Re: [-empyre-] Re: xmedialab

[fizzion <fizzion@optusnet.com.au>]

I know this is slightly off subject but has anyone in Oz noticed the
workshops being run at the Museum of Cont Arts in Sydney?

http://www.xmedialab.com.au/xmedialab.html

To be held on Saturday June 7 - 10th

Cost is a bit high though, not for artists, more for commercial types with
mega salaries.

Trouble is it sounds sooooo interesting.

Barrie 




> 
> to add a view or two to the topic.
> 
> i find programing (or scripting) to be the necesary medium to realise
> the work = it would be imposible to make this work
> in noprogramable environment. do one use java, perl, php, shockwave, ...
> it does not matter much. Still with any
> programing/scripting language you get special 'flawor' by using it.
> 
> So in most cases decition for specific programing/scripting language is
> part of the work itself. (beside typical interface and inherent
> estetic (you know it's flash when you see it) there are in some cases
> also political implications (open source, copyright, ...)).
> 
> 
> +
> 
> http://vispo.com/StirFryTexts
> 
> i found it wery interesting. how come it was decided to change text
> based on mouseovers?
> + maybe i overloked: when were StirFryText made?
> ++  http://vispo.com/StirFryTexts/1.html :
> else {
> alert("Sorry, you need Internet Explorer 4 or later for the Stir
> Fry Texts.");
> window.close();
> }
> 
> radical solotion? :)
> 
> 
> click,
> jaka
> 
> 
>>>> 
> Jim Andrews wrote:
> 
> in response to your post about the role of programming in typescape.2, i want
> to make a point
> about one of the roles of programming in digital art more generally. i want to
> suggest that
> programming, in works in which it is important, often is important in thinking
> about the form of
> the work.
> 
> i find that in my own work, often how it proceeds is, first, some long time in
> writing the code
> and creating the accompanying graphical interface that supports the
> interactive operations on
> the content. this process is quite long, and throughout it, i'm thinking of
> possible content for
> the piece, and am also thinking about the efficacy of letting the
> player/reader/wreader supply
> part or all of the content, as well as providing content myself. for instance,
> arteroids at
> http://vispo.com/arteroids lets the wreader write their own texts using Word
> for Weirdos (in
> 'play mode') or they can 'play' the texts that it defaults to. This is related
> to the sort of
> work you do also.
> 
> Word for Weirdos defines a 'literary form'; you write five texts, and there
> are various
> relations between these texts, and these five texts form 'one text', the text
> you play with when
> you play the game itself.
> 
> Some other work I've done, in the Stir Fry Texts at
> http://vispo.com/StirFryTexts (apologies,
> requires IE for the PC), is similar to arteroids in the relation between the
> programming/form
> and content. There are various stir fry texts, but they all use the same
> programming engine
> (done in DHTML that keys on the innerHTML method (so the content could be text
> or image or
> whatever other media types can be referred to in HTML)). This project has
> enjoyed some
> successful collaboration with various people including Pauline Masurel and
> Brian Lennon, both of
> whom wrote texts especially for the stir fry form, and did so in very
> different ways. The collab
> with Brian is on ubu.com as well as his and my site, and the collab with
> Pauline was featured in
> rhizome digest and has gone over pretty well.
> 
> We see this sort of somewhat separable relation between the programming/form
> and content in
> other types of digital works in which the content is perhaps only partially
> (or sometimes not at
> all) provided and through some sort of collaboration (either with the wreader
> or, as in the stir
> frys, with other artists), the content is realized.
> 
> the canadian media artist david rokeby has written about the notion that
> 'interface is content',
> ie, the form does have certain things to 'say', apart from whatever the
> content says.
> 
> one of the roles of programming, then, is to create new forms of art. as simon
> pointed out,
> computers are machines that can be *any* machine.
> 
> software such as Word or Director or Photoshop etc, supply almost none of the
> content, whereas
> programmed works of art generally play on the relation between the (usually
> partially) supplied
> content and the form, ie, they play on the relation between the tool and the
> work of art; that
> is, as it were, part of the 'content'.
> 
> for viewers to 'read' this part of the 'content' is apparently unusual. But
> it's present in
> thoughtfully formed/programmed work, ie, it encourages reflection about the
> relation between
> form and content, or programming and poetry...of course, being artists, we are
> interested not
> only in the form but the content also.
> 
> ja
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre