[-empyre-] Process as paradigm

Sat May 22 19:20:36 EST 2010

The idea of an image having agency is what I was trying to get at in an
earlier posting, where we discussed the open nature of systems. I am not
sure if I follow the fine distinction you are making between an animated (in
process) and still (processed) image in this context though. The agency of
an image is in the mind of the viewer and the interactions it is involved
in, which are often social. In that sense a record of an activity can have
agency of equal import to something that is currently active. In fact, there
are no inactive elements in this context as agency is something evoked in
relationships, not something emergent from things themselves (that suggests
naive essentialism).

Your comment on the Louvre gets to the heart of the problem with museums and
why their hand is so often dead. The Louvre presents the Mona Lisa as an
iconic object that we are meant to regard as emanating some kind of value,
an agency. But that agency is not a product of the image. It is a product of
all the relationships that picture exists within  in the first instance,
the relationship with the viewer (and all the baggage they bring to the
party), the relationship with the institution, the art world, human history,
the larger world, etc. As such, agency is not a property of things but of
relationships.

Best

Simon

Simon Biggs

s.biggs at eca.ac.uk  simon at littlepig.org.uk  Skype: simonbiggsuk
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
Research Professor  edinburgh college of art  http://www.eca.ac.uk/
Creative Interdisciplinary Research into CoLlaborative Environments
http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
Electronic Literature as a Model of Creativity and Innovation in Practice
http://www.elmcip.net/

From: "Eileen Reynolds (Asst Prof)" <EReynolds at ntu.edu.sg>
Reply-To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
Date: Sat, 22 May 2010 11:18:04 +0800
To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Process as paradigm

Hi Erika,

The image as output seems to me the most active agent because it is out in
the world communicating.   However, if one is more interested in the the
data set being "algorithmicly" processed through a computer, then why waste
the paper to create an image that is non active at the end?  If the
production of the image is just a remnant and record of the computer's
processing, then no, it is not an active agent, and only proof of the
actively processing computer and its ability to do something.

My other thought is the old classic - "the computer is just a tool".   And
since we place these tools on such a high pedestal, perhaps the Louvre
should instead display the paint brush that Leonardo used to paint the Mona
Lisa rather than just the 30 × 20 inch remnant of the pigmented data set
that he "algorithmicly" processed through the bristles. But I'm not too
certain that would interest very many.

-Eileen

________________________________________
From: empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
[empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au] On Behalf Of Erika Jean Lincoln
[fur_princess at yahoo.ca]
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 11:38 PM
To: soft_skinned_space
Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Process as paradigm

Hi Maria, Yann,
Isn't it more precise to say that the data set of the digital image is
"algorithmicly" processed through an computer which leads to a different
data set which is then represented as an image?

To me the image is not the active agent.
Thoughts?

Erika Lincoln
Electronic Media Artist
Winnipeg/Manitoba/Canada
http://www.lincolnlab.net

--- On Thu, 5/20/10, Maria Verstappen <notnot at xs4all.nl> wrote:

> From: Maria Verstappen <notnot at xs4all.nl>
> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Process as paradigm
> To: "soft_skinned_space" <empyre at gamera.cofa.unsw.edu.au>, "Yann Le Guennec"
<y at x-arn.org>
> Received: Thursday, May 20, 2010, 11:37 AM
> Dear Yann,
> In the context of this exhibition the notion of "generative
> image" can be taken quite literal as a still image that
> generates the next image in real time. Subsequently this new
> image forms the basis for the next image, etcetera. In case
> of a screen based work, the viewer experiences this ongoing
> sequence as a dynamic animation.
> Maria
>
> On May 19, 2010, at 10:09 PM, Yann Le Guennec wrote:
>
> > Hello dear Empyreans,
> >
> > systems are open;
> > entropy is a mistake;
> > boundaries are in the mind (of the 'modelizer'=
> someone making a model);
> > every process is part of n systems;
> > quantum physics is a biface (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biface);
> > we build tools we need, to prove what we think;
> > we use tools someone built (some day), to prove what
> we thought (some day);
> >
> > but ... i would still like to know what is this: a
> 'generative image';
> >
> > http://www.laboralcentrodearte.org/en/714-catalogue
> (PDF p: 55)
> >
> > Do you mean a picture can generate something, or, an
> image is necessarily a mind projection ? in the future
> (unforeseen) ?
> >
> >
> > best,
> > yann
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>

_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre

CONFIDENTIALITY: This email is intended solely for the person(s) named and
may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient, please delete it, notify us and do not copy, use, or disclose its
content. Thank you.

Towards A Sustainable Earth: Print Only When Necessary
_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre

Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20100522/0bac0b66/attachment.html>