XXV Oscar Signorini Prize – Robotic Art

The D’Ars Studio presents XXV Oscar Signorini Prize – Robotic Art

 

 

 

Italiano [English below]

 

 

Lo studio D’Ars presenta:

XXV Premio Oscar Signorini – Robotic Art

a cura di: Cristina Trivellin e Martina Coletti

Proclamazione del vincitore e mostra dei progetti selezionati
Martedì 16 dicembre 2008 ore 18:00-23:00
Via Sant’Agnese 12/8, Milano

“Ho sempre considerato l’arte il principale mezzo che gli uomini hanno
per comunicare fra di loro, sentendosi nella storia e in armonia con la natura.
E in questa comunicazione risiede la felicità”
Pierre Restany, 31 marzo 2003
Il Premio è stato istituito nel 1984 in memoria del fondatore di D’Ars, Oscar Signorini (1910-1980), e si rivolge annualmente ai giovani artisti under 35.

Questa XXV edizione è dedicata all’Arte Robotica, ovvero alla tematica della tecnologia robotica impiegata in ambito creativo e artistico. Come ogni anno il Premio propone una sfida volta alla comprensione e alla divulgazione di temi strettamente legati alla cultura e alla società contemporanee.
Il fine dell’iniziativa è quello di porsi come riflessione attenta alle problematiche dell’attualità attraverso il punto di vista privilegiato dell’arte contemporanea, interrogata nelle sue forme più attuali, emblematiche e internazionali.
Ecco perché per il 2008 il Premio Oscar Signorini guarda all’arte robotica chiamando in causa una giuria di rilievo internazionale, composta da teorici e artisti affermati, ad ognuno dei quali è stato chiesto di candidare due giovani artisti. Tale giuria è composta da: Pier Luigi Capucci (Presidente), Eduardo Kac, Riccardo Notte, Luigi Pagliarini, Laura Sansavini, Pavel Smetana e Franco Torriani.

Gli artisti nominati dalla giuria sono: Adelin Schweitzer (Francia), Paula Gaetano (Argentina), Haakon Faste (USA), Shih-Chieh Huang (Taiwan), Niklas Roy (Germania), Ximo Lizana (Spagna), Garnet Hertz (Canada), Nemo Gould (USA), Ulrich Emanuel Andel e Christian Gutzers (Germania).

Martedì 16 dicembre alle ore 19 presso lo studio D’Ars si inaugura la mostra che esporrà i progetti (rendering e illustrazione dei lavori) dei primi tre classificati e verrà comunicato il nome del vincitore al quale verrà offerta una mostra personale presso lo Studio D’Ars nel corso del 2009.

La mostra sarà anche l’occasione per rendere omaggio ad un pioniere dell’arte robotica in Italia, Luigi Pagliarini, esponendo un saggio del suo lavoro.

L’esposizione resterà aperta sino a lunedì 22 dicembre 2008
Orario: da lunedì a giovedì dalle 15.30 alle 19 – venerdì dalle 17 alle 19.00. Sabato e festivi chiuso
Per informazioni:
Tel. 02 860290 02 86450302
email: dars@email.it – www.dars.it

 

English

 

The D’Ars Studio presents

XXV Oscar Signorini Prize – Robotic Art

curated by Cristina Trivellin and Martina Coletti

Proclamation of the winner and exhibition of the selected projects
Tuesday December 16, 2008, 18:00-23:00 CET
Via Sant’Agnese 12/8, Milan

The Prize was established in 1884 in memory of the D’Ars founder, Oscar Signorini (1910-1980), and every year is dedicated to young artists (under 35).

This XXV edition of the Prize is focused on robotic art, that is the use of robotic technologies in the arts. The Prize yearly proposes a competition aimed at understanding and spreading topics which are strictly connected to the contemporary culture and society.

The Prize aims at raising a reflection on contemporary topics through the main viewpoint of contemporary arts, in their newest, most emblematic and international forms. This is the reason why the Oscar Signorini Prize on robotic art has an international jury with renowned theoreticians and artists, who indicated two young artists each. The jurors are Pier Luigi Capucci (president), Eduardo Kac, Riccardo Notte, Luigi Pagliarini, Laura Sansavini, Pavel Smetana and Franco Torriani.

The selected artists are: Adelin Schweitzer (France), Paula Gaetano (Argentina), Haakon Faste (USA), Shih-Chieh Huang (Taiwan), Niklas Roy (Germany), Ximo Lizana (Spain), Garnet Hertz (Canada), Nemo Gould (USA), Ulrich Emanuel Andel and Christian Gutzers (Germany).

The exhibition of the three first projects (renderings and illustrations of the works) will take place on Tuesday December 16 at 19 CET in the D’Ars Studio, and by that date the name of the winner will be communicated. The winner will also have a solo exhibition at the D’Ars Studio in 2009.

The exhibition of the three first projects will also be the chance to hommage a pioneer of the robotic art in Italy, Luigi Pagliarini, who will show an essay of his work. The exhibition will be open until Monday December 22 2008.

Timing: Monday to Thursday 15:30 to 19:00; Friday 17:00 to 19:00. Saturday and Sunday closed.

Information:
Tel.: +39 (0) 860290 – (0)2 86450302
dars@email.it – www.dars.it

 

Italiano [English below]

 

 

XXV Premio Oscar Signorini – Arte Robotica

Vincitori e motivazioni

Pier Luigi Capucci

La robotica conosce oggi una crescita straordinaria ed è considerata all’interno dell’UE una disciplina di importanza strategica. Tra qualche anno i robot saranno indispensabili alla nostra società, sollevando problematiche sociali, etiche, giuridiche, un argomento che abbiamo affrontato nel numero di D’Ars dedicato alla “terza vita”, la vita delle entità e degli organismi creati dalla cultura umana. Non stupisce dunque che molti artisti in tutto il mondo abbiano posto al centro del loro operare l’evoluzione di questa disciplina – o meglio, di questo insieme di discipline – e le sue problematiche, cimentandosi anche con gli strumenti robotici.

Questa XXV edizione del Premio Oscar Signorini, istituito nel 1984 in memoria del fondatore di D’Ars, è dedicata, per la prima volta in Italia, all’arte robotica. Il Premio ha avuto spesso una dimensione anticipatrice. come per esempio nel caso della net art (1998) e della bioarte (2005). Ma l’arte robotica e le sue problematiche rivestono un’importanza particolare perché sono, per così dire, alle origini della rivista, dato che tra i fondatori di D’Ars figurava Silvio Ceccato, che aveva contribuito a introdurre la cibernetica in Italia, e vari suoi scritti vennero pubblicati nei primi numeri del periodico (un ricordo di Ceccato e della sua scuola, ad opera di Pino Parini che ne è stato per lungo tempo collaboratore, viene pubblicato in queste pagine). Dunque l’arte robotica scaturisce quasi naturalmente dalla continuità tra passato e futuro.

Il compito dei giurati quest’anno non è stato semplice nell’avanzare le proposte (ogni giurato doveva indicare due artisti con meno di 35 anni operanti nel campo dell’arte robotica). Probabilmente ciò è dovuto al fatto che le competenze interdisciplinari, teoriche, tecniche, tecnologiche e scientifiche necessarie a operare in un ambito di eccellenza in questo settore richiedono un iter più lungo rispetto ad altre forme artistiche.

Questa difficoltà si acuisce per quanto riguarda il nostro Paese: nessun artista italiano under 35 figura tra le segnalazioni della Giuria nonostante fosse in maggioranza composta da italiani. In Italia nel settore della robotica esistono scuole di eccellenza a livello internazionale (uno dei primi tre prescelti si sta specializzando proprio nel nostro Paese), sono nate correnti di pensiero (come la roboetica), e a livello industriale l’Italia si colloca tra le prime nazioni europee. Tuttavia, a differenza di altre nazioni, probabilmente mancano le opportunità, le strutture e forse anche le aperture culturali per un incontro costruttivo tra competenze tecnologico-scientifiche e competenze artistico-umanistiche. Mi auguro che le aperture del XXV Premio Oscar Signorini costituiscano un contributo e uno stimolo interessante e fecondo in questa direzione.

La selezione operata dalla Giuria che ho avuto l’onore di presiedere e che voglio ringraziare, composta da Eduardo Kac, Riccardo Notte, Luigi Pagliarini, Laura Sansavini, Pavel Smetana e Franco Torriani, ha mostrato un panorama internazionale molto interessante, articolato e vario, che va dalla robotica più tradizionale alle commistioni con la biologia, con la realtà aumentata, con l’arte cinetica, dalle relazioni uomo-macchina e animale-macchina alle interazioni tra dispositivi e ambiente, alla dimensione sociale della robotica.

Tutti i progetti sono risultati molto interessanti, per tematiche, realizzazione, dimensione artistica, visione… Alla fine la Giuria ha dovuto scegliere i primi tre, e tra questi il vincitore.

I tre progetti selezionati sono:

1) Cockroach Controlled Mobile Robot, di Garnet Hertz (Canada) – vincitore
[http://conceptlab.com/roachbot/]
Per la completezza e la maturità del lavoro, e per la prospettiva delle tematiche concettuali che la commistione tra robotica e biologia solleva.

2) The Ultimate Aesthetic Experience, di Haakon Faste (USA)
[http://www.haakonfaste.com]
Per la ricchezza e l’ambizione dei presupposti teorici su cui il progetto si basa e per la visione originale della robotica che suggerisce.

3) EX-SE-08, di Shih Chieh Huang (Taiwan)
[http://messymix.com/]
Per la dimensione suggestiva e la sensibilità spazio-ambientale del lavoro e per l’idea di una robotica “popolare”.

 

English

 

 

XXV Oscar Signorini Prize – Robotic Art

Winners and motivations

Pier Luigi Capucci

Today robotics shows an extraordinary growth and inside the UE it is considered strategic. In a few years robots will be indispensable to our society, raising social, ethical and legal problems (we handled this topic in the D’Ars magazine issue dedicated to the “third life”, the life of the entities and beings created by the human culture). Hence many artists all over the world focused their work on the robotics’ evolution – indeed a variety of disciplines – and its challenges.

The XXV Oscar Signorini Prize, created in 1984 in memory of the D’Ars magazine founder to support young artists (under 35), in 2008 was devoted to robotic art, for the first time in Italy. In the past the Prize often disclosed the new art forms in my country: for instance, in 1998 it was dedicated to net art and in 2005 to bioart. But robotic art and its challenges have a unique relevance here because they stand at the roots of the D’Ars magazine, since among the magazine’s founders there was Silvio Ceccato, who contributed to introduce the cybernetics in Italy and published some articles in this magazine’s early issues (a memory of Ceccato and his education, written by Pino Parini who was one of his collaborators, is published in the D’Ars pages concerning the Prize). So robotic art almost naturally originates from a continuity between the past and the future.

This year the jurors’ task in nominating the young artists working in the robotic field wasn’t easy. Maybe it depended on the reason the necessary interdisciplinary theorethical, technical and technological skills in order to operate with excellence in this realm require a path which is longer than in other artistic forms.

This difficulty heightens when we refer to Italy: no italian young artist was nominated by the jurors, even if the Jury had a majority of italian members. In Italy in the robotics field exist excellent and internationally renowned schools (the author of one of the three selected projects is a PhD student in Italy); Italy hosted the First International Symposium on Roboethics (in 2004) and is among the first european nations in the industrial robotics field. But differently from other nations, opportunities, structures and maybe also cultural openness for a concrete collaboration between technoscientific and artistic skills are needed in Italy. I hope the XXV Oscar Signorini Prize can give a contribution and a powerful boost in this direction.

The projects selected by the Jury I had the honour to chair (whose members were Eduardo Kac, Luigi Pagliarini, Pavel Smetana, Laura Sansavini, Franco Torriani and Riccardo Notte) shows a rich international survey, ranging from traditional robotics to robotics-biology relations, from augmented reality to kinetic art, from man-machine and environment-machine interaction to social robotics.

All the projects were very compelling for topics involved, artistic dimension, vision… In the end the Jury had to select the first three ones, and among them the winner.

The selected projects are:

1) Cockroach Controlled Mobile Robot, by Garnet Hertz (Canada) – winner
[http://conceptlab.com/roachbot/]
The most complete and best-accomplished project, dealing with a provocative interpretation of the relations between robotics and biology.

2) The Ultimate Aesthetic Experience, by Haakon Faste (USA)
[http://www.haakonfaste.com]
A project with a very rich and challenging theoretical structure, and with an original vision about robotics.

3) EX-SE-08, by Shih Chieh Huang (Taiwan)
[http://messymix.com/]
A project with a striking dimension, with a great ambient insight and the idea of a “popular” robotics.

 

 

Cockroach Controlled Mobile Robot, Garnet Hertz (Canada) – winner

http://conceptlab.com/roachbot/

Oscar Signorini Prize – 2008
NAME: GARNET HERTZ
TITLE OF THE ARTWORK: COCKROACH CONTROLLED MOBILE ROBOT
(Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine)
YEAR: 2006

 

TECHNICAL INFORMATION

• Frame: Aluminum plate and tube, tapped/bolt construction.
• Drivetrain: Differential drive with DC motors and drive collars, 10 inch pneumatic tires with non-driving steel axle.
• Control: A cockroach is placed atop a modified computer trackball in a special harness. As the insect moves, electrical pulses from the trackball are sent to a circuit that decodes the quadrature-data into direction-data that is sent to a set of 12V DC motor controllers. Tecel D200 motor controllers are used.
• Feedback: Eight infrared distance sensors are positioned at the front of the robot to detect potential obstacles. When a sensor is within a close proximity of an object, several bright lights shine toward the insect from the direction of the obstacle. This is designed to work with a cockroach’s natural instinct to scurry toward dark places: seeing the light, the cockroach ideally turns toward the dark, and in turn, steers the robot away from the obstacle. The LEDs are arranged in a semi-circle around the front of the bug, with green LED panelblocks as a display for the insect. This is a little bit like an “insect VR CAVE”.
• Special features: The robot ships as standard (but overweight) excess flight baggage, can usually be assembled in about an hour, can operate for 4 hours without needing a battery recharge and features auto-resetting fuses and diagnostic indicator lights.
• Limitations: The light-feedback system doesn’t consistently give the desired object-avoidance behavior… as it turns out, cockroaches are considerably complex insects with a mind of their own.

 

LINK TO ONLINE PAGE ABOUT THE ARTWORK:
http://conceptlab.com/roachbot/
Video overview: http://vimeo.com/2398096

 

CONCEPTUAL DESCRIPTION

“Cockroach Controlled Mobile Robot” is an experimental robotic system that translates the bodily movements of a living, organic insect into the physical locomotion of a three-wheeled robot. Distance sensors at the front of the robot also provide navigation feedback to the cockroach, striving to create a pseudo-intelligent system with the cockroach as the CPU.

This project is motivated by three key concepts: 1. Biomimetics, 2. The Cyborg, and 3. The Computational/Biological.

1. Biomimetics is an approach to technological development that looks toward living, organic systems as a source of technical inspiration. Specifically within the field of robotics, cockroaches are admired and used as models for navigation logic and the physical construction of mobile robotic systems. Instead of using a model of an insect, “Cockroach Controlled Mobile Robot” inverts biomimetics by using the real thing.

2. The Cyborg: Popular culture appears to have a recurring interest in the human-machine and animal-machine hybrid. This project strives to construct a literal cybernetic organism that plays into and off of cultural and scientific visions of synthetic and organic hybridity. Despite the somewhat popular “cyborg” Science Fiction concept, few hybrid robots like this have been built.

3. Thirdly, the Computational and Biological. This project, in essence, is a robotic system in which a computer-based microcontroller is replaced with a biologically-based insect. In the process, the operating machine highlights key characteristics of being biological. The robot and insect display attributes like unpredictability, laziness, irrationality and emotional response.

These three motivations are embodied in the mobile robot system, a platform that makes the intentions of the insect legible to a wide and diverse audience. Although technically and con- ceptually complex, the system is easily understood by young and old with little or no explana- tion. Individuals tend to watch the robot for extended periods of time, empathizing with the insect, and trying to discern whether or not the organism is controlling or being controlled by the technology… and whether it is aware of, immersed in, or pleased by its synthetic and me- diated environment.

 

BIOGRAPHY

Garnet Hertz is a Fulbright Scholar, Research Fellow at the California Institute for Telecommunications and Information Technology, and is a doctoral student at the University of California Irvine. He also holds an MFA from the Arts Computation Engineering program at UCI and has completed UCI’s Critical Theory Emphasis. His current interests include the history, theory and practice of electro/mechanical art, computing, media theory, digital/internet art and robotics. He has shown his work at several notable international venues including Ars Electronica and SIGGRAPH and is also founder of Dorkbot-Socal, a monthly Los Angeles- based lecture series on electronic art. Popular press about his work is widespread, disseminating through 25 countries including The New York Times, Wired News, I.D. Magazine, The Washington Post, Slashdot, NPR, USA Today, NBC, ARTE, Deutsche Wella, CBS, TV To- kyo, ZDTV and CNN Headline News.

 

TRANSCRIPTION OF VIDEO NARRATION
Video overview: http://vimeo.com/2398096

[00:04] Cockroach Controlled Mobile Robot
“Cockroach Controlled Mobile Robot” is an experimental robotic system that uses a live insect as the controller, or driver, of a three-wheeled robot.

[00:30] Robot Control
The system is controlled by a Giant Madagascan Hissing Cockroach, about 5 cm, or 2 inches, in length. The insect is placed on top of a modified computer trackball, with an adjustable harness that helps the insect stay on top of the ball. The ball operates like a two axis treadmill that controls the motion of the larger robot: as the cockroach moves forward on the ball, the robot moves forward. If the cockroach scurries to the left, the robot moves to the left. If the cockroach scurries to the right, the robot moves to the right.

[01:25] Sensors & Feedback
The robot also features a navigation and sensor system to help the insect avoid smashing the robot into nearby objects. An array of distance sensors looks out in front of the robot. When an object is a few feet in front of the robot, the sensors detect the object and shine lights toward the insect from the direction of the obstacle. Banks of small lights are positioned around the front of the cockroach in attempt to build an immersive, virtual environment. Since cockroaches tend to avoid light, the insect should — in theory — turn into the dark and therefore steer the robot away from obstacles.

[02:09] Motivations
This project is inspired by three key influences.

[02:15] Biomimetics
First: Biomimetics. An approach to technological development that looks toward living, organic systems as a source of inspiration. Specifically within the field of robotics, cockroaches are admired and used as models for the navigation logic and physical construction of mobile robotic systems.

[02:40] Cyborg
Second: The Cyborg. Popular culture appears to have a recurring interest in the human-machine and animal-machine hybrid. This project strives to construct a literal cybernetic organism that plays in and off of cultural and scientific visions of synthetic and organic hybridity.

[03:03] Computational/Biological
Thirdly, the Computational and Biological. This project, in essence, is a robotic system in which the computer based microcontroller is replaced with a biologically-based insect. In the process, the operating machine highlights key characteristics of being biological. The robot and insect display attributes like unpredictability, laziness, irrationality and emotional response.

[03:32] Audience Response
The mobility of the robot makes the intentions of the insect legible to a wide and diverse audience. Individuals tend to watch the robot for extended periods of time, empathizing with the
insect, and trying to discern whether or not the organism is controlling or being controlled by
the technology… and whether it is aware of, immersed in, or pleased by its synthetic and mediated environment.

[04:15] Garnet Hertz 2006

[04:20] http://conceptlab.com/roachbot/

 

 

 

The Ultimate Aesthetic Experience, Haakon Faste (USA) – 2nd classified

http://www.haakonfaste.com

Name, surname Haakon Faste
Title of the artwork entrant: The Ultimate Aesthetic Experience
Year: Ongoing (2007—)

Technical description:

Perceptual robotics is the use of robotic and multimodal display systems as a platform for sensory interface with real or virtual worlds. Well implemented perceptual robotic interfaces provide:

Fully immersive and believable interaction with virtual or tele-operated worlds, including the sense of touch, force feedback, and presence in that world.
Intuitive perception of the robot as an extension of the user’s body and mind.
Insight into human perception through this interaction, which may be used in the development of more intelligent interface systems that are capable of perceiving and learning autonomously.
It is my intent to use perceptual robotic technology as a development platform for The Ultimate Aesthetic Experience, an immersive multimodal robotic art interface installation. The behavior of this interface, a complex and nuanced expressive environment, emerges through kinesthetic interaction between the human and robot. A conceptual overview of the development process and its specific goals is outlined in the section below.

 

 

This piece consists of a darkened room containing a specialized perceptual robotic interface device, immersive 3D virtual environment, audio speakers, Infitec glasses and a stereoscopic projection screen. The robot is sensitive to input forces and internally actuated in relation to its environment such that it cooperates as tool to provide interactive force feedback. The users’ glasses are tracked by a long-range Polhemus electromagnetic sensor in real time, allowing spatial exploration of the virtual world as it is being created. Visual display is projected within a CAVE-like¹ rear-projection system driven by two superimposed high resolution projectors connected to a PC rendering the virtual world. Real-time positional information of the user’s eyes is processed by the Polhemus system and passed to the rendering engine on the PC to generate the appropriate perspective for each of the user’s eyes, allowing immersive exploration of the virtual space. The environment is written in XVR (eXtreme VR), a C++-based scripting language designed for mechatronic device integration, high-speed graphics and online network rendering² (the projected stereo environment runs within Internet Explorer). MatLab software is also used to drive certain virtual computations (i.e., those requiring the use of artificial neural networks).

 

 

Concept

Robots are extensions of human activity. Just as we use our bodies to create and experience art, robotic bodies may be used as expressive and experiencing tools. Robots, like humans, are processes of interaction and learning that operate within the context of pre-existing systems. The robotic body is a purposeful medium, not an end in itself.
Robots are often sophisticated and expensive tools, and may be designed or appropriated for artistic use. When designed to satisfy specific objectives, the use of robotic technology requires a significant investment of resources before a working system is produced. For robotic art to have a serious cultural impact, it can utilize design processes that allow imagined or prototyped visions or fantasies of robotic expression to be realized according to a plan. Engineering strategy thus becomes an artistic process by which the expressive potential of the robot is defined.
To touch, feel, and empathize with our surroundings are central aspects of human experience that are widened through the use of robotic technology. This piece, The Ultimate Aesthetic Experience, is a high-impact immersive multimodal virtual environment that integrates diverse interface technologies including stereoscopic projection, spatialized audio, perceptual robotic feedback, tracking and real-time 3D graphics rendering. A sampling of available technology is included as image 1. My activities are focused on exploring the possible behaviors of and relations to this technological platform while maximizing its emotive potential. The specific configuration and behavior of elements of the system has been left intentionally ambiguous such that they may emerge through the process of designing and interacting with it. The system architecture includes numerous parallel computational frameworks that are reactive to interactions between the robot and human with the intent of creating a profound sense of magic and wonder.

 

The mind of the robot is a virtual world. Fully immersive robotic minds allow humans to experience unlimited fantasy. Possibilities are boundless. I have therefore been employing design methodologies to inspire and guide the imaginative process. An overview of this process is included as image 2. This process has included a combination of ethnographic research, trend analysis, drawing, sculpting, computer programming and creative speculation.
The first phase of the project has been trend-finding research that has identified nine major opportunity areas representing a cross-section of “the technocultural condition.”³ A summary of these findings is provided as image 3. Design theory demonstrates that compelling and powerful human experiences arise from merging aesthetics and technology with underlying human need. By emphasizing the creative skills of synthesis, pattern recognition, aesthetic awareness and artistic intervention, cultural trends, subtleties of human and robot behavior, pain-points, blocks, and opportunities may be identified. Once identified, this information can provide a valuable roadmap for the accomplishment of projected goals.
Based on opportunity areas drawn from this trend research, over 250 innovative perceptual robotic experience concepts have been brainstormed, prototyped, evaluated and refined. These concepts have been stored in a database, tagged, filtered, expanded, illustrated, and differentiated. They were then mapped onto the easy/hard low/high impact matrix shown in image 4. Selected details have been called out to give an idea of the information contained by each concept. The most promising concepts have been advanced through iterative cycles of ideation, scenario storyboarding, integration with other ideas, further brainstorming and software prototyping. A group of test users have been evaluating the system as it has evolved through an assortment of artistic contexts centered on the immersive technology described above. Iterative feedback from these sessions has been included in the design over time. The result is both a strategic map and evolving development platform for The Ultimate Aesthetic Experience.

 

 

My work deals with the experience of reality, not specific instances, methods, media or tools. Robotic art inherently concerns itself with the perception and cognition of and by robots, the behavior of robots and humans in their presence, and the fantastic visions of both that result. Artists can become the parents of robots, manipulating technology in the creation of life, or collaborators with them as tools to help cognition emerge. In this project I have pragmatically avoided a premature definition of the robotic body and mind such that its behavior may emerge from the cultural, psychological, and physical constraints we experience through the sharing of artistic cognition.

A catalogue of selected earlier works has been included for reference [PDF, 1,3 MB]

 

Notes

 

 

EX-SE-08, Shih Chieh Huang (Taiwan) – 3rd classified

http://messymix.com/

Artist Statement

My work focuses on exploring the unusual evolutionary adaptations undertaken by creatures that reside in inhospitable conditions. I create analogous ecosystems in my installations and populate them with organic living things made from common, everyday objects. I source my wholly synthetic materials from the mundane objects that comprise our modern existence: household appliances, zip ties, water tubes, lights, computer parts, cheap motorized toys and the like. The objects are dissected and disassembled as needed and reconstructed into experimental primitive organisms that reside on the fringes of evolutionary transformation: computer cooling fans are repurposed for loco-motion, Tupperware serves as a skeletal framework, guitar tuner rewired to detect sound, and automatic night lights become a sensory input.

 

 

Please see web links below. One is how the works are made, the other is the finish to the final installation.

http://messymix.com/showvideo/other_constructions.php

http://messymix.com/showvideo/exse08.php

 

Alexitimia, Paula Gaetano (Argentina)

http://www.paulagaetano.com.ar/

The Oscar Signorini Prize
Submission 2008 – XXV Prize edition

1. General Information

– Artist’s name: Paula Gaetano Adi
– Title of the artwork entrant: Alexitimia
– Year: 2006
– Technical description: Autonomous Robotic Agent
– Link to the online page about the artwork: http://www.paulagaetano.com.ar/

Concept

Alexitimia (from the Greek):
a= prefix meaning lack; lexis = word; thymos = feelings or emotions

“Alexitimia” is the manifestation of a deficit in emotional cognition. The terminology is a clinical construct that describes the behavior of someone who is mostly unaware of his feelings, or does not know what they signify, and hence, is not able to talk about their emotions or their emotional preferences. Alexithymics beings are incapable of expressing mental conflicts verbally and therefore they express them through the body and its somatic functionality. In this way, instead of findings a means of symbolic expression mediated by words, the agent releases the emotions translated in some kind of “organ language”.

 

 

For this reason, Alexitimia is also the name of this “autonomous robotic agent” whose behavior is analogous to the process of sweating of the human skin. This alexithymic agent has a very unusual and ambiguous behavior for a robot and, as a result, does not seem to be a powerful machine with equally powerful software housed in a mobile body able to act rationally on its perception of the world around it. On the contrary, Alexitimia is a robot constructed definitely without a clear function, a clear utility and consequently, clears motivations or goals to achieve. This autonomous robot was made to propose an ironic position different from the view of an agent as a “competent system of autonomy and determination”.

Created with an organic appearance made with soft and flexible materials, this “alexithymic robot” was designed as an irregular semi-sphere that remains immobile in the exhibition’s room. This robot cannot move around the space, cannot see, cannot emit sounds and also cannot detect voices; however, it can interact with the spectators through its somatic self (his body).

With the intention of showing a holistic approach to the hardware/software dichotomy that seems to be the echo of the previous and more primitive Cartesian duality of mind/body, this robot, without any anthropomorphic (or robotic) aspect, interacts and communicates with the environment only by a tactile way of perception. Therefore, using it’s “artificial skin” as an interface, the corporeal scheme of this robot begins to sweat when somebody (a spectator) touches it.

In Alexitimia, the robot’s “body” occupies a hegemonic place and in contrast to an “Artificial Intelligence”, this work conceptually proposes the existence of an “Artificial Corporeality” that functions fundamentally as the interface of the piece, as its materiality and its form. At the same time, the creation of this second artificiality is also an attempt to explore a ‘body language’ in robotic agents that can challenge those computational paradigms and AI research programs that seem to find their main difficulty of representation in the fact that machines do not have a body with appropriate movements, abilities and vulnerability.

 

 

2. Artist Bio (short version)

Paula Gaetano Adi (1981) is an artist and researcher working in sculptures, performances, interactive installations and robotic agents.

Her work has been presented in solo and group exhibitions at MejanLabs (Stockholm), ARCO 07- Madrid Contemporary Art Fair, National Art Museum of China(Beijing), BrandenburgerTor Foundation (Berlin), FILE Festival (Sao Paulo), BIOS4 (Sevilla), BrandenburgerTor Foundation (Berlin), Museum of Modern Art Buenos Aires, Espacio Fundación Telefónica (Buenos Aires), among others.

Her awards include, the First Prize in the international competition on art and artificial life VIDA 9.0 – Fundación Telefónica; the First Prize ‘LIMBØ’- Museum of Modern Art of Buenos Aires. Grants and fellowships from the Argentinean government, San Juan Bank Foundation, Fondo Nacional de las Artes, Ohio State University and Blas Pascal University.

Gaetano Adi received a degree in Audiovisual Communication from the Blas Pascal University, and a postgraduate degree in New Media Arts from the same university. Currently, she lives in Ohio-U.S where she pursues a Master in Fine Arts – Art & Technology program- at The Ohio State University.

From 2006 to 2008 she was a faculty member at the Electronics Arts program, Tres de Febrero National University in Buenos Aires and the program on Mixed Media Art at the National University of Lanús, Buenos Aires. During 2006 she was a visiting scholar for a research residence at the REMAP – Center for Research on Engineering, Media and Performance – University of California, Los Ángeles (UCLA).

Download a complete resumé at: http://www.paulagaetano.com.ar/cv_paula_gaetano_adi.pdf

 

 

3. Additional Information

For more information about “Alexitimia”, the autonomous robotic agent:

I) – Please, find a video documentation, at: http://www.paulagaetano.com.ar/video_alexitimia.htm

II) – Download the digital version of a published paper, at: http://www.paulagaetano.com.ar/alexitimia.pdf
– Or find it at the journal “a.minima”. Edition 23, January 2008. Barcelona, Spain.

 

[Shockbot] “Corejulio”, 5VOLTCORE – Emanuel Andel, Christian Gützer (Germany)

http://5voltcore.com/

[Shockbot] “Corejulio” (2004)

5VOLTCORE has built a programme controlled robot (Shockbot Corejulio, Transmediale Award 2005) that creates asthetic information out of dysfunction in the form of audio and visual output.

Shockbot Corejulio is built out of three main parts:

1st the programme that controls the shockbot, 2nd the circuit board, that operates, via relays, the (3rd) motors that then move the shockbot. Essential for the piece is the circular process between the computer and the shockbot. The computer sends impulses to the robot that subsequently moves on it’s tracks targeting random points within the computer hardware.

At the point of contact a short-circuit occurs creating a fault current. This error is recognized as a command and in an attempt to interpret this disinformation, the computer creates, together with the shockbot, random pictures on the display.

As the damage to the computer increases, there is a proportional rise of dysfunction to the controll signal. This overload of errors ends in a total collapse of the system.

A video that shows the work is online available.

http://5voltcore.com/typolight/typolight257/index.php?id=1&articles=1}}

 

 

 

 

Saving Myself

“saving myself” thematises the chronotopic universum: time as humanity’s final frontier, as a delimited unit of measurement of the existential: an artifically controlled climate is created in a sealed opaque glass cube containing a bonsai tree. By altering the climatic conditions according to the seasons, the bonsai can be made to produce a diverse series of annual rings. The size of the rings reflects the climate – the plant in any particular year therefore becomes “manipulable”: a potential data store.

Every quarter year a picture of the tree is made automatically, evaluated, and this information is then used to produce an illumination and watering plan for the coming quarter. The tree saves a picture of itself, fragmented over time, in which it inscribes year by year, pixel by pixel. From outside the tree is only visible when illuminated, the only way of reading the saved image is by felling the tree.

A PDF [4,7 MB] about this work

http://5voltcore.com/typolight/typolight257/index.php?id=1&articles=69

Blink, Nemo Gould (USA)

http://www.nemomatic.com/

Blink, 2008
Blink is a kinetic sculpture that “blinks” its eyes by way of displaying two different symbols in its vacuum tube eyes. The sculpture is made entirely from found and reused materials.
Link to web page:
http://www.nemomatic.com/nemomatic/portfolio_blog/Entries/2008/9/7_Blink_2008_%2847%22_x_24%22_x_18%22%29_.html

Blink is one example of many attempts I have made over the years to build robot-like sculptures that convey a strong sense of character through the use of salvaged materials. In this case the figure itself does not move, but its “mood” does. A home made cam mechanism in its head causes a pair of old display tubes to switch from “volts” to “ohms” which has the effect of blinking, or of a shifting mood from friendly to menacing. Some of the parts used to build this piece were: Floor polisher, vacuum cleaner parts, baseball bats, fence caps, ski bindings, wooden gear, LED’s, motor, golf caddy cart parts, circuit board.

 

 

 

 

Libelula Robot (Robotic Dragonfly), Ximo Lizana (Spain)

 

Name, surname Ximo Lizana (Joaquin Lizana Escartin)

Country Spanish

Title of the artwork entrant Libelula Robot (Robotic Dragonfly)

Year start 2006 and finished 2007

Technical description

Simulation in the Project Render 3D, Rinho, Real Flow, Bit Map JPG

Real Construction External Structure: · 3D Mesh, code machine, robotic 5-axis milling, electroplating and Polish Material: High-density polyurethane.

Internal Structure: Linear actuators, steel, LEDs, transformers, microprocessor without graphic capabilities (micro pic), transformers,and infrared remote system, potentiometers and aluminum.

Idea

This project is part of what we know as artificial robotic life, interactive robotics, the robot dragonfly book a room designed and built entirely in plastics source binary, it represents a copy of a dragonfly seeming modernist, mechanized and robot to recover artificial life combines language with random reactions interactive, designed to give a jump between the worlds of engineering and nature.

A tribute to the modernist universe, giving rise to a symbiosis between nature and the machine as part of it, in which the artist’s proposal is merely a means of communication and where the dialogue between the robot and he becomes a spectator The real artistic event.

The technology seeks inspiration in nature, as the origin of the unequivocal reference in this era of sophistication is to be read, the reunion of the individual towards life and its mystery, and the mechanical prostheses that can amplify the ideas and the body of man.

 

 

This is a sculpture, that interacts through a sensor infrared in a random secuence of movements with those produced by the viewer.
The Dragonfly seeks to create the magic of Interactive, to create an environment where technology thanks to the viewer becomes an active part of the artwork and the artist in the person who puts the means to establish this dialogue.

In a time of complex binary and technological means, art should be a mirror of the overall sensitivity, resulting in creations with a dynamic spirit, not forgetting the history and conceptual essence.

In my creations, the importance of uniting tradition, history and technology is essential. The development of man and subsequent sophistication, does not have to lose sight of the primary and essential ideas.

Looking for a contemporary re-reading and endowed with the energies of the era in which we live.

Robotics for the people !!!………

 

 

Text about my activities

Ximo Lizana, lecturer at the prestigious North American University UEM, and multidisciplinary creator within the world of new media art and technological art, has received awards such as the AECA (best living artist in Spain, according to the Spanish critics association). He has been the artistic director at ARCO, tackling the world of advertising, communications and contemporary culture, as well as a consultant and adviser of some of the most avant-garde events, publications and festivals.
His work has been admired at artistic events such as the biennial exhibition in Valencia, in Buenos Aires, and at countless contemporary art festivals, fitting in between the classics that make up some of the best contemporary art collections. Ximo was the first artist in the history of Spanish art to include robotics in contemporary art collections (IVAM). He is currently working on projects for some of the most prestigious galleries, and his work has been exhibited and promoted at galleries such as Galería Punto in Valencia, 57, Marlborough and Vostell, to name a few.
At this year’s edition of ARCO, and following a period of arduous research, he presented the first holographic sculpture made without any type of material (based on electrical fields) of which there is international evidence, Mid Air Shark.
His creative career ranges from robotic, laser and interactive sculpture to aesthetic analysis concerning biotechnology and its dilemmas.
Surfing the new poetics of the digital age, he explores the human-machine relationship and the ethic and moral dilemmas of the coexistence between the cyborg, android and human being.
This project is set in a philosophy consistent with the times in which we live, a result of research on what does not exist or what is to come, giving rise to a nexus between work and prototype, and fleeing from anecdotal art that invades the contemporary world.
It is a proposal in which interactivity becomes a point of inflection when establishing an interactive and dynamic dialogue between the work and the public, and above all between the artistic creation and the concept.

 

 

The subject matter tackled is formed in an aesthetic analysis of violence, as well as in a search for technological solutions for specific problems. This search for a break with tradition, by incorporating technological concepts and conceptual aesthetics, leads him to create work that is in constant evolution (capturing the elements of light, heat, image, etc.), in an aim to create a type of work that reacts with energetic exchanges, or even with the subconscious of the person observing the image.
With his photographic proposals, Ximo tries to bring us nearer to a world in which aesthetics, beauty and suffering blend together. Disturbing photographs reflect the force of a tragedy purified with the beauty of Siberia, giving rise to a magma in which the excessively realistic looks on the angelic faces define, accentuate and verify the more than likely apocalyptic end of their existence.
Looks of overwhelming beauty, the aesthetics of extinction, which mask an existence with no possible escape: a blind alley in which context limits existence and survival becomes infinite beauty.
In times of excessive consumerism, lack of values and the loss of identity against the global nature of things, the failure of one’s dreams attempts to be an interlude of reflection on impermanence and its dilemmas.
The photographs are large and the technological language purified in an attempt to reveal humaneness, the machine at the service of man, and the synthetic image under the orders of the soul.
Technology looks for its inspiration in nature, as the unambiguous origin of the referent that has to be reread in this age of sophistication: the re-encounter of the individual confronted by life and its mystery, and the mechanical brainchild as the amplifying prosthesis of man.

 

 

CURRICULUM

STUDIES & PROFESSIONAL CAREER
1988-1992 Graphic Design Studies, Art School . Huesca
1995-1996 Desktop Publishing Studies, Art School. Huesca
1995 Artist represented by S,art Gallery. Huesca
1993-1995 Artistic “A Levels” degree and niversity access course ( Selectivo). Art School.Huesca
1996 Artist represented by Santa Cruz Gallery. Zaragoza
1996-1997 Image Synthesis Studies and VR. Paris
1997-2002 Arts degree. Universitat San Carles. Valencia
1998 Exclusive artist represented by Punto Gallery in Spain (Valencia)
1998-2001 Didactic Department in IVAM. Valencia
2001 Artistic adviser of leading-edge technology in Artistic Investigation International Festival OBSERVATORI 00. Generalitat Valenciana.
2002 ARCO Artistic Director (International Contemporary Art Fair ARCO).IFEMA. Madrid
2002 Co-management in Spacial Project ARCO02 (arq. Vicente Salvador-art. Ximo Lizana).
2001 Curator in technologic art events .E_PRON , May Moré Gallery .
Madrid (co-curator with Pistolo Eliza).
2002 Artist represented by Vostel Fine Arts.ARCO02. Berlin
2003 Awarded Artist with the Principal hall of the Köln Messe, international selection by the German critics. Colonia. Alemania.
2003 Art Director. Seisgrados Buzz Marketing. Barcelona proyect for Imperial Tobacco
2004 ARCO 04. IFEMA. Madrid
2004 Permanent Exhibition Observatori 04.
2004 Photo NY. Brown Bag Contemporary New York USA
2004 ART L.A, Brown Bag Contemporary. Los Angeles. USA
2004 ART COLOGNE. Köln Messe. KÖlnn. Germany.
2005 DIVA. Digital and video Art Fair. Begoña Malone Gallery. Manhattan. NY
2005 FIAC Paris
2005 ARMORY SHOW. International Contemporary Art Fair of NY.ART.ES Space.Pier 90 92 Manhattan ny
2004 Sensor Proyect General Manager , IVAM . Creation of the new IVAM, Technologic and experimental art museum placed in the palace of arts CAC (Ciudad de las Artes y Las Ciencias). Valencia
2005-2007 Lecturer in the European University of Madrid. Villaviciosa de Odon. Madrid
2006 Artistic Advisor of Gallery Mestre. Barcelona
2006 Cool Hunting, Duggal, NY
2006 Cubo Project, Cool Hunting. Ariza. Madrid
2007 Investigation in Robotics and Digital Image. Irvine University. California
2007 Eutopia Project.
2008 Solo Exhibition in Sun Contemporary. Seoul
2008 General Curator of Futura Project. Periferias. Huesca
2008 Eutopia. Cordoba

INDIVIDUAL EXHIBITIONS
1999 Aporias, Punto Gallery. Valencia
1999-2000 Ximo Lizana in Huesca. Interactive work of art exhibition, laser and 3D performances. Carderera Theatre, Town hall of Huesca.
1999 Performance in Auditori de Torrent. Valencia
2000 Permanent Exhibition Observatori 00. Interactive laser and electro-luminiscent sistems, Principe Felipe Museum. (Ciudad de las Artes y las Ciencias). Valencia
2001 Permanent Exhibition Observatori 01, Biotechnology and artifcial life. MUVIM museum ( Modernity museum of Valencia/ Museo valenciano de la modernidad). Valencia
2001-2002 Total Enclosure, digital photography and interactive installations, Galeria 57. Madrid
2001 Biennal of Valencia. Videoroad. Organised by Pistolo Eliza
2002 FIAC PARIS 3D photography and artificial robotic life,One man Show. France
2002 MEDUSA Proyect, ARCO02. Open Space, optical fibre,automatons and interactive plasma , light sculpture joining pavilions 7 and 9. Aragón Government and Punto Gallery. Madrid .Organiser: Pedro Pablo Azpeitia
2002 COCOON Project, ARCO02. Experimental landscape painting project. Azahar. Madrid
2002 METAMORPHOSIS Exhibition in Punto Gallery. Valencia
2002 CONVERGENCIA Macroinstallacion of ECL for Telefónica ( event presided by D. Jose Maria Aznar), 2 12 metres high pieces of cloth and 40 metres long as two ramps emanating light and covering the whole theatre of the Congress Palace of Madrid.

AECA Award:Best Alive Spanish Artist in ARCO02.( Spanish Critics Association National Award /Premio nacional de la asociación de críticos españoles).

2002 ROBOTICA Individual show room+ 3DY BITMAP in Marlborough Gallery. Madrid
2002 Contemporary Art Fair of Santander (Conference + work of art in the official section ) , in the gallery sector represented by Galeria 57.
2000 CHICAGO ART 2000, Navy Pier. Chicago USA
2000 TORONTO ART FAIR 2000, Toronto. Canada
2000 KÖLN MESSE. Köln, Germany
2000 PERSONAL EXHiBITIONS FIAC Paris, France
2000 ARCO. Madrid
2001 ART AL HOTEL. Valencia
2001 CHICAGO ART 2001, Navy Pier. Chicago USA
2001 KÖLN MESSE. Köln, Germany
2001 ARCO. Madrid
2001 PERSONAL EXHiBITIONS FIAC.Paris. France
2002 ARCO. Madrid
2002 ARTESANTANDER Gallery 57. Santander
2002 MEETINGS ON VIDEO. Salamanca
2003 PERSONAL EXHiBITONS FIAC.Paris. France
2003 KÖLN MESSE. ART CONTEMPORARY GALLERIES GERMAN ASSOCIATION AWARD, MAIN HALL IN THE FAIR. Robotic macro- installation . Köln. Germany
2003 Biennal exhibition of Buenos Aires. Buenos Aires. Argentine….. 2003 Biennal exhibition of Lima. Lima. Perú…… as a representative of Spain, sponsored by Generalitat Valenciana.
2003 La huella de España en la Habana. Habana, Cuba…… as a representative of Spain, sponsored by Generalitat Valenciana.
2004 ARCO. Madrid
2004 Theoretician and adviser of the internacional art magazine ARTE.ES
2005 ARCO 05, IFEMA. MADRID Punto Gallery
2005 ARCO 05, Robotic Angels Project. IVAM
2005 Individual Exhibition Art Gaspart. ENCLOSURE Barcelona.
2005 Biennal of Venice, Art Poles, parallel Project included in the offcial section. Internacional artists museum + withebox NY. Organised by Doron Polack and Juan Puntes. Venice
2006 Individual Exhibition in Galeria Maliarca, Ximo Lizana Photos and Robots, Alicante
2006 Barcelona Futur, Barcelona Fair
2006 Arco 06, IFEMA Madrid
2006 Resources agreement betweeen European University and ARCO.
2006 Scope. Art.es stand.Manhattan, NY
2006 Art Paris. Grand Palais, Paris
2006 Valencia Art Fair, Hotel Astoria. Valencia
2007 ARCO 07. ifema. Madrid
2007 Scope Miami Usa
2007 BIENNAL of VALENCIA-SAO PAULO, MEETING BETWEEN TWO SEAS. Valencia.Spain
2008 ARCO 08. Madrid
2008 Selection of the Culture Ministery, 20 Best Spanish Artists. ARCO 08
2008 International Exhibition Expo Zaragoza 2008
2008 Art Madrid Fair
2008 Tiaf. Toronto Art Fair. Canada
2008 Kiaf. Seoul Art Fair. Shouth Korea
2008 Dubai Art Fair
2008 Valencia Art, Valencia. Spain
2008 Scope NY, Ny. Usa

COLLECTIVE EXHIBITIONS & PROJECTS
1996 Art collection exhibition of S, Art Gallery. Huesca
1997 Selection of Young Aragón Expression (Selección de Expresión Joven Aragon), . Zaragoza
1997 Art Collection exhibition of Sta Cruz Gallery. Zaragoza
1997 Arista Project in collaboration with Mexico, Puebla
1998 Technologic works of art exhibition Javis Center. NY
1998 Rotary exhibition. Tarbes.Francia
1998 Sculpture 1. La Cisterna theatre. Aldaya Town Hall.Valencia Organiser:Teresa Cafer:
1999 Ultravanguardia. Punto Gallery + UPV + Auditori de Torrent. Organiser: R. Bochons
1999 In the sheep skin (En la piel del cordero), Micalet Theatre. Town hall Valencia. Organiser: Angeles Marco
1999 Renau Theatre. UPV. Valencia Organiser: Miguel Molina
1999 Poster Design in UPV. Vicerrectorado de Cultura. Valencia
2000 Save the Cabanyal (Salvem el Cabayal). Interactive intervention.Valencia
2000 Performances in the cements work of Burjassot. Valencia Organiser: Miguel Molina
2001 Young Art European Conference. Aragón Goverrnment. Teruel Organiser: Pedro Pablo Azpeitia
2001 NINPHOMANIA COMPUTER GRAPHICSFOGRFÍAS NINFOMANÍAS), Poetic photographies in the digital era. Conde Duque Centre. Madrid. Organiser: Jose Isla
2001 E-PRON. Technologic art. May Moré Gallery. Madrid
2001 Little Large Architectures (Pequeñas grandes arquitecturas), Dasto Gallery . Oviedo. Organiser: Fernando Martin
2002 On Gods and Monsters (Sobre Dioses y Monstruos), Sicart Gallery. Vilafranca del Penedés. Barcelona Organiser: Maria Falagán
2002 Ars Nova Mediterranea. Collection exhibtion IVAM. Valencia
2003 The Role of Art (El papel del Arte). Espacio Liquido Gallery.Gijon .Organiser: Fernando Martín
2003 The Light exhibition (La exposición de la luz). Organiser: M. J. Corominas. Santander
2004 Collective Art collection exhibition (Exposicion colectiva de fondos) Punto Gallery.Valencia
2004 Baggette Project Generalitat Valenciana.
2004 Great Artists from Aragon (Grandes Artistas Aragoneses), Sart Gallery. Huesca
2004 KANE Project. Imperial tobacco. USA
2005 Art collection exhibition of S, Art Gallery. Huesca
2005 Art collection exhibition of Punto Gallery. Valencia
2005 Creation of a Letter Project (Proyecto de creación de una letra). Aragon Herald.Zaragoza
2005 Exhibition “ Expo universal de: El Agua y la Mirada” , El Instituto Aragonés del Agua, Zaragoza
2006 Art Collection exhibition of Punto Gallery. Valencia
2006 Conference in Ibercaja Zentrum, Zaragoza
2006 ART TECH MEDIA 06. Parraga centre. Murcia
2007 Commemorative exhibition on the twenty-five years in Punto Gallery (EXPOSICION CONMEMORATIVA DE LOS 35 AÑOS DE GALERIA PUNTO).Valencia
2007 Digital Generation. Montehermoso Cultural Centre.Vitoria
2007 Exhibition on the twenty-five years in Punto Gallery (Exposicion de los 25 años de Galeria Punto.Galeria Punto). Valencia.
2008 Art Tech Media 07. Madrid

Gallerydrive – The Grand Illusion, Niklas Roy (Germany)

http://www.niklasroy.com/oscarsignorini/

Dear Jurors of the Oscar Signorini Prize

I was very delighted, when I’ve heard that you have suggested me for the Oscar Signorini Prize 2008 and I have decided to propose my latest project, “Gallerydrive – The Grand Illusion” for the award. I was working on this installation for the last 2 ½ years (with small interruptions where I was building other machines) and I just finished the work on this project this fall. Because the final webpage of the project is not online yet, I have assembled the required information for you on this page.

My medium of artistic expression are machines. And like a painter who mixes his own oil paint out of pigments, I put a lot of effort into the development of my own electronic circuits, into programming my pieces and into building the custom mechanic hardware. I don‘t have experienced a formal education in engineering and due to that, all of my projects are accompanied by a learning process, where I dive deeper and deeper into the world of electronics and mechanics.

Even if the work that I propose might not look, at a first glance, as what is usually called a “robot”, it involves and depends strongly on electronic and electro mechanic elements. The purpose of those technical parts in “Gallerydrive – The Grand Illusion” relates directly to the root of the word “robot”, to the Czech term robota, which means work. In my case, the technology serves the visitor. The mechatronic parts work for him in order to create an outstanding art experience that I will describe in the following text. The description is accompanied by videos, photos, and sound files in order to give you a good understanding of the project.

 

 

Project Description

“Gallerydrive – The Grand Illusion”is an instant art museum machinery. The installation explores the borderline between reality and virtual worlds; it uses elements of an amusement fair for an exceptional and immersive art perception experience.

The visitor takes a seat on a robotic chair, the Gallerydrive car, which processes him automatically through the installation. He cannot do anything else than perceiving. He finds himself locked in the passive role of a motion controlled observer, who follows a precisely choreographed path through a real world cyberspace. In order to give the visitor‘s perception the required emotional foundation, the whole ride is accompanied by a synchronized sound composition, that he perceives via headphone.

 

 

After sitting down and starting the ride by pushing a button on the car‘s own touch screen, the car drives the visitor slowly the way towards the “Robotik Room”, a self assembling white cube machine.

When the visitor has reached the center of the installation, when his car stops in the middle of the white cube machine, a giant transforming mechanism will start its work: It assembles a mini exhibition space around him, an ideal cube with four white walls and four golden frames. The visitor is encapsuled in an exhibition space of surreal perfection.

The bright white light turns off and the show inside the cube begins. Step by step, the visitor is driven in front of each of the four golden frames. What he sees now, when he has reached the core of the installation, contrasts as much as possible with the monumental physical transformation process that he has just perceived a few seconds ago. It is a serial presentation of the most elementary parts of each virtual world: Three pixels in the primary colors red, green and blue.

Each projection of a pixel is accompanied by a sound composition that lets the viewer see far more than just the pure color inside the frame. Each presentation of a pixel lasts for thirty seconds. The little touch screen, that is attached to the car, shows an increasing progress bar – and when the time is up, the car drives him to the next position, in front of the following frame, in which the proximate pixel is projected.

The fourth pixel, however, surprises by exceeding the minimalism of the three pixels before. It is not even colored. It is purely binary, it is just black and white. Or, to be more precise, it is first plain white, accompanied by a composition of sonic feedback loops, then it turns into a black pixel, apparently referring to Malevichs black square and locating the whole scenario on the fundament of his ideas of suprematism.

After this show has finished, the white light turns on again, the room disassembles and the visitor is driven back to the point where he entered the car. The visitor is clearly asked to use the contemplative drive back for re-thinking his perceptions. The visitor will leave the car, and there will have happened a little physical transformation process in his brain. Some synapses will have been activated, some proteins will have synthesized and the visitor will remember “Gallerydrive – The Grand Illusion” as a weird voyage between reality and imagination.

 

 

At the End…

… I’d like to invite you also to have a look on my webpage. Amongst the descriptions of my other projects, you’ll also find my vita there. I hope that all this material helps you in your discussions and I sincerely wish you a very good decision.

If you have the feeling, that you would like to learn more about my proposed project, here is also a list of related links, which will allow you to get far deeper into the subject:

Gallerydrive Webpage
Gallerydrive itself was planned as a very open project, that would enable artists and curators to create exhibitions with a very high level of immersion. The possibility of controlling the physical movement of visitors within art shows offers many new opportunities which still have to be explored. An automatic installation like “The Grand Illusion” can only be a first minimal step in this field.

Gallerydrive Building Diary
While I was working on the Gallerydrive car, I wrote down my experiences in an online diary. Besides personal thoughts and ideas, it also contains a collection of all schematics and codes of the project. The work is started and documented in a way, that other artists can build their own Gallerydrive cars, based on my R&D work.

Gallerydrive Video Album
I have accompanied the process of building the Gallerydrive car by filming many little videos. In this album, you can find them all and see how the project developed step by step.

Robotik Room Webpage
Even if I’ve built the Robotik Room with the clear vision of using it in a Gallerydrive ride, it can certainly be useful on its own, as I describe on this webpage.

 

Augmented Reality, Adelin Schweitzer (France)

http://www.deletere.org/

Name: Adelin Schweitzer
Project: Augmented Reality
Year: 2008

Concept

First of all, to apprehend this proposal in its globality it is advisable to leave the postulate which there does not exist that very little of differences between scientific analysis and artistic research. With the advent of new technologies, it is the border between these two universes which tend to disappear while at the same time the artist has tools allowing him to call in question the sensible universe such as we know it.

The project « Augmented Reality » was built on the geographical, economic, and social problems raised by the postulate of « Cities One the Edge ». This is why it can be considered like a kind of comparative study carried out in various towns of Europe.

Augmented reality is a technique which aims at supplementing our perception of the real-world, while adding to it of the fictitious elements nonperceptible naturally. This technology offers opportunity of using its experiment of the sensitive world to rediscover it, enriched by virtual elements.

While working with the augmented reality concept and with through the development of an entirely portable man/machine interface, this project will seek to question the human being on its perception of reality and the constraints which this one imposes to him. He thus seeks to draw up a cartography making it possible to explore the various forms of answers brought by the public.

This project appeals, for one part, with one of the concepts founder of the philosophy of Gilles Deleuze, « la territorialisation/déterritorialisation ». Territorialiser, it is to transform a potential into material for a use in a constraining space. Déterritorialiser, it is to divert a material of its initial use to return it, potentially, free of the constraint, or deinsane.

In this context Augmented Reality could then be a machine at « déterritorialiser » the individual. A machine thanks to which the human being could be freed from the constraints imposed by these directions on reality.

Dossier English – Dossier Français – PDF [500 KB]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hommage to Luigi Pagliarini

In the realm of the XXV Oscar Signorini Prize projects’ exhibition there was also an hommage to Luigi Pagliarini, one of the most prominent Italian artist working in robotics.

 

 

Fatherboard, The Superavatar
The Genesis
by
the Superavatars Group

the Superavatrs Group is: Luigi Pagliarini, Demian Battisti, Andrea
Gabriele, Marzia Di Giulio, Mauro Carulli, Antonio Fasolo, Riccardo
Mazzucco, Andrea Spina, Maurizio Piazza and DJ Brhams

Fatherboard, The Superavatar is a concept by Luigi Pagliarini

Fatherboard, the SuperAvatar is an avatar that – escaping from the virtual worlds (or the computer, generally speaking) – forms into a physical shape. It is similar to cyborgs – but is not a cyborg – and it is made out of the (recycled) hardware components of the computer where it came from. Fatherboard steps in to the “real world” and starts interrelating with the human beings (the audience). The essence of its dialog with humans is to be found in the idea of a confrontation between the “artificial” intelligences and the ones of their creators. The whole show is theoretically based on the concepts expressed in the Polymorphyc Intelligence and the Big Sieve theories, by Luigi Pagliarini.

The ß Version of the mask (i.e.: orange color) is composed by a steel helmet, a cotton suite, gloves, shoes and a cloak on which hardware components of recycled computers have been installed. Technically speaking, the whole set up can be called a “Wearable Modular Robot” (Luigi Pagliarini, 2008) or SuperAvatar.

Indeed, for the ß version mask some of the above mentioned components were integrated with an electronic circuit (in alternative, a pre-existing one was used) such as to locally react to the dynamics impressed to the actor’s body through the use of one or more sensors.

“FatherBoard, The SuperAvatar” has been built by Luigi Pagliarini and Demian Battisti.
The Superavatrs Group is a network of artists cooperating to the development of the performances
and related art, including: Luigi Pagliarini, Demian Battisti, Andrea Gabriele, Marzia Di Giulio,
Mauro Carulli, Antonio Fasolo, Riccardo Mazzucco, Andrea Spina, Maurizio Piazza and DJ
Brhams.

In this video the FatherBoard ß Version realized in between September 2007 and July 2008.

http://www.artificialia.com/Fatherboard

http://www.youtube.com/luigipagliarini

The SuperAvatars [PDF, 652 KB] (in Italian)

 

 

 

 

 

Il Premio Oscar Signorini

Il Premio veniva istituito da D’Ars nel 1984 in occasione del venticinquesimo anno di fondazione della rivista D’Ars a ricordo del suo fondatore, Oscar Signorini (1910-1980). Da allora molti giovani hanno affrontato questo concorso riservato ogni volta a ricercatori nell’ambito di differenti espressioni artistiche e rigorosamente segnalati da specialisti di settore. Si tratta di selezionare artisti di età inferiore ai trentacinque anni, così da valorizzare e sostenere, in linea con il pensiero di Oscar Signorini, la creatività dei giovani cponendola in’ contatto con la vita, […) perché possa inserirsi e vivere nel luogo, nell’ambiente, nel tempo che le si addice., in un confronto che cè una necessità culturale dell’artista, luogo di concerto della propria anima messa sufficientemente allo scoperto e sospinta a manifestarsi». Dal 1986 al 1990 la Banca Popolare di Milano è intervenuta al Premio con un apporto attivo alla ricerca del vincitore; le opere acquistate dalla BPM stessa sono diventate parte della Collezione Dante Bighi della Civica Galleria d’Arte Contemporanea di Copparo (FE).

Il Premio consiste in una mostra personale allo Studio D’Ars di Milano e in un servizio sulla rivista D’Ars.

I vincitori delle varie edizioni del Premio Oscar Signorini

1984
Riservato ai giovani talenti artistici entro i 25 anni
ARMANDO CARASTRO e LUCA CACCIONI (pittori) – PAOLA COLETTI (fotografa)

1985
Riservato agli allievi di scultura delle 21 Accademie di Belle Arti italiane entro i 25 anni
MATTEO OLIVARI dell’Accademia di Brera di Milano

1986
Riservato agli allievi di pittura delle 21 Accademie di Belle Arti italiane entro i 25 anni.
CARLO POLITI dell’Accademia di Lecce.

1987
Riservato ai giovani designer entro i 35 anni
ROBERTO MARCATTI, HAGAI SHVADRON, BATTISTA LURASCHI

1988
Riservato ai giovani talenti artistici entro i 35 anni
CRISTINA CARY

1989
Riservato ai giovani videoartisti
Ex-aequo CLAIRE ROUDENKO-BERTIN e THEO ESHETU

1990
Riservato ai giovani musicisti NEOPOP NEOROCK e dedicato a Mac Spasciani
Gruppo PANKOW di Firenze – CD edito da D’Ars

1991
Riservato ai giovani fotografi di ricerca
ALBERTO CATTANEO (1°) – ROBERTA BIANCA (2°) – PIETRO CARRIERI e MAURA & GIANCARLO (3° ex-aequo)

1992
Riservato alle tesi in Arte Contemporanea discusse nel biennio 1991-92 dagli allievi delle Accademie di Belle Arti italiane
PETRUZZA DORIA (Accademia di Catanzaro): “Joseph Beuys e Toni Ferro – Artisti del dissenso”

1993
Riservato ai video-computer artisti
MASSIMO CONTRASTO (1° Premio) – OLIVIER LANNAUD (Menzione Speciale)

1994
Riservato ai giovani critici di Arte Contemporanea
MAURIZIO CECCHETTI (1° Premio), segnalato da D. Boffo di “Avvenire”. Menzione Speciale a FRANCESCA BONAZZOLI (S. Grasso del “Corriere della Sera”) – MARTINA, CORGNATI (T. Carpentieri di “Arte&Cronaca”) – VITTORIA CRESPI MORBIO (G. Grecchi del “Giorno”) FRANCO FANELLI (Gianna Marini del “Giornale dell’Arte”).

1995
Riservato ai giovani disegnatoridi fumetti
SILVIA ZICHE (1° Premio) segnalata da Luca Novelli di “Grafica e Disegno”. Menzione Speciale ad ALBERTO REBORI segnalato da Oreste Del Buono di “Linus”.

1996
Riservato agli allievi di pittura delle Accademie di Belle Arti italiane entro i 25 anni
LORENZO AMADORI dell’Accademia di Urbino e NICO BERARDO dell’Accademia di Bologna

1997
Riservato agli allievi non europei delle Accademie di Belle Arti italiane
TOMONORI TAKAHASHI

1998
Riservato ai giovani artisti di Net Art (Remote Arts)
VICTORIA VESNA

1999
Riservato ai giovani organizzatori di mostre
ANTONELLA TRIPOLI (1° Premio) – Segnalazione per i progetti di IRENE CROCO e di ALESSANDRA MANCINI e MICHELE ROBECCHI

2000
Riservato ai giovani architetti – Tema “Un giardino urbano”
Progetto “L’arte informa l’arte” di BUSCI-FERRARI-SINOPOLI, invitati da Alessandro Mendini.
Menzione Speciale al progetto di PEDRO CAMPOS COSTA.

2001
REAL PRESENCE GENERATION 2001: Premio alla manifestazione internazionale di Belgrado che ha riunito i migliori allievi delle Accademie di Belle Arti europee.

2002
Riservato alle installazioni nell’ambito degli OPEN 2002
CLAUDIA ZURIAT

2003
XX Edizione riservata alle arti e alle scritture elettroniche
CATERINA DAVINIO

2004
XXI Edizione straordinaria in memoria di Mac Spasciani (1930-1989)
Progetto “Teatro Materia” di ANA MARIA GHISALBERTI

2005
XXII Edizione – BIOARTE
ANDREA CARRETTO&RAFFAELLA SPAGNA, DARIO NEIRA, ALESSANDRO QUARANTA, NICOLA TOFFOLINI

2006
XXIII Edizione – ATTRAZIONE FRATTALE, Arte e poetica nella teoria del caos
BETTY COLOMBO E GIANNI MORETTI

2007
XXIV Edizione – LAND ART E NON SOLO nell’ambito del progetto TRANSLANDS

2008
XXV Edizione – Robotic Art
Garnet Hertz (Canada) (1°), Haakon Faste (USA) (2°), Shih Chien Huang (Taiwan) (3°)

Note

1. See Cruz-Neira, C., Sandin, D.J., DeFanti, T.A., Kenyon, R.V., Hart, J.C., “The CAVE: audio visual experience automatic virtual environment,” Communications of the ACM, v.35 n.6, 1992, pp.64-72. [↩]
2. See Carrozzino, M., Tecchia, F., Bacinelli, S., Cappelletti, C. and Bergamasco, M., “Lowering the development time of multimodal interactive application: the real-life experience of the XVR project,” Proc. ACE ’05: 2005 ACM SIGCHI International Conference on Advances in computer entertainment technolog, 2005, pp. 270 – 273. [↩]
3. An in-depth analysis of these trends has not been included here as it was deemed overly distracting to the project at hand. [↩]