How is my project New Media?
How is my capstone new media?
CROSBIE:
a.) According to Crosbie, people participating in or viewing my project have to share recipricol control over the content. My project is on the new media fence if I choose to agree with Crosbie’s theory. By having 4 different sculptures with which the viewer can interact with, as well as video that is likely projected on all 4 walls, you could say that the user has some control over personalizing their experience. Still, since the viewer has no input on the content, I would have to say my project does not fulfill Crosbie’s definition.
How could I alter my project to help fulfill Crosbie’s definition? I think the best way would be to let the user contribute to the shell sounds in some way. I have read about a particular art installation someone did, where they had people call into a special phone number before the show and make confessions. The artist then mixed and distorted these calls and played them back thru the sculpture using bone conduction during the exhibition. So I would probably do something along those lines if I had to follow the teachings of Crosbie.
b.) I think Crosbie presents a good possibility for categorizing new media, but I don’t think reciprocol control is a requirement of the media. I do see how this is what makes new media transcend the old medias (interpersonal and mass, one-to-one and one-to-many) though, which makes me think maybe this is a solid definition.
MANOVICH:
a.) according to Manovich, there is a mutable, automated quality which pervades the new media. New media is also digitized, programmable. I think my project fulfills the digitized, programmable aspect of this definition with the use of video and unconventional auditory devices, but fails with the mutable, automated aspect. I could change this by having a bank of images that I’ve programmed to cycle and overlay eachother in random ways. I could do the same with the audio I transmit thru bone conduction.
b.) I agree with Manovich that there is a digital quality that seems to be a requirement of new media, but I think that is a really basic idea - I actually don’t see why he goes into that while bypassing interactivity, which he says is so basic it isn’t even worth discussing. I am sad to say I agree with the mutable/automated aspect of his definiton also. I mean, if you think about it, websites that are programmed to pull random images on load time are utilizing new media, and it’s not that complicated. It is an idea that pervades a lot of current media in a variety of ways..
CROSBIE:
a.) According to Crosbie, people participating in or viewing my project have to share recipricol control over the content. My project is on the new media fence if I choose to agree with Crosbie’s theory. By having 4 different sculptures with which the viewer can interact with, as well as video that is likely projected on all 4 walls, you could say that the user has some control over personalizing their experience. Still, since the viewer has no input on the content, I would have to say my project does not fulfill Crosbie’s definition.
How could I alter my project to help fulfill Crosbie’s definition? I think the best way would be to let the user contribute to the shell sounds in some way. I have read about a particular art installation someone did, where they had people call into a special phone number before the show and make confessions. The artist then mixed and distorted these calls and played them back thru the sculpture using bone conduction during the exhibition. So I would probably do something along those lines if I had to follow the teachings of Crosbie.
b.) I think Crosbie presents a good possibility for categorizing new media, but I don’t think reciprocol control is a requirement of the media. I do see how this is what makes new media transcend the old medias (interpersonal and mass, one-to-one and one-to-many) though, which makes me think maybe this is a solid definition.
MANOVICH:
a.) according to Manovich, there is a mutable, automated quality which pervades the new media. New media is also digitized, programmable. I think my project fulfills the digitized, programmable aspect of this definition with the use of video and unconventional auditory devices, but fails with the mutable, automated aspect. I could change this by having a bank of images that I’ve programmed to cycle and overlay eachother in random ways. I could do the same with the audio I transmit thru bone conduction.
b.) I agree with Manovich that there is a digital quality that seems to be a requirement of new media, but I think that is a really basic idea - I actually don’t see why he goes into that while bypassing interactivity, which he says is so basic it isn’t even worth discussing. I am sad to say I agree with the mutable/automated aspect of his definiton also. I mean, if you think about it, websites that are programmed to pull random images on load time are utilizing new media, and it’s not that complicated. It is an idea that pervades a lot of current media in a variety of ways..
posted by eleblanc at 6:41 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home