MY CONCEPT:

MY IDEA FOR MY MIDTERM COMES FROM THIS ARTWORK I PAINTED A WEEK AGO. WHILE I WAS PAINTING THIS PIECE, ONE OF MY FRIENDS SAID THAT THE PAINTING REMINDED HER OF AN AURA. I FOUND THIS INTERPRETATION OF MY PIECE VERY INTERESTING, SO I DECIDED TO PURSUE IT FURTHER AND CREATE A GENERATIVE P5 ARTWORK BASED ON IT. I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE REALLY COOL TO USE PERLIN NOISE AS ONE OF THE METHODS TO RECREATE THIS PIECE DIGITALLY.

https://editor.p5js.org/dianadonatella/sketches/GEIf0_ruE

 

TO MAKE THIS PIECE MORE INTERACTIVE AND INTIMATE, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD A FEATURE IN WHICH THE USER CAN TYPE THEIR NAME INTO A DESIGNATED LINE OF CODE AND THE ARTWORK WILL DISPLAY A UNIQUE RANGE OF COLORS THAT REPRESENT THEIR AURA. (MANY THANKS TO PIERRE FOR THE NAME) ADDING TO THIS IDEA, I’D LIKE THE NAMES THAT ARE TYPED OUT TO HAVE A UNIQUE SOUND IN ADDITION TO THE ARRANGE OF COLORS! FOR THIS PART, I WOULD MOST LIKELY COMPOSE SOME MELODIES OR USE A RANDOMIZED ARRAY OF NUMBERS REPRESENTING STAFF NOTES.

 

THIS PROJECT WILL BE DIFFICULT BUT I REALLY LIKE THE IDEA, SO I AM EXCITED TO TAKE ON THE CHALLENGE.

HERE ARE SOME BRIEF IDEAS FOR HOW THE SKETCH COULD APPEAR. (THESE ARE ROUGHHHHHHHH)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Computer vision algorithms have transformed the way I approach art and real-world problem solving. These algorithms track people’s activities in real-time, providing reports on identities, locations, gestures, and more. As a novice programmer, I have found it easy to implement user-friendly vision techniques quickly, while artists and designers can access advanced toolkits through popular authoring systems like Max/MSP/Jitter etc.

Software authoring tools have become more user-friendly, enabling art and design students, as well as novice programmers, to create interactive experiences for the web, installations, performances, kiosks, and prototypes. The integration of live video cameras as inputs has fueled the demand for straightforward computer vision capabilities.

Implementing machine vision techniques directly using environments like Processing, with its graphical capabilities, has proven rewarding. Computer vision has revolutionized art by enabling interactive and immersive experiences. In real-world problem solving, it has transformed fields like surveillance, robotics, and healthcare. Its ability to analyze visual data opens up new possibilities for understanding and addressing complex challenges and the reading has left me feeling more clear with what could be achieved with such stuff.

Concept

The idea is to make a drum machine is on loop and where the user can tinker with the different sounds of the drum machine to create a beat. It’s a super fun thing to do and I thought it would be cool to learn how to make one, since it also is useful for me to teach more of the p5.sound library while at it.

This is a reference image for a general drum machine you can find online:

My current progress has been learning about the p5 sound library and the various options available with it. Currently using p5.Phrase array and p5.Part, I have been able to create a working but kinda annoying hihat beat. My aim is to add more drum sounds into the p5.Part and make options available for stuff such as bpm select, volume, play/stop functionality as well.

I am currently still figuring out how it will look like, however for now i am focusing on the function so I figure out if it can work.

 

 

Golan Levin’s article, “Computer Vision for Artists and Designers: Pedagogic Tools and Techniques for Novice Programmers,” introduces us to the world of computer vision, which involves computer algorithms that enable computers to understand images and videos. In the past, this field was primarily the domain of experts in fields like signal processing and artificial intelligence. However, things have changed, and computer vision is now becoming more accessible to regular people, especially students and artists, thanks to improved software tools and open-source communities. This accessibility has led to a surge in the use of computer vision for creating art and interactive experiences that bridge the gap between humans and computers.

One notable example mentioned in the article is the “SuicideBox” installation by Natalie Jeremijenko and Kate Rich. This installation serves as a thought-provoking exploration of technology, surveillance, and social issues. It was designed to measure the hypothetical “Despondency Index” of a location but inadvertently captured real data related to suicide jumpers from the Golden Gate Bridge. This project vividly illustrates the power of technology, particularly machine-vision-based surveillance, in revealing hidden aspects of society. It raises ethical questions about recording such events and underscores the unique role of artists in addressing sensitive, often overlooked issues.

What struck me most in the article was how computer vision, initially perceived as something artistic and cool, can be used to tackle complex real-world problems. “Suicide Box” serves as a powerful reminder of the intricate moral and ethical dilemmas that can arise at the intersection of art, technology, and sensitive real-world issues.

Levin also provides insights into the technical aspects of computer vision, explaining how components like Background Subtraction work. This ties in with the “SuicideBox” project, as it used this technique to trigger recording when a vertically moving object was detected while ignoring stationary objects. It piqued my interest in seeing how technical terms in the interactive world can be applied to solve real-world problems and make human life more manageable, which is the essence of what technology should achieve.

Concept:

I’ve chosen to create a cognitive game for my midterm project, inspired by a warmup routine often used by professional gamers to enhance their tracking skills. This game aims to prime players for high-speed gameplay. In this straightforward yet engaging challenge, a circle appears on the screen, and the objective is to swiftly position the cursor over it and click before it vanishes. At the top of the screen, the game keeps track of successful clicks with a ‘Ball Count’ and records any missed opportunities with a ‘Balls Lost’ counter. The game continues until ten balls are lost, at which point a message will display, indicating the end of the game.

Most Challenging part(So Far):

The most challenging hurdle I encountered was generating multiple circle objects on the screen when the ball count surpasses a certain threshold, say 20. Despite my best efforts, I faced a persistent issue. When the ball count exceeded 20, the code went into overdrive, flooding the screen with hundreds of circles. No matter what approaches I attempted, I couldn’t make proper progress in this regard. Eventually, I made the decision to abandon the idea of introducing multiple circle objects. A friend pointed out that the game was already sufficiently challenging, and adding more objects would likely make it too easy to lose. This adjustment ensures that the game remains an effective warmup exercise, rather than becoming an overwhelming challenge geared towards causing the player to lose.

The democratization of computer vision represents a remarkable shift in the accessibility and applicability of this technology. In the past, computer vision was often seen as a highly specialized field reserved for experts in signal processing and artificial intelligence. Its applications were largely confined to military and law enforcement. However, the recent developments outlined in the article have broken down these barriers and opened up a world of possibilities.

One of the most exciting aspects of this transformation is the creative renaissance it has sparked. Artists, designers, and novice programmers can now explore and experiment with computer vision to create interactive, visually captivating experiences. This democratization aligns with the broader trend of technology becoming more user-friendly and accessible, empowering individuals to harness the power of advanced technologies for artistic expression and innovation.

The example of “LimboTime” is a testament to the ingenuity that emerges when individuals are given the tools and knowledge to work with computer vision. It’s not just about the technology itself but also about the ideas and artistic visions that can be brought to life. This democratization allows for a diverse range of voices and perspectives to contribute to the development of computer vision applications, enriching the field with fresh insights and innovative approaches.

Furthermore, the article’s emphasis on the synergy between physical environment design and software development is particularly insightful. It reminds me that successful computer vision applications often require a thoughtful integration of the digital and physical worlds. This holistic approach encourages creators to consider the real-world context in which their applications will operate, leading to more effective and imaginative solutions.

As the availability of computer vision tools continues to expand and improve, I can anticipate even more exciting developments in art, gaming, and beyond. The fusion of computer vision with other emerging technologies, such as augmented reality and virtual reality, holds the promise of creating entirely new modes of artistic expression and interactive storytelling. It’s a testament to the power of technology to empower creativity and democratize innovation.

In conclusion, I think the democratization of computer vision is a transformative and positive trend. It not only broadens participation in the field but also enriches the world of art, design, and interactive media. It signifies a shift towards a more inclusive and innovative future where the boundaries of what is possible with computer vision are continually pushed by a diverse community of creators.

Have you ever met a genius? I’m grateful to say that I have. You don’t stumble across geniuses very often. He doesn’t live on earth with everyone else. His mind is always in worlds beyond this one. And his computational genius extends to accommodate that. He makes virtual worlds that look like ours. He’s buying a tracking suit soon that will allow him to put himself and other actors in his video games and virtual simulations. It’s quite extraordinary. But the way he talks sometimes–”Very soon, you won’t need people to make movies. You can program them. If you want to make something in the sea, you won’t actually need to go to the sea. You can program it all on your own.” And it scares me. The technology that fueled computer vision is fantastic. It allowed us to put ourselves in worlds that allow us to express our deepest emotions and cognitive dissonances. But as what point do we abandon this world for the virtual one? And what will we sacrifice for it? I don’t want to live in a totally virtual world. My genius friend, he has no problem. As if he thinks there was nothing special about the one we occupy already anyways. And this world, which is never living up to our expectations, which we have no control over. This world, with its chaos and limitations and stopped dreams. Why would you choose this world over the one in your head? And hasn’t that always been humanity’s ultimate vision? To return to the Garden of Eden inside us. To be free. There’s this Arcade Fire lyric: “My body is a cage.” And computer vision and its associated technologies– it’s a way out of that. And I can see that. But even now, as our world grows increasingly digitally interactive, and the lines between technological worlds and reality increasingly blur, we are feeling the effects. And I’m not too sure that they’re all good. The old adage goes you can’t have your cake and eat it too. But have we ever really believed that, for a second?

I really loved the projects the reading used as examples. They reminded me of artistic conceptual pieces I’ve read about in photography and video classes. They’re so original. Such perspective-bending ways of interpreting reality that make you feel the way you do when you see a good design, that “aha!” moment–”life IS that way.” But they’re still innovations grounded in this reality. And in my heart, I was feeling I would rather stick to these methods of using the technology at our disposal. Even pieces like the Suicide Box, however jarring, stabilize me on Planet Earth. At least I’m grounded in this world, with its sadnesses and its issues. I still think, “And this is the story of us.” Soon, we’ll be leaving this world altogether. For better ones? I don’t know. I don’t know if being anxious about that makes me a luddite, short-sighted, conservative.

How far will you go to make a world? For me, I have to just focus on learning how to make even the most rudimentary projects using computer vision. Cute artistic pieces. But for the rest of humanity, for the farthest thinking of us, I think that will be the question on their minds as they delve deeper into these technologies. What is line between art and escape? Between reinterpretation and delusion? Either way, in the end, there is no escaping this life. Same party, different props I like to say. Mary Shelly was asking the same questions writing Frankenstein. The “modern day Prometheus” he’s called. How long can you play with the fire before getting burned?

Computer Vision X interactive Arts

After diving into week 3’s  paper that tackled the concept of “interactivity,” I couldn’t help but be intrigued by how this idea was put into practice in our current reading. It was like uncovering a hidden dimension of technology and its impact on our daily lives.

What really blew my mind was the revelation that the very first virtual reality (VR) environment came into existence roughly half a century ago. Imagine that, 50 years ago, someone was already dreaming up immersive digital worlds! This historical tidbit adds a layer of perspective to our modern, high-tech world and reminds us of how far we’ve come.

As the author sifted through various projects in their analysis, it became evident that there was a noticeable surge in the variety and scope of projects in the early 2000s. This period seems to have been a turning point where technology started enabling a broader range of interactive experiences, and that’s a testament to the rapid evolution of our digital landscape.

What truly captured my imagination, though, was the way computer vision revolutionized interactive art and computer-based interactions, which the reading explained through numerous real-world examples. It’s fascinating to witness how technology, particularly computer vision, has transformed the way we engage with both art and machines. The reading was like a window into a world where the boundaries between humans and technology blur, opening up exciting possibilities for creativity and innovation.

In essence, these insights not only highlight the evolving nature of technology but also underscore its profound impact on our lives, from the way we define interactivity to the immersive experiences we now take for granted in the digital age.

The article “Computer Vision in Interactive Art: A Survey,” by Golan Levin, provides a comprehensive exploration of the use of computer vision in interactive art. Levin’s article is a rich source of insights into the intersection of art, technology, and computer vision.

One crucial key takeaway, from this reading is that computer vision algorithms are not one-size-fits-all solutions. They heavily depend on the context and specific assumptions about the real-world video scenes they analyze. This resonates with my understanding of technology in art emphasizing the need for artists and designers to consider the conditions and limitations of their chosen environment carefully. The article highlights the significance of optimizing these factors to enhance the effectiveness of computer vision systems. It’s fascinating to observe how approaches, like using materials or specialized lenses can improve tracking and detection reliability.

Moreover, the article discusses how computer vision is becoming more accessible through user-authoring tools and multimedia environments such as Processing, Director, and Max/MSP/Jitter. These tools empower artists and designers to experiment with machine vision techniques if they have limited programming experience. This aligns with my belief that technology should be available to an audience encouraging creativity and innovation.

However, concerns are raised in the article regarding biases in computer vision algorithms, particularly identity recognition or gesture analysis. As these algorithms become increasingly intertwined with facets of our existence it is crucial to thoroughly analyze and address the ethical implications to avoid any unforeseen outcomes. 

Art has always been a way for people to connect deeply, and now, thanks to computers and digital media, this connection can happen from far away. The art pieces mentioned in the article use our movements, captured as pixels, to create special interactive experiences. This is a big step forward in how we express ourselves through art. These artworks often have important messages. One that really caught my attention is David Rokeby’s ‘Sorting Daemon’. It strongly shows how surveillance affects us by using real-life information in his art to send a strong message. When art and computer vision come together, something very powerful happens.

Even though interactive media art, like the examples in the article, is a clever way to share ideas and messages, and it can impact people from their own comfortable spaces, I still think there’s a bit of artificiality to it. When I say ‘fakeness’, I don’t mean it’s bad. It’s just that you can’t completely feel like you’re in that moment, even with virtual reality headsets. For example, I remember an art piece I saw with my class. There were lights hanging from the ceiling and a message playing in the background. That piece really touched us because we could touch the lights and feel the room around us, which is something you can’t do with VR headsets or other digital art.

I agree that computers are getting better and better at creating art that engages us. They’re getting really good at making it feel real. But they can never replace the special feeling of being physically present with a piece of art. There’s a unique connection that happens when all our senses are involved—our minds and our bodies. In the end, computer vision is improving every day, especially in creating interactive art that feels random yet beautiful to watch. This happens by using data we create, and by adjusting different parts of how the computer understands the images and videos. This leads to amazing art that really speaks to us. And there are new art pieces like this being made all the time.