Draft 01
In this iterating project, the tool / medium I chose was MAX MSP which is a computer programming tool in graphical language. Widely used in music and media art industry, I was attracted to the program itself and wanted to explore its different and independent ways of creating visuals. Furthermore, if possible, analyse how they make it possible.
During the first session in the class I had the idea that I want to generate a visual elements from the sound I recorded and then see how it goes as I proceed. Since I almost have never used the tool before, I had to watch the basic tutorials from the beginning. Prompted by tutorials I made my first set of iterations ; which are first focused on the basic functions and how to draw figures in MAX MSP.
Because it was totally different from how I used to create the shapes & other visual elements, during my first iterations, some questions emerged.
If I imitate the visual that I made in MAX MSP in illustrator or after effects, how much will the results are going to seem similar? And what sort of things are going to be the guidelines?
What is the border of real time performance between post production?
Reality and virtual, what is happening between them?
If I put the visual as a source which generated from the sound I recorded and make the visual into the audio again, what is going to happen? If the feedback loop is possible, will there be the rules or patterns?
In addition, in terms of the working order, it was interesting that instead of placing the actual shape that I want to create, first I need to put and array all the objects on the work area consequently makes me not moving the actual shape that I want to create but the functions itself.
Draft 02
During my second week of iterations, I recorded the 3 different types of audio ; repetitive(regular), irregular, and song then imported in MAX MSP in order to create the visual elements.
I manipulated the values, added and removed some of the attributes in the tool. The following visuals seems like they are not that much influenced by the audio itself, instead they reacted more extremely towards the values I manipulated.
What Michael Rock said in ‘Fuck Content’ Multiple Signatures : On Designers, Authors, Readers and Users, [1996] [2009] 2013 helped me to organise what I experience in my iterations. According to Michael.R [1996] [2009] 2013, …..are not the content narratives but the devices of the telling: typography, line, form, color, contrast, scale, weight. We speak through our assignment, literally between the lines.
What is having a power in this translation of data? I could see the original audio does not have a enormous effect on the generated visuals. Are the tools and elements that receiver has more influence instead of content? (input)
Due to technical limitations I couldn’t experiment further by making a feedback loops with visuals and sound, but I could provisionally lift my inquiries ; which operates in which portion?
Is data packing and unpacking works over the original content?
References
Michael Rock , ‘Fuck Content’ Multiple Signatures : On Designers, Authors, Readers and Users, [1996] [2009] 2013
Draft 03
Exploring between functions and forms
Due to my misinterpretations and fails in understanding the functional objects and its systematic roles, I could figure out which objects works for which more specifically through my last iteration in MAX MSP. I already recognised from previous iterations that the each objects performs their roles but did not really realised its form of data is keep changing.
These failures directed me to think more rigorously. Furthermore, according to Christopher (1981) , …another way of considering form and function is in
terms of input and output. The function changes the state of things
and the form controls that change.
Based on what Christopher (1981) mentioned, I reorganised the steps of the data processing and the mechanism, their pathways and the influence of it. Transiting the data through different objects which are performing specific functions, as a result the data is disassembled, stored and flows. Through those systematic filtering, performer can manipulate the original data and the function of original data changes. In my case, by importing and exporting the matrix through such steps creates the mesh and every time the data passes the object they receive a specific functions while changing their forms. In addition, the sound as a power source which is supporting the movements is also disassembled into matrix through the objects to perform its role.
I wanted to expand this to our way of understanding the data by exploring all these steps and the way of how MAX MSP deals with data. By translating the same content into different outputs I expect that in terms of forms, they performs different roles or their nuance is slightly changed.
When we communicate, different forms lead to different participations and variety of translations. And form itself, gives the specific roles to the original content and then modifies or changes them.
In order to apply these points in my practices, for my final presentation, I made 3 translations trying to maintain my intention ; explaining how to work these functions I used in the program.
01. Short pamphlet
In this pamphlet, I am introducing each objects, based on the order of its calculation and filtering. However I did not give them long expository descriptions. Instead, it turned out to be more archiving way. I collected the visual elements that I created by using only equivalent functions.
02. Short film showing myself working the program
In this film, I used screen recording to record my real-time presenting on the program. Without saying anything the film simply shows which values and which functions I am controlling.
03. Interaction / Participating
I made the presentation version of my patch, and suggested my peers to operate the program.
While I was actually producing the 3 translations of what I found from my iterations, I could realise the differences between the forms and how they react each other.
Printed pamphlet was more in an archiving way while other two actually shows the interface of the program. The book and the video were more showing than explaining . And it was really fascinating that the screen recording video was used for explanation when I utilised the video in my previous presentations in the class but in the video I made for final outcome it was applied as a source, as a layer and as an element for producing the film. Lastly, actual interaction with the program by peers lead me to think about data priority when I am translating, since I had to array and show the information that I think is important while organising the objects(functions) for the interface(forms).
After exploring and experiencing the program for the first time I could test, pack and unpack the data and also apply them to another forms. Trying diverse translations helped me to realise not only the final forms but also the small units in the entire form could changed into different outputs due to filtered through the functions.
Reference
Christopher, W. (1981) Origins of form, the shape of natural and man-made things. Maryland 20706:Architectural Book Publishing Company, Published by Taylor Trade Publishing, First Taylor Trade Publishing edition 2013