dear George
I really enjoyed your contribution to this discussion about your work
very important questions!
it seems to me that, in addition to the basic purchase price, the acquiring gallery should really budget in a fee paid to you for each time the work is exhibited (plus transport to brisbane and accommodation).
This would be akin to them acquiring, say, a work which needs "1000kg of fresh lemons" as part of the installation - each time it's exhibited, they obviously have to budget in the purchasing of the lemons.
Your presence in setting up the work (and adapting it if need be) is therefore "designed in" as an integral part of the work itself (and this is indicated in the contract).
Once you are no longer "of this world", your agent (or someone you trust with both aesthetic and technical issues - and that could be more than one person) is then the designated custodian of the work, and is accordingly paid etc by the gallery, to make sure it's set up properly in whatever new hardware/software conditions are deemed appropriate.
I'm sure that the folks at the variable media network have seen this sort of situation before - have you contacted them directly?
Another analogy you could move towards is the idea that they "rent" the work from you - basically, like renting software - paying an annual fee, but in return receiving whatever "upgrades" the work undergoes as you continue on your journey.
Thus the work constantly evolves (which is perhaps(?) part of the nature of the piece itself), and you're not always frustratingly trying to make something function on outdated hardware/software.
cheers
Lucas
Dr Lucas Ihlein
Lecturer, Media Arts
Faculty of Creative Arts
University of Wollongong
Room 25: G31
Phone (02) 4239 2548
-- on campus Tuesday and Wednesday only --
________________________________________
From: Curating digital art - www.crumbweb.org [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of NEW-MEDIA-CURATING automatic digest system [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 20 August 2012 09:00
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Digest - 17 Aug 2012 to 19 Aug 2012 (#2012-125)
There is 1 message totaling 127 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Collecting and preserving interactive art: factoring in lifespan, and
stages of dematerialisation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 13:53:38 +1000
From: George Khut <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Collecting and preserving interactive art: factoring in lifespan, and stages of dematerialisation.
Hi everyone
I realise this is a bit late now, but I'd be really keen for any advice re
approaches and strategies adapted by people on this list with experience in
the collection and re-exhibition of interactive computer-based
artworks. Apologies if some of these questions have already been addressed
in previous posts or forums…
A few weeks ago now I was the very happy recipient of the 2012 National New
Media Art Award, at The Gallery of Queensland, Gallery of Modern Art,
Australia for my iPad and Mac-Mini based work "Distillery: Waveforming"
http://blog.qag.qld.gov.au/winner-announced-national-new-media-art-award/
The award is an acquisitive prize, and I have embarked on a conversation
with GoMA curator Peter McKay on the process of documenting and archiving
this work for 5 iPads, 5 mac-minis, 5 heart rate sensors, software and a
wireless router.
This will be the first time that I have had a work purchased at all, and
this has forced me to consider my how individual art works function in
time. In the past - each exhibition provides an opportunity to re-write the
work, based on new software, new operating systems, hardware etc. Each
exhibition became an opportunity to 'perform' the work, drawing on
opportunities and working within the constraints at that moment and place
in time.
The project that the work has emerged on is part of my 10 year research
into biofeedback based interactions, and audience experience, and the iPad
version emerged from a residency and medical grant I received last year, to
work with Dr Angie Morrow at the Children's Hospital at Westmead, Kids
Rehab, were we are developing a biofeedback relaxation training app to test
with children undergoing recurrent and anxiety provoking painful
procedures. Audience experience of my works has been a central focus of my
work, and this exhibition includes three video portraits: video-cued
recollections recorded with specially invited participants, made with a
previous iteration of the work. For this GoMA project - I'll record another
set of these - using the work in it's current iteration. Video archiving
and translation seems relatively straightforward by comparison, and GoMA
has invested a lot of resources into preservation and archiving of video
files.
I think GoMA are interested in preserving this work as the prototype that
it is (I'll be developing it into an actual iPad app for recreational and
health care applications in the near future) as an example of a moment in
time where these ideas and technologies where coming together in art
practice.
GoMA require me to supply a set of MacMini's and iPad's for them to keep in
their collection - that they could use to re-exibit the work. There will no
doubt, be some kind of contract that we will negotiate together – and I'm
thinking it would be great if this could articulate some shared assumptions
about the work's longevity and transformation over time - into something
that will eventually be something very different from how it is currently
experienced.
I'm in the process of installing a version of Firefox 3.5 so I can better
interact with the Variable Media Questionnaire…
So my questions (so many!!) to this group at this stage are:
Has anyone else developed some form of life cycle analysis framework for
thinking about the life of a computer-based interactive artwork in an
institutional collection?
Obviously there will come a time in the very near future (5 years?) when
the work will cease to be exhibit-able in it's current form (battery
malfunctions etc.) – and we'll have to rely on
migrations/re-interpretations to provide some version of the interactive
experience.
I need a way to describe and anticipate the journey's that the work might
undertake between now, and the point at which it can no longer operate
because of hardware death, and to structure discussion around it's
financial value/cost accordingly
It seems to me that there are at least three or four stages to the works
presence/de-materialisation in an institutions collection:
1. The lifespan of the electronics that supports the interaction (i.e.
batteries, hard-drives and other corruptible components) - 5-7 years?
2. Possible migration/re-interpreation of code for new hardwares
3. The lifespan of the video documentation (i.e. documentation of the work
in use, and audience experiences- ?? years?
4. The lifespan of the written accounts (including transcriptions of
interviews with audiences) - preserved on some more durable material - acid
free paper, clay tablets, stone etc.
What are the artist's vs museums obligations with regard to migration and
re-interpreation of interactive works?
To what extent do these costs and responsibilities need to be taken into
account when negotiating the cost of the work?
Is it enough that I purchase a set of Mac Mini's and iPads for them - so
that the work might be exhibited again in 2 or 3 more exhibitions over the
next five years (at most?), before it's hardware dies?
I'm thinking there must be some other way to conceptualise how this type of
work functions in time as part of an institutions collection.
Thanks in advance
George Khut
http://georgekhut.com/
------------------------------
End of NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Digest - 17 Aug 2012 to 19 Aug 2012 (#2012-125)
*************************************************************************
