Monthly Archives: October 2016

Tutorial with Prof Stephen Farthing 27 Oct 2016 in his studio at Chelsea

We managed to cover all topics on my agenda I had sent him a few days before .

When I walked in Stephen had the Veronica Scan of himself on his screen, which he had done at The Royal Academy during their exhibition 2-11 Sept 2016. We talked about this for a while. Apparently he helped initiate this exhibition with the Factum Foundation, and the Rothschild Foundation who funded it (apparently to the tune of about £150,000). The Rothschild family also own Waddesdon Manor, part of which is operated by the National Trust, and where my wife Suzy and I went for our scans at their Veronica Scanner exhibition (on this week only). After this, the exhibition, goes back to its base in Milan, for some fine tuning.


I said that the people there said that they wanted to exhibit in Universities and I suggested UAL, and also the possibility of participating in our sessions during next years’ Tate Exchange. Stephen said that he knows the top man at the Factum Foundation, and who to contact at the Rothschild Foundation if I wanted to follow this up. I said that I would speak to Jonathan Kearney and Chris Follows about this, to see if they wanted to pursue it. Diary note for next week.

We then talked about my MA Display Metamorphosis, which Stephen thought had been my final MA Show exhibit. I explained the artwork, its meaning , how it was made and how it functioned. I also explained the resolution of the issue of ‘touching’ a naked female sculpture, raised by Jonathan, and which Stephen and I had discussed before. I said that I had come up with another solution, by triggering Vanessa’s narratives when a visitor picked up the book also entitled Metamorphosis , which I had found in the bookshop at Tate Britain. This involved proximity sensing with the Bare Conductive Touch Board, an adapted Arduino microprocessor.

Moving on to one of my key issues: how to make a meaningful and distinctive piece of art using Augmented/Mixed Reality. We discussed this for some time. I suggested that what the viewer got from this approach to artistic expression was  an immersive experience, which could trigger emotion much more effectively than most other visual art forms, as you the viewer were actually in the artwork not just viewing it. I said that if you were watching TV, or a film, you were detached from the screen and the screen displayed something that was happening somewhere else, other than where you were. He got this, but said that it depended upon what you immersed the viewer in. Stephen suggested I move away from the life figure or even dance movements as this was insufficiently engaging, if the full potential of the Mixed reality was to be realised. He suggested considering an event in history that had some meaning today. He cited an example of Strange Fruit, fruit hanging from a tree, which represented the lynching of Negroes in America, during the time of the Klu Klux Klan. A poem, immortalised in a song by Billie Holiday. I have ordered the CD and a book entitled  Strange Fruit; Billie Holiday, Cafe Society and an early cry for Civil Rights, by David Margouck. I want to understand more of the message Stephen was giving me, and took this as a good example to follow.

Stephen recommended that I find a theme that resonated with me. We discussed some, which I won’t go into here, but will later when I have given the subject a lot more thought. To see whether Mixed reality was adding to the experience, he also suggested that I write a script, and try to implement it in two or three ways including Mixed Reality. The idea was to see what the new media added to the experience. I said that I had limited time as I need to produce a finished piece for my MA show. He disagreed and said that an experiment, even unfinished, would be very meaningful and offer new insights and knowledge, and that would be quite acceptable as an MA show piece. I will talk to Jonathan about this.

Interrupted by a fire alarm (a real one), we talked about the PhD outside in the street (joined by Donald, who I was due to meet next). He echoed my thoughts that it was difficult to find a University which offered art and science at a high level that could offer someone as a suitable supervisor. We talked about CSM, and CCW, but he thought that they did not have the breadth of knowledge needed to support me in my proposed PhD (digital art conservation). He ended up recommending that I apply to Oxford University Ruskin (where he had been Master of Ruskin College), and when I asked, said that he would act as a reference (Thank you. Thank you). I said that he knew my background (no BA Fine Art), and said that only your MA mattered (you need at least a Merit and preferably a Distinction). He thought I could certainly do a PhD (more certain than I was). A reassuring vote of confidence).

He also thought that as I wanted to do a practice based PhD, that I should offer digital art conservation as a potential side benefit of my PhD, which could be about exploring emerging technologies for Museum Display. I talked about the Sydney Museum and the videos of characters at the time of early settlements and penal colonies. He talked about the Buffalo Bill museum in Colorado, where Bill Cody’s talking image was displayed through a fog-screen, which you walked through to get to the exhibition.

Overall a very interesting meeting (as usual). We agreed to meet again in late November.



Preparation for Tutorial with Prof. Stephen Farthing on 27 Oct 2016

Topics for discussion


I realise that there is more here than can be covered in one meeting, but hopefully we can meet again.

  • MA Show Exhibit 2016
  • Ideas for Meaningful and Distinctive Art deploying Virtual and Augmented Reality
  • PhD or Fellowship/Residency following MA


MA Show Exhibit 2016

fullsizerender-41  IMG_3976  



Ideas for Meaningful and Distinctive Art deploying Virtual and Augmented Reality


  • Focus to develop ideas – Tate Exchange, Feb/March 2017 and MA Show, July 2017


  • Technologies I want to experiment with:


  1. 3D Virtual Reality Painting – ideas we discussed last year have been realised in recent software – Google Tilt Brush using the Vive Virtual Reality Exhibit live painting experience, and displaying an example using a ‘Google Cardboard’ Virtual Reality headset.
  2. Augmented Reality, using Microsoft Hololens – dancing figure recording at Double Me/Ravensbourne. Displaying this on the Hololens and a Holographic Display.
  3. Making another foundry bronze by 3D printing in castable resin of myself from a Veronica Scan (as recently exhibited at the Royal Academy). What type of face should I make?
  4. I want to use some of my current work and these works for my MA show but need to follow a theme. Any suggestions as to a theme?



Spiral Paintings – Aurelie Freoua | AR Hololens – Double Me | VR 3D Painting – Tilt Brush

Tilt Brush in action with Vive | Hololens Augmented Reality  | Holographic Display – Holus+


  • Practice based PhD


A Practice based PhD would allow me to follow my interest and possible solution for: ‘the conservation of digital art installations for our cultural heritage’. See my Research Paper:

I have attended recent PhD events at CSM, and had intended to go to one at Chelsea but missed it due to illness. I have enquired at the Royal Academy of Art.

My issue is that I think that this topic is more in need of practice than theory. However, the practice spans art and science. I am not sure where I could find a suitable supervising Professor.

I believe it may be possible to create a system that can record a functioning digital art installation in one technical environment. This would avoid the alternative of preserving each unique digital art installation. Over decades, conserving individual installations would involve the impossible task of preserving multiplicities of hardware and software, as well as needing experts who understand all the current and legacy (unsupported) systems involved, and how they interact.

Only one system would need to be maintained and updated This would involve, artist interviews to record the artist’s intent, and recording the art installation in its functioning environment.

I envisage a modular ‘Digital Art Conservation System’ employing augmented or virtual reality, together with a sub-system that captures a sample of any external or Internet interactions employed in the art installation (this has been done before, except the attempt was to capture the entire content of the Internet). It may help that I was once a professional systems analyst/designer. Perhaps I could get the V&A or the Tate involved?

I recognise that this is not preserving the exact digital art installation in its original form and context for posterity. The alternative is a ‘Digital Gap’ where in the very long term it will not be possible to view the art of this ‘digital age’, alongside a Van Gogh painting or a Rodin sculpture. The digital art of a whole generation will be lost forever.

My proposal could be the next best thing. Or is it ‘Pie in the Sky’ thinking, and not a suitable PhD topic?


  • A Foundry Fellowship or Residency


The alternative is to make art, and not systems and theory for a PhD. I have a leaning towards this. Chelsea are interested.

















Double Me – Plan to make an Augmented Reality Video

At the follow up event to the Lumen Prize 2016, Lumen Presents #HackersvsMrRobot, Albert Kim, the CEO of Double Me invited me to make a 5-10min Augmented Reality video of Vanessa dancing. This can be viewed on Microsoft Hololens, which I tried, and now have on pre-order for UK release on 30 November 2016. Albert suggested I wait until their upgraded facility was installed in November, so I will follow up then. Will keep you posted.


Veronica Scanner – I am the model

The Veronica scanner was recently exhibited at the Royal Academy, and for this week only is being shown again at Waddesdon Manor. I am being scanned on Wednesday. It follows the same process that I have used to make sculptures of Vanessa, but my starting point was the Occipital Structure Sensor attached to my iPad. Some fellow students have asked, “why don’t I scan myself”. Not easy with the equipment I own, but now I can accomplish this. It is interesting to see the part of the video that refers to whether the output should be left as it is, or manipulated in ZBrush, which was the case before I printed my Vanessa sculptures. This time I plan to 3D print the sculpture exactly  as scanned. I want to make it larger scale and cast it in foundry bronze. So I will have to do some work on it, as I will have to carve up the figure into pieces that will fit in the bounding box of the 3D printers that can print in castable PLA.Then I will have to piece them back together somehow. I need to do further research to work out the best way of achieving the result I am looking for.

Update after my visit

Both Mady Dae (MA FAD 1st Year) and I have now been scanned, as well as my wife Suzy. I will help Mady decide what to do with her scan when she receives it. You are sent an email with the website address and your reference number. Samples can be seen on the following link. At some point ,in the next week or two, we will appear on it.

Here are some photos of the process. Apparently, weird poses give the most interesting results, so this is what we did.


The Veronica Scanner team are based in Madrid: Factvm Fovndation, for Digital Technology in Conservation. I asked whether they would be interested in coming to the Tate Exchange or to UAL. Apparently, CSM have already visited their offices in Madrid. I plan to talk to Jonathan Kearney and Chris Follows about this possibility.

Enrique, was the lead person there on the day Suzy and I visited. He is putting me in touch with the head of the Foundation, based in London, and letting him know that I will be contacting him. Enrique has my business card.

Otto Lowe, , mob 07908470207, 44 Lexington Street, London W1F 0LP, .

Whilst they had an array of 3D printers at the exhibition, none were able to produce the larger sculptures on display. These were produced using a 5-Axis CNC machine .


If you want a large 3D print contact: UCL, The Bartlett School of Architecture, 140 Hampstead Road, Camden Town, London NW1 2PT, Tel: 084515550000. It is possible to take your 3D files there and they will print them for a price. You give them the file and the size you want it printed at and they will quote you a price. For further information, see:

Other 3D printing services were provided by Hobs Studio, 144 Central Street, London EC1V 8AX, Tel: 0207 0141361, See:

I will post the results when I get them. Very exciting.







Unit 1 Assessment


My first thought when starting this self-assessment was “I wish I had blogged about many more activities and experiences I have engaged in during my MA”. My experience has been so fast and furious that there has literarily not been time to write up everything. As Jonathan once correctly observed to me “You have been studying and making as though this course was full time over two years”. Consequently, many so far un-blogged activities are also referred to here, alongside those I have referenced.

My second realization, was that I have written 50 blogs in a total of over 50,000 words which have had close to 2000 views. This includes recordings of two of my artist interviews. So please bear with me, as it could take some time to understand in depth what I have been up to in Unit 1, but I hope you will think it worth it.

Learning Outcomes:

  • Formulate, describe and implement a challenging and self-directed programme of study, relating to your Project Proposal 

I was interested to compare my proposals at the start of the MA,

with those I presented at the mid-point review

and the updated version I have now produced at the end of Unit 1. .

The process of research, making, and reflection resulting in my latest plan is documented fully in a recent blog, and explains why it was necessary to update my proposal for Unit 2.

In essence, my proposal has developed from extending my former life drawing practice of primarily the female body, to ‘born-digital’ art installations focused around the human form and activity. I am interested in researching and making born-digital artworks of this nature, where their final manifestations are distinctively either in material or immaterial form. I have termed these ‘digital to physical’, and ‘purely digital’. To date, my focus has been on the former, but now I am turning my attention to the latter, exploring leading edge emerging technologies to do so. I am interested in making a mix of both for my final MA Show.

Essentially, I recognise that these are all extremely ambitious programmes of work, and remain so, in the timescale of the MA. My primary motivation for this, is to learn as many ‘tools’ of a digital artist’s ‘trade’ as I can, to enable me to use a wide range of artistic expression in my practice. I am playing catch up as I do not have the art school experience gained during a fine art first degree. To me, this is the most important educational outcome of my MA, and why I have continued to work full time for my MA, including during my ‘vacations’.

Jonathan Kearney’s immediate response to my original proposal was “Terry, you have five MA’s there!”. I think and hope that these concerns are now allayed, as in Unit 1, I have almost finished everything I originally set out to do for my entire MA. I had thought of holding back my MA Display exhibit at the end of my first year, namely Metamorphosis, for my final MA Show. But I am glad I did not, as I have so much more I want to learn. I have therefore had to set some additional or modified objectives for Unit 2.

What has changed is that I now have much more clarity of purpose. I now realise that I have effectively divided my MA into three phases.

The first phase, to date, is a digital to physical practice, where the artwork is ‘born-digital’ and the final manifestation of the work is a physical object. I feel that I have largely achieved this objective. Here are some examples of my work, which culminated in my MA Display:


MA Display 2016 – Metamorphosis

The second phase is where the final manifestation of the artwork is entirely digital, and which relies on a digital environment for its display. I am currently working with the UAL Digital Maker Collective on an exhibition for their Tate Exchange Programme in February and March 2017. This includes my own collaborative mixed reality intervention, Alice through the looking glass.

The third phase, from late March to July 2017, will concentrate on my MA Show. This will be a combination of a purely digital work adapted from my Tate Exchange exhibit, and a physical work in the form of another foundry bronze. The latter will enable me to apply for a Foundry Fellowship, which I have already discussed at UAL Chelsea. It will be made from a 3D scan, 3D printed in castable PLA.

  • Critically engage with practice-based research and contribute actively to debate and discussion

Here I feel that I have been particularly successful. Jonathan can attest that I have been fully engaged in all that MA Fine Art Digital has to offer, and am now as much a part of the studio based group, as well as my online group. I have used Camberwell facilities and technical staff to the fullest extent I can for my practice. When I have found limitations I have reached out to other UAL colleges, namely Chelsea, Wimbledon and CSM. I use the Camberwell foundry, have special permission to continue to use the digital fabrication workshop at CSM, and am a founding and active member of UAL Digital Maker Collective.

When I find UAL does not have the equipment or facilities I need, rather than let that limit my activities, I have acquired my own and learnt how to use them. These include Wacom Intuos Pro graphics pad, 3D Structure Sensor scanning, Bare Conductive Touch Board Arduino, and Leap Motion, as well as many items of supporting or related software. Soon I will take delivery of a Holus Plus holographic display, and Microsoft Hololens Augmented Reality Development Edition, which will both feature in my MA Show exhibit.

I have also extended my research activities to external organisations, including one-to-one familiarization with 3D drawing, rendering and animation at Xchange Training, London and in Projection Mapping with Alex May. I have visited Fab Lab London and Digits to Widgets, London to understand more about 3D fabrication. By the time I submit this Assessment, I will have participated in the Veronica Scanner event sponsored by the Royal College of Art, and introduced a first and a second year MA Fine Art Digital colleague to join me on the day. I am currently also following up an invitation to participate with Double Me, a research arm of a USA based company, in conjunction with the Virtual Reality research department at Ravensbourne, in a project to make a short true 3D Augmented Reality video of Vanessa dancing.

I am anxious to use these facilities and technologies to make meaningful and distinctive art. Whilst I am keen to deploy emerging technologies, they must remain subsidiary to the artwork, as tools to explore new means of artistic expression. I have therefore sought additional tutorials with art professors within UAL to help me accomplish this, including one with Prof Paul Coldwell, and most notably Prof Stephen Farthing who continues to offer me tutorials at his studio in UAL, Chelsea. I have also sought advice from other artists including Alex May, and June Mendoza. I have not written blogs for all of them, but here is a selection from those I have:

There are several other exemplars I have spent time with since starting my MA but sadly, to date, most of which I have not had time to include in my blogs. These include meetings with: Richard Colson – author, artist, and MA course leader in Computational Design at Ravensbourne; David Byers-Brown – artist and MA Course Director VFX and Digital Animation, who I visited at Kent University; Patrick Gibbs, MA Ruskin – landscape/figurative painter; Kate MccGwire – MA Royal Academy, specializing in large sculptures made entirely of bird feathers, and a regular exhibitor at international exhibitions including the Venice biennale 2016. My MA colleagues and UAL technical staff have also offered helpful comments and suggested areas for research.

Additionally, and also un-blogged, I have attended several UAL Post Graduate events including meeting Grayson Perry in his studio, and the MA Fine Art graduate show 2016. Prior to meeting Grayson Perry, I independently visited his solo exhibition at Turner Contemporary, Margate to see his digital to physical works including the Walthamstow Tapestry. I have been to lectures given by Prof Steven Farthing including Drawing and writing: the intersection, at the University of London, as well as visiting many other art exhibitions independently, including: V&A Digital Weekend 2015 and 2016; Patrick Gibbs’ solo exhibition of 100 paintings at the Mall Gallery; William Kentridge at the Marion Goodman Gallery with Kate MaccGuire, as well as visiting her sculpture studio on the river Thames in Hampton; Anthony Gormley’s Another Place, on Crosby beach Liverpool, his Angel of the North, and Firmament at Jupiter Artland Sculpture Park, Edinburgh; Digital Weekend at Edinburgh Festival 2016, where I experienced Tilt Brush in action; Ravensbourne final MA Show 2016 Human; Lumen Prize 2016 including the follow up event HackervsMrRobot, where I experienced Hololens Augmented Reality, and was personally invited to correspond with two of the main speakers, Prof. Carla Gannis, who won the Founders Prize, and Douglas Dodds, curator responsible for the V&A’s digital art collection. Most recently, I visited the Institute of Making at UCL with Romain Meunier, and during Jonathan’s annual Liverpool trip, was invited to correspond with the artist Cecile b Evans, who was setting up her solo exhibition at Tate Liverpool, Sprung a Leak, which explores our relationships with humanoid robots. I could go on, but I hope that this sufficiently illustrates and demonstrates the kind of contextual research that I have undertaken to inform my study and practice to date.

I regularly contribute to the UAL Digital Maker Collective (formerly CCW Digital) at UAL Chelsea, including collaborative education workshops and a week-long Pop-Up show, which Jonathan Kearney visited at Chelsea. This has included demonstrating and teaching 3D scanning, 3D printing, use of conductive materials and proximity sensors with Arduino.  As a result of becoming aware of my work with their products, Bare Conductive have asked me to blog on their website. My acquired expertise and skills in this area have enabled me to provide assistance to other MA students, two of whom were keen to show me the outcome in their recent final MA Fine Art degree show at UAL Chelsea.

  • Critically reflect upon your practice and articulate a clear understanding of methodology and context of your creative practice 

There were several major reflections affecting my practice: The first was the desire to give the usually silent and objectified life model a voice in the artwork; the second was the conflict between physical touch and nakedness; the third was the realization that I enjoyed making physical artwork, in particular foundry bronze sculptures; the fourth was that I could be seduced by technology, and I needed to ensure that technology remained solely as a tool for artistic expression; the fifth was that I am fascinated by the issue of conservation of purely digital art installations for our cultural heritage, which became the subject of my research paper. The sixth was that I can see where Augmented and Virtual Reality could help resolve this conservation issue, and that this encouraged me to look at the possibility of a research based PhD. There is no clear statement on any of these major realizations, but they run through many of the following blogs:


These reflections have clearly affected the methodology and context of my practice, as I hope has been demonstrated in the earlier sections in this self-assessment. This resulted in my Research Paper, which explores the potential loss of purely digital art installations for our long term cultural heritage.

These reflections continue, and I am grateful to able to discuss my thoughts with some eminent people in the art world.


Tate Exchange – Feb/Mar 2017 – Proposed Exhibit

This is my proposed exhibit for the Tate Exchange, when the Digital Maker Collective take over the entire 5th Floor of the Switch House extension to Tate Modern on 8/22 February and 8/22 March 2017.

Lead Names: Terry Quinn & Aurelie Freoua

Others: For a full program, we need additional supervisors on the day

Title:    Alice through the looking glass

What:  A visitor intervention: multiple visitors view or interact with a painting in five different ways at the same time. They can:

  • Walk in, around and through a pre-prepared canvas using VR ‘Google Cardboard’ type headsets. A Kinect or Leap Motion will track participant’s movement within the painting.
  • Another can view the pre-prepared painting in Augmented Reality using Microsoft Hololens. The live model for the sculpture dances on top of the floor in the painting, suspended in the real live environment of the Tate Exchange.
  • [Subject to delivery: Holographic display so that passers-by can see what is going on in Hololens.]
  • Another can add to the painting using Vive & Tilt Brush. The painting evolves through the day.
  • The painting as developed by participants is shown on TV (or is projected), so that passers-by can see what is going on.

Key Words: intervention, interaction, virtual reality, augmented reality, artist, painting

Equipment Needed: Vive with Tilt Brush and gaming PC; Kinect; TV or projection surface; Table for equipment. Terry has everything else.

Caveats: This is an ambitious programme, and some elements may need to be dropped if technical issues remain unresolved, or if there are not enough supervisors (need another 3 or 4) to support all the activities.



MA Fine Art Digital Unit 2 – Updated Study Proposal



This updated Study Proposal for Unit 2 should be read alongside my original Study Proposal  and together with a comprehensive review of progress to date This review also includes reflections on my personal artistic journey since starting my MA, and explains why I have updated my Study Proposal for Unit 2.

Highlighted in bold are achievements and changes from the Original Study Proposal.

Working Title:

How technological innovation can provide new opportunities for the artistic presentation of the human form

Aims and Objectives: 

My aims are to explore how far digital methods can extend the artistic presentation of the human form beyond traditional life drawing and to demonstrate this by producing distinctive and differentiated artworks in both physical and digital form.

My objectives are:

  1. To research how’ artists use technology in their practice, specifically:
    1. The history of how artists have adopted new technology
    2. How contemporary artists have taken advantage of digital today, in particular in the presentation of the human figure
  2. To research recent technology developments and how these might be employed in my own practice, specifically:
    1. The use of digital devices to further express the model’s character in the artwork
    2. 3D scanning and sculpting
    3. 3D drawing and display including holography
    4. 3D animation of the drawn and painted figure
    5. Viewer interaction with the presented image
  3. To use this research to contextualise my own life drawing practice.
  4. To produce distinctive artworks to support my research.

With the exception of the highlighted objectives above, all have been achieved in UNIT 1. Other objectives remain, as I see them as ongoing, but my focus for UNIT 2 will be those highlighted above. If there is time I will also make another foundry bronze.

My success criteria are:

  1. To have understood the attitudes of artists towards the adoption of new technology in their practice and how that enables them to produce new valued works of artistic expression. I have interviewed several well-known artists and these interviews are recorded in my blogs.
  2. To name the contemporary artists I wish to be judged against. To date they include Antony Gormley, William Kentridge, and Lorenzo Quinn, who all make digital to physical artworks. I expect to add others who inspire me from my work in UNIT 2.
  3. To produce distinctive and differentiated works of which I am proud, and that are well received in the fine art community I feel that I have achieved this for my digital to physical artworks, which are described in my blogs. I now aim to produce distinctive works that are immateral in their final form.



This has altered very little from my original Project Proposal for Unit 1. I have highlighted significant changes in bold.

A life drawing, painting, or analogue photograph is a two dimensional image of the model seen from a fixed viewpoint. Due to the limitations of the medium used, this is a necessary abstraction of what the artist actually observes.

In a lecture given by Professor Stephen Farthing, RA (‘Drawing Large Amounts of Information into a Manageable Form’, University of London, 13 October 2015) he describes drawing as “a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event”. In his book ‘Art as Experience‘ John Dewey’ states “the very attempt to present three-dimensional objects on a two dimensional plane demands abstraction from the usual conditions in which they exist” (1934, The Expressive Object, Ch.5, p.98).

Artists, when creating an image from the human figure, can be viewed as falling into two genres: Those who wish to make the work as realistic as possible and those who prefer to create ‘abstract art’. I aim to explore how digital means offer new opportunities for artistic expression for both approaches. However, as my own taste is for a realistic or semi-realistic outcome, my research and works will necessarily lean in this direction.

From cave drawings onward, artists have continuously experimented with new ways to give a sense of visual depth and three dimensionality to something that is naturally flat. A major development in this respect was the use of Perspective. ‘The system of perspective we take for granted today is a relatively recent discovery in art history. Before the 14th Century little to no attempts were made to realistically depict the three dimensional world in art in which we are now accustomed to seeing it’ (, Op Art History Part 1: A History of Perspective in Art – Art Before Perspective). An example of an artwork painted just before the use of perspective is ‘The Calling of the Apostles’, c1308-1311, Duccio di Buoninsegna.

Historically, the desire to achieve realism is evident from the works of many artists, who attempted to overcome the limitations of the available mediums of their time, some using the technology of their day to help them achieve this.

An early example of using perspective in painting can be seen in the work of Jan Van Eyck, a Netherlandish painter. The Arnolfini Portrait is an oil painting on an oak panel dated 1434, painted in Brugge and displayed in the National Gallery, London. It is unusual for its time in its use of orthogonal perspective, that is the use of imaginary lines

disappearing to the vanishing point. This gives a sense of depth to the work even in the faces of the man and woman in the picture as well as in the room they occupy.

In order to gain perspective Van Gogh employed the use of a wooden Perspective Frame which he wrote about in his letters, and justified its use by saying that earlier masters had

employed it (, Perspective Frame). J.M.W. Turner used a different device. David Blaney Brown’s book J.M.W. Turner: Sketchbooks, Drawings and Watercolours (2012, Penguin) refers to Turner’s own ‘Diagram and Notes Relating to Perspective’ in which he describes a clapperboard type device which he used for the same purpose.

Conversely, at the beginning of the twentieth century artists such as Henry Matisse chose to move in a different direction, towards ‘abstract art’, placing a greater emphasis on visual sensation than the realistic depiction of objects. This approach was more recently endorsed by Henry Moore who said “Art is the expression of imagination and not the imitation of life” ( Archive of British Sculptures) and depicted in his semi-abstract monumental bronze sculpture ‘Two Piece Reclining Figure No.5’. John Dewey meanwhile has concluded “The conception that objects have fixed and unalterable values is precisely the prejudice from which art emancipates us” (1934, Art as Experience, The Expressive Object, Ch.5, P.99).

Latter day artists from both abstract and realistic genres also use other approaches to bring life to their work as can be seen in representations of movement. Examples include Marcel Duchcamp’s abstract painting ‘Nude’, 1912 and Gjon Mili’s realistic photographic rework of it in 1950. Both show overlapping images of a nude descending a staircase.

The digital age has exploded the opportunities to make images both more lifelike and dynamic as well as more abstract. Digital photography, video, and photo-realistic digital painting, together with the use of micro-processors or digital devices, can be used to bring our senses into the artwork, enable the viewer to interact with it, or create abstract art from data. Sound and visual special effects, or video projection on a huge scale, plus the transmission of created images and sounds to far away locations, can also be employed to great effect.

An example that combines digital with traditional drawing is an installation I saw recently at the Marian Goodman Gallery in Soho. This was a dedicated exhibition of William Kentridge (24 October 2015 ‘More Sweetly Play the Dance’) and the keynote work is of the same name. An African tribal caravan is presented moving continuously around the walls of a room in a large gallery. Connected multi-display screens are filled with movement, energy, and emotion. For the viewer this is an immersive experience, with individual animated videoed figures against a drawn landscape, each holding, pulling or interacting with a drawn object moving continuously around the walls to the sound of a marching band.

James Alliban’s installation ‘BiPolar’ (1992), uses a Kinect and a microprocessor to detect and manipulate a person’s image in a mirror. A person’s reflection is distorted by the sounds in the room, including a haunting track of his chosen music, and the proximity of the person’s body or body parts. Spikes all over the body project outward towards the person looking into the mirror, at various rates and intensity dependent upon the closeness of the person to the mirror and the beat and rhythm of the music.

I am interested in exploring the niche of artistic representation of the life model because most work of this type remains in the domain of the traditional artist. An artist draws in pastel or charcoal, paints in water colours or oils, or sculpts in clay or stone. The modelsits still and silent in a studio, and the viewer remains a distant observer of the finished piece. Excluding sculpture, the drawing or painting still remains a two dimensional image from a fixed viewpoint. In all cases the model is a still object in the finished piece and not an integral participant in it. Personality can only be suggested, because the model has novoice and no movement. The viewer of a drawing or painting cannot see the three dimensional reality observed by the artist, only the suggestion of it. This also applies to both analogue and digital photography.

Until quite recently, technology was not available, affordable or within the technical reach of artists to draw or paint in a traditional way from life in three dimensions or to animate their work.  Even digital 3D figures are usually painted in a 2D snapshot of the character because of limitations to most available software, which often takes years to master. 3D animation is also employed in the film and computer gaming industries on expensive and technically challenging projects that are either photo-realistic or involve fantasy semi-human characters.

I can see an opportunity to change this by using more established digital techniques not usually employed in the artistic representation of the life model and other figures of the human form, and by deploying recent advances in hardware and software.

My concerns are finding exemplars, mentors, technical support and facilities, as well as the limits of my own financial resource, and the time it takes to become competent in the various digital programs to enable me to achieve my desired outcomes.

Through my research I aim to overcome my concerns and deploy feasible digital advances in my practice. This will enable me to achieve my aim of producing distinctive and differentiated artistic representations of the life model.



For My Artwork

To achieve my aim of seeing how far digital methods can extend the artistic presentation of the human form beyond what you usually find today, I will start with one of my existing traditional life drawings in charcoal and contrast that with other pieces or installations that progressively extend into the digital arena. I would like to find an approach that nobody has used before and which perhaps may be adopted or adapted by other digitally inquisitive artists.

By using methods already demonstrated by other artists as a starting point, but combining them in a different way, I hope to introduce some innovation from the outset. I will then move into approaches practiced by different areas of the visually creative industry that as far as I can determine have not been applied (or hardly applied) to life drawing before. Finally, I will attempt to use leading edge technology in the presentation of my work.

I know these aims are ambitious, particularly in the time available, so I will travel as far as I can along this path. I may not get to the end, indeed this is quite likely, particularly as I wish to present a continuum of work to demonstrate the progressive use of digital in my practice, rather than just one piece for my final exhibition.

Essential to this objective is my use of whatever technological shortcuts are available. I will only learn and practice elements of new software and techniques that are directly relevant to the pieces of art I aim to produce.

If there are examples I can borrow and change for my purpose I will do so, if to start from scratch is impossible in the two-year timeframe of my MA. This approach is supported by a quotation made by Jonathan Letham ‘’All art exists in a continuum of borrowing’’ from an article he wrote in Harper’s Magazine, February 2007 ‘The Ecstasy of Influence – a Plagiarism’ and presented at a recent lecture I attended at the V&A on the topic ‘Friction and Fiction: IP, Copyright and Digital Futures’ given by a keynote speaker Dr JR Carpenter (Writing on the Cusp of Becoming Something Else, 26 September 2015).

I will make a prototype for each outcome, which will be a fraction of the desired result but sufficient to test whether the outcome is realistic and practical in the time I have allowed. Only if it is will I continue with it. In the prototype, I need to check the quality of each outcome. Only if it is of high quality will I proceed to the finished result.

For me this is a journey of experimentation and discovery extending my life drawing practice into areas employing digital means that I have not undertaken before, and which others may find innovative and full of ‘life’ and ‘truth’ in its artistic expression.

For My Research

There is practically no limit to my research if I start with all forms of visual art directed at life study of the human body. So I must set strict boundaries. I will therefore focus on artists who have directed their work away from that of their contemporaries to take advantage of technology changes, in particular those who have focused on work representing the human form.

I will begin with a study of the different art movements where innovation in materials or approaches pushed the boundaries of common practice of their time.

I will research past and present artists who have used digital methods in their practice to produce different forms of visual art primarily using the life model as the focus of their work.

I will examine how artists are currently deploying the latest technologies in my artistic territory, and examine the possibilities that are opening up today. In particular, I will look at the work of some current day artists who have been immersed in more traditional practice

but are now leading the way in ‘digital art’. I aim to conduct some of this research through interview with the artists concerned.

I will document my research in my WordPress blogs.



Jonathan expressed concerns over my Original Project Proposal, commenting “Terry you have 5 MA’s there”. These concerns proved to be unfounded, as even more substantial projects were completed than originally planned. Most were brought forward from Unit 2, and others were added.  

Project 0    Completed    

An existing traditional life drawing of my model, Vanessa in charcoal taken Completed   from my current completed works (Vanessa reclining, charcoal)


Project 1     Completed

A life sized painting in a minimalistic style where narratives spoken by the  model are heard when the viewer touches different parts of the body in the artwork (Unrequited Love)  


Project 2        Completed

A large sculpture in angled slices of MDF (Vanessa, in 244 pieces of laser cut MDF 1m tall)

Project 3        Completed

My MA Show Display Metamorphosis consisted of a work in three  connected parts representing Vanessa’s metamorphosis from an injured professional contemporary dancer and choreographer to a life model at the Royal Drawing School, Buckingham Palace:

A 3D scanned and 3D printed (laser sintered) plaster sculpture of Vanessa in life pose 75cm tall, to represent ‘perfection’.

A foundry bronze of Vanessa’s head morphed to represent ‘stress’.    

A Book entitled Metamorphosis, which when touched triggered  Vanessa’s story in her own words. This deployed conductive materials, remote sensing, and Arduino.


Project 4       Completed

A triptych showing Vanessa in three morphed poses with her face   looking at them. Total artwork size 3m x 75 cm on digitally printed canvas. It will be exhibited at the Fine Art Digital Pop Up Show this November.

Project 5       Completed  

3D Scanning, 3D Printing, and Digital Printing Workshop for CCW  Digital Pop Up Show, Chelsea earlier this year. 


The following are my planned projects for the rest of UNIT 2

Project 6      

Import a rotating or animated 3D file of Vanessa into Google Tilt Brush,  to be displayed holographically on a plinth, supported by a large projected video in the background, of Vanessa in her professional life as a dancer. A 3D Holographic Display is on order for delivery in Q1, as is a Microsoft  Hololens development edition.         


Project 7      

For Tate Exchange at the Switch Building, Tate Modern in Feb/Mar 2017:

Alice Through the Looking Glass .

Essentially, a 3D video and interactive painting in VR/AR.

A collaborative project with Aurelie Freoua, Vanessa Abreu, and possibly Double Me, the London based AR research arm of a San Francisco company, undertaking AR Research at Ravensbourne, which has said it will work with me to produce a 3D video in Virtual Reality.

An intervention/interactive series of works using Google Tilt Brush in VR with the VIVE, Microsoft Hololens Augmented Reality, Holus Plus Holographic Display, and Google Cardboard with Kinect tracking.


Project 8      

A continuation of work in CSM Digital Fabrication and the Camberwell Foundry. To make a morphed scanned face sculpture in foundry  bronze directly from a 3D Scan and 3D printed in castable PLA. This will be a bust of myself using the Veronica Scanner recently exhibited at the Royal Academy of Art


Project 9       MA Show Project

A selection or combination of work done above to represent an artistic idea. I am continuing my tutorials with Prof. Stephen Farthing to ensure that the result is a meaningful piece of art, and not a  demonstration of technology in art.


Work Plan

My original work plan for terms 1-4 to date has been completed or substantially exceeded, with projects originally planned for Unit 2 being brought forward. 

To date, I have less blogs than previously planned, but the ones I have are very substantial, and currently total in excess of 50,000 words plus recordings of artist interviews. I have completely revised my work plan for terms 4 to 6 as below.  

Terms 1-3     Please refer to my work plan in my original Project Proposal.

Term 4         

Read one book from Bibliography every few weeks

Visit one relevant Exhibition or attend one External Lecture every few weeks

Carry out set assignments

Attend Tutorials and Lectures

Publish WordPress Blogs

Weeks 1-2

Research for Research Paper including artist interviews

Weeks 3-4 

Write and submit Research Paper

Weeks 5-6

Complete rest of work for Unit 1 Assessment

Week 7

Complete rest of work for Unit 1 Assessment

————————————————————————–To date

Weeks 8-9 

Project 7- Practice VR using Tilt Brush, Vive and Google Cardboard

Visit Double Me/Ravensborne for AR Hololens

Visit Waddesdon Manor for Veronica Scanning

Week 10

Project 6 – Finish making for Pop-Up show

Weeks 11-13

Project 6 – Pop Up Show

Project 8 – Make morphed castable 3D print of own bust from Veronica                                       scan

Holiday in Koh Samui & Sydney – 4 weeks over Xmas and New Year with my son and his family.

Term 5         

Read one book from Bibliography every few weeks except low residency and Exchange. Visit one relevant Exhibition or attend one External Lecture every few weeks

Carry out set assignments

Attend Tutorials and Lectures

Publish WordPress Blogs

Weeks 1-2   

Project 7- If available, test H+ Holographic Projector by displaying the same VR/AR images created for Vive and Hololens

Visit Double Me/Ravensbourne to record 3D AR Video of Vanessa dancing

Weeks 3-4 

Project 7- Preparation for Tate Exchange

Weeks 5-6

Project 7- Final preparation for Tate Exchange

Exhibit at Tate Exchange

Attend low residency

Weeks 7-8    Attend low residency

Project 8 – Prepare castable 3D print to make foundry bronze

Weeks 9-10

Project 7- Exhibit at Tate Exchange

Project 8 – Prepare castable 3D print to make foundry bronze

Easter Break

Project 8 – Make foundry bronze

Finish & Publish WordPress Blogs for Completed Work

Reflection and catch up on uncompleted tasks

Formulate idea for Final MA Show

Term 6         

Read one book from Bibliography every few weeks except MA Show.

Visit one relevant Exhibition or attend one external Lecture every few weeks

Carry out set assignments

Attend Tutorials and Lectures

Publish WordPress Blogs

Weeks 1-6 

Project 9 – Make final MA Show exhibit including finishing foundry bronze

Weeks 7-8

Transport projects to Camberwell and test

Week 9

Set up final projects for MA Show

Week 10 

MA Show – Final Exhibition

Tear Down of Final Exhibition Projects

End of MA



Below is a list of references used for my early research. Additional references were added for my Research Paper, , and are not included here.


Topic 1 – The Life Model

Vanessa: An Interview with a life model – Terence Quinn, Nov 2015

Model and Supermodel: The Artist’s Model in British Art and Culture (Critical Perspectives in Art History), Jane Desmarais, Manchester University Press, Dec 2006

Modeling Life: Art Models Speak about Nudity, Sexuality, and the Creative Process, Sarah R. Phillips, State University of New York Press, Oct 2006


Topic 2 – Defining ‘Fine Art Digital’


Digital Art, Christiane Paul, Thames and Hudson, June 2015

New Media in the White Cube and Beyond – Curatorial Models for Digital Art, Christiane Paul, University of California Press, Jan 2009

New Media in Art, Michael Rush, Thames and Hudson, June 2005

Understanding Media, Marshall McLuhan, Routledge, May 2001

Understanding New Media: Extending Marshall McLuhan, Robert K. Logan, Oct 2010

Art, Time and Technology (Culture Machine), Charlie Gere, Berg Publishers, May 2006

Digital Culture, Charlie Gere, Reaktion Books, June 2011

Art as Experience, John Dewey, Penguin, 1980 and reprinted Aug 2005


Topic 3 – Creating the illusion of Reality – including the use of Perspective


Historia Timelines: History of Art, HistoriaTimelinesCom, Nov 2015

Vanishing Point: The Perspective Drawings of J.M.W. Turner, Andrea Fredericksen, Tate Publishing, June 2004The Rhetoric of perspective: Realism and Illusion in Seventeenth- Century Dutch Still-life Painting, University of Chicago Press, Oct 2006


A History of Perspective in Art,, Nov 2015

Dali’s Optical Illusions, Dawn Ades, Yale University Press, Feb 2000

Masters of Deception: Escher, Dali and the Artists of Optical Illusion, Douglas R.Hofstadter, Sterling, Oct 2007

3DJoeandMax,, Pavement artist specialists in 3D representation, Nov 2015


Topic 4 – Art Movements – including The Futurists


100 artists’ Manifestos: From the Futurists to the Stuckists, Marshall Berman, Penguin Classics Jan 2011

Futurist Art and Theory 1909-15, Marianne W. Martin, Hacker Art Books, Sept 1978


Topic 5 – Historical uses of Technology in Art


A Brief History of Drawing Machines Since 1425 | MIT Architecture, The Creators Project, The return of Drawing Machines, Lauren Leibowitz, April 2011

The Drawing Machine, National Portrait Gallery, , Nov 2015 , Nov 2015

The Letters of Vincent Van Gogh, Vincent Van Gogh, Penguin Classics, July 1997

Eadweard Muybridge, the complete Locomotion Photographs, Dr Hans Christian Adams, Taschen, Sept 2009

Murder in Motion: The Strange Life of Photographer (and Murderer) Eadweard Muybridge, Jennifer Warner, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, May 2015

Micromundi: Museum of miniatures and micro-miniatures of Besalu, Spain,, Visited Oct 2015

Sol LeWitt: The founding artist for conceptual art who later created sculptures using architectural computer software: ‘Sol LeWitt: Structures 1962-1993’, MOMA New York, Jan 1993


Topic 6 –  Art Technology in the 21st Century


Art by Machine: Taitographs Programmable Analogue Drawing Machines, Jack Tait, Bronydd Press, Oct 2013

Computer Algorithm recreates Van Gogh painting in one hour:, Leon Gatys, Sept 2015

Turning Van Gogh’s The Night Cafe into Virtual Reality, Mac Cauley,, 27 Sept 2015

Digital Visions for Fashion + Textiles: Made in Code, Sarah E. Braddock Clarke, Thames & Hudson, Sept 2012

Material Alchemy: Redefining Materiality Within The 21st Century, Jenny Lee, Bis Publishing, Feb 2015

Alexander McQueen, Savage Beauty at V&A, Peppers Ghost Holographic Illusion of Kate Moss, , March-August 2015

Conran Holographic Display:, Nov 2015

H+ Technologies, Holus: The Future of Interactivity | GetConnected, YouTube,, July 2015 The use of conductive paint and the Arduino microprocessor for education and art, Nov 2015, Bart Kresa, Projection Mapping Central, Nov 2015

3D Technology in Fine Art and Craft: Exploring 3D Printing, Scanning, Sculpting and Milling, Bridgette Mongeon, Sept 2015

Figures, Characters and Avatars: The Official Guide to Using DAZ Studio to Create Beautiful Art, Les Pardue, Delmar Cengage Learning, May 2012

Digital Women: A Tutorial to Create Amazing Images with DAZ 3D Studio, Richard Luschke, RCMP, May 2015

Digital Women II: A Guide to DAZ Studio 4.8 Iradium, Richard Luschke, Ricardo Portella, RCMP, July 2015


Topic 7 – Selected Contemporary Artists using Digital Media in their work


William Kentridge – For his installations combining drawing, video, and animation.

William Kentridge ‘More Sweetly Play the Dance’, EYE Film Museum, nai010 publishers, Oct 2015

The Refusal of Time, William Kentridge, Editions Xavier Barral, Feb 2013

Six Drawing Lessons, William Kentridge, Harvard University Press, Sept 2014

The Soho Chronicles: 10 Films by William Kentridge, Matthew Kentridge, Seagull Books, Mar 2015

Cinematic Drawing in a Digital Age, Ed Krcma, Tate Papers no. 14, Autumn 2010


Marc Quinn – For his scans of very small objects such as a sea shell transformed them into huge sculptures in various materials and for his life model sculptures           london_exhibition_archive/statuephilia/marc_quinn.aspx

The British Museum, Contemporary Sculptors at the British Museum.

Marc Quinn’s Siren (Philia) at the British Museum (Kate Moss)

Marc Quinn review – ‘He sells sea shells’, Jonathan Jones, The Guardian 13 July 2015


Bill Viola – For his digital art (said to be the inventor of video art)

Bill Viola, John G.Hanhardt, Thames & Hudson, November 2015

The Art of Bill Viola, Chris Townsend, Thames & Hudson, 2004

The Unspeakable Art of Bill Viola, Ronald R.Bernier, Pickwick Publications, May 2014


Three Women, 2008

Bill Viola: Bodies of Light, James Cohan Gallery, New York, December 2009

Inverted Birth, 2014 Video Projection

The Crossing, 1996 Video sound Installation


Iris Van Herpen – For her female fashion installations which blend laser cutting, hand weaving and 3-D printing and visited CERN Large Hadron Collider for inspiration for one of her works

A Magazine 13 – Iris Van Herpen, Iris Van Herpen, Flanders Fashion Institute, Mar 2014


Alex May – For his formative work in the area Projection Mapping and science based digital installations. Works with code, performance and creative technologies

Aesthetica Magazine, Kinetica Art Fair Artist Interview: Alex May, October 2014

Painting with Light, Alex May, Tate Modern Performance, April 2013


Grayson Perry – Now UAL Chancellor, a Potter who used digital means to produce his huge tapestries

Grayson Perry, Jacky Klein, Thompson & Hudson, 2013

Grayson Perry: The Vanity of Small differences, Grayson Perry, Hayward Publishing, June 2013


Jordan Wolfson BFA Sculpture – Who now works only with digital technology

Jordan Wolfson – Female Figure – The Artist’s Studio, Los Angeles, June 2014, Animatronic and Video Installation


David Hockney – A painter who has produced some of his works digitally for example

using the iPad

David Hockney: A Painter Enjoying New Technologies

David Hockney: A Bigger Picture, Royal Academy of Arts,’, Alastair Sooke and book from the exhibition of the same name


William Latham, MA (RCA), BFA (Oxon) – A traditional Painter who now works entirely digitally.


Evolutionary Art and Computers, with Stephen Todd, Academic Press. ISBN: 012437185X

New Media in Late 20th-Century Art? Michael Rush, Thames and Hudson

Digital Art, Christiane Paul, Thames and Hudson, 2008


Karin Sander – For her work using early versions of 3D printing

Karin Sander: Hybrid Encounters – Sculpture Magazine, Gregory Volk, Dec 1999


June Mendoza – A portrait painter in oils of royalty and public figures


Marilene Oliver MFA (RCA) – A Brazilian Artist who uses digital imaging/body CT scans in her work


Post Digital Artisans: Craftmanship with a new aesthetic in fashion, art, design and architecture’, Jonathan Openshaw, Frame publishers, May 2015

Hanging bodies, Dervishes: an installation at the Bristol Academy of Art by Marilene Oliver, 2007, 2001


Nam June Paik – Who works only with digital technology

TV Bra for Living Sculpture, Nam June Paik /Charlotte Moorman, YouTube, 1969


Michel Canetti MA – An Australian Artist for his fashion illustrations and large scale

minimalist paintings employing a digital art projector


Topic 8 – Interviews with Artists on their Attitudes to ‘Digital Art’


Artists who have agreed to be interviewed:


Prof Stephen Farthing RA, MA (RCA) – Former Professor of Drawing at Oxford University and now of UAL. For his work Drawing and Painting and his discomfort with digital art

‘Plan de Dessin, A Drawing of the Bigger picture of Drawing’, Autumn 2006

‘1001 Paintings You Must See Before You Die’, Stephen Farthing, Universe, September 2011


Prof Paul Coldwell, Artist and Professor of Fine Art at UAL


Kate MccGuire, MA (RCA) – Who creates feather sculptures based around parts of the human body

Kate MccGuire, Stolen Moments, Spine TV, 2011

Surface Design, Nature Bound , Unexpected Beauty, Spring 2014

Kate MccGuire: Nature Bound, Jessica Hemmings, SDA Journal, Spring 2014


Patrick Gibbs, BFA (Oxon) – A painter who uses digital photographs taken during his travels for inspiration Everyday lives, exotic lands at Mall Galleries London SW1, 29/4/14-3/5/14

Artist Profile – Patrick Gibbs – Out & About –, 23/12/13


Richard Colson BFA , MA – A traditional painter and author of a book on digital art who

also leads the Computational Design MA at Ravensbourne University ‘The Fundamentals of Digital Art’, Richard Colson, Ava Academia Publishing, November 2007


Alex May Digital Artist and Resident Artist at the University of Hertfordshire


David Byers Brown, MFA (Oxon) – An artist whose forte is Drawing but switched to Painting and now teaches Animation at Kent University


Topic 9 – Key Hardware and Software proposed for my projects


Key Hardware


MacBook Pro, Retina15-inch with Intel Core i7 Processor & Intel Iris Pro Graphics

iMac late 2009

Apple iPad Mini 2 for Photography and with attached Occipital Structure Sensor Scanner Wacom Intuos Pro Large Graphics Tablet and Pen

Autograph LED1000 Digital Art Projector

Bare Conductive Arduino MicroProcessor with SD Card Reader preprogrammed for MP3

Micca Speck G2 1080p Full-HD Ultra Portable Digital Media Player for SD Cards

Zoom  H1 Handy Recorder and accessories including Lavalier Microphone

LG Hi-Fi Sound Bar

Laser Cutter (UAL Camberwell)

3D Printing – Laser Sintering (UAL CSM Digital Fabrication)

Foundry (UAL Camberwell)

H+ Technology Holus Pro Holographic Display

Leap Motion

Vive Virtual Reality

Google Cardboard Virtual Reality

Hololens Augmented Reality

360-degree VR and AR Video


Key Software


Itseez3D Scanning Application with processing in the Cloud for creating 3D models of the Human Figure from Life

Cinema4D Release17/Bodypaint3D for painting 3D models of the Human Figure in 3D

AutoDesk 123D MAKE for Laser Cutting Preparation and Input, and 123D CATCH for creating 3D Models of the Human Figure from Photographs

Painting With Light, Projection Mapping software by Alex May

DAZ3D Studio and MarketPlace for posing pre-made 3D Models of the Human Figure

Poser Pro 2014 advanced software for posing pre-made 3D Models of the Human Figure

Reallusion iClone6 and accessories, with Bootcamp (to run Windows 10 on MacBookPro) for 3D morphing, posing and animation of pre-made 3D models of the Human Figure

Turbosquid for very high quality pre-made 3D Models of the Human Figure (if necessary) Processing for programming of Arduino microprocessor (if necessary)