our process book

46
OUR PROCESS BOOK UNFINISHED

Upload: camila-afanador

Post on 29-Mar-2016

221 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

This books is a collection of texts and images that emerged from the Independent Study Group working with the GSpeak System during Wintersession 2011.

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Our Process Book

OUR PROCESS BOOK

UNFINISHED

Page 2: Our Process Book
Page 3: Our Process Book

Olivia Verdugo, Micah Barret, Catherine Siller, Camila Afanador, Keitaro Sakamoto, Niu MiaoGSpeak Wintersession Group 2011

OUR PROCESS BOOK

Page 4: Our Process Book

This books is a collection of texts and im-ages that emerged from the Independent Study Group working with the GSpeak System during Wintersession 2011.

GSPEAK WINTERSESSION GROUP RISD 2011

STUDENTS Olivia Verdugo, Micah Barret, Catherine Siller, Camila Afanador, Keitaro Sakamoto, Niu Miao.

INSTRUCTORSLucinda Hitchcock and Jamie Jewett.

PROCESSING WORKSHOP AND HELP: Clement Valla

Special thanks to Lane Myer for being part of our process.and to Oblong Industries for allowing us to use it and discover the potentials of the system.

Page 5: Our Process Book

33 DAYSFIRST MEETING

JAN 6 /2011-

FINAL SHOW

FEB 7 /2011

Page 6: Our Process Book

WEEK 1 & 2January 3 - 11 / 2011Processing Workshop by Clement Valla

Page 7: Our Process Book

06/01/2011

7

During 4 days be had an intensive Processing Workshop with Clement Valla in the GSpeak room.

Page 8: Our Process Book

8

void setup() { size(500,500); stroke(200); background(255);} void draw() { //background(255); fill(random(255),random(255),random(255)); noStroke(); ellipse(mouseX+random(15),mouseY+random(15),20,20); }

First sketch. By Keitaro.

Selected sketches produced during the Workshop

int xpos = 0;int ypos = 0;

void setup(){ size(400, 400); background(255); frameRate(10);} void draw(){for (int j=0; j<400; j = j+10) { ypos = j;for (int i=0; i<400; i= i+50) { xpos = i;

strokeWeight(2); stroke(0,0,0); fill(random(255),random(155),random(255), 85); rect(xpos,ypos,50,50); fill(random(155),random(155),random(255), 65); rect(xpos,ypos,20,20); fill(255,255,255,50); rect(xpos,ypos,10,10);

} }}

Loop. By Camila

Page 9: Our Process Book

9

First sketch. By Micah.

void setup(){ size(900, 500); background(77, 29, 29); smooth();}void draw(){ background(map(mouseY, 0, 500, 0, 100), 29, 29); stroke(255); strokeWeight(random(0,10)); line(0, 0, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(map(mouseY, 0, 500, 1, 10)); line(100, 0, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(map(mouseY, 0, 500, 1, 10)); line(200, 0, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(map(mouseY, 0, 500, 1, 10)); line(300, 0, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(map(mouseY, 0, 500, 1, 10)); line(400, 0, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(map(mouseY, 0, 500, 1, 10)); line(500, 0, mouseX, mouseY);

stroke(255); strokeWeight(map(mouseY, 0, 500, 1, 10));

line(600, 0, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(map(mouseY, 0, 500, 1, 10)); line(700, 0, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(map(mouseY, 0, 500, 1, 10)); line(800, 0, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(map(mouseY, 0, 500, 1, 10)); line(900, 0, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(random(0,5)); line(0, 500, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(random(0,5)); line(100, 500, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(random(0,5)); line(200, 500, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(random(0,5)); line(300, 500, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(random(0,5)); line(400, 500, mouseX, mouseY); stroke(255); strokeWeight(random(0,5)); line(500, 500, mouseX, mouseY);

Page 10: Our Process Book

10

void setup() { size(700,700); stroke(255); background(53,165,145);} void draw() { //background(53,165,145); strokeWeight(mouseX/25); stroke(mouseX/3,mouseY/3,mouseX/3,mouseY/3); fill(random(200,255),mouseY/3,mouseX/3,mouseX/3); triangle(mouseX, mous-eY, width-mouseX, (mouseX+1)/(mouseY+1),height-mouseY,mouseY/2);}

int xpos = 0;int ypos = 0; void setup(){ size(400, 400);// background(0);} void draw() { background(mouseX,mouseY,0); for(int j=0; j<=400; j = j+50) { for (int i=0; i<=450; i = i+30) { //i starts at 0, goes to 40, increases by 1 every time //starting condition, exit condition, incriment xpos=i; ypos=j; noStroke(); fill(255,0,155); rect(xpos,ypos,10,20); stroke(255);// fill(mouseX,mouseX,mouseY); fill(random(255),random(255),random(255)); ellipse(xpos-40, ypos, 10, 30); fill(255); ellipse(xpos+40, ypos, 10, 10); stroke(xpos,xpos,xpos); line(xpos-10, ypos+15, xpos+20, ypos+35); } }}

Loop. By Catherine. First sketch. By Olivia.

Page 11: Our Process Book

07/01/2011

11

int j;int x=20;int y=30;int w=40;int h=40; void setup(){ size(400,400); // shapes = new Shape[i]; background(255);} void draw(){ stroke(random(0,255),random(0,255),random(0,255),random(0,255)); for(int i=0; i<100; i++){ line(i,i+j,mouseX,mouseY); j++; } }

First sketch. By Niu.

First program for GSpeak. Basic drawing tool activated with the movement of the hand. By Camila

First program for GSpeak. By Keitaro

Page 12: Our Process Book

12

WEEK 3January 17 - 23 / 2011First Group Discussions and Work Sessions

Page 13: Our Process Book

07/01/2011

13

lucy:

ideas to think about: art, history, music, science, movies, games etc? what interests you?

system is performative, is it possible to turn the “performers” around such that we be able to engage with our audience.

even if our back is to our audience, how can we consider that audience?

framing and composition, how we make these connections. visualizing these ele-ments.

jamie:

choreography: move from a full body point of view, and then see how gesture emerges from that, or, see how whole-body choreography could emerge from specific gestural vocabulary

necessarily working with local space: what happens if we use up and down or back and fourth in a more extreme way? we tend not to use the volume of the space in its entirety when we use the system

what’s happening on stage that we may direct the audience’s attention to? some-thing we think about in any performative medium. thinking about spacial relation-ships not only between the performer and the screen, but also the audience, the demarcated space of the system etc.

where is the space for the person to talk? where is the space for the technology to talk?

camila:

primary interests: drawing tools as a starting point, discussion on the drawing experience, history, collaboration using g-speak. Documenting the whole experience.

keitaro:

so far, he has been able to connect his pro-gram with g-speak, if possible, he’d like to use type in an experiment. one interest is in data visualization using type/numbers, another possible interest is in using the whole field in a kinetic manner (tracking movement). a third interest might be using “real” imagery: building, stars, nature etc. to do something.

primary interests: type design & typogra-phy, gaming

catherine:

very interested in tracking movement (dance) and potentially attaching sensors to things other than hands. attaching sensors to things other than hands may be difficult, however, as sensors are reading the spatial relationships between tags, ergo it we put the tags somewhere else, it would not necessarily mean anything to the computer. but, maybe we should just try it?

if we place tags on parts of our body, would it be possible to contort into the x,y rela-tionships necessary to trigger the system?

approach from two angles, one, movement without worrying about what’s being made on the screen, two, the reverse: how to get a very specific result on the screen, what movements would be required? also inter-ested in the incorporation of language as well (written). perhaps a collaboration with some writers to “perform” a text? we must consider the 3d component of the system when we are creating.

how might something created in this environment stand up outside of this environment?

January 18th, 2011: G-Speak meeting notesNotes by Olivia Verdugo(please excuse typos, spelling mistakes and incomplete sentences! also, auto-correct kept changing G-speak to “speak” sorry)

Page 14: Our Process Book

14

what is the work beyond this room? how could it possibly exist in the worked at large?

primary interests: movement, language

evelyn:

haven’t thought about g-speak too much. traditionally before coming here very interested in thinking about tools for art-ists (digital tools for children and artists) very interested in the idea of collaborative tools. would like to develop as an artist as well as a tool maker. drawing tools would be something of interest, particularly if there could be a collaborative aspect involving more than one person at a time. taking how we work in the studio and ap-plying that here. thinks she should be able to spend a bit more time here now that the intense part of drawing marathon is over.

lucy:

should there be both a pragmatic project, and a poetic one? again, the interest in spatially exploring typography.

micah:

interested in how the impute devices affect how we interact with the content of the computer and think about the screen in general. for example, the new trackpad + hopw it has affected the way undergrads draw using the trackpad

how does the technology we use affect the very way we create/what we create

how would using both parts / both of our limbs to control content creation affect US

as with ipods/ipads, the content is shaped differently + our reading habits are changed

get away from making specific tools to-wards exploring the design of relationships and how it affects us as users of that tool

pitcher that can pitch both right and left handed

have made so far: exploring the practical technical side of things

primary interests: music, food, sports

lucy:

i know that you have a tendency for the

practical + like to frame things as they are

desire to be pushed into a less familiar place?

jamie:

defamiliarizing our physicality allows us to be more open/ expand what we do

o: (will add)

lucy:

when we talk about what g-speak was first designed for, would you say it was basically designed to be a bigger projection that we can get on our laptops

jamie:

the interface, not merely the projection

opec: used in a huge room to parse huge amts. of data pertaining to the mineral content of the earth

micah:

g-speak is more of a one-to-one relation-ship, quicker navigation etc.

non-linear, and spatial way to visualize/traverse information

information is not “chopped up” the same way (the power pt problem)

immediacy of information availability

lucy:

what are the kinds of artwork that get generated out of processing language

always look similar, time to move on?

o: (will add)

lucy:

what is drawing? old school thinker explains drawing, what is the limit that makes drawing not drawing anymore

what is a mark?

why is mark making so essential?

jamie:

from an art-making pt of view: one-to-one interactivity: drawing

what is the interactive paradigm that we are working with?

how may we define interactivity?

citrus bohn (sp?) “a system is only interac-tive if the user changes the system, and

Page 15: Our Process Book

07/01/2011

15

the system changes the user”

what if there are variables and diff func-tions that the computer responds to and then we resound to that? interface loop?

critique about non-understanding of interacting in dm

could the system be a part of the dialogue?

camila:

the potentials of creating, accidental creation, chance, not-knowing what the computer is going to do next?

lucy:

puppets on gloves? scrim/wyang kulit type shadow theater?

catherine:

julie taymor(sp?)

lucy:

shadows: camille utterback

catherine:

we want to explore something with speak that is more that you can just do with your computer with your mouse.

jamie:

3d

gestural

collaborative

micah:

but, we could create a drawing app on g-speak that does what you could never do on a computer

lucy:

would we be comfortable with being very open/not having a totally “finished” program/product at the end? perhaps a proposal?

jamie:

but, the “this is what i made” part is very important. without making, being here (in the g-speak space) is irrelevant

lane:

i have a huge list!

interesting things: thinking from purely a sculptural standpoint: space, light, simple investigations dealing with the fact that

there is a shadow and the machine is reading some response to the hands

hand:

puppet

shadow

tools

transcribing information vs navigating information

picking up the relationships of what your hand is doing as transcribing information

deafness and the way that a blind person exploders an object with their hands and how that-kind of tactile exploration might influence the way we create form

children’s games?

using mistakes: being able to uniformly obstruct information

mirrors

the fact that the machine creates scenery

assistance from others while “perform-ing”? (so, a kind of participation?)

andy warhol and his placing the camera on the doorknob, or just observing very basic things

taking the system in and out of the room,: how things begin in a salon or gallery be-fore they are able to move somewhere else

the extension of a projector - light film etc. without thinking about interface

“the one-eyed projector god”

art and design: history about what hap-pens when something is used “wrong”

mapping the inner-self: what would the battle-ground for one’s body be? what would happen if we could organize the 3d space that was self?

melding of household and self in an exter-nalized way

film before film? how people attempted to breathe life into an inanimate object before film

some connection btw watching slow tran-sitions between things that cause cracks in the way we see/understand information

drawing in the 3rd dimension: key things

Page 16: Our Process Book

16

to think about: what’s so cool about the word drawing is that it doesn’t exclude the notion of drawn (pulled out from) once you understand that notion of draw-ing you know that you are pulling it out and then shoving it forward

(vs rendering)

to draw and then project

extrusion

drawing as an activity

the translation between what we see in our open minds and the tapered tools with which we render those visions

(love that idea)

what does it take to get someone emotion-ally invested?

violation of security of understanding

evelyn:

PUSh on the system to see what it can do! it will push back

try to understand the parameters within which we are working

catherine:

do not undervalue the tools that we do have

lucy:

Richter Floating rectangles to sound?

work within our limits and do not be nega-tive about our simple gestures

lane:

is there a bulletin board to post just the simples thing that someone could create?

a way to just see what we’ve discovered

lucy:

ugop(sp?): flash pro guy

look at what he is doing

o: (will add)

lucy:

if we could take everything everyone has tossed out…

niu:

plays the accordion!

building sketches?

moving skyscrapers in manhattan

Q:

designing a typeface. speak could be a very interesting tool to explore the creation of a typeface through gesture

perhaps a script face? but very intuitive

creating a system to design a typeface?

micah:

body language - could the system respond to shifts in our body language?

lucy:

how could we move to the next level of creating our projects now?

catherine:

maybe we could start to mock things up?

could what we’re doing be BOTH practical and experimental?

lucy:

type, drawing, language, body & computer interface

what part of this can we really do in 4 weeks?

go have lunch together and mull over this question

maybe:

half of us: purely practical design?

half of us: purely exploratory exploring the connection btw hand gesture and image?

catherine:

first have a tool, then repurpose that tool for something experimental rather than just trying to make something impractical

micah:

experiential vs practical?

lane:

responsive system transcribes and then allows us to be responsive to what it transcribes

no matter what we do, it may be inter-preted into something we can interact with in a physical way

from general to specific

going from the self

Page 17: Our Process Book

11/01/2011

17

kind of like a three-dimensional tape recorder?

lucy:

the magic of what your hand can do is a bit less magical unless you kind of pull whatever is truly unique and surprising out of the system.

what can we do with this system/with our hands that is NOT just mouse like

how can we name a direction that will bring the amazingness of this experiential space forward?

lane:

can we storyboard the circumstances that cause what the dream is?

abstract thinking/feeling

next step: get specific, get visual and demonstrative

how can we get it out of a specific laptop into a communal space?

lucy:

independent study: urban curators?

using found gold frames draw attention to various things around town

this is different as we each/all want to be the architect of the programming and the recipient of the ah-ha

start with something that is a GIVEN is helpful, a dot, a line, a word, a poem, a prop?

if we could start with a thing we wanted to solve visually/expressively that might be able to start things moving/going

niu:

performace

game

two terminal directions

in the middle space there is a lot we may explore

lucy:

could we say that our primary goal is to use g-speak in a group situation?

two groups feels more manageable in terms of having some voice

our personal interests could be explored after wintersession

(now we are looking at our sketches/previ-ous work)

lucy:

specificity of hand gesture should be what we are working with

the limited from the limitedness

or vice versa

nancy dwyer - three dimensional typogra-phy um… extruded

how do we see type? when does type be-come something else? the portent of what is to be said?

lane:

orthographic drawing

hidden potentiality? mutations

catherine:

perhaps videotaping our hands close-up and projecting on another wall our hand gestures

Page 18: Our Process Book

18

The system has performative qualities, is it possible to turn the "performers" around and engage with an audience. How can we consider that audience?

∞∞∞

We are necessarily working with local space: what happens if we use up and down or back and fourth in a more extreme way?

∞∞∞

Think of spatial relationships, not only between the performer and the screen, but also with the audience. Where is the space for the person to talk? Where is the space for the technology to talk?

∞∞∞

Programming drawing tools as a starting point and discussion on the drawing experience. Documenting the whole experience as part of the learn-ing process.

∞∞∞

We could use type in experimental ways and work with data visualization.

∞∞∞

group discussion - january 18th, 2011Edited version (Original notes by Olvia Verdugo)

Approach from two angles: movement without worrying about what’s being made on the screen, and how to get a very specific result on the screen, what movements would be required? How might something created in this environment stand up outside of this environment? What is the work beyond this room?

∞∞∞

Exploring the idea of constructing collaborative tools. Development as artists as well as a tool-makers.

∞∞∞

Interests in how the input devices affect the way we interact with the content of the computer and think about the screen in general.

∞∞∞

How does the technology we use af-fect the very way we create, what we create? Get away from making specific tools towards exploring the design of relationships and how it affects us as users of that tool.

∞∞∞

Defamiliarizing from our physicality

Page 19: Our Process Book

18/01/2011

19

just do with your computer with your mouse.

∞∞∞

But, we could create a drawing appli-cation on GSpeak that does what you could never do on a computer.

∞∞∞

Explore the idea of transcribing infor-mation vs. navigating information.

Picking up the relationships of what your hand is doing as transcribing in-formation. Using mistakes: being able to uniformly obstruct information

the fact that the machine creates scenery.

∞∞∞

“The one-eyed projector God”

∞∞∞

Drawing in the 3rd dimension.

∞∞∞

Translation between what we see in our open minds and the tapered tools with which we render those visions.

∞∞∞

Push on the system to see what it can do! It will push back. Try to understand the parameters within which we are working.

∞∞∞

allows us to be more open and expand what we do.

∞∞∞

When we talk about what G-Speak was first designed for, would you say it was basically designed to be a big-ger projection that we can get on our laptops? The interface is not merely the projection. G-Speak is more than a one-to-one relationship; it allows quicker navigation and a non-linear, and spatial way to visualize/traverse information.

∞∞∞

What is the interactive paradigm that we are working with? How may we define interactivity?

Could the system be a part of the dialogue?

∞∞∞

What are the potentials of creating with code and not knowing what the computer is going to do next?

∞∞∞

We want to explore something with GSpeak that is more that you can

“A system is only interactive if the user changes the system, and the system changes the user”.

Page 20: Our Process Book

20

Designing a typeface? GSpeak could be a very interesting tool to explore the creation of a typeface through gesture. Perhaps a script face? but very intui-tive...

∞∞∞

Body language. Could the system re-spond to shifts in our body language?

∞∞∞

Could what we’re doing be both practi-cal and experimental?

∞∞∞

Exploring the connection between hand gesture and image?

Experiential vs practical?

∞∞∞

Responsive system transcribes and then allows us to be responsive to what it transcribes.

∞∞∞

What can we do with this system/with our hands that is NOT just mouse like

∞∞∞

Get specific, get visual and demonstra-tive

∞∞∞

How can we get it out of a specific laptop into a communal space?

Start with something that is a GIVEN is helpful, a dot, a line, a word, a poem, a prop?

∞∞∞

Could we say that our primary goal is to use g-speak in a group situation?

∞∞∞

Specificity of hand gesture should be what we are working with

perhaps videotaping our hands close-up and projecting on another wall our hand gestures

drawing applications, hand gestures, start-ing point, participa-tory drawing tools, hand gestures, con-struction of an experi-ence, group project, movement with visual responses, influence of movement, par-ticipation, languages, typography, stage, face an audience, body changes, perfor-mance, spatial rela-tionship, framing and composing

the input device affects how we ex-plore and generate the content

Page 21: Our Process Book

18/01/2011

21

Participants of the discussion: Micah Barrett, Olivia Verdugo, Catherine Siller, Niu Miao, Camila Afanador, Keitaro Sakamoto, Jamie Jewett, Lane Myer and Lucy Hitchcock

25 / 01 / 2011BRAINSTORMINGLane helped us writing down all the ideas in a brainstorming session we had. We proposed to develop a group project.

“...the proposal is to create a way to visually map (in 3d) gesture whether that gesture be behavioral or emotive with a focus on (spa-tial) relationship between hands and bod-ies and what info we may parse from those spatial relationships.” Catherine's description of our project

Page 22: Our Process Book

22

WEEK 4January 24 - 30 / 2011Group Discussions and Work Sessions

Page 23: Our Process Book

19/01/2011

23

first: catch-up

catherine: working directly on system rather than only on our computers

encountered problem: not able to save things once we’ve uploaded them to g-speak

jamie: there has been a new user set up for you guys (not clements)

we should find login info for this

catherine: perhaps we should ask evelyn?

jamie: if there is a problem with the system, let me know instead of going to clement directly b/c i can try to fix it first &/or alert Peter

interesting to publish the notes that i am taking

olivia: process document consisting of google docs notes, video, photos, etc.

jamie: who is hosting the wordpress blog? (we think risd/dm?)

catherine: worked on the technical aspect of developing our projects yesterday (on sunday)

1 group project (micah, Camila, catherine, olivia)

niu: doing own thing/ working on cityscape processing

keitaro: working on own typographic project

(edit - we all plan on working in the space at the same time so that we may help trouble shoot one another’s sketches etc.)

lucy: niu kept talking about fingers?

catherine: working on manhattan sketch as primary project

catherine: talking about the general group

project: what we ended up agreeing on as a group project was the idea of using the gspeak system to translate gestural expression into visuals

i.e. two people having a conversation and using gspeak to record a gestural record of what the hands are doing during a conversation

we each did a little visual brainstorming

lucy: makes me think about standard ty-pographic example: massin’s bald soprano (visualizing typography)

the other thing that brings to mind is the greek theater chorus trope - narrating and coloring what is happening on the stage

if something is happening here (in the gspeak space) in a small way (hands) where does that leave the rest of the space?

jamie: working 1:1 way

background of the environment that this is happening on top of could be impacted by secondary or tertiary levels of interactivity

still GENERATIVE thus

most of the gspeak stuff i’ve seen has been 1 layer- neutral

is there different layers of content/inter-polation of data that could create a layered record? mining the data from the hands in different ways to create layers? even just using time: slow down, speed up etc.

(edit: this is a really good point to think about!)

camila: how do the visuals affect the com-prehension of what someone is saying?

what kind of text or speech would we want to read? if the gestures will be enough

group discussion - january 24th, 2011Notes Jan 24th, morning meeting:. (sorry guys, this one is REALLY chock-full-o typos. i will try to edit it when i have a chance)

Page 24: Our Process Book

24

movement for us to produce the visual part of the project?

lucy: my dinner with andre? recording a conversation with two people

micah: making someone type/rip paper/cut paper - what do different actions LOOK like?

lucy: i like that this pulls out how we inter-act with tools

it’s saying something/making a statement culturally or sociologically

camila: VISUALS: how can the movement of the hands be visually represented, thinking about the movement of a ribbon (like olympic ribbon) element in 3d space etc. (shows us an image of two intertwined ribbons of color)

this was the basic idea of thinking of the seismograph but not thinking of the lines as “lines” but objects in a space with surface

(shows processing sketch) dimensional lines generated by the movement of the mouse across the screen

catherine: color will also play a role of course

camila: what can happen if we track the interaction btw. both hands?

jamie: one of the points of gspeak is that it applies DEFINITION and MEANING to gesture

most of the gestures we use in conversa-tion would have more than one meaning

most of the gripes we have defined are not conversational

lucy: maybe we need a middle ground/translating device?

(talks about friend’s project involving wind)

couldn’t you record the movement of people speaking with some other device and then feed that into gspeak to be ma-nipulated gesturally?

in order to get it to that place of pure gesture instead of just gripes...

jamie: i think thats going to be a rub that we come up against with gspeak often

you’re saying can i have a realtime motion capture data, which is the first layer, but we have access to the gripe info, not that

catherine: everything we do generates some kind of gripe information

if we can use this as a tool to identify what gripes are not in the packet that could help us

another thing that could help is figuring out how to assign, for example, 3 different gripes to the same effect, so that there is a little bit of leeway built into the gesture

camila: when you see the system, it us a little too rigid, we started to try to build in a level of flexibility

lucy: what if you had a mannequin, or someone that wasn’t human and did stop-frame animation while moving the fingers?

micah: i imagined programming little “traps”

catherine: someone should maybe jot down questions and concerns we have as we move along

two of the things you have brought up is the specificity of the system?

lucy: for me it’s not

(okay taking a mini break from typing to present my stuff - these notes are in the google doc olivia notes ideas )

lucy: i love how these things are hovering around real possibility for use in the world

i am thinking about the stem/steam thing

the idea that you could take an ephemeral gesture and turn it into a form

so that the thing ends up looking like something no one has ever seen

read christopher alexander

talks about the relationship of the whole system to the parts

what i love is the idea that the concrete aspect of the system (this moth) is in its nature to do what else works that way?

do two hands talking make some sensible form as this does? or will it be a mess?

what is the difference between us and this perfect being?

Page 25: Our Process Book

20/01/2011

25

Page 26: Our Process Book

26

25 / 01 / 2011KEITARO:I succeedED in controlling the camera angle, and now trying to figure out how to use ‘translate()’ at ‘hand.pos.z’.

24 / 01 / 2011MICAHMicah trying out his sketch in the GSpeak system,

Page 27: Our Process Book

20/01/2011

27

jamie: one of the differences btw this and a standard like quality is TEXTURE

tracking the relationships btw two hands and the fingers could create interesting texture

micah: trying to track relationship btw individual fingers etc.

is it possible to track each tag in space in-dividually? or do they only track in relation to one another?

jamie: what you are trying to do is subvert-ing the intent of gspeak - going behind the layer they have created. it might be as interesting to NOT do that

you can draw the path of the hands from the path of the hands

what happens if you draw the path of the gripes instead of the motion of the hands?

what happens if you track the path of the hands in relation to THEMSELVES?

from the standpoint of not doing what a lot of other people have done, how can we present it differently by taking advantage of what the gspeak system does best?

what can we do with the gripe informa-tion to create a different kind of positional data?

(edit: i agree)

lucy: what is the conversation thats being had and what does that do to the hand gestures?

micah: (showing sketch for dynamically drawing bezier curves) based on where the mouse goes it changes the curve

what i was envisioning is a more human looking line

i agree with what jamie said that this is very computer-looking

jamie: maybe its because i’m a geek but even so i find this so pleasing

micah: if the representation of it is some … what if all the dots/lines are coming out of the matrix of the tag, instead of just a single line? i’ve been thinking about what a seismograph does, it takes this really long record and

i’m really interested in the possibility of

maybe (the central square) never moves from the center, but the evidence of motion is captured behind it

so we would have this long trail of evidence

(sketch done in illustrator) bands of color emerge from the individual balls other tags creating very interesting paths

jamie: as opposed to just tracking a swishy line that follows my fingers there’s a “blob” of meaning that appears relating to specific gesture?

catherine: so the weight or quality of the line would be changed/determined by gesture?

micah: so the lines would all coalesce to make a shape.

one thing i’ve been really interested in is the relationship of people to the machine

example: fb: you have a transcript of the convo

with this you get something else

lucy: what if you traced the gestures of a convo, and sent that info to someone else? what would that look like?

catherine: a dm student wrote a program that drew squares according to sound

louder speaking-larger squares

ended up with a catalogue of conversa-tions; visual record of convo with mom, sister etc.

it was more intuitive/easier to read than one would initially think

lucy: video someone made of people de-scribing the relationship btw two people

hands playing with yarn

micah: i’m also interested in taking it out of the conversational concept: a pair of scissors, how do we use our hands as tools?

lucy: other situations where it would be interesting to look at what the hands are doing? political rally?

what other situation would we be able to look at?

catherine: something i thought was inter-

Page 28: Our Process Book

28

esting visually

(video with green type and threadlike structures)

dealing with space 3dimensionally

ribbons

all on the same page visually

how could this exist outside of the system?

i will be the voice for impracticality@!

how neat it would be to have some model for some kind of three-dimensionally thing but then what if i built it myself out of dowels and yarn instead of having it rapid prototyped

what if we did videotape the hands? so we could see what they are doing while we are tracking their movements?

what are the circumstances? this is the really big thing we haven;t figured out

are we going to put random people in here besides ourselves?

is it two people having a convo?

would we project text onto the other walls?

what about the performative aspect of this?

(viewpoints book) visual take on theater

one of the ways scientists use seismo-graphs is to map the inside of the earth that we can not see

lucy: t looks like a geologic map

catherine: exactly. what if we create this kind of tool that enables us to map some-one’s internal landscape?

jamie: interesting bc its one of the things that gspeak is being used to do: parse geological data?

lucy: would we overlay data? what’s hap-pening inside you (gesture) and whats happening in the ground in rhode island right now?

(edit: interesting)

catherine: whats the situation, who are the people that we are putting in this situ-ation? how can we begin to pin this down

cultural aspect:

how do gesture shift depending on what

language is being spoken?

another idea that camila had, that might be interesting to look into: there may be some kind of way that the content of the convo could somehow be built into that visual ribbon

dos it make sense for the person being mapped to be able to watch the map evolve?

jamie: that goes back to whether this is a stage or not. is this performative? or is this

lucy: you have e an interest in the record and the documentation

(note to self: olivia & lucy said something interesting at 20:03-21:00 listen to record-ing and add into notes)

[then we talk a little bit about how we each might be interested in being involved dur-ing the spring semester]

jamie: if we continue in the spring we might not have to continue working on this specific project, but we could build upon what you’ve learned and created

lucy: catherine before we move on what , in a nutshell, is the group project?

catherine: i think that the proposal is to create a visual / a way to visually map (in 3d) gesture whether that gesture be behavioral or emotive with a focus on (spatial) relationship between hands and bodies and what info we may parse from those spatial relationships.

keitaro: want to create processing applet to manipulate typefaces and converse through gesture

(shows examples of text manipulation by Peter Cho)

Jamie: have you guys talked about Daniel Howe’s Rita library?

keitaro(shows examples of how he hopes he may be able to manipulate single letter-forms through gripes)

lucy: why single letters rather than phrases?

keitaro: technical constraints

Page 29: Our Process Book

20/01/2011

29

24 / 01 / 2011CAMILA:Drawing sketch using 'easing'. Now the idea is to make it work in G-Speak. and make each hand draw in a different color.

lucy: it might be interesting if instead of squeezing for example the c, you went from something like a wide letter-form like a w to narrow letter-form like an l

catherine: we also worked on a sketch yesterday where the line will follow your hand’s x and y position and the z coordi-nate of your hand affects the width of the line

jamie (shows some fire calligraphy dance sketches to us as an example)

texture mapping flame on top of the rib-bons created by dancers

(also shows us troika ranch dance ex-ample)

lane (43:00-44:00 - fill this in)

jamie: ancillary movement why we have motion capture so that the movement we use in our animations are more real-

seeming

lucy: designer who created the string project: leslie kwok

http://lesliekwok.info <this is her main page

http://lesliekwok.info/mfa-thesis/socio-grams/ <this is the string example

[took a break here to talk about scheduling and decided that Monday at 6pm Feb 7th will be our final showing of our wintersesh work]

(camila shows her gspeak sketches - and they work! and look awesome)

we discuss the possibility of getting Pilot 1 working (right now only pilot 0 is function-ing)

(catherine shows her gspeak sketch - and it works! and looks awesome)

Page 30: Our Process Book

30

(jamie gives catherine’s sketch a try)

(edit: BRB)

catherine: making a plug for simplicity (edit: here here!! i agree. “K.I.S.S.”)

in my experience if we’re really particular and specific about how we set up the environment it will take us a long way in making the result / visual more impressive and valuable

jamie: and just to be clear, the point is not necessarilly to be “impressive”

you came in here, learned and went through a process that is dynamic and interesting and exciting, that = success. that’s why we’re here. that’s what risd’s agenda for the tool is.

I think its importatn/ what david wants to see is that there’s something happening taht’s interesting

we might think about inviting peter/david

since we’re doing agreat job at documen-tation, part of what could happen is having recordings of our steps along the way documented on the gspeak blog

one problem with our last classes is that we have no documentation of previous work done on the system! so it is as if it never existed

lucy: your research has been incredibly rich etc.

one of my goals in being part of this is to say this is here and lets keep using it and how can we continue to keep using it as a learning tool even if we end up making smaller tools/’sketches instead of some-thing “grand”

example of book containing lovely threads/layers connecting parts of the book: -> http://maria-fischer.com/en/traumgedan-ken_en.html

[niu now talks about his project]

niu: (shows us his cityscape sketch on the gspeak system) moving hands creates citys

jamie: maybe you should think about creating a gripe to clear the screen

lucy: and somehow i think it would be

lovely to record all the data thats being created (points to edge of screen where gripes are being recorded by “println”)

olivia: lets make a poster using all the gripe data generated by an interaction with the system!!

niu: i want to create an applet whereby with a very subtle gesture one can control the skyline/buildings flying away from the horizon line

lucy: where is that? wouldn’t it be interest-ing to create a sketch of a city that doesn’t have skyscrapers, or that needed them?

niu: (shows black and white photo) this is more like what i’d like to use in my sketch

jamie: what about asl?

potential problem: so much of what is communicated through asl is through emotional moement/facial expression etc. not just the letters/words formed by the hand but HOW they are formed

micah: paleography - developing a cal-ligraphic language for the hand?

jamie: might be interested to look into the stylus shorthand of palm pilots

lucy: if you aer going to do something where you trace two peoples hands in a convo what if one of these hand \-;..

what if we are already making marks with our hands that are somewhere represen-tative of an alphabet?

so, what do we want to sort of leave with?

continue to read each other’s notes on google docs

look back at that nice nugget that cath-erine expressed

do we need to specify things more pre-cisely in the next 20 mins before we walk out of here?

catherine: for me our interests seem to lie in somewhat different areas

should we agree upon that now, or decide to set it aside entirely?

lucy: could we make each of our ideas live in small sketches?

and the look to the process documentation

Page 31: Our Process Book

20/01/2011

31

to show what else we’re thinking about?

jamie: so today maybe figure out what you want to pursue and let us know

(1:36-37 - notes on what we want to do over the next two weeks)

lane: ideas for niu about being able to vi-sually traverse a city by moving things with our hands-shoving buildings apart etc. interacting organically witht he cityscape

lucy: be cognizant of the binoculars - do you need them if you are not using them?

niu: the binocs move with the car. not sure if coding ability is up to par with trying to get done what i want to get done

catherine: devils advocate we don;t have much coding experience either but we;’re getting it done we can make something simple and yet compelling

lane: don’t ever underestimate the cumu-lative effect showing these demonstra-tions in steps can have

people have a tendancy to understand the new by things that we already understand today

jamie: on interaction: you impact the sys-tem and the system impacts you

what about faking it???

(sorry everyone i am losing steam here a bit when it comes to typing - 3 hrs and my hands hurt!)

lucy: good conversation around the big project, tracking (1:47-1:48)

get some nourishment

come back and try to lay out one or two sentences that explain the goal

then maybe there’;s a way you can each work on different parts of the goal/real-izing different parts

jamie: its a great idea to think about working as a group to build the gestural motor, and then each can use it potentially differently

for next time:

developing the visual

exploring our understanding of code

basically, we are all interested in very similar visual parsing of the data:

where the hand(s) is in space, and how the hands relate to one another > how can we translate that information into a compel-ling visual?

& keep in mind what catherine stated earlier: “i think that the proposal is to cre-ate a visual / a way to visually map (in 3d) gesture whether that gesture be behav-ioral or emotive with a focus on (spatial) relationship between hands and bodies and what info we may parse from those spatial relationships.”

QUICK CHECK IN at 3:00pm:

olivia: interested in mapping gripes/rela-tionships rather than just hand in space (not just hand:hand but gripe:space). very interested in the REMNANT - what data is left over from a conversation articulated with our hands, and what can we DO with that data?

GSpeak screen dimensions

Page 32: Our Process Book

32

could we make a poster of gripes?

do we use the data in a video?

do we create a 3d prototype?

camila: like that idea - mapping btw two hands

catherine: might be interested to map btw behavioral gesture and … mapping behavior to mode of communication i.e. do we gesticulate more when speaking face to face than we do on the phone? over ichat etc.?

would like to have outside pressure (in

the form of people coming to our final showing)

as lane said, sharing our IDEAS RESEARCH

maybe (olivia) begin to brainstorm about how we could visually collate our

micah: excited to be playing with the visual aspect of this

keitaro: hmmmmmmmmm........hmmm-mmmm......want to keep coding and try to figure out how it might be possible to ma-nipulate typeface in 3d through process-ing. simple prototyping?

24 / 01 / 2011NIU:

Page 33: Our Process Book

20/01/2011

33

24 / 01 / 2011CATHERINE:

Page 34: Our Process Book

34

27 / 01 / 2011KEITARO:Considering again from the beginning, I made dot fonts on processing. This only works on PC so far, I want to connect with G-Speak and also make it 3D (like spheres).

Page 35: Our Process Book

20/01/2011

35

27 / 01 / 2011OLIVIA AND MICAH:We finally had a little breakthrough tonight! micah and i were able to get a bezier sketch running such that each of us could control one of the origin points with a gripe. camila took pictures, which we will post as soon as we have a chance to upload them to the laptop.

Page 36: Our Process Book

36

WEEK 5January 31 - February 6 / 2011Final Work Week

Page 37: Our Process Book

20/01/2011

37

Micah's sketch

Page 38: Our Process Book

38

Niu's sketch

Camila's drawing sketch

Page 39: Our Process Book

20/01/2011

39

-We need to update the library on the g-speak system

-there is now a second winter-session acct, perhaps we could upload the 2nd library there, so that if there is any problem with one, we can use the other

-via email, let’s compile a guestlist con-taining specific members of gd and d+m to invite to our showing next monday night

-kelly, evelyn, beth, dylan, andrew etc.?

-probably we should refrain from inviting the whole of each department so that the space is not overwhelmed.

-we can also always perform a demo for people who are not there at our “show-n-tell” next monday

please note:

the other g-speak acct info

acct name: risdwint2011

password: lines2001

--we might be able to save our sketches when working on this acct, as the prob-lems we’re having with saving on clement’s acct have to do with permissions.

everybody, check-in!:

keitaro:

-working on a sketch called “dotfont”

-the size of the dots composing the type are determined by how many times you click on the sketch with the mouse

-each of the circles jiggle slightly and leave a trail behind them when you move the word around the screen

-next step: upload to gspeak and control dot font through z-position of the hand

-also, try to control each letter separately

(one glove:one letter)

-the dots grow to a specific size, then return to their original small size

-lucy wonders if there could be one row of dots rather than two? if your investigation is about type, perhaps you could start it from the smallest version i.e. start with one dot? then bring in more dots (w mag-netic force?) and see the type assemble. that would create a narrative: how the type gets built.

-petri dish growth as a jumping off point?

-the “jiggling” of the dots suggests mo-lecular movement

-how could it be pushed forward? what if the dots were scattered, and went looking for each other?

-would it be possible (if each letter were a separate object/function) to manipulate them more carefully?

-lucy says: what word you’re teaching seems to matter to me. why risd? what about hotdog? blood? there ought to be some deeper connection between the meaning of the word and the form you’re giving it.

-lane says there’s almost something intestinal about the letter-forms, mentions cell mitosis. creation of a creature as a typographic image?

-growth is at the crux of this exploration

-when things grow, we don’t necessarily think of them as done. we’re just seeing them in one stage of their growth.

micah/olivia:

-THIS SKETCH (the one we just showed you all):

group discussion - january 31th, 2011

Page 40: Our Process Book

40

-the origin points of the bezier curves are controlled by the x and y position of pilot 1’s hands in the g-speak system.

-the bezier handles (aka control points) which control the curvature of the lines between the origin points controlled by the x and y position of pilot 0’s hands in the g-speak system. This is functional, but too exaggerated right now, so we need to scale it down.

-OUR NEXT STEP:

-we would like to map the bezier handles (aka control points) which control the curvature of the lines between the origin points to the x and y position of the hand in the g-speak syste m.

-OUR NEXT, NEXT STEP:

-get pilot 0 and pilot 1 working in concert such that each pilot’s left hand controls their respective origin point, and each pilot’s right hand controls their respective bezier handles (aka control points).

--notes--

-maybe we should incorporate a thin line of light into the bottom of the screen?

-how does having to kneel when interact-ing with the sketch change the meaning of the sketch?

-how doe we want to *FRAME* ourselves on “stage”? (or, is it even a stage?)

-could the control points of the bezier curves become something other than dots? letterforms? geometric shapes?

-micah shows beautiful sketch of rotating white circles

catherine:

-feeling a bit out of the loop

-b/c we are all new to coding, it is difficult for her to look at the code and understand what’s going on

-perhaps we can split up the work as we continue:

micah & olivia can continue trying to con-trol the bezier handles?

camila & catherine can work on replacing the circular bezier control points with

typographic characters, or perhaps other shapes?

-project catherine has been working on alone: understanding how the system fol-lows quality of touch

-videotaped an experiment this morning

-playing around with the idea of drawing by touch rather than sight -

-interested in using the computer as a barometer to measure quality of touch

-sketch shows catherine running g-speak gloved hands over her own body to pro-duce forms on the screen

-looks like duchamp’s nude descending a staircase (cool)

-what about incorporating an audio ele-ment?

-keep thinking about all the possible ways to enrich this artform

camila:

-has been working on exercises regarding grabbing points and moving them?

-working on a process book for her open research class

-it is awesome! incorporates notes, images etc. documenting our processes as a group

-please send camila any images + cap-tions you would like to see in the book

niu:

-demonstrating his sketch wherein the city line is controlled by niu’s gripes as he moves his hands across the screen

-there is also a sailboat(?) hanging out in the sky

-the ship is three dimensional! and it changes!

-perhaps the buildings could be stretched like taffy?

-visual NARRATIVE

-what does this mean? what’s it saying? what’s it about?

-also, think details - why upper left box? why nav(?) bar on right? smooth out the details in the graphics etc. so that the city looks like it is growing better.

Page 41: Our Process Book

20/01/2011

41

Olivia's Diffusion Limited Aggregation

Olivia's tree sketch

Page 42: Our Process Book

42

WEEK 6February 7, 2011, Final Presentation

Page 43: Our Process Book

20/01/2011

43

HH

H

M

M

M

M

M

aaa

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

nn

n

n

n

d

d

d

d

d

dd

d

d

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

ee

d

A collection of images produced through mapping the location and character of hands in space. Written in Processing at the Rhode Island School of Design in the winter of 2011.

Micah's Poster

Page 44: Our Process Book

44

(1) Two-hand drawing. Hand 1: Micah, hand 2: Camila. (2) Clemen Dancing Drawing

Camila's Poster

Page 45: Our Process Book

20/01/2011

45

Catherine's Poster

Page 46: Our Process Book

46