieve? It does not explicitly express much about who Mouchette is, and it does also not cater to the viewer with a user friendly design. Who is the site for? And what is the audience supposed to do or think? What should we be taking away from our time at this site? Perhaps the true content of this site has little to do with Mouchette herself but is in fact these very questions. The various graphics, statements, pages, etc. are merely the medium with which the artist has worked to convey their message.
The biggest question to me is why would a person want to engage with this site? What about it draws people in? The graphics and overall design are very dated and the construction of the site is confusing and difficult in terms of navigation. This again makes me ask what is the creator of this site hoping to achieve? It does not explicitly express much about who Mouchette is, and it does also not cater to the viewer with a user friendly design. Who is the site for? And what is the audience supposed to do or think? What should we be taking away from our time at this site? Perhaps the true content of this site has little to do with Mouchette herself but is in fact these very questions. The various graphics, statements, pages, etc. are merely the medium with which the artist has worked to convey their message.
NY Times Article: "In a Digital Age, Students Still Cling to Paper Textbooks"
Here is an interesting article about the popularity of paper textbooks in today's digital age:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/20/nyregion/20textbooks.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/20/nyregion/20textbooks.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
My Online Identities
I would say that I have 6 total online identities. I am counting my facebook profile as two because I have different levels of privacy settings for my friends vs. say my parents. Then I have four blogs, one is sort of like a personal diary that I only share with a couple of close friends, one is public on tumblr.com that I use to post images, articles, videos, music, or thoughts that I find interesting and want to come back to later and share with others. Then I have two blogs with more specific purposes, one is for this class and the other is to document my time in Hong Kong. For my Hong Kong blog I have to be very conscious of what side of my identity I show since some of the kids who I babysit for read it. At the same time, I like to post some content that readers like my parents or family friends would be interested in so it's a mix of things that I try to make appropriate for and interesting to all audiences. One benefit is the fact that online identities allow for this type of control. Each one of my online identities represents a different aspect of the full picture that is only seen when interacting with me in real life. The other side of this though presents a risk of online identities: the fact that this sort of constructed facade can be shattered as other sides of your identity might leak through in ways that you don't want. Also sometimes I think that people express aspects of themselves online that they don't want to leak out into real life which could lead to trouble.
Research Topic: Constructing Identity online
- Key quotes (at least five)
-“In sum, the selves that we have are composed of multiple identities and contradictory experiences. In late-modern society, it is almost impossible to have a fully unified, completed and coherent ‘self’; rather, we all tend to have fleeting, multiple and contradictory selves”
(Charles Cheung “Presentations of Self on Personal Homepages”, p45)
-"The cyber space offers the unique opportunity to communicate with one another; thanks to the virtual world it creates. In the world of virtual reality, you can be what you had always wanted to be."
-"Personas demonstrates the computer's uncanny insights and its inadvertent errors, such as the mischaracterizations caused by the inability to separate data from multiple owners of the same name. It is meant for the viewer to reflect on our current and future world, where digital histories are as important if not more important than oral histories, and computational methods of condensing our digital traces are opaque and socially ignorant. " (from official Personas website: http://personas.media.mit.edu/ e
-"The distinguishing character or personality of an individual" (one definition of "identity" from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary) condition of being oneself or itself, and not another"
- Key Links. Add links to at least 5 good webstites/youtubes that give further information about this topic
http://www.annehelmond.nl/2010/01/21/essay-on-identity-2-0-constructing-identity-with-cultural-software/
http://www.pcmech.com/article/construct-your-online-identity-carefully/
http://www.articlesbase.com/visual-art-articles/how-to-establish-a-unique-online-identity-in-the-virtual-world-995452.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity
http://mashable.com/social-media/
- Key Books and Articles. Make a list of at least 5 books or articles that contain interesting material on the topic. Write one phrase or one sentence comment on what you think of this book or article eg "looks easy to understand", "seems to focus mainly on one digital game, Counter-Strike"
"The Presentation of Self on Personal Homepages: A new phenomenon in the post-traditional age" by Yusuf Kurniawan (http://www.slideshare.net/yusuf_k/presentation-of-self-on-personal-homepages)
"The World Wide Web as Social Hypertext" by Thomas Erickson (http://www.pliant.org/personal/Tom_Erickson/SocialHypertext.html)
"Writing Oneself in Cyberspace" by Daniel Chandler (http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/short/homepgid.html)
"Personal Home Pages and the Construction of Identities on the Web" by Daniel Chandler (http://leahanderst.com/Composition/Personal%20Home%20Pages%20and%20the%20Construction%20of%20Identities%20on%20the%20Web.pdf)
"Essay on Identity 2,0: Constructing identity with cultural software" by Anne Helmond
"Construct Your Online Identity Carefully" by Ryan Passey
"How to Establish a Unique Online Identity in the Virtual World" (http://www.articlesbase.com/visual-art-articles/how-to-establish-a-unique-online-identity-in-the-virtual-world-995452.html)
CASE STUDY: "Personas"
http://www.jazjaz.net/2009/08/personas-art-project-visualize-your-online-identity.html
http://personas.media.mit.edu/
http://web.mit.edu/museum/exhibitions/connections/
http://web.media.mit.edu/~azinman/
- Who is the artist/maker of the artwork/website/game?
-Aaron Zinman, with help from Alex Dragulescu, Yannick Assogba and Judith Donath
- What is its name?
-Personas (http://personas.media.mit.edu/)
- When was it produced/released?
-2009 as a component of the Metropath(ologies) exhibit at the MIT Museum by the Sociable Media Group from the MIT Media Lab
- Describe it in detail
-In contrast to many online personas, this one does not give any power to the person being portrayed. Often the act of creating an online identity allows for some level of manipulation by the individual being identified as seen in facebook or many other examples. With “Personas” the only action the individual can take is typing in his or her first and last name and pressing enter. Personas then scans the internet for mentions of this name and sorts through the words associated with each mentioning, classifying these words into different categories like “sports,” “politics,” or “art.” In a sense, “Personas” is a way of using the internet as a mirror or maybe just a way of stepping back to see exactly how the internet sees you (or at least your name). In the end, the users of “Personas” are left with a color coded horizontal bar running across their computer screen displaying a proportioned representation of their online identities.
- For you, what is interesting/unusual/thought-provoking/aesthetically pleasing/puzzling about this artwork/website/game? [you may choose your own adjectives! These are just some suggestions]. Explain in detail.
-For me, this project is both conceptually and visually or aesthetically interesting. Most basically, I think it is great to see a compilation of our various online identities created in this sort of hands off way. Even when the “Personas” generator grabs information pertaining to a different individual by the same name, it seems to add meaning to the project, reminding us that these sorts of confusions can be made by real people running google searches as well. This also begs the question of how much more “you” is one of these quotes that you believe pertains to the real you than one that you feel is about someone else?
Aesthetically speaking, the colors and the overall layout were clearly selected by someone with a design background as they are very pleasing to the eye and complement each other well. As I watched this program generate its visual representation of my own online identity I was mesmerized by the changing colors of the words and segments of the bar. Both the process and the final product were undoubtedly visually stimulating in my opinion.
- What key issue(s) or questions does this artwork/website/game raise? Explain these thoroughly, making use of quotations and paraphrases from your readings, and other examples, as appropriate
This project addresses the troubles with authenticity when it comes to online identities, showing that many of the people identified as being you while generating your Persona are not actually you at all. It reminds us how this same sort of confusion can happen when we are attempting to analyze the identity of another person online. This project is also an excellent illustration of identity convergence, grabbing an assortment of presentations of one person from across the web and mashing them together into one color-coded bar.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Youtube in Regards to Originality and Imitation
Do video sharing sites such as Youtube enhance or worsen creative culture?
About a week ago I wrote an extra blog post about the Youtube based exhibition that the Guggenheim Museum is organizing and the organized awards being given to videos on a similar site called Vimeo just because it was something I was interested in and it seemed relevant to this course. I think that look at these two instances it disrupts the argument of those who believe sites like Youtube worsen creative culture with the absence of "cultural gatekeepers" as clearly structures are being applied to make it so that those still exist.
I agree that Youtube makes it a lot easier for us to waste a lot more time watching mindless crap, but at the same time it makes it a lot easier for more people to publish more things that might turn out to be actually really great. So many times I have talked with friends about sort of "what ifs" for example I've never tried to play the trombone, what if I was given a gift that I've never had the chance to discover and utilize as a brilliant trombone player?
As we discussed in class, before Youtube making a music video to be seen by the masses was extremely difficult and exclusive. This site invites any aspiring musicians, video artists, dancers, commentators, etc. with ease for the opportunity to be discovered by the public. An article on http://abcnews.go.com about young pop star Justin Bieber does an excellent job illustrating how important this can be.
Basically, I feel that although the open nature of sites like Youtube leave us with a lot more junk to sort through they also make it possible for many more actually great things to get out there which in the end seems more important and certainly enhances creative culture.
About a week ago I wrote an extra blog post about the Youtube based exhibition that the Guggenheim Museum is organizing and the organized awards being given to videos on a similar site called Vimeo just because it was something I was interested in and it seemed relevant to this course. I think that look at these two instances it disrupts the argument of those who believe sites like Youtube worsen creative culture with the absence of "cultural gatekeepers" as clearly structures are being applied to make it so that those still exist.
I agree that Youtube makes it a lot easier for us to waste a lot more time watching mindless crap, but at the same time it makes it a lot easier for more people to publish more things that might turn out to be actually really great. So many times I have talked with friends about sort of "what ifs" for example I've never tried to play the trombone, what if I was given a gift that I've never had the chance to discover and utilize as a brilliant trombone player?
As we discussed in class, before Youtube making a music video to be seen by the masses was extremely difficult and exclusive. This site invites any aspiring musicians, video artists, dancers, commentators, etc. with ease for the opportunity to be discovered by the public. An article on http://abcnews.go.com about young pop star Justin Bieber does an excellent job illustrating how important this can be.
With "Bieber fever" sweeping the globe it is incredible to remember that this young celeb would be likely be no where without his Youtube account.Usher had "Star Search" to launch him out of obscurity at age 13. His new protégé, Justin Bieber, had YouTube. At 12, Bieber was posting homemade videos of himself on YouTube and industry insiders starting taking notice.
"It had a hundred views, then a thousand views, then ten thousand views, so I just kept posting more videos and more videos," Justin, now 15, says in a soft voice. "Eventually, I got found by my manager who flew me to Atlanta to meet Usher."
Basically, I feel that although the open nature of sites like Youtube leave us with a lot more junk to sort through they also make it possible for many more actually great things to get out there which in the end seems more important and certainly enhances creative culture.
Looking at Chris Crocker's "Leave Britney Alone"
1. How many viewers are estimated to have watched the youtube video?
According to Chris Crocker's youtube page this video has received 34,190,488 views to date and the Wikipedia page on Crocker states that "Within the first 24 hours of its posting, the video had accumulated over 2 million views."
2. How would you rate the video?
- Is it of high quality in technical terms? Is it interesting aesthetically eg camera angles, use of light, the narrative, and so on?
“Bo” (1991). Catherine Opie vs. a still from Chris Crocker's "Leave Britney Alone"
- Does it raise interesting socio-cultural issues?
These are all complex issues and it's fascinating to consider that such a low-tech and brief video can touch on all of them but what I think is important to remember regarding this point is that youtube is about much more than the video itself. Many of these issues and the extent to which they were expressed via this video were seen more in the response to the video than the clip itself. What seems so significant about the youtube site is not just that anyone can post their work, but that anyone can view and respond to it. With this site we see a new type of forum for discussion and a way to expose people to numerous things they otherwise might not see. It is this two way street idea that makes youtube as powerful and significant as it is.
3. Do you think it deserved the attention that it reeived from the internet community?
Though in many ways the attention that this video received seems a bit excessive (when you compare it to all of the more "serious" and "important" issues out there that could receive this level of attention instead) but at the same time I think that it is fitting. I suppose the reason that it makes sense is the fact that it received attention in a community not dissimilar to what it is discussing for example shallow pop-culture blogs like Perez Hilton's site. What I mean by this is that within this context of online entertainment, a video like this that is commenting on issues related to online entertainment seems very relevant and therefore deserving of the attention it received.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Digital Film Making and "Mission to Earth"
Using "Mission to Earth" as an example, note what is new or different about digital cinema compared to traditional film making? Consider the story and appearance of the film.
In addition to the more traditional camera shots showing the main character moving through her life, other sections of the visual frame contained illustrative graphics that were quite abstract. These aspects of the video could not be created without digital technology and the overall feel of the film would be different without them.
What about the construction of the film?
There seem to be two ways that the construction of this film can be viewed: the visual structure and the narrative structure. Both visually and in terms of the organization of the story's narrative the organization of this film was very unusual and could not have been produced that way without digital technology. Visually, the screen was broken into a grid pattern, displaying a collection of visuals simultaneously. Most prominently were the realistic camera shots, but we also saw abstract digital animations and frames of solid colors alongside what the camera had captured of the actress moving through her world.
What struck me as most interesting about this film was how the storyline was structured. We learned that the DVD contained a larger database of scenes than what is shown in one viewing of the film. At each scene change the next segment is pulled from the database creating a different story than the last time it was watched.
What other art forms (eg film, digital art, painting, websites etc) does this film remind you of? Explain the similarity.
This film reminded me of a collage, pulling together a variety of visuals that were chopped up, moved around and put together in one frame to create a new product for the viewer. It also reminded me of the way we often treat the computer screen with a variety of windows open all at once. Lastly, I didn't think of it myself but it seemed so obvious once a classmate said it: the way the grid of this film was organized looked quite a lot like a painting by Piet Mondrian.
Did I like it?
This is such a difficult question to answer, I suppose because nothing is really as black and white as "like" vs "not like." For entertainment value, I would not say that I liked this film, however for something that makes me think both about the world around me and the possibilities of film and digital technologies I liked it a lot.
In addition to the more traditional camera shots showing the main character moving through her life, other sections of the visual frame contained illustrative graphics that were quite abstract. These aspects of the video could not be created without digital technology and the overall feel of the film would be different without them.
What about the construction of the film?
There seem to be two ways that the construction of this film can be viewed: the visual structure and the narrative structure. Both visually and in terms of the organization of the story's narrative the organization of this film was very unusual and could not have been produced that way without digital technology. Visually, the screen was broken into a grid pattern, displaying a collection of visuals simultaneously. Most prominently were the realistic camera shots, but we also saw abstract digital animations and frames of solid colors alongside what the camera had captured of the actress moving through her world.
What struck me as most interesting about this film was how the storyline was structured. We learned that the DVD contained a larger database of scenes than what is shown in one viewing of the film. At each scene change the next segment is pulled from the database creating a different story than the last time it was watched.
What other art forms (eg film, digital art, painting, websites etc) does this film remind you of? Explain the similarity.
This film reminded me of a collage, pulling together a variety of visuals that were chopped up, moved around and put together in one frame to create a new product for the viewer. It also reminded me of the way we often treat the computer screen with a variety of windows open all at once. Lastly, I didn't think of it myself but it seemed so obvious once a classmate said it: the way the grid of this film was organized looked quite a lot like a painting by Piet Mondrian.
Did I like it?
This is such a difficult question to answer, I suppose because nothing is really as black and white as "like" vs "not like." For entertainment value, I would not say that I liked this film, however for something that makes me think both about the world around me and the possibilities of film and digital technologies I liked it a lot.
Digital vs. Analog Photography
1) What are some photographic effects that can be achieved using digital or analog (darkroom, film, lights etc) technology?
Using light to alter an image can be used in a lot of different ways in analog photography. When taking a picture with a traditional camera a photographer can change the shutter speed to affect how much light is let in. Light can also be used to make interesting special effects during the development process and one can use techniques called dodging and burning to change how light or dark the final image is during the printing process of the photograph.
Photographers can also use a technique called double exposures where they capture two photographs on the same piece of film. This can be used to create interesting optical illusions, it can suggest powerful statements through insightful juxtapositions, and create false impressions by suggesting that two things were in the same place at the same time that in fact never were. A contemporary artist who does interesting work with double exposures is Tierney Gearon.
2) What are some photographic techniques that can only be done using digital technology?
To me, the most important feature of digital technology that traditional photography does not have is the "undo" button. The fact that photographers can make all sorts of alterations and quickly go back if they don't like how they turned out seems really incredible.
Looking at Photoshop, it seems like a lot of the features are inspired by techniques used in analog photography (like the example of solarization above) but the "artistic" filters are new techniques that could not be done without this technology. Here are some examples of what these filters can look like:
3) What is the difference between analog photography and digital photography?
The technical difference between analog and digital photography has to do with how analog photography uses light and chemicals in the development process to produce an image on film while digital photography involves manipulating a digitized image on a computer. As both technologies advance the difference visually seems more and more difficult to spot when they are used to depict a realistic image that has not been heavily manipulated. In a practical sense it could be argued that digital photography is a better pursuit at least to a beginner since you do not need to spend money on film or dark room equipment and it is much easier to correct your mistakes. Though on the other hand, the laborious process that can be involved with analog photography makes it more easily viewed as a true art form and not just a simple process of pressing a button.
Using light to alter an image can be used in a lot of different ways in analog photography. When taking a picture with a traditional camera a photographer can change the shutter speed to affect how much light is let in. Light can also be used to make interesting special effects during the development process and one can use techniques called dodging and burning to change how light or dark the final image is during the printing process of the photograph.
Photographers can also use a technique called double exposures where they capture two photographs on the same piece of film. This can be used to create interesting optical illusions, it can suggest powerful statements through insightful juxtapositions, and create false impressions by suggesting that two things were in the same place at the same time that in fact never were. A contemporary artist who does interesting work with double exposures is Tierney Gearon.
2) What are some photographic techniques that can only be done using digital technology?
To me, the most important feature of digital technology that traditional photography does not have is the "undo" button. The fact that photographers can make all sorts of alterations and quickly go back if they don't like how they turned out seems really incredible.
Looking at Photoshop, it seems like a lot of the features are inspired by techniques used in analog photography (like the example of solarization above) but the "artistic" filters are new techniques that could not be done without this technology. Here are some examples of what these filters can look like:
3) What is the difference between analog photography and digital photography?
The technical difference between analog and digital photography has to do with how analog photography uses light and chemicals in the development process to produce an image on film while digital photography involves manipulating a digitized image on a computer. As both technologies advance the difference visually seems more and more difficult to spot when they are used to depict a realistic image that has not been heavily manipulated. In a practical sense it could be argued that digital photography is a better pursuit at least to a beginner since you do not need to spend money on film or dark room equipment and it is much easier to correct your mistakes. Though on the other hand, the laborious process that can be involved with analog photography makes it more easily viewed as a true art form and not just a simple process of pressing a button.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Playing With Digital Photography
Last summer I took a picture of my friend standing in front of Maya Lin's earthwork Wave Field. I thought it was difficult to see the waves in the earth in this photograph so I tried to use photoshop coloring to emphasize the changes in the landscape. I also tried to make the color fade into black and white as you look further into the background. And then I added some pops of color scattered throughout the forest just for fun and because I thought it looked sort of interesting and maybe makes the forest look a little less ominous. I would like to work on it a bit more and make the changes more dramatic but here is what I have so far:
A Week For Online Video Sites
Earlier this week the Guggenheim curators for their upcoming, groundbreaking exhibition YouTube Play. A Biennial of Creative Video announced the shortlist of 125 videos that will next be narrowed down to 20 on October 21st. The selected 20 videos will be on view at the Guggenheim Museum in New York for just a short time (Oct. 22-24) so it seems most people will be viewing them online through the playbiennial's YouTube channel.
According to the web page for the biennial, "It is the goal of YouTube Play to reach the widest possible audience, inviting each and every individual with access to the Internet to submit a video for consideration. The end result will hopefully be the ultimate YouTube playlist: a selection of the most unique, innovative, groundbreaking video work being created and distributed online during the past two years." With this mission statement in mind, it seems logical that the videos will be on view at the museum for only a few days.
For more information on the show and issues related to video art and online video in general check out the blog created in conjunction with YouTube Play: The Take.
Vimeo, another popular online video website just announced the finalists for its first ever Vimeo Awards. They have divided their finalists into 9 categories:
According to the web page for the biennial, "It is the goal of YouTube Play to reach the widest possible audience, inviting each and every individual with access to the Internet to submit a video for consideration. The end result will hopefully be the ultimate YouTube playlist: a selection of the most unique, innovative, groundbreaking video work being created and distributed online during the past two years." With this mission statement in mind, it seems logical that the videos will be on view at the museum for only a few days.
For more information on the show and issues related to video art and online video in general check out the blog created in conjunction with YouTube Play: The Take.
Vimeo, another popular online video website just announced the finalists for its first ever Vimeo Awards. They have divided their finalists into 9 categories:
- Narrative
- Documentary
- Motion Graphics
- Remix
- Music Video
- Experimental
- Original Series
- Animation
- Captured
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Wikipedia vs Britannica
If I had to choose between these two sources for information to be the only encyclopedia for the world to use I would have to go with Wikipedia.
Although this encyclopedic source can be less reliable than the Britannica Online Encyclopedia in terms of being factual, I feel that Wikipedia has enough other benefits that are absent from the Britannica format to make up for this common complaint.
Links for Further Research
Though both encyclopedia sites feature hyperlinks throughout their content, connecting them to other related pages it is my experience that Wikipedia has many more of these. But perhaps more importantly Wikipedia generally speaking lists many more external links and long lists of additional resources. For me, encyclopedias have always been a starting point for researchers to obtain a base of knowledge on a given topic and then move forward to other texts produced by specialists in the subject matter at hand.
Greater Spectrum of Topics
When it comes to prominent figures, events, and other well established and widely recognized topics it may be that Britannica is a better source than Wikipedia but when it comes to lesser known subjects they seem to be omitted completely. While Britannica has substantial entries for many historic figures, when it comes to contemporary individuals the site is seriously lacking. Wikipedia, in contrast, provides in depth information on significant figures in a variety of fields. Personally, this type of information has been important for me as I have entered various internships in art museums, with a quick search one can learn the key facts related to the institutions director or perhaps prominent curators. With an openness to anyone as an author, Wikipedia provides an opening for the creation of pages on topics that perhaps only a limited population would know of or think to create but these topics could end up being interesting and of value to a greater population once published.
Low Costs
As mentioned in a 2005 lecture on Ted Talks, Jimmy Wales (founder of Wikipedia) explained that while they have a very significant number of authors contributing to the site's content, Wikipedia's actual staff consists of just one individual. In contrast, Encyclopaedia Britannica employs "trained editors and fact-checkers, more than 4,000 experts," according to Dale Hoiberg the senior vice president and editor in chief of Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc. as he stated in a 2006 discussion with Jimmy Wales published by The Wall Street Journal. Along with cost of production goes a cost to access the information. While Wikipedia is free for all users, Encyclopaedia Britannica is a proprietary source and users must pay for full access to the information that it provides.
Easier and Faster Correction of Errors
Perhaps the most common criticisms of Wikipedia is the question of the site's accuracy of information. It is true that many more errors or misinformation appear on Wikipedia than on Britannica's site but being an open source, these things can much more easily and promptly be corrected on Wikipedia than on Britannica where errors that do pop up take much longer to see corrections.
Broader Collection of Authors and Perspectives
With such openness in terms of authorship, it is much easier for Wikipedia to combat the sort of bias that the Encyclopaedia Britannica has been accused of often in the past. One example of this bias that has been given much attention is Britannica's portrayal of Hinduism that some have disputed as inaccurate and negative.
Provides a Platform For Information Storage
Wikipedia is a great place for individuals to compile and record information on a given topic that might otherwise be lost. For instance my high school has it's own Wikipedia page where individuals can record various facts and accomplishments of the school that might not otherwise be compiled all in one place.
Although this encyclopedic source can be less reliable than the Britannica Online Encyclopedia in terms of being factual, I feel that Wikipedia has enough other benefits that are absent from the Britannica format to make up for this common complaint.
Links for Further Research
Though both encyclopedia sites feature hyperlinks throughout their content, connecting them to other related pages it is my experience that Wikipedia has many more of these. But perhaps more importantly Wikipedia generally speaking lists many more external links and long lists of additional resources. For me, encyclopedias have always been a starting point for researchers to obtain a base of knowledge on a given topic and then move forward to other texts produced by specialists in the subject matter at hand.
Greater Spectrum of Topics
When it comes to prominent figures, events, and other well established and widely recognized topics it may be that Britannica is a better source than Wikipedia but when it comes to lesser known subjects they seem to be omitted completely. While Britannica has substantial entries for many historic figures, when it comes to contemporary individuals the site is seriously lacking. Wikipedia, in contrast, provides in depth information on significant figures in a variety of fields. Personally, this type of information has been important for me as I have entered various internships in art museums, with a quick search one can learn the key facts related to the institutions director or perhaps prominent curators. With an openness to anyone as an author, Wikipedia provides an opening for the creation of pages on topics that perhaps only a limited population would know of or think to create but these topics could end up being interesting and of value to a greater population once published.
Low Costs
As mentioned in a 2005 lecture on Ted Talks, Jimmy Wales (founder of Wikipedia) explained that while they have a very significant number of authors contributing to the site's content, Wikipedia's actual staff consists of just one individual. In contrast, Encyclopaedia Britannica employs "trained editors and fact-checkers, more than 4,000 experts," according to Dale Hoiberg the senior vice president and editor in chief of Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc. as he stated in a 2006 discussion with Jimmy Wales published by The Wall Street Journal. Along with cost of production goes a cost to access the information. While Wikipedia is free for all users, Encyclopaedia Britannica is a proprietary source and users must pay for full access to the information that it provides.
Easier and Faster Correction of Errors
Perhaps the most common criticisms of Wikipedia is the question of the site's accuracy of information. It is true that many more errors or misinformation appear on Wikipedia than on Britannica's site but being an open source, these things can much more easily and promptly be corrected on Wikipedia than on Britannica where errors that do pop up take much longer to see corrections.
Broader Collection of Authors and Perspectives
With such openness in terms of authorship, it is much easier for Wikipedia to combat the sort of bias that the Encyclopaedia Britannica has been accused of often in the past. One example of this bias that has been given much attention is Britannica's portrayal of Hinduism that some have disputed as inaccurate and negative.
Provides a Platform For Information Storage
Wikipedia is a great place for individuals to compile and record information on a given topic that might otherwise be lost. For instance my high school has it's own Wikipedia page where individuals can record various facts and accomplishments of the school that might not otherwise be compiled all in one place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)