Glitch Me

Original Image

1st Glitch: Sihui

2nd Glitch: Me

3rd Glitch: Reuben4th Glitch: Siqi

Glitch Art

Describe how this process of collective image creation and decomposition creates a glitch transformation.

The final collective image was a result of four individuals distorting an image taken by me. We played with Hue/Saturation, Liquify, Line Distortion, Posterise and layering to create the glitch effect at each stage. Randall Pecker describes Glitch Art as the embracing of chaos. The more you mess up, the better. At each stage, we let loose to mess up the image given to us as much as we liked. The transformation can be observed through the four images, how there are some traces of the previous artist’s glitch elements that the next artist decides to retain.

How is each transformation creating a new form of its precursor?

Each transformation builds upon its precursor, whether the artist chooses to retain elements from it or to distort it until its precursor is unrecognisable. A new form is thus created at each stage, no matter how subtle the difference as it is not exactly the same. For example, from stage one to two, the difference is quite huge as the liquify and line distortion are new elements introduced. From stage three to four, the images look mostly similar except for the change in hue and saturation. Therefore, as long as a change is made to its precursor, a new form is created with each transformation.

Research Critique II

I think the third space is a bridge that connects two physical entities into one reality that is virtual and unbound by time or space. The third space can arguably achieve a level of intimacy close to that of two parties being a single setting, while being in completely different locations.

In his article, Randall Packer describes this phenomenon as “the pervasiveness of distributed space and the degree and myriad of ways in which we are constantly connected”.

Packer likens the third space to the fourth dimension, where “spatial trajectories have no boundaries”. Not to say there are no boundaries in the third space, but the extent to which we use the third space can open up new channels for communication and interaction.

In my third micro-project for example, Desmond and I performed an interaction using Facebook live as our bridge to the third space where location was no longer a boundary. We planned to use the third space as a portal to transport an object from my location to his.

The plan was for me (in Location A) to throw a piece of roller coaster snack into Desmond’s mouth (in Location B). I would throw the snack through the “third space”, or out of frame, and we got our friend Samantha to throw the snack to Desmond in his location. This created the virtual illusion of it passing through from my end, and transformed the snack into a third body.

This project allowed us to recreate the intimacy of two people passing items to each other in the same physical space, despite being in separate locations. We connected by speaking to each other over the live video, counting in time so that we were all in sync with the movement of the object.

A project that also transcends locational boundaries through the third space is Hole-in-Space. According to Maria Chatzichristodoulou’s article on Cyberformance, Hole-in-Space was “one of the most celebrated pre-Internet telematic installation/performance works”.

The artists themselves described it as a “public communication sculpture”. People in a certain location were confronted by large, virtual images of people in another city, who they could see and talk to, severing the distance between both locations and creating, like the artists said, an “outrageous pedestrian intersection”.

Micro Project III

Posted by Kwok Quan Rui on Wednesday, 31 January 2018

In this micro project, my partner and I planned to transport an object from one location to the other, using the third space as the portal for that teleportation. The plan was for me (on the right) to throw a piece of roller coaster snack to Desmond (on the left). I would throw the snack through the “third space” and we got our friend Samantha to throw the snack at Desmond in his location to create the illusion of it passing through.

It is challenging to throw a snack into someone’s mouth under normal circumstances, so throwing it through the “third space”. We decided to rotate the phone around and drop the snack into Desmond’s mouth instead. This worked better and we succeeded after a few attempts. I guess what we could have done better was make the object more visible like choosing a bigger object or pouring a larger amount of snacks through the portal. Another challenge we faced was the lag of the video so the snack might have appeared too slowly or quickly through the portal. Even though we counted to three before I dropped the snack, there is still an evident lag in the journey of the snack.

Ultimately, the snack wasn’t really “transported”, rather, there were was a snack double that appeared on the other side. But this project aimed to recreate that intimacy and illusion of an activity across two locations. The intimacy created by the third space can be seen in how two people are coordinated despite being in different locations.

 

Micro Project II

In our Instagram poll artwork, the viewers’ role is to participate in the decision making of the outcome of an artwork. Viewers get to vote between 2 options at a time and slowly see the artwork come to life based on what they picked.

To a certain extent, us as primary artists are controlling the outcome of this piece of work. We provide the viewer with 2 artistic options at a time – sun or moon, black or white etc. 

If we were to give the audience total control, we would probably ask them to reply to the insta story post with a suggestion or a sketch element of their own. This way, it isn’t just one person controlling the entire artwork. What we did was less interactive because the only people physically making the artwork and providing the options to choose were us.

According to the article, DIWO means that ‘source’ materials are open to all; to remix, re-edit and redistribute, either within a particular DIWO event or project, or elsewhere. The process is as important as the outcome, forming relationally aware peer enactments.

However, our artwork was still social as people got to have their vote change the outcome of the artwork. Sun or Moon as options for example, split the voters into metaphorical team sun and team moon, even though none of the voters knew each other.

In this case, the artist and the viewer each get the chance to take hold of the same canvas; and see how different people can affect the direction of the work.

A similar project to our exercise is Swarmsketch, an ongoing online canvas that explores the possibilities of distributed design by the masses. Each week it randomly chooses a popular search term which becomes the sketch subject for the week. In this way, the collective is sketching what the collective thought was important each week. A new sketch begins after one week, or after the previous sketch reaches one thousand lines, whichever comes first.

Similar to our microproject, Swarmsketch relies on user response in order to complete an artwork. This open source method of continuing an artwork with different artists creates a challenge and renegotiates the power roles between artists and curators, like Marc mentioned in the article.