intro to FABRICATION

MULTIPLES

 

4 1/6 MOBILE

 

 

multiplecalder

img_5966

img_5965

 

img_5956 screen-shot-2016-09-22-at-2-29-39-am

Assignment: Make multiples of something. The objects must be a multi-process piece.

Does it happen to you, from time to time, that you wonder: Why do we need more objects? I always give myself the same answer: public bathrooms or bathrooms in general need to be redesigned; along with so many other objects. However, when thinking about this assignment, I had a hard time deciding what deserves to be multiplied. first, I thought about something practical that could be done elegantly by only using 4 or 5 objects with exact symmetry. A chair for instance or a table. I even thought about a toothbrush.
Then, I started thinking about materials and space; and I thought about words that have exact same spelling (same shape) but have a different meaning (weight) and how would that work for objects. How to create a sentence with the same words but different meaning, how to find balance and symmetry with these objects?
So I researched Alexander Calder’s work, which I have loved since I discovered he made a mercury fountain.

I then decided to take 5 different materials and try my best to make exact same objects with them.
4 1/6  x 0.5 ” ellipse.

To my surprise, this particular task allowed me to explore multiple tools in the shop, more than I ever thought I used but it also made me realize I could get really good results if I had specific knowledge of certain tools. For instance: How to make a perfect circle when using metal? How to sand metal? How to calculate a weird angle? How to clamp and glue two seemingly impossible materials?
Patience is for sure the best tool at the shop!

There is so so much that I need to learn.

Reference:

calder_halfcircle calder-8

SONY DSC

Physical Computing · Uncategorized

SWITCH

;;

;;

The Yam HaMelach Switch 

;;

;;

;;

dead-sea-salt-crystals2fullsizerender-5 fullsizerender-4

 

 

 

 

 

PROCESS 

yamamelaprocess

Switches belong to that category of objects in our every-day human life, that are just taken for granted. Who really thinks about the switch that turns the light off in a room every night? Or for that matter, who stops to think about the Sun, that lights up our day, every day!? Observation is essential. Sometimes I wish I had more time just to observe, or I guess I just have to learn to be present.

This assignment was very interesting, because it somehow takes us to another level of observation. We clearly went looking for different kinds of switches, but I think we were all really imagining and drawing in our minds the internal mechanism or interaction of this object. I particularly found myself wondering, what else can it do? A candle for instance will also “turn off or on” the light of a room, but, how can I make my switch feel like a candle? But not really look like one.
The human brain has infinite switches, well maybe not infinite, but each neuron has multiple switches which I believe also learn to evolve and adapt. How could we map these switches? Would it be a good idea to learn from internal brain interaction? What about in a cellular level? Could we learn to design as cells in our body do so magically?

I feel that Pcomp, is a little bit like dancing or any procedural memory, if I stop to think too much about the circuit or the process, my mind goes blank. However if I observe and imagine, circuits start coming together. I tried many different options before arriving to the salt+water switch. I tried working with a motor, but there was something too mechanical or technical that removed the simplicity of good design. It so interesting to discover how effective one interaction can be if it resonates in the mind of the person experiencing it. If there is no dialogue there is nothing.

As designers or creators, can we learn a new dialogue?

To draw with bubbles and lab-grade ink using the arduino and maybe even to calculate the exponential or fractal growth of the bubbles and thus the final drawing- I really want to do this!

 

result-exp_1422yeahburb_600                      –

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Communications Lab: Video and Sound

Egg Incubation


 

 

 

 

Instruments:

Process:

 

This sound piece is an experiment based on Octavia Butler’s Short story “BloodChild”.
An attempt to imagine the fertile process, the reproduction and cell division of an unknown species. Thus, we had the opportunity to imagine life from its origin, from its unknown origin to its visceral, physical manifestation-through sound.
Looking for the right instruments to create the sounds we somehow associated with this new life formation, was an interesting process. To my surprise, the simplest most basic tools can emanate the most intrinsic and complex sounds. We had to ask ourselves questions like: What kind of heartbeat does this creature have? How many hearts? In a cellular level, how do we imagine this life form? Do we think metallic or slimey? Achute or smooth? How can we demonstrate growth and process but not a clear beginning or end, for it is the process what we would like to record. What are the specific emotions we would like to create, and how will the sound be perceived? What materials should we use?
One of the most powerful moments of recording and editing this piece, was actually closing my eyes and listening to the final cut and literally feel SUSPENSE and a certain fear, being able to visualize or sense the creation of an uncertain life form that changed its aesthetics as sounds changed and thoughts followed.

Teamwork with Chester Dols

intro to FABRICATION

LIGHT(flashlight)

 

 

img_5782     img_4737

img_4708      img_5815      img_4712

A1-I am so tired, but so extremely happy! Today I was able to do what I am most passionate about in life: the opportunity to create and imagine. This, I believe, is ITP’s particular magic. To exercise one’s intellectual capabilities to the fullest while getting your hands dirty trying to build and produce what your imagination dreams about, it is definitely the must effective learning experience. I began today’s assignment with, what I thought were fantastic ideas, but zero technical knowledge. It was not an easy task, but there is nothing more rewarding for an artist, than to be able to produce something you imagined and now see it in front of you just exactly how you wanted it to be. So much that one can learn from this process, not only in a technical level but also in a personal aspect. To be confronted with failure, with choices and risks. Having to deal with time and recognizing that the best tool is actually listening.
When I thought about making a flashlight, I thought about objects that people describe as needs not as pleasure. I realized that the object that I need the most is also my source of pleasure: the sun.
I was born in the Caribbean, a place where you learn that the sun is carried inside and it leads the way. Therefore my flashlight had to be a sun, a portable sun.
I did some research, and I thought about using prisms, crystals or mirrors, but I already had two salt crystals that I picked from an expedition in an island in the Caribbean. I intended then, to make a small hole trough the rocks and start the foundation for my flashlight. In the way I visited the Junkshop and found really interesting objects, which I ended up loving and visualizing immediately as the piece I wanted to create. I struggled at first letting go of imaginary sketches and coming up with new ones, but every time I took the risk, something really good happened.
I learned so much about electricity, energy and patience. At the end of the day, I produced magic, or at least what I see as magic. I was surprised by my flashlight infinite potential, just like the sun.

ezgif-com-video-to-gif

 

ezgif-com-video-to-gif

 

Intro to Computational Media

InfinitePossibilities



Infinite possibilities/potential, this is what I would like to explore. A concept that seems so easy for a computer or a programing mechanism and so difficult for humans, but in reality the human body-or nature-seem to have organically infinite possibilities.
I would like to understand how can we measure the dialogue amongst these infinite possibilities. How can we learn from it? Is it a new measurement unit? Is it maybe a new way of learning that is not based in comparison?
I feel that artists have always thought about the fabrication of reality, in different levels and spheres. Just as anthropologists or other social sciences. (In the beginning there was the bubble.) With P5.js, everyone could think about this, everyone can participate in the dialogue or can resonate with someone else’s dialogue with reality. I have questions.
Ideas:
Can I use coding to make drawings with light in space? Can I upload my own hand drawing and transform it into code and then have it virtually in space, similar to:

article-2109060-11fea371000005dc-386_306x406 picasso_3 http-%2f%2fa-amz-mshcdn-com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2014%2f10%2fpicasso-light

Can I change the entire color/light of a room during time using coding and connect the technology to a chemical  process?

P5 Sketch: https://alpha.editor.p5js.org/projects/ryIdOBd2

Physical Computing

SELF-INTERACTION

cropped-a5_detail_em-1.jpg

 

SELF-INTERACTION (THOUGHTS ON PHYSICAL COMPUTING)

As I walked out of our first class, I had one concrete question (why almost everyone wanted to make a dream machine? Can we re-imagine how humans dream?) And then I had a very abstract question clutter, which kept on tormenting me:

I keep on thinking about the input-output conversation inherent to interaction.  I wonder, is there a measurement for that? The bit is a measurement for information, right? What is then the measurement for communication or interaction?
If you have an idea that demands an interaction between machine/machine or machine/organism, is there a method to start calculating the input-outputs that you might need?
Lets say, like when you find a new species and you try to identify it on the scientific scale (kingdom, domain, genus etc.)
Science learns by comparison, technology learns by?

In the assigned readings, one author describes interaction as a conversation, a cyclic or continuous variable with relative measures. He then attempts to distinguish between interaction and reaction or participation, emphasizing three particular elements inherent to successful interaction: listen/think/speak (loop). However, I still cant see or understand how he measures or what tool or thought process he uses to calculate interaction. At one point he writes: “performance artists seldom interact with their audiences at any deep level.” I wonder what is his definition of “deep” for, I can certainly understand the practical aspect of his arguments and the importance of the non-subjectivity, but if we think of interaction as a conversation or a dialogue, how are we measuring it’s reciprocity? When I stand in front of a work of art and I sense the reality of an artist being depicted somehow and this reality resonates with my own reality and yes, somehow a dialogue begins…is that interaction? I can’t send an input to the painting, so I guess no, but there is a dialogue and it goes deep. Certainly Giacometti’s drawings seem to be an interaction with time and space and he even mentioned how drawings could never be finished for there are infinite interconnections between objects, movements, space, time etc.
I don’t know why I keep associating interaction with magic or awe. I feel that in my personal work, I have focused not so much in the practical aspect of design but on the elements of surprise or wonder that can yield to discoveries and certainly deep dialogues between those interacting.

Are rugs interactive? NO. Could rugs be interactive if you were to genetically modify cotton molecules to have bioluminescence and therefore glow when touched or stepped on?

I agree on the fact that visions do matter, they matter a lot; so do human capabilities, which I think need to be explored to their full potential, particularly those capabilities which seem more organic and less technological.

Human needs and human capabilities are interesting thoughts. It would be great to see a daily record of every object we manipulate with an anatomical and anthropological study next to it. Nowadays when we record everything we do, but we fail to observe how we do it.

Take for instance, plants, and their high- high tech interaction with sunlight. Do we really know how to measure that? We can measure light, but in order to interact with light, that means plants have a faster mechanism than the speed of light?

Ok, I’m going to stop this blog post now. I have too many ideas, but I really want to learn more!

cyanometer

 

Communications Lab: Video and Sound

Sound Expands

INTERESTING:

As sound expands spherically from its generating source, it creates spherical waves that spread simultaneously in all directions.

Reference: http://whatmusicreallyis.com/research/cymatics/

The science of movement and patterns created by sound frequencies on physical surfaces and inside mediums, that is, the science of dancing matter, is called Cymatics.

http://www.npr.org/2014/04/09/300563606/what-does-sound-look-like

World’s largest natural sound archive now fully digital and fully online.

Sound Walk: Thoughts on history, space and time

For almost 4 years I lived in a small but sunny apartment in 315 East 12th street. My room received the most beautiful sunlight I have seen in New York City, particularly because there was an empty lot across the street, the lot is a basketball court, but to my surprise it is not just that. Today as I followed the Poetry Walk, I found myself standing in front of my old building and learning that my precious-sun provider-courtyard is actually the place where Lorenzo Da Ponte, the famous writer of Don Giovanni is buried, and just a couple of buildings down the street, a poet that transformed literature and inspired so many young minds, used to spend his days and troubled nights.
To explore the full capacity of the human senses, corroborates once and again the infinite possibilities of creation.

I wonder what role does evolution play in the development or decline of human senses? What role does technology play?
It was very interesting to experience such a high level of concentration, focus and complete awe while an audio piece led me through my old neighbored. Streets I could relate to, places I already associate with memories and a sense of reality but that now have so many different layers of time, space and history. So much can be done with this tool!
I would like to explore the relation between sound or vibrations and the human body. How our 70% liquid structure reacts to different vibrations or frequencies. Certainly our bodies are already a very complex audio piece.

On Plagiarism

I am curious to know if you might have a similar reaction:
As I repeat the phrase “All mankind is of one author, one volume.” I get a peculiar sensation, one of aesthetic unity, symmetry or a sense of something being complete.

It is the exact same reaction that I feel when I stand in front of a work of art that moves me, that fills me or empties me but that somehow gives clarity to my own reality. I find it interesting that I could unconsciously make that connection, and then consciously generate a comparison that yields to a learning process.
However, my second thought-process relates to an expression Picasso used to say: “Some can paint the sun as a yellow spot, but there are others who can make a yellow spot, the sun.” At first I thought this distinction, which seems subjective even if Picasso renders it universal, could inform the doubts behind plagiarism or the organic influence in creation. It certainly goes along with the idea that “…a gift is carried by the work from the artist to his audience”…” “Where there is no gift there is no art.” Yet, there is something missing. And that is the value inherent in the reciprocity of the gift or the infinite loop of creation. “Most artists are brought to their vocation when their own nascent gifts are awakened by the work of a master. That is to say, most artists are converted to art by art itself.”
That awakening process is universal, empathic and organic. Anyone who in the presence of a work of art, is able to identify their own reality with the artist’s reality and engage in a conscious or unconscious dialogue, that individual is creating, and therefore the whole of society is learning, evolving.

If we learn by comparison, if science learns by observation and comparison, how then does technology learn? How can it ever be universal and organic? How does technology fit in the reciprocal gift?

I deeply enjoy this visual/audio experience:
“The silence in a movie theater is a transitory commons, impossibly fragile, treasured by those who crave it, and constructed as a mutual gift by those who compose it.”