I-X-D-X

[ejtechnology]

Liquid Midi

https://vimeo.com/130185068

[i-x-d-x]

I love this super graphic, interactive midi controller fabric the duo, EJTech, an audio-visual artist, technologist and a textile artist and researcher in the field of e-textile. They describe their work as “Instead of visual concepts or speculative design, we make working prototypes. This attitude has led our research-based practice to the approach of trial and error”, which is important in the interactive, and interaction design. We consider the new developments and technologies as creative tools and open possibilities, not as a creative aim.” This project combines traditional screen printing techniques, digital alternative interaction, and audio feedback. 

[uxrave]

Some amazing GIFs explaining 9 Principles of Responsive Design 

[newrafael]

This is an archive of an article in Human Being Journal #5. Text by Tag Christof, Photography by Clement Pascal.

In the early 1980s, Sherrie Levine gained notoriety for her groundbreaking exhibition After Walker Evans. She had photographed a number of the FSA master’s Great...

[80r3d10rd]

[i-x-d-x]

Short Thoughts About Big (Connected) Things

In talking with my dad, I realized sometimes it's nice to take a step back, and see what the other side thinks. Sometimes a little honest naivety inspires the best thought nuggets. For example, his question, "So I want your honest opinion, daughter, do you think digital things you wear, I guess they're calling them wearables, are the future? - because they're saying this is the new Industrial Revolution, only faster and more widely spread. Ya know?" Well, dad, yes and no. Let me explain (and I really appreciate his attempt in using correct jargon). 

While I do think wearables are a big part of what's coming in the tech industry, it's much grander than that. Currently wearables are 'simply exaggerated pedometers' (I put that in quotes because someone told me that once, but I can't remember who, and I loved the saying, so whoever you are, here's your recognition). Essentially they're self tracking devices. Whether it be location based, or body-levels function based, most are created to know something more about yourself or a friend's self. However, I don't think that's where it stops. 

One of my favorite case studies from my Thesis was the Disney Magic Band. It's not only a wearable that tracks your location, but it works as a debit card system (you pre-pay for things with it), connected experience, with check ins and social sharing, and promotion tool. However, even this is a simplified example of what will be in the future. Imagine if this band worked at Disney, but also at your nearest CVS. The connected experience doesn't have to be a solitary, single location event, and it probably won't be very soon (and in that context, it already isn't considering we currently pay for and plan many things with our phones, the only difference is how we strap them to our bodies making the 'wearable'). What if our digital devices (wearablessss) had the ability to hold our medical insurance information as well as track our health. When we went to doctor's offices or CVS, to use my prior example, we could just hold up our wrists, pay for things, see what we're eligible for, call for help if we need, communicate with our doctors, etc., while still keeping track of our heart rates, blood pressure, electrolyte levels, and whatever other medical things people track that I don't know. 

So dad, in summary, tech futures become really exciting (for me) when we look at how an individual acts with their environment (connected experiences) in tandem with society as a whole (social media). I think this is the gap that will create the most innovative and exciting outcomes.  

[i-x-d-x]

Project Review: "Shadow Monsters" by Philip Worthington

image from here

I saw Philip Worthington’s “Shadow Monsters” when I first moved to New York, started grad school for graphic design at Pratt, and got a student ID that got me into most museums for free. I grew up going to museums as a kid with my dad, in such, I have been to quite a few. I (as I think others do) have a tendency to get overwhelmed with so much good art that I forget how good it is. Seeing “Shadow Monsters” however, was one of the most life changing moments I have ever had the opportunity to experience.

I’ve heard multiple people express dissatisfaction of standing in front of a painting and just looking at it. I get it. It can be very boring to view art this way. Without having some context of the artist’s intent, life, or even cultural relevancy, it can be difficult to appreciate. Traditional museum art can come off asunrelatable, unobtainable, and pretentious. Shadow Monsters, however, has the complete opposite vibe. 

The piece was installed in the atrium of MoMA, and all that the viewer saw upon arrival was a platform and a blank projection. However, as soon as you stepped onto the platform, a hidden camera would read your body, then project your silhouetted form onto the wall, and apply monster-like extensions to your body. You could all of a sudden have giant squiggly tentacles, scary teeth like an crocodile, or plates down your arm like a stegosaurus. As you moved, the extensions would change, and your silhouette would follow your movements. Once you stepped off, the projection was blank once again.

The thing that I love the most about this piece (and I think the thing that got me into interaction design in the first place) is the absolute necessity for participation from the viewer. The word viewer itself becomes antiquated, is replaced with participant, and the art doesn’t exist unless you interact with it. You, or the user, actually becomes the art by interacting and the traditional formula of art on wall + viewer = museum is shattered, and replaced with this lovely new mix of art = viewer = participant = museum = experience. 

I also love how low the barrier to entry is. The participant does not need to know any special facts, history, or cultural ideologies to have the best experience possible. In fact, it was quite the opposite for me. I didn’t know anything about interaction design before experiencing this piece, and after I did it, I wanted to know everything. The piece is meant to provide an experience for its participant and have them interact with themselves in a new way. Basically it’s vain, and low-brow in the best possible ways, and changed my life forever. 

[i-x-d-x]

RECAP: NYU ITP Show Spring '14

Maybe I'm jaded, or maybe now that I'm more informed on what these technologies are/can be, either way, I wasn't super blown away this year. Maybe it's because I'm less fascinated with the technology itself, and more interested in what it can do or the idea it can help facilitate. To be fair, there were a lot more students it seemed and it was very crowded, so please forgive my brash assumptions and immediately negative opinions. 

HOWEVER, there were some refreshing ideas and good projects. There were two major winners for me. They were both in the back, and maybe I call them winners (wieners, bad pre-emptive joke) because they actually had space to exhibit their work.

The first of which was a connected device system. A student (I cannot find his name right now, but I am working on it) had connected recycled pieces of metal, objects once used and now seemingly out of commission, and turned them into an entire communicative system. You could talk into the phone, which then controlled a tiny horse who would walk around in circles if you spoke loud enough. The connections could be transposed, and reconnected between objects, and were entirely manipulatable via an HTML site on an iPad. The interface was also very simple: two dials you spun to connect which ever objects you wanted to control, via one another. Then, you could spin the dials again and connect other, different objects. As long as an object had an input and an output, it could communicate with the others. This lends itself to an immense amount of options. Just think if you could tell your bed to tell your coffee machine to turn on by turning a dial on your phone. Controlling remote objects from another remote object could provide a literal world of connections and possibility. 

The second idea, that I think everyone else also loved, was just a plain and simple, good concept. She (don't know her name right now either !!) connect a Kinect to a lot of Arduino motors and some plastic penises. When you waved your hands up, all the penises became erect. When you waved your hands down, they all became limp. But here's the kicker: they also responded to the stock market. Yep, when stock prices fell, so did the dicks. I mean, how great is that? 

To wrap up my impression of this year, good ideas > technology, but the right technology can really help out a good idea. 

[i-x-d-x]

RECAP: Seven on Seven, #7on7NYC

Seven on Seven was this weekend, and holy shit. This was my first time attending, and it was absolutely amazing to see such passion and ingenuity in one room and given only one day to develop. 

The concept of the conference, held by Rhizome at The New Museum, is to pair up seven influential technologists with seven influential artists, and they are given a day to make something new. 

Firstly, the keynote was given by the amazing, and powerfully composed, Kate Crawford, (who I later learned is also an accomplished electronic musician). Most of her research is on Big Data. While I am an utter novice to this subject, she was able to provide some concrete relations such as her claim that trend, Normcore is the representation of the population's shift in perception of coolness from thinking of different = cool, to sameness = cool. This, she stated, is in response to the influx of governmental surveillance and easily accessible personal information. She also related this to Occupy. I never thought of fashion trends coming out of public anxiety about information, or government oppression for that matter, but it a very interesting comment to say the least. **I also learned that the term Normcore came out of a document, "Youth Mode," released by K-Hole, a trend forecasting firm, and was not originally intended for fashion, but was picked up by the industry within a few days.** 

After this eye opening keynote, the artist/technologist parings presented their work. Here's a quick wrap up of the various ideas they came up with: 

Kate Ray (Scrollkit), and Holly Herndon created Spyke (Skype and spy) which fosters online digital intimacy by giving permission to the other person you are chatting with the ability to take a picture of you whenever they want without your knowledge. I thought this was a strange representation of intimacy considering it's not necessarily a supportive exchange, and it would probably be used more in hopes of catching a person doing something wrong, than catching them sweetly candid, however, the agreement the two people enter before chatting is a definite exchange of intimacy. I wonder how this would have done in AIM era. 

Aza Raskin (Jawbone) and Kari Altmann created a google image conglomerator putting images together to create an attempt at more universally ‘cultural’ images (blurred together). This was the most obscure idea for me to comprehend, ironic that the images were running through a program that was obscuring them also. However, it seemed to be blurred lines between team members that inhibited the outcome. Raskin mentioned his perception of conceptual art as "candy," which probablyyy prevented trusting communication with Altmann, conceptual artist. 

Nick Bilton (NYT Bits Blog) and Simon Denny created Drawthenewsfor.me asked strangers to reinterpret the news and payed them a small amount for their drawings. This was easily the funniest communication of idea, considering their presentation was based around jokes about the culture of start-up land. There was a slight ethical question raised suggesting that all the drawings people submitted were being openly mocked in a very high art society. I thought was a very valid critique, however in my opinion, inadequately examined because it didn't seem as though they represented themselves as serious in their request for drawings, suggesting the work did not have to take itself seriously either.

Avi Flobaum (Flatiron School) and Hannah Sawtell created Sawbaum.com, a space to appropriate vine videos and make a collages where you can change size, opacity, layer videos, and have it exist as its own url. This project, in my opinion was by the easiest to digest. By appropriating a pre-existing format, users have the ability to make another, slightly exaggerated version of the same format. It's also open to anyone else making things, and does not subscribe itself to a particular format or participant but has the learning curve of a toddler, which are usually things that foster digital success. I would love to see this project catch on. 

David Kravitz (Snapchat) and Frances Stark did a performance piece where they live chatted for 20 minutes, emulating her work of anonymous sex chats. This was a perfect counterpart to the very marketable idea prior. There was no finished product, and no idea to sell. It was an ephemeral, in the moment experience, which is un-ironically congruent to Snapchat as a medium. This, however, brought up very real feelings of angst, anxiety, and anticipation from my days of chatting with boys online in high school.  

Jen Fong-Adwent (Meatspac.es chat) and Ian Cheng created a location based ice breaking game where you are paired with a person, then you must find him or her. One is given the title of maser, and the other slave, then you have to agree on a safe word. After this, your connection has officially been made. This would be a very fun game to play at a party, but it would have to a party where everyone was suggested to play, otherwise I would find this creepy. The sexually suggestive nature of the words master/slave also bring up interesting contexts. It prescribes the titles at random, so even if you prefer being a master (you do you, snowflake), you might have to be a slave upon meeting. Because this feature is randomized, I'm not sure if making this so blatantly explicit is the best practice for two strangers to meet, especially given that s&m is a subcategory of sexual interest. Given that, I would probably try this game out at least once at a party. Seems like it would provide for a lot of laughs. 

Anil Dash (blogger) and Kevin McCoy created Monegraph, using Namecoin ownership of digital art, which generates and transfers the title of a digital work to someone else via cryptocoin, or public Namecoin blockchain. To be honest, this is all very confusing to me, but it seems really really cool.

Also, the word "user" was brought up multiple times throughout the day. Raskin made an interesting point when he stated that the only other community to actively use the word user is in context with drugs. Many stated that the word is very distant from its actual meaning, and too third party to represent an actual human. He also stated that he was open to suggestions for new words to represent a more human user. Should I suggest "huser"?? No. 

Overall, the event could be summed by appreciation for the ideas. Some were obscure (the cultural image), and some were super concrete like Sawbaum.com (which is really cool, and you all should go make one, like, right now).  And, while I'm sure the project is going to make waves, unfortunately, ownership over digital space on a server is something a little over my head, however, everyone I talked to at the end said it was their favorite, and it was amazing, etc.

After the day of amazing ideas, I got to drink a bunch of Heineken Darks (is that a thing??) at the SkyRoom, where a bunch of other really influential people also showed up. Prettttty fucking cool day, all around. 

Also, if you want to make your own conclusions or debunk any of mine, you can watch the whole thing here: http://new.livestream.com/newmuseum/7on7

[i-x-d-x]

Laymens' Variables

Today I guest lectured for a friend at Pratt Institute in the continuing education department on the subject of New Media and how it pertains to design specifically for beginning designers. While these people were eager, at one point, I mentioned the words HTML and CSS, and they looked at me in astonishment. I then thought about how I got started in the interactive game, and realized coding was how I got started. This is not the case for most people. However, one of the things that I love most about New Media is that, at least in most scenarios, everything is copyright free. This means no one owns any of the work, everything is shareable, and everything is manipulatable, which makes learning very easy. 

One of the questions I got, which is quite frankly the question I most often get when I talk about what I do was, “Do you have to know how to code to be an interactive designer?” The answer: no. Absolutely not. Does it help? Absolutely yes. Granted I haven’t hard coded anything for about a year now, it has definitely helped me to understand the nature of what I’m doing. I understood how CMS’s worked coming into design. I knew that if I made a character style, I could apply it to other places. These are basic coding skills, that are easy to learn. HTML can be a scary beast, but once you dive in and realize that although it looks a little different, it’s really not too far off from character or paragraph styles in InDesign or other programs. The beast of the beast is just getting used to a new language. Russian looks pretty scary to me, but that’s only because I’m unfamiliar with the characters themselves. If I knew the Russian alphabet, I bet I’d be way less intimidated. 

There is a solid attempt at trying to bridge the gap of programming and designer or laymen in New Media: Processing. This, I feel, is the best example of colloquial programming. It uses real words like sketchbook, draw, and object. When you tell things to do something, you tell them to draw() or move(). It’s not too too far off from how we speak. 

For a programming layman, Processing is where it's at. 

One of my favorite Processing projects: 

Rock Paper Scissors from weAREmedienkuenstler on Vimeo.

[i-x-d-x]

Beginnings of an Exploration

I admit, I am no art critic. I am no professional programmer. I am no professional designer, oh wait – I am that! I'm also really corny. Although I may be a professional designer (I am a user experience designer working at an agency in New York City), I like to think about the term loosely. I have studied art for years – basically my whole life, and it has taken me a little while to find my niche, which lies in between where I currently am and my past – quel surprise. However, I am not alone.

Luckily, there is a field for this blending of art and design – specifically interactive/interaction or experience design, which all have their own connotations, but I’ll get into that later. With the growth of the internet, art and design are no longer flat things. They can be interactive, provide feedback, and communicate with its participants. The rapidly growing influx of technologies, programming, new media, open source technology, etc., and interest from a few people who are unafraid to experiment, have allowed for a big new thing to happen, and I’m into it.

I’ve started this blog as a way to catalog my interests, share them with others, and discuss the thought that has been spinning around in my head since I was about three: the blending of art, design, and business, and how they can or do influence each other.