Archive for April, 2006
April 30, 2006 at 4:47 am · Filed under Uncategorized
A factor of interest to molecular biologists, designers, and psychologists is the phenomenom of the smallest effective difference. For a visual designer, Tufte (1997) argures that one should “make all visual distinctions as subtle as possible, but still clear and effective.”
Tufte using a blue painting of Ad Reinhardt’s to illustrate what subtle variations can do when placed against each others’ background (figure/ground).
Psychologists measure the smallest differences in a signal or stimulation that an individual can sense.
Molecular biologists study mutations. Some mutations are synonomous and some are nonsynonomous- though synonomous occur at a higher frequency in functional regions of the genome. One question they frequently ask is what the smallest effective mutation is that will cause a perceptible change in the phenotype of an organism. Put another way, how many mutations can an asexual population accumulate before there is a detectable decrease (or increase) in it’s growth rate.
The point here is that if changes (saturation, intensity, kenetic, etc) are too small, they will have no effect on how the system is understood by the “community.” If those changes are too large, then the effects can also impair communication with a sort of “information overload.”
Tufte called the smallest effective difference the Occam’s Razor of information design.
In following this path, the differences that do get noticed form a heirarchy.
–for biologists, think of synonomous mutations versus nonsynomous mutations….
note: this is a work in progress..
April 29, 2006 at 10:21 pm · Filed under Uncategorized
One of the striking similarities between biological signals and artistic signals takes place at the levels of genetic and screen space organization. Genetics of course refers to the study genes and, often times, to the mutations that underly changes in their phenotypic effects. By screen space, I am referring to the movies, film, video, cinema, and even video games.
Statistical Epistasis is a phenomena observed in populations whereby the effect of a one gene is determined by the genetic background against which it is expressed. The result is that it can be difficult to predict the effect of a gene or mutation unless its interactions with other genes or loci are known. Across generations statistical associations of these interactions can develop in populatiions because there is non-randomness in the heritability of these “complexes.” This is called linkage disequilibrium in population genetics.
Simply put, the effect of element a in the array is influenced by elements b, c, or d. They must be able to freely segregate but they may become linked by their combined effect on the fitness of the system/organism. Physical linkage (i.e. directly next to each other) is possible but not necessary.
The Kuleshov Effect was observed by Lev Kuleshov around 1918 through a series of experiments done using stock footage. Kuleshov intercut an image of an expressionless man, with a bowl of soup, a girl, and a child’s coffin in turn to illustrate the effect editing could have. The audience interpreted the sequence of the man and the soup to mean that he was expressing hunger, while the man/coffin complex communicated sadness. Thee audience attributed these effects to the man’s acting- even though the same shot of the man was used for each “complex.” This was a controlled experiment: the image of the man was held constant, but the background on which it was employed changed the meaning or effect of that image.
The Kuleshov Effect is similar in that a is also affected by the influence of b, c, or d. However, b, c, or d must by physically adjacent to a in order for the effect to occur. That is, the shots must occur in sequence while for epistasis, they need not be next to each other. Nonetheless, the combined effects of the filmic interactions may select for “enhanced” or de-emphasized meaning.
Kuleshov Effect – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Epistasis – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
April 29, 2006 at 10:18 pm · Filed under Uncategorized
“the price of metaphor is eternal vigilance…”
–Arturo Rosenblueth and Norbert Wiener
if art is visual metaphor
and art who’s goal is communication
communication of scientific concepts
theory precedes the metaphor
metaphors should not be built on misunderstandings
metaphors are constantly in the process if modification
one of the concerns of scientists in creating these relationships between art and science is that artists don’t do their homework or focus on superficial aspects of the concepts, work, tools, or artifacts…
why? because often times these visual metaphors are not based on an understanding of the issues and theories…
and so research precedes construction of visual metaphors…but does experimentation and continuous rearticulation of the visual metaphors somehow push the understanding of the theory? For whom? the artists? the scientists? the public?
If the processes of artistic visual research IS going to push the articulation and understanding of scientific understanding, then it too must be transparent and available outside of the studio— as process unveiled…
April 28, 2006 at 8:18 am · Filed under Uncategorized
Previously featured on Plus, the A&D Blog, eBayADay, curated by Associate Professor Rebekah Modrak and MFA candidate Zack Denfeld, may be the first juried group exhibition on eBay. Undergraduate, graduate students and faculty submitted proposals for artworks in which the entire ebay listing (item for sale, descriptive text and placement within chosen categories) is the work. Works presented in the show exploit, redefine or underscore eBay’s potential in the exchange of ideas, objects and commerce.
The artists chosen for the show received instructions for the day and time to post their listing in a 7-day online auction. The first of the 25 auctions begins on December 1st 2005 and the last auction ends on January 1st, 2006. This 31-day event of staggered auctions can be viewed simultaneously at www.ebayaday.com.
From Michigan Radio:
If you go on Ebay this month, you might stumble on a work of art. But these pieces are different than the thousands of paintings and sculptures you’ll find for sale on any given day. They might not even be listed in the art category. Michigan Radio’s Tamar Charney takes a look at the University of Michigan art exhibit EBayADay.
Link to audio story (requires Real Player)
April 25, 2006 at 6:06 am · Filed under Uncategorized
Bobby Campbell gave a great thesis presentation this afternoon. This year the first crop of MFA grad students will graduate from our program. It has been unfortunate to not be able to attend each person’s talk, but at least I was able to attend this one.
Bobby discussed his images of body transformation and anatomy. He presented (as was characterized in the discussion afterwards) a departure from what could be called the cult of beauty to perhaps a cult of power or capacity. Bobby made explicit connections to genetics and nuclear power- as indicators of a general anxiousness about these new technologies whose effects are mostly unknown. The conversation turned towards this desire of people from a cult of (what I argue) functions rather than power or capacities. Along with these functions comes conflict in the form of the social structures to which these individuals belong. The social melodrama..the conflict that arises when the operations of a character or characters come into direct conflict with the values of society…the figure/ground relationship.
The way this could be visualized is a positive relationship between the number and kinds of functions that an object or person has (i.e. the kinds of things they do or perform- also a measure of complexity) and the interconnectedness or networked relationships the object or person has. This needs to be tested of course, but it certainly can be reasoned that as an individual gains functions they may come into conflict created by their other functions.
The reason this is interesting to me is because it may create some new possibilities for the formation of narrative structures. It doesn’t necessarily have to be narrative, but conflict is interesting and provides a basic narrative framework- thesis, antithesis, synthesis. Such is melodrama, but what accounts for function? How is function gained? Where do, when, and which functions create the conflict?
Work investigating gene function, conflict, and networks can provide information as can the work of Jessica Flack at the Santa Fe Institute for complexity which in many ways synthesizes genetical and social models of function and conflict.
Bobby’s website
April 14, 2006 at 9:07 am · Filed under Uncategorized
Factor analysis gives a direct mechanism by which to relate gene or social networks (as in the processes of science) to complex traits (such as the social value of the science or political constituencies represented by scientific claims).
strength of networks
sign of relationships
connectivity
April 13, 2006 at 8:34 am · Filed under Uncategorized
April 13, 2006 at 7:09 am · Filed under Uncategorized
April 13, 2006 at 3:59 am · Filed under Uncategorized
Some of you may be interested in this. It’s new to me.
It’s an art & genomics research centre in Amsterdam, NL.
I thought their rationale (i.e. grant proposal) was interesting. It is downloadable from the site. This appears to be a more sophisticated implementation of previous european efforts aimed at collaborative endeavors- special emphasis on genomics though.
here is the link
http://www.science.uva.nl/artsgenomics
anyone wanna go hang out there for a month- june perhaps?
April 9, 2006 at 10:57 pm · Filed under Uncategorized
Next entries »
