What you want SFPC to be
I would not like to say so much conceptual and abstract things. What I hope SFPC is to stay cool simply. I think the method of “sharing process and code” doesn’t come from a kind of moral or conscience, but just for a kind of efficience. I think so many young students interested in new media art want to be a cool artist, but some of them who don’t have a background in hacker culture doesn’t consider it as important at least in Japan. So I’d like SFPC to be an icon of new media arts on the earth, and spread the sense of value that “sharing some stuff is not only kind but also cool as an artist”.
What do you want to make at SFPC
I might be saying the same things again, however, I would like to make a video at the end. It’s just an idea of this moment, I’m planning to build a sort of interactive website, which has stunningly beautiful color and impressive texture. I already have an image for it, however, it’s too difficult to explain on Medium. If I was to say, it might look like chromatography or something.
On the other side, I’ve been hooked on the problem: “How to integrate a generative approach and hand-made approach”. In this case generative means using creative-coding framework, procedural, realtime. Hand-made means timeline-based, designing frame-by-frame, or some laborious work. I always like generative approach as an engineer. However, as motion graphics designer, I’ve thought such a kind of method add a look of works some certain similarities. In short, so many digital works looks like Tron:Legacy, Minority Report. Using a method which has developed in video production field in generative approach could resolve this problem. So I’d like to explore and expand possibilities of it. And then, I’m planning to archive the website as video before it becomes unavailable.
(This statement might be too abstract. I think below my work is good example for it. Which combined with stop-motion, kinect, and openFrameworks.)
What can you teach and share
(Japanese, interesting terrain I’ve found at Google Maps, Anime, basic use of terminal and git)
As I mentioned, I have a background in video production. Although I’m not a good engineer and much less hacker, I can teach my experience using both ways of creative-coding and timeline-based video production. For example, how to export keyframes from Cinema4D and play it on a browser with Three.js. Or how to control DMX using Cinema4D. It is still so niche though…
Anyway, I’m planning to share an idea and process of my ongoing graduation work as much as possible while the school term.
Today it was the first class of Ramsey Nasser, a computer artist and designer. In this few year, I’ve tried to consider and relativize programming as one of painting tools such like brush, pencil, and plaster. However, through this class, I came to think it might be a bit unreasonable, at least with the present.
Programming is still depending on a text information, unlike other painting tools. In addition, there’s significant latency between ‘implementing’ and ‘executing’. If I put an oil color to canvas, I can see its result momentarily. However, Programming cannot behave such like this. So I inspired his thought that ‘Processing is not enough for instinctive creative coding since it has “Run” button.”
How to make programming more instinctive tool? Now I assume programming itself could not be instinctive forever. And what we can do with programming will be able to be achieved by GUI with the times. I don’t mean humankind will not need programming near future. However, coding as implementing variables, functions following to very struct syntax will be not essential except for few people, like even professional creative coder doesn’t need to write an assembly language anymore.
On the other hand, highly encapsulated system and software tend to put a limit on artists’ imagination unconsciously. Many graphic designers who using Illustrator barely come up with procedurally created logo because it doesn’t allow them to draw with a more generative approach. So no matter how the technology develops, we as new media artists still have a role to explore lower-level layers of computation, hack them, and inspire the other artists whose idea are limited by the design concepts of their software.
Today is the day “Meet the Student” event held. Since it’s a first time to have a presentation in English in my Life, I’d been so nervous. Anyway, I’m now relieved as my speech somehow appeared to made sense for audience…
Although this is just my standpoint, nothing is a better way than to show what someone has made and achieved to introduce oneself as an artist or maker. Each of them has their own thought, belief, and stance and we can talk about so conceptual and idealistic story related to that. However, there’s no meaning if their works don’t reflect such an idea. This is why I won’t talk about what I haven’t achieved yet as much as possible. I can’t make sure my way of presentation worked as well, though.
By the way, I’d like to explain how I’m thinking about the recent tech buzzwords such like IoT, VR, Deep Learning and so on. It might make some people confused. I didn’t intend to harm someone working in these field. I’m still respecting and getting inspired by such an important breakthrough or paradigm shift. On the other side, I think there is a kind of politics in this industry. Some of the new media arts appear to be just a competition about how early does someone turn such a new technology into an eye-catching entertainment. I think it’s a kind of populism. I know such works also have an important role in this society and don’t intend to deny themselves. But I personally prefer so niche works by artists who are stubborn and having fetichism. Such a kind of bias makes them unique and impressive. A work without a certain imagination is just a demo of the new technology. (Of course, I’ve used Kinect, 3D printings, and Oculus Rift. That was so fun.)
Anyway, the event was so exciting (only after finished my presentation haha) and I was so interested to hear about classmates’ work by their own word. I got more excited for the upcoming program.
In this Monday, we discussed the definition of the poetic computation. Each of us has a various perspective to a kind of programming, and such a difference is inspiring for me. So I’d like to write down how I’m thinking about the topics at the moment.
In short, being poetic with computation is to think a computer as an extension of one’s body. In particular, someone who is practicing it doesn’t aware of using a computer and only think of what to make. Which is that a poet doesn’t consider how to move their pen on a paper.
I know it’s just an idealistic thought and a computation itself is still hard and not instinctive compared to a pen. However, the easier computation becomes, the more seamless we might feel about it. Just like writing characters used to be much more hard in the era of slete before humankind invented a paper and a pen.
And I think, before thinking about poetic computation, it could be some clue to consider about what is “not” poetic computation.
In these days, there are so many works insisting “Art & Code”. They make me inspiring everyday, however, some of them has a tendency to be misled by fashion and tech buzzwords such like VR, deep learning, and the MAKERS movement.
To regard technology itself as a purpose is just a demo rather than poetic. The most important thing for art is what it looks like, smells, and feels after all. (And sometimes context.) Therefore I think that its texture, colors, and atmosphere should come to first than which technologies will be used and combined. I don’t mean it’s evil to think like “We have Oculus Rift! So what to make with this!?”. New device and technique still bring us a new idea. However, we should have an imagination and philosophy for the work even if it’s unpredictable like generative arts. New media art without fetishism and biased preference can’t be impressive, at least for me.
This is my thought for poetic computation. Someone could disagree with my idea, but it’s also interesting for me and I’d like to discuss.
In my view, what’s the matter of being ‘generative’ is controlling unpredictability. We were talking about this topic but I couldn’t explain my idea with my poor English.
To let some algorithm draw something is just one of tendencies that generative art has. However, if there’s no randomness in the algorithm, it just manufactures the same thing like a factory. I think being generative requires such an unpredictability rather than an algorithm. Much less programming.
Using watercolor could be generative. When I put it on a paper, it diffuses with (a sort of) randomness. Rorschach test also behaves unpredictably. But only randomness itself doesn’t turn into art. It’s just a chaos. To make it attractive as an art, we all have to understand the physics and law then control it.
Generative art might be similar to “bonsai”, I sometimes think so.
There are so many attractive events and encounters in here, but I always prefer to make something. What I’ve made is much more important than what kind of sociable person I am and it goes for anyone too.
Of course, it doesn’t mean I don’t like a community. Just like I’ve always done, It’s a fundamental behavior for me to contribute and commit to them. I’d like to say it’s more important for connection to be knowing one’s works and respect each other rather than whether we’ve met in somewhere before.
It was a first day of the class. After introduced each other and had a lunch, there’s a robot standing in a center of the room (it was apparently Mushon Zer-Aviv, our teacher whether way I looked at it) Taeyoon said we have to ‘program’ the robot to exit the room. However, it didn’t move and just spoke “Can’t compute” when we ordered messages like “move” and “turn left”.
- Install packages including sensor, muscle, balancing system
- activate them
- define walk function as a sequence of moving of joints.
- execute walk
Through this session, I realized how I used to a highly abstracted layer of computing everyday. As Mushon said, it was still better that the robot has standard I/O such like the ability of listening and speaking. I reminded of Matz’s talk (the advocator of Ruby) and it was that he had to spend first half year to implement kinds of “cin” and “cout” in Ruby.
And then I assume we discussed the notion of “encapsulation” and “relation of layers in computer”. But my brain was so busy and not enough to understand their English😞
Anyway, it was so inspiring for me.
(btw, we also visited NYC Resister at night near our room and there were stunningly cool geeks and CNC mills.)
- 直交座標以外の座標系に変換してみる (極座標)
- (関連して)RGBの各チャンネルではなく, 複合的なパラメーター(HSBなど)に対して操作を加える
- 値自体ではなく, 値の変化量に操作を加える (速度にlerpを適用)
- Robert Penner氏のそれ以外の, 別のイージング関数を考えてみる
- Add, Screen, Overlay, Multiply以外のレイヤーモードを考える
- 予めPhotoshopでカラーパレットを作っておく. その時, 単に色相違いにするだけでなく, 複数のトーンを組み合わせるようにする (肌色と真っ青, テニスボール色と煉瓦色)
- リッチ感を出すために加えがちな光学現象のセットを, 別の一貫した物理法則に置き換えてみる (David O’Reilly氏のエッセイ)
- パラメトリカルに完結させずに, 物撮り素材を使ったり, 1つ1つ手打ちしてみたりする
- オイラー法のズレ, Z-Fightingなどの浮動小数の丸め込み誤差に由来するグリッチを逆手に取る
- コンポジション毎にレンダリング設定, 出力パスを保持できる
- ↑に加えて, 静止画書き出しの設定も保持できる
- 出力パスのテンプレート文字列に, 日付フォーマット追加
- Bool値のキーフレームは, 形状や色で真偽を判別できる
- プロジェクトファイルごとに, 連番のデフォルトFPSを設定できる
- レイヤー選択状態でショートカットキーでSpotlight的な小窓が開く. インクリメントサーチでエフェクトを追加できる (C4DのShift+Cに相当)
- エフェクト&プリセット フォルダ名でも絞り込めるように. (ベンダー名の検索にも対応)
- レイヤーインスタンス機能. エフェクトを加えた調整レイヤーなどを, そのままインスタンスとして複製でき, 他コンポジションで再利用できる. 元の調整レイヤーを変更すると, インスタンスに反映される.
- AEP同士のDiff, マージ機能
- ExtendScript, ES6とCommonJSのサポート
普通のコンポジションから, 再利用性を一切抜いたもの. 特定のコンポの中に, 一度のみ使われる.
TCも親コンポに同期していて, プロジェクトパネル上でも親コンポの子要素として表示される. フォルダ機能にも近く, 親コンポのレイヤーパネルの中で, Finderのツリー表示よろしく展開することもできる.
普通のコンポジションは再利用性がある一方, 再利用先のコンポ内でそれぞれに別の見え方になるような設定を個別にできなかった. クラスコンポジションは, よりコンポジションを抽象化することで, そういった問題を解決する. コンポジション自体に, カスタムプロパティを設定できる. 「コントロールエフェクト」をコンポジションに追加できるイメージ. そのプロパティはエクスプレッションを用いてコンポ内のレイヤーのプロパティとひも付けることができる. 再利用先の親コンポから, クラスコンポジションのカスタムプロパティを設定することで, クラスプロパティ内のレイヤーを再利用先から間接的に制御できるようになり, ある種のカプセル化が可能になる.