The Network A software is featured in the E-volve exhibition at Gallery [DAM]Cologne from 24 April – 24 June 2010. This is the first exhibition at the new gallery extension of [DAM]Berlin. This group show includes work by Eelco Brand, boredomresearch, LAb[au], Manfred Mohr, Mark Napier, C. E. B. Reas, and Marius Watz.

The Process 18 software, prints, and objects are a part of the exhibition el proceso como paradigma at LABoral in Gijon, Spain from 23 April – 30 August 2010. This exhibition was curated by Susanne Jaschko and Lucas Evers. They explain:

Before the background of unforeseen global processes, credit crash and climate change, the exhibition el proceso como paradigma researches the nature of processes and self organising, processual systems on a cultural level and in the arts. el proceso como paradigma puts forward the idea that today processes have become one of the major paradigms and creative strategies in contemporary art and design across the disciplines. The show reveals the elementary shift from a culture based on the concept of manifestation and the final product to a culture of process resulting from a networked society. Consequently, the show introduces a new understanding of process-based art which goes beyond previous definitions. el proceso como paradigma suggests that the new process-based art is the art of the 21st century.

The exhibition features work by Jelte van Abbema, Ralf Baecker, boredomresearch, Gregory Chatonsky, Adrián Cuervo, Ursula Damm, Driessens & Verstappen, Peter Flemming, Isabelle Jenniches, Roman Kirschner, Allison Kudla, Manu Luksch & Mukul Patel, Aymeric Mansoux & Marloes de Valk, Luna Maurer, Marta de Menezes, Henrik Menné, Leo Peschta, Julius Popp, C.E.B. Reas, RYBN, Warren Sack, Antoine Schmitt, Ralf Schreiber, and Jan-Peter E.R. Sonntag.

After nine months of discussion and building, we’re happy to announce the re-launch of the UCLA Department of Design Media Arts website. The team is Chandler McWilliams, myself, and DMA undergraduates Vincent Cordero, Greg Batha, and Johanna Reed. The site uses the same database, but re-organizes the content with different groups (undergraduates, graduates, faculty, alumni) as the primary categories.

I’m not sure why I’m compelled to write this, but I am. (It’s probably because I’m cleaning out my studio for the first time in six years.) I’ll keep it brief.

In summer 1996, I graduated from the University of Cincinnati and moved Brooklyn (Greenpoint) the following week. I worked at Two Twelve Associates for three months under David Peters. Cait and I came back to Ohio to get married in the fall. When we returned to New York, I worked for Abbot Miller at Design Writing Research for a few months. While there, I learned about i/o 360 on page 59 of the January/February 1996 issue of I.D. magazine (thanks Janet and Chee). These were the stats:

Firm: i/o 360 digital design
Location: New York
Principles: Dindo Magallanes, Arek Banasik, Nam Szeto, Gong Szeto, Robert Clyatt, Ralph Lucci
Ages: 29, 24, 23, 28, 35, 23
Staff: 7

The first paragraph of the one-page feature captures the time and place:

In the back of i/0 360’s New York studio lurks the Monster: hard-drives individualized with given names like Elvis and Yoda, snaking cables and Houston Mission Control-style colored lights blipping in sequence aloft a console whose monitors are arranged side by side. It’s emblematic, like the firm’s title, of i/o 360’s modus operandi: Input/Output, all-rounders, around the clock.

After an interview with Gong Szeto in winter 1997, I started making websites (the information architecture and visual design) at i/o 360 as my profession. As we started taking on more ambitious projects for companies like The New York Times, J.P. Morgan, and Microsoft I shifted into design direction. i/0 360 was an amazing place at a pivotal time. It mixed energy, experimentation, and humor with rigor and excellent design. I worked with fantastic people including the principles, my fellow designers (Judith Park and Jeff Piazza), and Joshua Davis at the start of Praystation; I later worked with Khoi Vinh and Chris Fahey after the unfortunate dot-com-style merger with Rare Medium in fall 1998. With the merger and the dot-com crash, i/o 360 disappeared and Behavior rose from the ashes. i/0 360 is not well archived or known today, but it was exceptional while it lasted. I have the best parts of the website on a hard drive and I expect others probably do too. Maybe it will escape back onto the web one day, but not today.

In spring 1998 I met John Maeda through Gong. (I was obsessed with Maeda’s The Reactive Square.) At the meeting John demoed Design By Numbers. That started the series of events that led to my resignation in Winter 1999. I starting at the MIT Media Lab during the summer of that year. And that’s another story.

The Interactivity class for winter 2010 has finished. This class is a ten week introduction to writing software within the context of visual design. The students write programs to learn about interactivity (from basic response to designing a simple game) while learning the basics of computer programming.  Some great work was produced within each of the six projects.

Visit the course website
Visit the course exhibition at OpenProcessing

Here’s a partial list of projects that impressed me:

Project 6: Play
Michael, Ola, Matthew, Thomas, Mayura, Hugo, Grace, Gina

Project 5: Transform(er)
Ola, Michael, Heather, Jimena

Project 4: Narrate
Gina, Michael, Patricia, Mayura, Adrienne,

Project 3: Collage
Jimena, Heather, Michael, Grace, Mimi

Project 2: Respond
Ola, Grace, Heather, Michael, Ryan, Matthew

Project 1: Draw
Brianna, Ola, Hugo. Michael, Alexander, Matthew

I changed the assignments significantly from the previous version of the class and anytime that happens, there are some hits and misses. I feel good about the hits and I have clear ideas about how to improve the project briefs that were less successful. In the spirit of information exchange and self-critique, here are my thoughts:

Project 6: Play
The decision to limit the visual elements to 2 lines and 2 circles was a good move. The students focused more on the interactivity than in the past when they could spend more time creating elaborate graphics. Future: limit the project to 4 elements total rather then 2 lines, 2 circles. Each of the elements can be a circle, line, or rectangle.

Project 5: Transform(er)
This was the first time for this assignment and the brief didn’t lead to the kind of learning that I had intended. For many students it became an illustration project with very simple moving components. Future: Rename the project to something like “Transform(er) SuperMega” and turn it into a branding/logo/ID design project (can be earnest or a parody). Restrict all graphics to Processing geometry to encourage maximum formal flexibility. Instead of using mouseX as the input, use controlP5 library and have around three scrollbars change different parameters such as width, height, color, quantity, etc. Make a presentation of generative ID design (Karsten, Gadget OK!). This might be a good time to introduce bezierVertex(), curveVertex(), sin(), cos().

Project 4: Narrate
I think Alice in Wonderland was a great text to select, but not enough of the class read it closely, leading to generic narratives: “Oh no! Alice is being attacked by the cards.” The source material is amazing, it should be used. I think it’s important to formerly review the early steps of the process on this project, they should spend at least a week working on the story and images before starting the program. The decision for everyone to use the same story as the starting point was good. Future: Be a stickler for the diagrams and paper prototype, find another appropriate text with illustrations, constrain the text in the software to found elements within the  story. This leads off the Collage project well.

Project 3: Collage
Future: Too many of the projects were slight variations of the sample code, so explain the project is about setting up relations between elements, not simple giving them random values.

Project 2: Respond
This was the first time for the “eye” exercise and I was happy with the results. Future: encourage more variation (there were too many generic cartoon eyes), encourage more fluid response.

Project 1: Draw
This quarter, I limited the graphic elements to point(), line(), triangle(), quad(), rect(), ellipse(), and arc() and this was a good decision. I removed curve() and bezier() as options and didn’t discuss them in class. In the past working with bezier() was extremely frustrating to students and I don’t want to start them off frustrated. (Working with Bezier curves directly with coordinates is not pleasant for anyone.) I also made it clear that only integer numbers should be used as parameters to the drawing functions. Future: need to emphasize comments as a way to organize the code, emphasize variables.

Also, starting in Fall 2009, we started hosting the class at OpenProcessing.org. This has been great; Sinan has my sincere gratitude for creating a wonderful system.

I’ve taught for ten years now, but I’ve not written about my teaching or curriculum ideas. I’ve written extensively (too much?) about Processing, but not specifically how I use it in classes at UCLA and workshops elsewhere. This post is a start.

To throw a few more thoughts in…
I’ve been thinking more lately about how tools used for education are often different from tools used by professionals/experts. I think there’s substance to writing about how Processing relates specifically to education. How it fosters sharing information, how it limits the initial technical complexity of programming but details can be revealed to provide more flexibility in time (the training wheels come off to reveal a new experience), and how it is also simple at the core to give learners the experience of doing things the long way before they move to a higher-level library to give the same result with less effort. These factors encourage exploration, reduce frustration, and can lead to a deeper understanding of the software medium.

I’m teaching a one-week workshop at Anderson Ranch this summer from 26-30 July. The audience is total programming beginners and the topic is Drawing with Processing: An Introduction to Coding. The description follows:

Writing code to draw is a fun, easy way for artists to learn computer programming. We focus on the basic elements of programming and apply them to making digital prints. Processing is an open source programming language and environment for creating images, animation and interaction.

Students write code to create images for high-resolution digital prints using the Processing environment and print on digital printers. No programming experience is necessary, but participants should be very comfortable using computers. Too much programming experience is discouraged.

Short presentations on technique and concept are mixed with studio work sessions. The instructor tutors students individually during studio time. New techniques are introduced in the first three days with concentration on a final project during the last two days.

The details are available on the Anderson Ranch Website.

I’m looking forward to being in London next week for the Decoding the Digital conference at the Victoria & Albert Museum. The two-day event is held in relation to the Decode exhibition, a collaboration between the V&A and onedotzero. The program follows:

Decoding the Digital
Thursday 4 & Friday 5 February
Hochhauser Auditorium, Sackler Centre
10.00-17.30

Day One: Thursday 4 February
10.30 Joseph Watson (Learning & Interpretation, V&A)
10.45 Charlie Gere (Lancaster University)
11.15 Frieder Nake (University of Bremen)
11.45 Roman Verostko (independent artist and historian), “Sixty Years: from brush in hand to brush in machine”
12.15 Discussion and questions from the audience
13.45 Honor Beddard (V&A), Douglas Dodds (V&A) and Patric Prince (independent art historian and collector), “Collecting as an Amateur”
14.30 Anne Morgan Spalter (independent artist and writer) and Michael Spalter  (independent collector), “Creating, Critiquing and Collecting Computer Art”
15.30 Paul Brown and Daniel Brown (independent artists)
16.30 Discussion and questions from the audience

Day Two: Friday 5 February
10.30 Joseph Watson (Learning & Interpretation, V&A)
10.45 Edward Shanken (University of Amsterdam/Donau University)
11.15 Casey Reas (University of California, Los Angeles)
11.45 Karsten Schmidt (independent artist)
12.15 Discussion and questions from the audience
14.00 Louise Shannon (V&A) and Shane Walter (onedotzero)
14.45 Beryl Graham (University of Sunderland/CRUMB)
15.15 Hannah Redler (Science Museum)
16.15 Julius Popp  (independent artist)
16.45 Panel discussion and questions from the audience
Chair: Charlie Gere
Participants: Honor Beddard; Douglas Dodds; Beryl Graham;
Julius Popp; Hannah Redler; Louise Shannon; Shane Walter

For the first time, we’re selling Processing t-shirts. Profits will fund Processing development. We’ve partnered with Wire & Twine to make this happen. The shirts are hand screened in Oxford, OH, the home of the Processing 1.0 launch in November 2008. The shirts are available for pre-order on a navy American Apparel 100% cotton. Order by November 30th to get your shirt by December 25th. Shirts will begin production on November 30th and ship no later than December 14th.

We have two styles: the BEAUTY, and the BEAST. The BEAUTY shirt features a network image created with the code written for the Processing web header and the cover of the Reas/Fry book. The setup() and draw() functions from this code appears on The BEAST tee. The BEAST shirt features a diagram of the iconic Processing Development Environment and a piece of the code used to create The BEAUTY tee.

I’m exhibiting The Protean Image Machine 2 in the Collider exhibition in the Emily Davis Gallery at the Meyers School of Art, University of Akron. The project plays with the mutable nature of software. Participants modify software by filling out programming cards that are inserted into The Protean Image Machine. The Machine reads the cards and makes alterations to the software as it’s projected onto the wall. The emphasis of this action is on the relationship between the visitors choices and the resulting changes to the software.

I’m giving a public lecture at 6:30pm on 22 September 2009 in Folk Auditorium, University of Akron, Myers School of Art. The lecture is in affiliation with the Collider Exhibition at the Emily Davis Gallery, where I’m exhibiting The Protean Image Machine (2009).