Art Unlimited: an Investigation Into Contemporary Digital Arts and the Free Software Movement
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Art Unlimited: An investigation into contemporary digital arts and the free software movement A thesis submitted to Middlesex University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy/Master of Philosophy Chun Lee School of Art Middlesex University May, 2008 Abstract Computing technology has not only significantly shaped many of the contem- porary artistic disciplines, it has also given birth to many new and exciting practices. Modest, low cost hardware enabled artists to manipulate real-time multimedia data and coordinate vast amounts of hardware devices, whilst high bandwidth Internet connections has allowed them to communicate and dis- tribute their work rapidly. For this reason, art practices in the digital domain have become highly decentralized. It is therefore not surprising that the rise of free and open source software (FLOSS) has been warmly welcomed and adopted by an increasing number of practitioners. The technical advantages in free software allows them to create works of art with greater freedom and flexibility. Its open and collaborative ideology, on the other hand, further embraces the increasingly autonomous and distributed characteristics in the artistic community. This thesis aims to examine the impact of free and open source software in the context of contemporary digital arts. It will look at the current climate of both digital arts and the FLOSS movement, attempting to rationalize the implications of such a phenomena. It will also provide concrete examples of ongoing activities in FLOSS digital arts, as an evidence and documentation of its development to date. Lastly, the practical work in this research will offer a first hand insight into developing a FLOSS project within the given context. Acknowledgments I would like to thank Dr. John Dack for the continuous support throughout this research. Without his invaluable input and encouragement, its completion would not have have been possible. I would also like to thank professor Huw Jones for his initial supervision. I would like to express my gratitude to Inna for her enduring support, as well as my close friends and colleagues. I wish to thank my collaborator, Mathieu Bouchard, for sharing his expertise and knowledge. They have given me the inspiration and motivation to carry out my work. Lastly, a very special thanks to my parents, Y.C and Grace Lee, to whom I dedicate this thesis. Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Research Context . 1 1.2 Research Motives . 5 1.3 Research Subjects . 7 1.3.1 Digital arts . 7 1.3.2 Generative art . 9 1.3.3 Free software . 10 1.4 Subject relationship . 12 1.5 Documentation . 14 1.6 Practical component . 16 1.7 Objectives . 17 1.8 Compositional example . 18 2 Digital arts and FLOSS 28 2.1 Digital Art . 28 2.1.1 Types of digital art . 29 2.2 Current digital art practices . 34 i 2.2.1 Generative art . 34 2.2.2 Code as creative medium, Algorithm as instrument . 46 2.3 Free and Open Source Software . 53 2.3.1 Terminology . 54 2.3.2 Ideology . 55 2.3.3 Historical accounts . 57 2.3.4 Free software and Open Source . 64 2.3.5 Current FLOSS climate . 66 2.4 FLOSS Digital Art . 69 2.4.1 Model of analysis . 70 2.4.2 Current software development method . 72 2.4.3 FLOSS as alternative . 74 2.4.4 Practical example . 76 2.4.5 Conclusion . 77 3 Activities 80 3.1 Introduction . 80 3.2 Collaborative groups . 81 3.2.1 Goto10 . 82 3.2.2 OpenLab . 85 3.2.3 Dyne . 88 3.2.4 Bek . 91 3.2.5 Mediashed . 92 3.2.6 Folly . 95 ii 3.2.7 Access Space . 95 3.2.8 Summary . 96 3.3 Projects . 99 3.3.1 Pure Data . 99 3.3.2 SuperCollider . 102 3.3.3 pure:dyne . 105 3.3.4 PacketForth . 108 3.3.5 Fluxus . 110 3.3.6 Conclusion . 111 3.4 Events . 114 3.4.1 Make Art . 114 3.4.2 Piksel . 116 3.4.3 Linux Audio Conference . 117 3.4.4 International Pure Data convention . 117 3.5 Conclusion . 118 4 Practical Project 120 4.1 Introduction . 120 4.2 Personal practice . 121 4.3 Limitations of Pure Data . 123 4.3.1 Lack of customization . 124 4.3.2 Lack of optimized command invocation . 125 4.3.3 Lack of utility features . 127 4.3.4 Client and server architecture . 129 iii 4.4 Branches of Pure Data . 130 4.5 DesireData . 133 4.5.1 Methodology . 134 4.5.2 Design principles . 135 4.6 Social context . 140 4.7 Current Status and Conclusion . 145 Selected Bibliography 150 Appendix A 154 DesireData . 154 Appendix B 161 List of software . 161 Appendix C 163 Selected performances and workshops . 163 Appendix D 165 CD ROM table of contents . 165 iv List of Figures 1.1 Top level patch of Hypothetical Waves . 20 1.2 Top-level subpatch of [pd WAVE] . 22 1.3 Interpolated random wave generator . 23 1.4 Top-level subpatch of [pd NOISE] . 24 1.5 The use of white noise and audio gates . 25 1.6 Mixing mechanism type one . 25 1.7 Mixing mechanism type two . 26 v Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Research Context Mass production has made technology remarkably accessible to artists. Soci- ety’s vast demand for electronic devices, consumer or industrial, means that cutting edge designs are being constantly and rapidly developed1. As a result, costs of computing power dramatically decrease as hardware becomes evermore capable and abundant. Using technology, or more precisely computers, as a creative medium is now an attractive and common practice amongst contempo- rary artists. Computer generated works of art or designs are now seen in almost every social scenario, ranging from mass media production to the experimental art scene. Several factors have contributed to the widespread use of technology based artis- tic practices. The affordable price of new and modest computers can obviously 1Trade shows such as CES (http://www.cesweb.org/default.asp) and CeBIT (http://www.cebit.de) are prime examples where cutting edge designs are introduced to the consumer electronic market. Technologies such as display systems, mass storage devices, high definition video formats and inexpensive, ultra portable laptop computers are some of the areas where advances have been made in recent years. For example, practical applications of OLED (Organic light-emitting diode), Electronic paper, SSD memory are some of the technologies that have been seen in these events. 1 account for such phenomena. What used to be expensive and impractical, is now an attainable reality for most artists with slender financial means. Further, as ever more hardware is simply disposed of by consumers keeping up with lat- est trends, they remain functional and can thus be recycled. These “outdated” hardware devices are often offered cost-free, making them a viable supply for artists working with technology. In fact, artistic creations based on recycled or found hardware, have become a dominant practice in contemporary media art, expressing various ethical and sociological concerns. Ready-made computers aside, components such as micro-controllers are also widely available and can be easily customized for specific needs. Whilst a different level of expertise is required to be proficient with technology (depending on the source and type of hardware), this nevertheless illustrates that artists of all abilities are able to work comfortably with computers and produce works of art. Artistic concerns have also evolved in correlation with the increasing capability and availability of computing hardware. Real-time media processing, artificial life2 and distributed systems3 are just a few examples which have become widely popular in the current practices of digital art. The technological possibilities are now immense in comparison with a few decades ago. The shift of creative interests can be clearly observed in the practice of generative arts in the dig- ital domain. No longer satisfied with works that have a static appearance or predetermined structure, artists are now able to construct algorithms which ac- tively take part in the creative process with or without human intervention. In other words, instead of producing recognizable artifacts, artists define “cre- ative” procedures in the forms of computer codes, which in turn generate the final result. Moreover, these system can be constructed rapidly to provide fast and immediate feedback, which enable artists to efficiently achieve the desired design. They can even be employed in the performance context. Several inter- esting issues may arise in this mode of practice: authorship of the end result, machine creativity4 and related aesthetics, are common debates amongst its 2One well known example is Karl Sims[35] research in applying evolutionary algorithms to generate computer graphics and animations 3Electric Sheep, by Scott Draves[12], is an award winning project utilising distributed com- puting techniques as well as genetic algorithms to render fractal based computer animations 4Researching into the nature of creativity has attracted extensive interest in both art and 2 practitioners. Other forms of digital arts that are equally exciting and challeng- ing also exist, exploring various aspects of digital art as a result of technological advances. Computers need software to be useful and functional. For this reason, the widespread use of computing hardware equally highlights the significance of software and its implications. Software is now also in abundance, fulfilling creative tasks of all types and scales. Software can be bought, downloaded, exchanged and even modified at the artists’ will to suite their individual cir- cumstances. Furthermore, programming is becoming evermore accessible to artists, with many computer languages specifically designed for creative pur- poses and easy to learn.