Monthly Archives: July 2016

Reflections on MA Show 2016

FullSizeRender 29

My comments are focused on MA Fine Art Digital, on our first year display, and then on my exhibit ‘Metamorphosis’.

Firstly, the final year exhibits were inspirational and set a high bar for us next year. The range of works was incredible, from paintings by Aurelie, artistic photography by Clara, visual performance by Anthi, sound performance by Manuel, hanging Narwhale skeleton by Jiarqi, abstract picture videos displayed on over 20 iMacs by Donald, to virtual reality by Charles (long listed for the Lumen Prize 2016) to name but a few. In the closing moments of the MA Show Group Crit I expressed my thanks to all the final year students (who had by now all passed their MA, some with distinction) on behalf of the first years. Their exhibits truly made us proud to be part of the MA Fine Art Digital Course. Jonathan’s efforts to get the show up and running were beyond the call of duty and many of all our displays owe a lot to him for their final presentation.

The first year display was impressive too. I won’t go through them all as they were in the same well lit space (shared with MA Designer Maker first year) and are pictured below. Congratulations to all.

There were some lessons to be learned which I hope will be remembered for our final year display.

Firstly, it is up to all of us to help prepare the display space, not just the few who spent a lot of time doing this. My special thanks goes to Celine.

Secondly, we need to help our fellow exhibitors to display the works of online students and others who cannot be there. We cannot leave it up to Jonathan who has enough to do over the show. He put up David’s work and was heavily involved in Yvonne’s, for example. I helped Leonie and Sharon. I am sure others helped too, but I think next year us students should all pull together and only rely on Jonathan for advice with our final displays.

Thirdly, we should resist Jonathan’s suggestion that our exhibits need only be cataloged online (so I am told by Donald). Nick Gorse, our UAL Camberwell Dean offered to pay for a brochure and it was declined. All other courses seemed to have one and they were certainly picked up by many visitors. I am not even sure that visitors were aware that the final year students had an online brochure. We should do both. This means we need to decide on our exhibits in enough time to take pictures and narrate our works in time for the brochure to be produced.

Fourthly, Labels should not be produced at the last minute by UAL Admin. They were a fiasco. No-one had time to check them before the start of the show. As they are transparent they only show on a white background. Whilst the need for consistency is recognised, I personally would have preferred printing in white, so that they showed up on my dark brown plinths. David and Patrick said that they would duplicate the format from this year and make their own, as none of their narrative was included in their labels. I noticed that Clara had to hand write her narrative on her label – and that was for the final year display! Again, we students need to provide our input in good time. Not everybody did so.

Fifthly, the first year display was invigilated by a few people only, and sometimes not at all. Celine and my attempts at getting a schedule together was responded to by a familiar few. Please pull together next year guys and girls.

Sixthly, lets ask that the security personnel do not turn off the power supply to all the exhibits in rooms that need it. We don’t turn off our computers at the plug at home every night, so why do security feel the need to do so? Apparently they need a request from Jonathan. Otherwise, Donald’s 20 odd iMacs need to be rebooted every morning for example. An hour’s exercise. Here are pics of our work after I invigilated one morning and switched the first year exhibits back on.

Some needed Donald’s passwords. Others needed to provide instructions how to bring them to life – including my own with no sound, but we did not provide any documentation about how this could be done. We just cannot let this happen next time. A professor from another art university specifically went to visit mine when I was not there and the sound did not play. How many others visited when these displays were not on? Not very professional and a big disappointment for the viewers.

So we all need to provide this documentation, just in case – there could be an overnight power cut or the security person the night before was not told about the request not to turn off our exhibits.

I would be interested if anyone else has points we could learn from. For our final show we need it to be on time, right first time, well communicated, and everyone must know how to recover the work that they are invigilating.

All that said, we all deserve a pat on the back

Finally, I was very pleased with my exhibit. I managed to combine practically everything I had learned and made during the past year: 3D Scanning, 3D Software, 3D Printing, Lost Wax Bronze Casting, Bare Conductive Arduino with adapted programs (sketches), voice integration using Audacity, proximity sensing and conductive materials. I owe thanks to many (in particular Ed, Jonathan, Becky in the foundry, Billy at CCM digital fabrication, Grzesiek at Wimbledon Digital Media, Chris Fellows and fellow enthusiasts at CCW Digital, and Prof Stephen Farthing at UAL Chelsea) and including all who contributed to my learning experience in any way especially to my fellow first year students and visiting artists who provided a crit of my work.

Over and out on this subject as i now have to get on with my Research Paper.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Digital to Physical – Made to Last? Prof. Paul Coldwell Interview 27 July 2016, UAL Chelsea

Last Import - 1 of 1

Paul Coldwell 27 July 2016, UAL Chelsea
Interview for my Research Paper

Planned Script (Not strictly adhered to)

Thank you for agreeing to talk to me about the subject of my research paper. I hope this has relevance to your work too. Would you mind if I recorded our discussion so that I may reference it in my paper?

Describe my research question. Give Paul my Synopsis to read.

Questions

1. Paul. Do you think that it is important that art produced today should be available for future generations to enjoy? And why?
2. Do you think that this also applies to art produced using or relying on digital products and processes? And why?
3. I know that you use some digital processes in some of your work. Please could you briefly describe them or any future digital technologies you are interested in using in your practice.
4. Does exhibiting any of your work rely on any of these digital processes? If so, if any of the hardware or software used became redundant could your work be shown as you originally intended? Is your work documented in a way that it could be shown or reproduced and exhibited as you intended?
5. You were probably there to enjoy digitally inspired artworks from the 1960’s onwards. Are there any in particular significant works that you remember displayed at that time? Have you been able to see it again more recently? If so was it functioning in the same way? If not, would it if it were displayed now?
6. Do you think, with the massive advances in technology that today’s important digital artworks will be able to be seen as the artist intended in say the next century?
7. If not, why not?
8. Do you think that art institutions and fine art schools such as UAL are addressing these issues?
9. What more do you think needs to be done?
10. Are there any questions or areas I have not explored today that you think I should have covered?
Thank you Paul.

Audio File of the Interview

Please turn your sound UP.

The interview started with my introductory comments followed by this recording:

 

 

 

Research Paper – Proposed Research

Digital to Physical – Built to Last?

image  ‘Sequence’

Will functioning digital art be part of our future cultural heritage?An examination of built in obsolescence in digital art contrasting two installations, one physical ‘Still Standing’ by Antony Gormley and the other a purely digital artwork ‘Sequence’ by Alex May and Anna Dumitriu.

Terence M Quinn

Abstract

The proliferation of new digital technologies employed by artists raises increasingly pressing questions related to preserving their work for our cultural heritage. Will only physical art survive intact over time? Can purely digital artworks continue to operate in the distant future and thus provide a digitally functioning legacy for generations to come? Is it possible to conserve digital artworks for the long term? Is this matter being adequately addressed by artists themselves, by those who collect their work, and by art institutions?
This research paper examines these questions and contrasts two contemporary installations, one physical ‘Still Standing’ by Antony Gormley and the other a purely digital artwork ‘Sequence’ by Alex May and Anna Dumitriu.
The conclusions reached are worrying for those concerned with the legacy of purely digital art practice. This paper argues the need to provide future generations with working examples of contemporary digital art. If artists care, it is observed that they are not doing much about it, perhaps because they don’t know how. Curators, government bodies, museums and institutions involved with this issue are aware of the urgent need for it to be addressed but for present practitioners it is a matter of too little, too late.

Bibliography

Interviews – Carried Out

David Byers Brown, MA Oxon, Course Leader Computer Animation, Digital Visual effects, Architectural Visualisation, University of Kent, Personal Interview Notes Spring 2016
Prof Paul Coldwell, Professor of Fine Art, Researcher and Artist, Chelsea College of Arts,
AudioFile on WordPress Blog 27 July 2016

Interviews – Agreed

Alex May, Agreed, 22 August 2016, Brighton, Re ‘Sequence’,
Bridgette Mongeon (by her invitation), a Texas based sculptor and author

Interviews – To be Requested

Prof Stephen Farthing, Professor of Drawing, Rootstein Hopkins University Chair of Drawing (personal mentor, Chelsea College of arts)
Prof Fred Deakin, UAL Chair of Interactive Digital Art, Central Saint Martins
Richard Colson MA, Artist and Subject Leader Computational Design, Ravensbourne and 2015 Lumen Prize Judge

Jocelyn Cumin, Course Leader MA Conservation, UAL Camberwell
V&A Curator, to be identified
Pip Laurenson, Head of Collection Care Research at Tate

Books – Obtained

Anthony Gormley ‘On Sculpture’, Thames & Hudson Ltd, 2015, ISBN 978-0-500-09395-5
3D Technology in Fine Art and Craft, Focal Press, Taylor & Francis Ltd, Bridgette Mongeon, 2016, ISBN 391-3-685-6-7222,
The Fundamentals of Digital Art, Ava Academia, Richard Colson, Jan 2007, ISBN 391145153687
Digital Art Conservation: Preservation of Digital Art: Theory and Practice, Ambra |V, Vienna 2013, ZK||| Centre for Art and Media Karlsruhe, ISBN 978-3-99043-538-0 (An Academic Study sponsored by the EU)
Theorising Digital Cultural Heritage: A Critical Discourse, Fiona Camaron and Sarah Kenderdine, The MIT Press, 2007, ISBN 978-0-262-51411-8
Preserving Our Heritage: Perspectives from Antiquity to the Digital Age, selections of papers and commentary by Michelle Valerie Colonna, Neal-Schumuman, Chicago 2015, ISBN 978-1-55570-937-2
Preparing the Workforce for Digital Curation, Committee On Future Career Opportunities And Educational Requirements for Digital Curation, The National Academies Press 2015, National Research Council, Washington USA
Preserving Complex Digital Objects, Janet Delve and David Anderson, Facet Publishing UK 2014, ISBN: 978-1-85604-958-0
Time and Bits: Managing Digital Continuity,Margaret MacLean and Ben H.Davis, Getty Publications, 31 Mar 2006, ISBN 978-0892365838
From Dust to Digital: Ten Years of the Endangered Archives Programme, Maja Kominko, Open Book Publishers, 16 Feb 2015, ISBN: 978-1783740628
Curation: The Power of Selection in a World of Excess, Michael Bhaskar, Little Brown Book Group, June 2016, ISBN 9780349412504

Books to Review

Copper and Bronze in Art: Corrosion, Colorants, Conservation, Getty Trust Publications, David A.Scott, 2002, ISBN 9780892366385
Digital Visual Culture: Theory and Practice, University of Chicago Press April 2009, Anna Bentkowska-Kafel, ISBN: 9781841502489
Museums of Tomorrow – an Internet Discussion (Issues in Cultural Theory), Centre for Art and Visual Culture, UMBC/Georgia O’Keeffe Museum, 2016, ISBN 1890761079
New Roles for New Times: Digital Curation for Preservation, Tyler Watson and Katherine Skinner, Association of Research Libraries, March 2011, ISBN 9781594078620
Digital Curation: A How-to-do-it Manual, Ross Harvey, Facet Publishing 2010, The Facet Preservation Collection, ISBN 9781856047333
Digital Curation in the Digital Humanities: Preserving and Promoting Archival and Special Collections, D R Harvey and Gillian Oliver, Neal Schumen Publishers, New Zealand, April 2016, ISBN 978-0838913857
Digital Preservation and Metadata: History, Theory , Practice, Susan Lazinger, Englewood, Colorado: Libraries Unlimited 2001, ISBN 1 56308 777 4

Conferences/Exhibitions

Reflections on From Clay to the Cloud: The Internet Archive and our Digital Legacy, April 29,2016, Caitlin, report on the exhibition Jan 23-Mar 20 2016, at the Laband, Internet Archive Blog, WordPress. Curator: Carolyn Peter, director and curator of the Laban Art Gallery at Loyola Marymount University.
Crafting our Digital Futures, part of V&A Digital Design Weekend 2015, ISBN 978-0-957-0-9576868-4-7, Sequence Alex May & Anna Dumitriu
Digital Media in the Upper Rhine Valley: Conservation-Restoration-Sustainability, Open Space 2014: Exhibition, Lecture & Talk (The starting point for the digital art conservation project was the insight that the conservation of digital artworks is fundamentally threatened as a result of the rapid obsolescence of digital technology, and that adequate theoretical as well as practical standards have yet to be developed and introduced at an institutional level).
Techarcheology: A Symposium on Installation Art Preservation, Steve Seid, Experimental TV Centre, MAIN, NAMAC, Issue Winter 2000, CA(2000)
Media Art Histories Conference 2015, Montreal Nov 2015, http://www.digitalmeetsculture.net
Sunken Cities: Egypt’s Lost Worlds, British Museum, Thames and Hudson June 2016, ISBN 978-0-500-98175-7

Videos

What Do Artists Do All Day? Antony Gormley, BBC4 1 July 2014, http://bbc.in/1kqsqkT

Academic Articles

Cesare Brandi, Theory of Restoration: Conservation of Contemporary Art, Francesca Valentini, PhD, University “Roma Tre”, Rome, Italy (concerning the relationship between Cesare Brandi’s *Theory of Restoration and the Problem of restoring objects of contemporary art), http://www.teleculture.com/archive/2005_01_01_TCarchive.html
Conservation and Documentation of New Media Art: The debate between the Italian Theory and International Strategies, a paper by Laura Barreca, italianacademy.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/papers/Laure%20Bareca.pdf
ZKM, Digital Art Conservation, Three-Year Project (2010-2012), EU program INTERRED IV Oberrhein. See proceedings Artech10 Table of Contents (of Papers)
Assembling Traces, or the Conservation of Net Art, Annett Dekker, NECSUS 3(1):171-193, DOI: 10.5117/NECSUS2014.1.DEKK, European Journal of Media Studies, Amsterdam University Press, June 2014
Conservation Strategies for Modern and Contemporary Art: Recent Developments in the Netherlands, http://www.academia.edu/7991626/Conservation_Strategies_of_Modern_and…Contemporary_Art 2005, Elizabeth Nijhoff Asser
Developing Strategies for the Conservation of Installations Incorporating Time-Based Media with reference to Gary Hill’s Between Cinema and a Hard Place, Pip Laurenson, JAIC 40 (2001):259-266
The Media Art Notation System: Documenting and Preserving Digital/Media Art, Richard Rinehart, Leonardo Vol 40: Issue 2: Pages 181-187 (Issue publication date: April 2007)

Web Articles

Cherishing the Legacy, Art Cart: Saving the Legacy, RCAC’s study, Above Ground: Information on Artists III, Special Focus New York City Ageing Artists, 95% of artists have not archived their work, 2015/6
Art360, current research project by DACS Foundation, dacsfoundation.org.uk/art360
The Betamax vs VHS Format War, Dave Own, MediaCollege.com, last updated 2008-01-08
Best Practices for Conservation of Media Art from an Artist’s Perspective, Raphael-Lorenzo-Hemmer, GitHub.com/antimodular, Sept 28 2015
The Most In-Depth Mega Man Legacy Collection Interview You’ll Read Today: We discuss the philosophy and tech behind the anthology with Capcom and Digital Eclipse, Jeremy Parish UsGamer.net 8/21/2015
Virtual Heritage – Wikipedia, http://www.thefullwiki.org/Virtual_Heritage, 22 June 2016 (Definition and 3D reconstruction of Dudley Castle in England as it was in 1550)
The V&A’s Computer Art Collections, acquired collections of Computer Arts Society and Patric Prince archive form the basis of the UK’s emerging national collection of computer art, http://www.vam.ac.uk/page/d/digital-nd-design/, 22 June 2016
Digital meets Heritage, http://www.digitalmeetsculture.net/article/digital-meets-heritage, 22 June 2016
How EGI is supporting Digital Cultural Heritage, EGI.eu, Steve Brewer, 2012, European Grid Infrastructure and Technical Resources for the Preservation of Digital Heritage
Digital Preservation Coalition 2016, DPA2014: DPC Awards for safeguarding the digital Legacy- Finalists, University of Glasgow, also see 2016 Awards, http://www.dpconline.org/advocacy/awards
How do we Protect our Digital Legacy after Death? Clive Coleman, Legal correspondent, BBC news, online resources such as Twitter, Facebook etc. (Who owns the data? Not you! Story of Becky’s mother, Louise who could not get access after her daughter’s (age 19) death).
Preserving Progress for Future Generations, Feb/Mar 2015, Research Information
Cultural Heritage, Wikipedia, definitions and list of worldwide organisations, 22 June 2016
ADA – Archive of Digital Art (Former Database of Virtual Art), a site for recording/archiving your work, elmcip.net/node/6641, Elizabeth Nesheim, initiated 2013 (one of initiators is Christiane Paul)
Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage (JOCCH), abstract of areas covered

My Research Paper – Digital to Physical Built to Last? Question & Abstract

RESEARCH PAPER – MA Visual Arts – Fine Art Digital

Terence Quinn – Student ID QUI15472637 – Version 1 – 18 July 2016

Digital to Physical – Built to Last?

Will functioning digital art be part of our future cultural heritage? An examination of built in obsolescence in digital art contrasting two installations, one physical ‘Still Standing’ by Antony Gormley and the other a purely digital artwork ‘Sequence’ by Alex May and Anna Dumitriu.

Abstract

The proliferation of new digital technologies employed by artists raises increasingly pressing questions related to preserving their work for our cultural heritage. Will only physical art survive intact over time? Can purely digital artworks continue to operate in the distant future and thus provide a digitally functioning legacy for generations to come? Is it possible to conserve digital artworks for the long term? Is this matter being adequately addressed by artists themselves, by those who collect their work, and by art institutions?

This research paper examines these questions and contrasts two contemporary installations, one physical but made digitally ‘Still Standing’ by Antony Gormley and the other a purely digital artwork ‘Sequence’ by Alex May and Anna Dumitriu.

The conclusions reached are worrying for those concerned with the legacy of purely digital art practice. This paper argues the need to provide future generations with working examples of contemporary digital art. If artists care, it is observed that they are not doing much about conserving their work, perhaps because they don’t know how. Possibly, as they have not been taught how. Curators, government bodies, museums and institutions involved with this topic are aware of the urgent need for this important issue to be addressed, but for present practitioners and most past work it is a matter of too little, too late.

For the future, the view is taken that digital art conservation issues are so wide, complex and rapidly changing at an accelerating pace, that a comprehensive methodology for preserving digital artwork is unattainable. In effect, a resolution lies with the training of artists to recognize the need, and to take their own steps to facilitate conservation of their own individual digital artworks, as far as is reasonably possible. In that way the best will survive to characterise today’s digital art movement (however it is named in the future) to provide a valued cultural legacy for generations to come.

IMG_3977 2 (1) 314 words