Symmetry is boring and to prove it I took a video of an online face symmetry test using two photos of myself. Symmetry is a marker of beauty — the more symmetrical your face the more beautiful you are. The photos I analyzed are an ID photo and the other a photo of my friends and I. I’d rather be happy and asymmetric than boring and pretty.
“…but institutional websites do tend to offer the illusion of control, the sense that visitors can curate a museum’s collection by arranging images to their liking.”
I’ve taken some of my favorite works from my favorite museum and curated them here. What happens when the viewer becomes the curator? The artists? The civilian? Are tastemakers a dying breed?
I found this article very interesting because recently I have been thinking a lot about how we experience moving through spaces. I think the legitimacy of the interaction is often placed below the interest founded in moving through time. However I believe that our ability to move through space is infinitely more interesting than moving through time would ever be. Because we already move through time at the pace we are at it is only the speed that would change. Just the idea of there being depth in spaces is amazing. That we can move forward and back through spaces that we create is incredibly interesting. The three diminutional then being interrupted into the two dimensional is a tough task. Certain nuances are bound to be lost. The feeling of the ground beneath your feat and the brush of the air around you is gone however the most interesting aspect, the experience of depth is achieved.
I decided to try to create depth using boxes. As you click through the colors rotate to simulate depth.
I read Pleasurable design and agree with it entirely. As an industrial designer in our current global state of affairs it is extremely important to be away of what we are producing. If we produce a dangerous car we are murderers. We walk a very thin line as creates, with the constant possibility that we may do something wrong or that someone may be inspired by us to do something wrong. We play many roles as creator, we can be an entertainer, a stylist, a helping hand, a shelter and countless more. One of the most important facets of design to keep in mind is pleasure. There is never anything wrong in pure pleasure, it is never something we have to fear. I was inspired by Ronan and Erwan Bouroullec and decided to make a website inspired by their designs.
I set all the vectors i created off of their work to transparencies and percentages so that they would overlap in different ways when you expanded the page.
I hate the social construction of taste. By collecting records, drinking dark coffee and having an iPhone all of a sudden you have more cultural currency than someone who listens to One Direction, drinks Sunny D and has a flip phone. These ideas we link to our level of education and therefore our wealth and intelligence. With the rise of fast fashion and more easily accessible forms of cultural currency there has been a need to divide what is good and what is bad in order to other, to bring ourselves up higher in the hierarchy and push everyone else down as we go. To respond to this article I coded a ridiculous list of people to avoid
people to avoid
Is a museum website a good form to experience the art piece ?
Many of the museum these days have a online website, where the visitor could get the basic information as well as the new exhibition and new event. Many exhibitions are photo taken. Video and photography are the form of the recording. I find it useful sometime, when I don’t have time to go to museum. I could simply just get online and read about the most recent exhibition. However the Museum website does lack of pace and sense of the space, I can choose which one image to look at. Also before I get to popular exhibition. I will have already seen the image from elsewhere, such as Intagram. Therefore I think before I went to the museum, I would have a expectation of the show already. That expectation is very much influence by the photographs that I saw through digital devicec. If the photograph is displayed and shot in nice ways, I would have highly expected the exhibition.
As article mentioned, “enforce those pedagogical prescriptions through architecture, texts and other didactic materials, public programming and, of course, the placement of art works themselves—we simply have to acknowledge and even accept the ever-changing role technology plays in that experience, for better or for worse.”Technology and digital interaction between people and the art pieces change the way people approach the art. Therefore I think is important for people to look at the art pieces in its physical form. To approach to the most natural and realistic of the art pieces enable people to have deep thinking. The display space encourages people to step out of environment that once lived in and to able to experience the art piece in five sense ways. Therefore I think museum website is good place for people to get information about the art piece and to read about the story behind it, but going to museum and be in physical space is very import for the visitor as well.
This article explores a new way of accessing art museums. Particularly, through a digital interface, allowing users to view art in a different way. The issue is, does viewing art through a web-based platform convey the same real-life experience that physically going to the museum does? This modern world is very digitally driven and using these interfaces are seen as being more effective and useful. They use an example with the Kara Walker exhibition, and how people saw her work through Instagram so they felt no need to actually go to the exhibit. In doing so, viewers only get a subjective viewing of art through a digital interface. Visiting museums allows the viewer to see through their perspective and not someone else’s.
This subject also opens up the discussion for experiencing art through other mediums. Many museums have some sort of gift shop, where they sell reproductions of art in poster form or miniature sculptures. This gives viewers a way to get the art experience outside of the museum. The MoMa has different design locations throughout the city, selling hip, modern-design objects, gifts, housewares & art books. Just like through the digital interface, do stores convey the same real-life museum experience?
How to use cyber data efficiently also ethically?
Many issues have risen in the reading. There are couples of them that interest me, First, if the cloud space need any regulation, second the problem with who can be the regulator for the cyber space, and the third the privacy of the online user. All of these questions are hard to answer. Due to the increase number of online user, many user data was collected to benefit some organization. It is a waste to not using the data that we have. Data can be very powerful in terms of studying customer behavior and wants. As mentioned in the reading, internet data can be divided into two separate visions, first is the cypherpunk dream, which includes all anarchic stuff (youtube/twitter). Second is the data’s empire, which include most the cloud and surveillance.
Internet is originally designed to be anarchic, people can do whatever online with out think about law. Due to heavy use of data in business and political environment recently, I think it is necessary to impose law in order to protect the user and business. I think there should be fundamental law that applies to the world, since the Internet have no border boundary. I agree with the reading that the third party are only the carrier for user’s information, but not the stakeholder. It is like when people store their stuff in storage, the storage has no right to open the storage of others and share with anyone else. If a company is going to use the user’s information, the notification and permission is needed. I know a lot of company sale their customer’s information to another party; I think it is very unethical, because the user doesn’t know about any of these. The contract and agreement online sometime can be very hard read, many user don’t really read it. I think it is important for a company to protect users information. Cyber-libertarianism can only be implement when there are rules around it. Most importantly, as the reading states: “A cloud provider is a new kind of third party; it manages and hosts vast troves of personal data belonging to its customers.”
The article begins by introducing and explaining the idea of the cloud and how it came into use. It was a little difficult to actually grasp this abstract idea and understand the how it actually works and what it means. Throughout the article there was a series of graphics to explain different concepts and situations, but personally made things even more confusing. The article goes on to further describe that use of the cloud means that your data falls under the jurisdiction of the Patriot Act. Furthermore meaning that the information that we have on our computers, tablets, mobile devices, etc. is available for the government to surveillance.
There really is no way to stop these actions of all of your personal information to be inspected unless we stop using the devices all together. It seems that many people have an understanding of these actions, but people still continue to use these electronic devices. Does the the patriot act really pose a threat or issue to the American public? Are people really willing to give up their complete privacy in order to be digitally connected to the world?