The final show

So our final presentation, exhibition and critique has come and gone. Similar to last semester, we were to select either Sound Building or Urban Screen to present on a space of wall in and around the studios. In addition, we were also to collate documentation pages of all three of the studio projects (including the week long 'Ideas, Concepts and Visualizations.'

I began with the journal pages as an opportunity to revisit the previous projects before deciding for concrete which one I wanted to present. I felt that I had explored my Sound Building brief quite thoroughly, even with a further reflection a few weeks later as part of one of the idea generation activites. I didn't feel there was a lot more I could get out of this brief without redesigning and rebuilding the instrument according to some of the reflective ideas I brainstormed but this didn't fit into the short space of time in preparation for the presentation.

When revisiting the short Ideas, Concepts and Visualisations Brief, I went back and completed the activities which I had missed while I was away sick that week. The first one was called "What’s an Idea? What’s a concepts and where do I get one?" which was focused on using the process of creating art as both subject matter and concept as means of generating ideas. I chose from Richard Serra's verb list "to tighten" and explored it by use of photography, as shown below (left). An extract from my analysis of this activity is viewable by clicking on the image.

The second activity was exploring the generation of ideas through a matrix and 'cross pollinating' platonic solids to create new and hybrid forms. As this activity was originally intended for a group of three, I scaled back the 6x6 matrix to a simpler 3x3. The result was the image above (right) and my analysis of the activity is viewable by clicking on it.

Finally, I returned to the activity which I had started, where we had interviewed each others precious objects with no knowledge of them and then based on common ideas that arose, we were to develop a visual signifier for our own object. I didn't complete this because I was completely stuck for ideas but after completing the other two activities, the ideas came more easily. Final result is as below with more detailed analysis viewable by clicking the image.

So that left Urban Screens as the one to present. I had been hoping to successfully complete the programming as we had intended it to be but was again constrained by the lack of time. So instead I made a dummy version of how it was supposed to look with preloaded headlines, Tweets and Flickr images but using content which the program had generated over our trials. By finishing up the journal and documentation work for this project, I was able to look over my initial research again to generate some new ideas as to how it could be improved.

Our current visual aesthetic of the screen output was, as we had established from trials and presentation, pretty static overall so not very eye catching. It was constrained to a very geometric format as we had tried to stick very closely to our concept, something the viewer would only be able to take in if they stopped to look at it. If I was to develop it, I would find perhaps a more abstract way to visually represent the 'data' (i.e. text sources) to make it more dynamic and eye catching, so the viewer would WANT to stop and look at it, and then take in the meaning.

As we were no longer retrained to the A1 poster format for presentation, I chose to present my project in several simple glass frames to give the impression of several screens on the wall. My main two 'screens' of content I literally added the image of a screen frame around it while I used invididual frames to highlight and simply explain visually how the programming worked.

I expanded upon the visual imagery of the circuit board which I have been using throughout by mimicing the connections of a circuit board between the frames. These visually worked very successfully and I feel helped unify the individual frames and convey one of the key concepts of the project, that is, the global connection made possible by technological advancements. (Click on image for other documentation photos from this project).

Overall, I felt it all came together well but was taking it off the wall again before I knew it. I realised later that the space of wall where I had set up my exhibition was the exact same spot of wall I had used in the very first activity this year, the social mapping. It was a nice connection to make and even in the space of a year I feel we have come so far from programming the Lego NXT robots. The Urban Screens project served also as an introduction into year 2 with the logistical challenges of sourcing outside assistance and I am pleased we managed to make it work. This too was a reflection of one of the years' initial activities where we were out on the streets of the Auckland CBD in the situational shuffle.

I feel more confident now in moving to bigger projects outside of the direct university sphere and I look forward to continue to build on what we have learn so far this year and take on the challenges of Year 2.