Sound Art for Sound Lab

Soundart for SoundLAB - Edition V :: Call for proposals :: Theme: soundSTORY :: deadline 1 August 2007

SoundLAB -is currently preparing its fifth edition and is inviting soundartists, musicians and composers to submit one piece of soundart using sound (music) as a tool for storytelling.

In 2004, SoundLAB was launched as a corporate part of the global networking project [R][R][F]200x—>XP - on the occasion of BEAP - the Biennale of Electronic Art Perth/Australia 2004. Soon thereafter it started acting on its own as an environment for sonic art.

Edition IV was launched in October 2006 under the title “memoryscapes” and included 144 artists and 235 soundart pieces dealing with “memory and identity”; it became a part of the media art show selfportrait - a show for Bethlehem - a show for Peace - which is currently running at MACRO - Museo de Arte Contemporaneo Rosario/Argentina

Edition V has the theme: “soundSTORY” and explores “sound” as a tool for storytelling. Therefore besides the soundart piece itself, the story the piece tells has a particular relevance.

Call for entries
1. Theme: soundSTORY
2.. one single work of soundart may be submitted
3. exclusive soundformat: mp3
4. max. duration 10 minutes
5. each submission has to accompanied by the story behind
6. the artist/author keep all rights on the submitted soundwork and story
6. the work to be submitted has to be posted on a webpage for download, including artist bio, and story
7. the complete entry form including the requested info material has to be submitted via email
8. each submitter is obliged to answer the questions of the interview
Each serious interview will be included no matter, whether the submitted work is selected or not
9. Deadline: 1 August 2007

Entry form

artist/author
# full name
# email
# URL
# short biography/CV (not more than 300 words in English)
# interview (English only, please download the questions here)
http://downloads.nmartproject.net/SIP_interview_project_invitation1.pdf
http://downloads.nmartproject.net/SIP_interview_project_invitation1.doc

Work
# title (one work only)
# year
# duration
# URL for download
# story (no more than 1000 words in English)

Confirmation/authorization: The submitter declares and confirms that he/she is holding all author’s rights and gives permission to include the submitted work in “Soundlab” until revoke. Signed by (submitter)

Please send the complete submission, including artist bio and story in plain email, RTF file format or WORD. doc to:
soundlab[at]newmediafest.org
subject: Soundlab edition V
.
# Deadline: 1 August 2007

SoundLAB Editions I - IV can be visited at http://soundlab.newmediafest.org

Originally from Networked Music Review by helen
reBlogged by michael on Apr 19, 2007, 2:44PM

Interview with Stephen Wilson

Stephen Wilson is a San Francisco author, artist and professor who explores the cultural implications of new technologies. His computer mediated art works probe issues such as interaction with invisible living forms, information visualization, artificial intelligence, robotics, etc. But most of all he’s interested in exploring the role of artists in research. He is Head of the Conceptual/Information Arts program at San Francisco State University.

I actually first got to know his through his writing. When i started getting interested in new media art, i was so clueless about the field that i asked people who knew (and still know) much more than me about it which books they’d recommend me. Most of them advised me to get my hands on Information Arts – intersections of art, science and technology. I did. It’s a hefty volume, a wonderful reference i usually turn to when i need some information on a particular aspect of the domain where science/technology and art meet.

You wrote “I am simultaneously awed and troubled about the course of scientific and technological research. Historically the arts kept watch on the cultural frontier. I fear that in the contemporary technology-dominated world they are failing that responsibility. Historically, the arts alerted people to emerging developments, examined the unspoken implications, and explored alternative futures. As the centers of cultural imagination and foment of our times have moved to the technology labs, the arts have not understood the challenge.” but surely there must be some artists around who are doing a good job at engaging with the advances of research, don’t you think so?

Yes, I didn’t mean to imply artists were not involved in these kind of explorations. In fact, many of the artists highlighted on WMMNA are good examples of artists willing to engage frontier areas of research. But there are some problems. One is the mainline definitions of art. Technology/science art research is still marginalized as a fringe activity. In a technoscientific culture, artistic probing the world of research is a critical, desperate need.

We need people looking at these fields of inquiry from many frames of reference, not just those sanctioned by academia or commerce.

Another is scope of artistic interest. Scientific and technological research is proceeding at breakneck speed - moving into fascinating areas of great cultural impact. Examples of areas are: genetic engineering, designer drugs, brain functioning, bionics, stem cells, materials science, alternative energy, extreme environments. There are tools now available such as microarray biology labs on a chip that enable research that used to take years to be accomplished in minutes. And these tools are becoming affordable for independent artists. There are a few artists beginning work in these areas but there should be many more. Where are the artists? It worries me to read about exciting, provocative new research areas without artists even aware of them. Also artists may need to get involved at a deeper level than they have so far.

Maybe the other problem is that even though the work of some artists comments on science and technological advances, they strive to find an audience. Where and how do you think works like yours can find an audience? Are festivals and museums the only channel to exhibit challenging projects?

Audience and support are major problems. Alternative art spaces and festivals have been a lifesaver for my practice over the years. They have been willing to show exploratory work. Mainstream museums and galleries have not been very interested. There are hopeful signs. For example WMMNA and sites like it attract not just people in the arts. In the Conceptual Information Arts here at San Francisco State University where I teach, I get students who come from outside the arts and media. They seem to have a more generalized cultural thirst for experimentation. Now the challenge will be to convert this spectator interest into a producer interest. The DIY and open source movements are other hopeful signs. They encourage people to think of themselves not only as passive consumers but potentially as producers and innovators. The web makes for a whole new venue for finding audiences but the museums need to do some catchup.

What triggered your artistic interest for scientific or technological research?

It started when I was finishing college. It was America in the 60’s so social change and justice movements were important foci in our lives. Everyone had to do a senior thesis. I was in humanities/social sciences so professors thought I would do something in those fields. I noticed, however, that electronics were critical forces in our lives. We listened to radio and music. Radio and TV were shaping the political mind of the society. It struck me that we didn’t really know how radio worked. How did this device capture sounds from far distances? For most of us it was a ‘black box’. I thought that was culturally dangerous - to have something so central be a mystery. I made self study in electronics and radio the subject of my senior thesis. My professors were not happy but I did learn how radio worked. Even more importantly I learned that things that had been mystified could be understood and that one didn’t need to be an expert in a field to do interesting work with it.

Later in 1980 when I was an art student at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, I was in a program called Generative Systems run by a fascinating artist named Sonia Sheridan. She encouraged us to tear things apart to understand them. Microcomputers had just come out.Up to that time most people thought of computers as specialized devices only relevant to science and business. My gut told me they were going to have a more profound cultural impact than that. I wanted to work with them artistically.

Most of the other art students and professors thought it was a waste of time. There were few information sources in the arts. Even academic computer scientists thought the microcomputer was a toy, not worthy of their attention. I was somewhat on my own. I had to search out resources. I had to teach myself. I had to find other researchers wherever they were. I came up with ideas that people told me were impossible. I experimented. I did them anyway. It all taught me to be somewhat skeptical about common knowledge in any field. Learn what there was to learn but be willing to follow unpopular lines of inquiry. The arts have a long venerable tradition of iconoclasm that will serve them well as artists pursue frontier areas of scientific and technological research.

Does the public understand immediately what is at stake in your work? How do they react to your installations?

I try to create installations that can be appreciated at many levels. The audience can be provoked, intrigued and have fun even if they don’t understand the bigger issues. For example, children usually get involved in my installations. I’m not sure how many in the audience think about the larger issues. That’s a problem not only with general audiences but even the judges in festivals. IntroSpection and Protozoa Games got shown in a few places but mostly got rejections. Some judges felt they were too much like a ’science fair’. (Protozoa Games let people play games with protozoa - single cell animals. IntroSpection let people play games with their own cells and microorganisms.)

Many audience members dealt with Protozoa Games and IntroSpection only as unusual games. But the installations did have more critical agendas. In Protozoa Games I wanted people to think about the complexity of life even at the single cell level and the relationship of humans to other animals. In IntroSpection I realized maybe 99.999% of people had never looked at their own cells and the microorganisms living inside of them and never had experience with basic biology research processes such as taking samples and using microscopes. I felt that this level of unfamiliarity was culturally dangerous in an era where biology research was becoming so critical. I thought it was an fitting role for the arts to appropriate the tools, bring them into public media, and comment and intervene in this situation of unfamiliarity.

IntroSpection

What do scientists make of works such as Protozoa Games (video) and Introspection? Are they “awed and troubled” or do they see the pieces as complementary to their own work for example?

Mostly they ignored them. In doing research for my book Information Arts I was distressed to learn of scientist attitudes. Many are rather arrogant - they doubt that even other scientists outside their discipline can contribute to their work - let alone artists. Even though many are great supporters of classical forms of art, music, theater, ballet etc., their interest and knowledge of the art stops in the 70’s. They had little interest and familiarity with contemporary experimental conceptual, critical, and technological arts.

But there are hopeful signs also. There are several efforts around the world to involve artists in research - all based on the idea that artists can bring unique perspectives to the research process. For example there is the Artists in the Lab program in Switzerland, Interactive Institute in Sweden, SymbioticA in Australia, Hexagram in Montreal and many others. It’s not clear how they will all turn out but its a great start. Web viewers can find a more complete list at my art/research organizations page.
In creating IntroSpection I got a glimpse of the possibilities. I consulted with a Biologist at my university who is a world expert in bacteria. I wanted to learn more about the bacteria in the mouth since they might be important in my art installation. I was amazed to find out that in spite of all her knowledge, she had never taken a sample of her own mouth to see what was there. We had a good time together seeing what we could find in our mouths. We found some bacteria but they were all immobile. At that time in the development of my installation I was planning on using the movement of the bacteria in my art game so it was troubling. She pointed out that most organisms don’t move around if they have what they need in the niche where they are - it costs unnecessary energy. So we hypothesized about what could get the bacteria moving. She said she had never encountered that issue in the literature. We did several mini-experiments with coffee, alcohol, sugar, stimulants, drugs without much luck. We both learned from each other. I doubt it had any profound impact on her research, but I think it opened up some new ideas and approaches for her. I hear similar stories often repeated from artists who have worked with scientists.

Would you say that Protozoa Games and IntroSpection belong to the bioart category? What happened to bioart? It seemed that it was booming around 2003, at the time of the L’Art Biotech exhibition in Nantes (France). Is it back into marginality now?

I guess a lot of the fields in this hybrid art/science/tech world dwell in marginality. Some rise in attention and then recede. Bioarts continues to be an area where many artists are working around the world. In the last few years there are several books that have come out. As is probably clear from my work, I think it is cultural suicide for the arts not to pay attention to new developments in biology research. My hope is that gradually the importance of many of the art/science fields will be recognized and that it will become part of the mainstream expectations for artists to work in these fields. I joke with my students that the art supply store of the future will include sections for electronics and biology research supplies.

IntroSpection uses microorganisms. What is/are the biggest challenge(s) when working with tiny human cells?

There is so much to learn when working with microorganisms. I guess the biggest challenge artistically is how to bring these cells into cultural and art discourse. They are so alien at first for viewers and so easy to dismiss them as science. Also, many of the cells you can get to easily - eg on the skin are not very active. More lively stuff is more intricately involved in bodily processes - eg blood, sexual fluids, feces. You can well imagine art venues don’t want to deal with this stuff or the processes to get it.

What did you try to achieve with the work Body Surfing?

At the time of installation there was much discussion about the irrelevancy of the body. Virtual experience (eg Internet, online, games, vr, animation, etc) was seen as more important for the culture. I felt those themes were being oversold and people were ignoring the ongoing importance of the physical world. I have great interest in crossover areas where information and computational technology intersect with the physical - for example, physical computing, tangible interfaces, biology, materials science. I tried with Body Surfing to create an installation that didn’t do much unless the viewer exerted their body.

One section had digital movies that required viewers to run around the room; the speed and direction of the running directly controlled the speed and direction of the movie. Another section required people to stretch and contort their arms and legs in order to access information. Another section required people to beat on an African drum to control the digital world. I wanted people to come out of the installation sweating and thinking about the joys and limitations of the physical body.

You published Information Arts – intersections of art, science and technology. It was in 2002. Do you still keep a close eye on what’s going on in that artistic field? Have the interests and practices of artists evolved since the book was first launched? Do you think that it’s time for an Information Art, volume 2?

*** I do keep up. I love the risks artists take to work in these research areas. For example, I get such a kick out the artists that appear in WMMNA. It is a bit harder now to keep up because more work is going on. I am working on a new book for Thames & Hudson (a UK publisher famous for publishing big format art books). It will focus on artists working at the edges of scientific and technological research and will emphasize work created since 2000. It will be highly illustrated and will be aimed at the general public. I am looking forward to finding a way to explain this work that makes it understandable but preserves the integrity and complexity of the artists’ intentions. People will walk into the art section of their bookstore and there, right next to the big books on Monet and Picasso, will be this book full of fascinating artists working in this hybrid research. Perhaps that will help reduce the marginality we discussed earlier.

Thanks Stephen!

More information about Wilson’s installations, essays, books, and the Conceptual Information Arts Program at SFSU where he is teaching.

List of artists, organzizations, essays, books, and festivals related to the intersections of art, science, and technology.

Leonardo - International Journal of Art, Science and Technology (40 year history of monitoring this kind of art).

Originally from we make money not art by Regine
reBlogged by michael on Apr 29, 2007, 2:37PM

Robosonic Eclectic: Live Music by Robots and Humans

LEMUR presents Robosonic Eclectic: Live Music by Robots and Humans :: LEMUR’s First Annual Commissioned Works Concert :: May 31-June 2, 2007 :: 3-Legged Dog Art and Technology Center.

Featuring Pop Musicians They Might Be Giants, Punk cum New Music Composer JG Thirlwell (Foetus), Electronic Music Pioneer Morton Subotnick and Jazz Trombonist and MacArthur Fellow George Lewis, Performing Live with LEMUR’s Robots; plus Solo Works for LEMUR Robots by R. Luke DuBois and J. Brendan Adamson.

LEMUR: League of Electronic Musical Urban Robots presents its first concert series consisting entirely of works commissioned for LEMUR’s musical robots. The program, Robosonic Eclectic: Live Music by Robots and Humans, will be performed during a three-night run, from Thursday, May 31 through Saturday, June 2, 2007, at 8 pm each night. The series will take place at the Mainstage Theatre at the new 3-Legged Dog Art and Technology Center. Robosonic Eclectic is presented as part of the New York Electronic Art Festival (NYEAF), a month-long celebration of cutting-edge electronic music performed at various venues from May 12 through June 10, 2007.

Four commissioned works, each with a live performance component, serve as the backbone of the evening, alternating with works that the robots will perform solo. Composer/performers for the live pieces are John Flansburgh and John Linnell (They Might Be Giants), JG Thirlwell (Foetus), Morton Subotnick and George Lewis. These works will feature live performances by the composer(s) of the piece, plus special guests. Pieces for solo robots by R. Luke DuBois and J. Brendan Adamson will also be performed by the robot ensemble.

Tickets are $20 and available online now from Brown Paper Tickets.

LEMUR: League of Electronic Musical Urban Robots is a Brooklyn-based group of artists and technologists developing robotic musical instruments. Founded in 2000 by musician and engineer Eric Singer, LEMUR creates exotic, sculptural musical instruments which integrate robotic technology. LEMUR’s philosophy is to build robots that are instruments as opposed to robots that play existing instruments. LEMUR’s growing ensemble includes over 50 robotic instruments. GuitarBot, an electric stringed instrument, is comprised of several independently controllable stringed units which can pick and slide extremely rapidly. ModBots are a large collection of modular percussion robots in a variety of styles and functions, including beaters, singing bells, and shakers. The Ill-Tempered Clangier is a robotic xylophone-like tubular bell instrument which clangs percussive melodies on forty-four tuned metal pipes. ForestBot is comprised of a forest of egg-shaped rattles sprouting from long rods that quiver and sway over onlookers. TibetBot is designed around three Tibetan singing bowls struck by robotic arms to produce a range of timbres.

They Might Be Giants (John Flansburgh and John Linnell) Combining a knack for infectious melodies with a quirky, bizarre sense of humor and a vaguely avant-garde aesthetic borrowed from the New York post-punk underground, They Might Be Giants became one of the most unlikely alternative success stories of the late ’80s and early ’90s. Musically, the duo of John Flansburgh and John Linnell borrowed from everywhere, but their freewheeling eclecticism was enhanced by their arcane, geeky sense of humor. They Might Be Giants released their eponymous debut in 1986, and the album became a college radio hit. Two years later they released Lincoln, which expanded their following considerably. Their third album, Flood, worked its way to gold status. They celebrated their 20th anniversary in summer 2002 with the release of their first children’s album, No! Early in 2005, Here Come the ABCs and its accompanying DVD were the band’s first releases for Disney Sound.

JG Thirlwell: The inscrutable JG Thirlwell was dropped on this planet some time ago to bestow sonic majesty, chaos, violence & beauty and cunning linguistics on an unsuspecting earth. A Brooklyn-based Australian ex-pat, Thirlwell has used many names for his many visions: Foetus (and its many name variations), Steroid Maximus, Clint Ruin, Wiseblood, DJ OTEFSU, Manorexia and Baby Zizanie. His multitude of influential recordings under the name FOETUS and variations thereof, has amassed a rabid world-wide cult following. Over the course of more than a dozen albums he has stretched from yearning orchestral soundscapes, meticulously organized chaos, electronic swathes, blistering big band pastiche, crunching hard rock and even inventing stupefying collisions of genres and forms with a raw emotion and irresistible musicality. More recently JG has also branched out into audio installations (the freq_out project curated by CM Von Hausswolf, with whom he also conducted an audio workshop at the Stadelschule in Frankfurt), DJ-ing (as DJ Otefsu), has appeared in an opera (Der Kastanienball in Munich in 2004, directed by Stefan Winter), has scored a cartoon series for The Cartoon Network in the USA (The Venture Brothers), and recently completed a commission for Bang On A Can. In 2005, he wrote his first commission for Kronos Quartet, which premiered in 2006.

Morton Subotnick: Known as a grandfather of electronic music, Morton Subotnick is one of the pioneers in the development of electronic music and an innovator in works involving instruments and other media, including interactive computer music systems. Most of his music calls for a computer part, or live electronic processing; his oeuvre utilizes many of the important technological breakthroughs in the history of the genre. In addition to music in the electronic medium, Subotnick has written for symphony orchestra, chamber ensembles, theater and multimedia productions. Currently, Subotnick holds the Mel Powell Chair in Music at the California Institute of the Arts. He tours extensively throughout the U.S. and Europe as a lecturer and composer/performer.

George Lewis: MacArthur Fellow George Lewis is currently Edwin H. Case Professor of Music at Columbia, having previously taught at UC San Diego, Mills College, the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, and Simon Fraser University’s Contemporary Arts Summer Institute. He has served as music curator for the Kitchen in New York, and has collaborated in
the “Interarts Inquiry” and “Integrative Studies Roundtable” at the Center for Black Music Research (Chicago). A member of the
Association for the Advancement of Creative Musicians (AACM) since 1971, Lewis studied composition with Muhal Richard Abrams at the AACM School of Music, and trombone with Dean Hey. An active composer, improvisor, performer and computer/installation artist, Lewis has explored electronic and computer music, computer-based multimedia installations, text-sound works, and notated forms. His artistic work is documented in over 120 recordings and has been awarded by a 2002 MacArthur Fellowship, 1999 Cal Arts/Alpert Award in the Arts, and numerous fellowships from the National Endowment for the Arts.

R. Luke DuBois: R. Luke DuBois is a composer, performer, video artist, and programmer living in New York City. He holds a doctorate in music composition from Columbia University and teaches interactive sound and video performance at Columbia’s Computer Music Center and at the Interactive Telecommunications Program at New York University. He has collaborated on interactive performance, installation, and music production work with many artists and organizations including Toni Dove, Matthew Ritchie, Todd Reynolds, Michael Joaquin Grey, Elliott Sharp, Michael Gordon, Bang on a Can, Engine27, Harvestworks, and LEMUR, and is the director of the Princeton Laptop Orchestra for its 2007 season. He is a co-author of Jitter, a software suite developed by Cycling’74 for real-time manipulation of matrix data. His music (with or without his band, the Freight Elevator Quartet), is available on Caipirinha/Sire, Cycling’74, and Cantaloupe music, and his artwork is represented by bitforms gallery in New York City.

J. Brendan Adamson: Brendan Adamson’s compositions and interactive works are informed by the superhuman performance requirements of works by Conlon Nancarrow and others, but employ recently developed capabilities of such robotic instruments as modern self-playing pianos, recent automated organs, and musical robots created by LEMUR. As an undergraduate student, Brendan presented his “impressive compositions” (The New York Times) at Juilliard’s first ever all-robot-performed concert, RoboRecital. In addition to numerous performances in the United States, his music has been performed by robots at international festivals around the world, including those in Belgium, Poland, Lithuania, Mexico, and Japan. Brendan holds a Bachelor’s degree in music composition from the Juilliard School. A native of West Palm Beach, Florida, past teachers include Nils Vigeland, Christopher Rouse, Mari Kimura, and Milton Babbitt.

Robosonic Eclectic is presented in collaboration with Harvestworks Digital Media Arts Center. Works by George Lewis and Morton Subotnick are commissioned by LEMUR and Harvestworks with support from the Rockefeller Foundation Multi-Arts Production (MAP) Fund.

LEMUR is supported by generous grants from the Rockefeller Foundation, the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), the New York State Council on the Arts (NYSCA), the Greenwall Foundation, the Jerome Foundation and Arts International. See http://lemurbots.org for more information.

For more information, contact info@lemurbots.org. For press information, contact Gayle Snible at gayle[at]lemurbots.org.

ALSO DON’T FORGET! TRANZDUCER.004 Friday, April 27th 8-11 pm

This month’s acts
* R. Luke DuBois and friend(s): Local new media celeb + >= 1 special guest(s)
* Marek Choloniewski: Krazy sensor music from Krakow
* Ellis & Aguilar Duo: Bass, percussion and electronics

LEMURplex: 461 3rd Avenue, Brooklyn, Between 9th & 10th Sts. $5

TRANZDUCER is LEMUR’s music, art and performance series hosted by Eric Singer, Jamie Allen and Tristan Perich.

Originally from Networked Music Review by jo
reBlogged by michael on Apr 27, 2007, 1:20PM

Forrester’s new Social Technographics report

Social Technographics
Mapping Participation In Activities Forms The Foundation Of A Social Strategy
by Charlene Li
with Josh Bernoff, Remy Fiorentino, Sarah Glass

Forrester just released a new report, titled “Social Technographics“.

Executive summary
Many companies approach social computing as a list of technologies to be deployed as needed – a blog here, a podcast there – to achieve a marketing goal. But a more coherent approach is to start with your target audience and determine what kind of relationship you want to build with them, based on what they are ready for. Forrester categorizes social computing behaviors into a ladder with six levels of participation; we use the term “Social Technographics” to describe analyzing a population according to its participation in these levels. Brands, Web sites, and any other company pursuing social technologies should analyze their customers’ Social Technographics first, and then create a social strategy based on that profile.

Author Charlene Li provides us with some more insight into the report:

“We group consumers into six different categories of participation – and participation at one level may or may not overlap with participation at other levels. We use the metaphor of a ladder to show this, with the rungs at the higher end of the ladder indicating a higher level of participation.

For example, 13% of US online adult consumers are “Creators” meaning that they have posted to a blog, updated a Web page, or uploaded video they created within the last month. […]

The value of Social Technographics comes when it’s used by companies to create their social strategies. For example, in the report we look at how Social Technographics profiles differ by primary life motivation, site usage, and even PC ownership.

The report also lays out how companies can create strategies using Social Technographics. For example, I’ve used the “participation ladder” to help figure out which social strategies to deploy first – and also how to encourage users to “climb up”, so to speak, from being Spectators to becoming more engaged.”

- Read full story
- Related blog post (by Ross Mayfield)

Originally from Putting people first by Experientia
reBlogged by michael on Apr 28, 2007, 2:02AM

Flex Goes Open Source

This is pretty cool news. Adobe has decided to open source the Flex platform (or specifically, the Flex SDK). Flex is as much a platform as it is a single-purpose piece of software. The result is a pretty vibrant (and growing) community that contributes all sorts of cool components that sit atop Flex.

By open sourcing Flex, Adobe is joining the party and looking to provide even more support for the community. At Arc90, we’ve got some really talented engineers that immediately chose to go right under the hood and do some really cool things. The result is some really valuable feedback (we’ve had numerous conversations with Adobe’s Flex team) that we’re anxious to share. This move by Adobe is welcome because it’ll hopefully make this more of a conversation between Adobe and the community. Rather than give feedback and hope for the best, Adobe joins the community.

The buzz continues to get louder around Flex and Apollo. This is about keeping the momentum going and recruiting more developers. Regardless, this is a great move for the platform. Open it up and build on top of it.

Is Adobe becoming IBM? (Heh).

Originally from Basement.org
reBlogged by michael on Apr 26, 2007, 8:05AM

RECONFIGURABLE HOUSE: HACKING LOW TECH ARCHITECTURE

By Usman HAQUE & Adam SOMLAI-FISCHER using sensors and actuators developed by the Reorient Team.

The Reconfigurable House is an environment constructed from low tech components that can be “rewired” by visitors. The project is a critique of “smart homes”,which are based on the idea that technology should be invisible to prevent DIY. Smart homes actually aren’t very smart simply because they are pre-wired according to algorithms and decisions made by designers of the systems, rather than the people who occupy the houses.

Originally from Networked_Performance by jo
reBlogged by michael on Apr 26, 2007, 1:41PM

Subway Maps & Purpose-Driven Design

Maps are just…cool. They put us two or three miles above the earth and let us peer down, like God(s) at what lies below. By giving us this view, they ground us and give us information and perspective that we couldn’t otherwise obtain and digest.

There many types of maps: climate, political, topographical and transit system maps and they all have one thing in common: we overlay information upon the geography to help serve some purpose. A topographical map is of no use to me if I’m interested in zip code boundaries.

Tina Eisenberg’s excellent Swiss Miss blog points to a redesign of the NY subway map has been boldly put forth by designer Eddie Jabbour. Here’s a little taste of what Mr. Jabbour’s done to our beloved subway system map:

You can see a lot more by clicking the above image. A quick stare tells the story: the map has been redesigned with a greater focus on its intended purpose. Mr. Jabbour is clearly cheating here. The paths of the subway lines are downright inaccurate, but alas there’s a great lesson to learn here: good information design is about cheating with information if the result better serves the consumers of that design. We’re not looking to plot out exactly where the subway lies underneath New York City. We’re just trying to make our way around the city, and this revised map is better aligned with that purpose.

The Metropolitan Transit Authority to date hasn’t shown much interest. Ah well…

Originally from Basement.org
reBlogged by michael on Apr 25, 2007, 9:46AM

Solo bus stop ads let you talk to strangers. Over.

Nokia’s got bored British commuters playing games, but Solo takes a different approach to interactive bus stop marketing by showcasing the phone’s walkie-talkie feature. Under Vancouver-based agency Rethink’s creative guidance, bus shelters in Vancouver, Montreal, Toronto, and Calgary were equipped with built-in two-way radios that connect commuters between different cities, in real time, with just a push of a button.

via ad goodness

…

Originally from core77.com's design blog
reBlogged by michael on Apr 25, 2007, 10:41AM

boredomresearch’s

the Forest of Imagined Beginnings

boredomresearchs’ latest web project is now live! Go to Explore the Forest of Imagined Beginnings & leave your thoughts embedded in the trees.

boredomresearch are interested in creating landscape environments online that develop over time, where users can explore and manipulate these environments, creating an individual experience which is both contemplative and rewarding. In the Forest of Imagined Beginnings there are no clear rules or objectives. It is simply an online landscape that is vulnerable to the whims and wants of the community that adopt this digital terrain as their own.

Forest of Imagined Beginnings will be exhibited at enter_unknown territories, International Festival & Conference for New Technology Art, Cambridge UK (25th-29th April). During this festival boredomresearch will be discussing the development of this work in a public presentation on Saturday 28th April.

This project has been co-commissioned by folly, Lancaster & enter_unknown territories, International Festival & Conference for New Technology Art, Cambridge UK and supported by the National Centre of Computer Animation, Bournemouth University.

Originally from Networked_Performance by jo
reBlogged by michael on Apr 25, 2007, 11:32AM

Crystal radios made from (m)any materials

Make:blog’s got a great roundup of everyone’s favorite DIY project, the crystal radio. We love the one up top, contructed from household items, but you’ll find all kinds of creative enterprise in the post. Listen up here.

…

Originally from core77.com's design blog
reBlogged by michael on Apr 24, 2007, 11:00AM