 |
 |
apologies, here is link to the Macfarlane interview: http://youtu.be/AuE6hiPGPo0 all best B On Sunday, 29 June 2014, bronac ferran <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dear All > > One of the most visionary writers and communicators about art and > technology was Jonathan Benthall with his monthly columns in Studio > International from March 1969 to the early 1970s when he decided > 'avant-garde contemporary art was a dead end' cited in interview with > Professor Alan Macfarlen ((2005). > > He's coming to speak on 26th July at a one day symposium in Cambridge > which may offer some new insights into this 'marginal/mainstream' dialogue > as other speakers include Jasia Reichardt, Roger Malina, Nigel > Lesmoir-Gordon, Neal White as well as Gustav Metzger. > http://www.kettlesyard.co.uk/whiteheat/ > > Hope to perhaps see some of you there. Thanks to Johannes and Paul for > these fascinating emails. > > all best wishes > > B > > On Saturday, 28 June 2014, Paul Brown <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Hi everyone >> >> If I may briefly put my tuppence into the mix: >> >> I studied art from 1965 and only later - in 1968 at Cybernetic >> Serendipity - discovered what I will for brevity call “computer art”. So I >> see myself as an artist. I am continuing a tradition that goes back via >> 20th century constructivism, etc… to Cezanne and further back to Giotto and >> beyond. I adamantly opposed (as many of you will remember) the attempts in >> the 2000’s to claim that “new media” was significantly different from the >> art of the past. This mistaken attitude only helped to ghettoise the field. >> >> The other thing to consider is the long-established conservatism of the >> mainstream art world. The “new” has always found it hard to break in. An >> editorial in the Studio Magazine (in 1929 I think) asked if it was time to >> reconsider Cezanne or whether to just leave him in the “amateur” category. >> Another editorial in Modern Painters (in 1979 I think) asked if >> photography had matured enough to be considered as an art form. The >> lessons of the Salon des Refuses (in 1863) didn’t get accepted into the >> British art education system until the Coldstream Report was implemented >> after 1963 - over 100 years later. >> >> In my opinion it’s foolish to expect the mainstream to comprehend or >> accept the new work. They have too much invested both intellectually and >> economically in their entrenched attitudes and memes. >> >> The lesson of art history is that art that pushes the boundaries has >> always been an outsider activity. >> >> Some institutions are breaking the mould - Doug Dodds and his colleagues >> work at the UK’s V&A Museum is an eminent example. London’s Barbican have >> a serious programme addressing digital and electronic arts - both my son >> Daniel and I have work in their “Digital Revolution” show that opens there >> this week. Others dabble (one was famously quoted recently that they had >> “done” digital art and it was time to move on…). >> >> It seems to me that this is just business as usual. Complaining about it >> is a waste of breath. Just get on with making the work and getting it >> seen. The mainstream will catch up in a hundred years or so. >> >> Best to all >> Paul >> >> >> On 29 Jun 2014, at 08:11, Goebel, Johannes <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> > Dear Crumbs, >> > >> > Please allow me to share a different view to Oliver¹s perspective. >> > >> > Since I am not a known member of the new/digital media circles, I should >> > maybe give a few pointers to my background so what I write is not by >> > necessity heard as the voice of a disenchanted person, but as coming >> from >> > someone who has been involved deeply in parts of the field discussed in >> > this list. This background does not pre-qualify my view, but it does >> give >> > an indication of my continuous involvement in some parts of the field. >> > >> > I have worked in institutions focused on ³digital² and ³art² in two >> > phases. 13 years as a founding member of ZKM in Germany and then 13 >> years >> > as founding director of EMPAC in the US. And then outside of such >> > institutions in the 13 years before ZKM, I was learning some trades in >> the >> > field starting with computer music at Stanford, trying to get ³something >> > going² in Germany with a culture deeply averted at the time to the >> > combination of ³digital² and ³art(s)² which is another interesting >> > subject. >> > >> > As part of these positions I curated and organized in 1989 the first >> > MultiMediale festival of ZKM, which then took place up to the opening of >> > ZKM. At ZKM I was able to set-up the structure of ³institutes² for >> > production and research as the first Leiter, ³director², of music and >> > acoustics and a year later Jeffrey Shaw joined us as the Leiter of >> image >> > media. During the first half of my time at ZKM, I was highly involved >> with >> > the design and construction of the ZKM building and facilities. And at >> the >> > same time I was deeply involved in a large archival project of digital >> > data (music) at a time when grants were declined for such endeavors >> > because ³all-digital archives are not feasible² (1990). >> > >> > The discussion, Oliver spearheaded in this forum regarding museums and >> > digital art, would find a trove of materials by analyzing the process, >> > development and turns of the museums at ZKM. Indeed, the ZKM museums did >> > have the largest ³media art² collections at the time and they have >> > invested a lot of energy, work and more or less deliberations into the >> > museumification of such art works. A highly interesting case study some >> of >> > you in academia might find a Ph.D. student to dive intoŠ >> > >> > An analysis of the productions and directions of the two producing >> > institutes at ZKM might be equally valuable. Both institutes had >> > distinctively different goals, methodologies and cultural perspectives >> in >> > pursuing their potential. And I think it is fair to say that an analysis >> > of how the production side of ZKM evolved after Peter Weibel took the >> lead >> > at ZKM and Jeffrey and I left in 2002 may indeed be of high historical >> > interest how it all shifted, where the creation of new works has been >> > positioned in relationship to the agendas of the ZKM museums, how >> > exhibition, retrospectives and preservation activities in conjunction >> with >> > panels and intellectual activities have shaped the change over time at >> an >> > institution founded specifically as a combination of production, public >> > engagement and exhibiting museums. >> > >> > Analyzing in concrete terms the activities of the ZKM museums regarding >> > ³media art² works at ZKM will reveal in very concrete terms the needs >> and >> > necessities, strategies and difficulties, Oliver addresses in his plea >> for >> > (central European) museums to integrate new/media/digital art into their >> > corpus. I do not believe that so much has changed in the field that an >> > analytical dissection of ZKM museum activities in regard to such art >> works >> > can be most revealing. (Starting with video monitors for Paik >> > installations all the way to operating systems and ports of ³only >> digital² >> > works) worth another Ph.D. thesis. >> > >> > Such analysis may yield, that the support system for digital ³stuff² and >> > for the related technologies as it was in exemplary fashion tackled at >> > ZKM is financially unobtainable or not sustainable (people, expertise, >> > machines, budgets etc.). Two pointers: Currently only the western >> military >> > powers (and maybe the cloud giants???) are most likely in the position >> to >> > constantly monitor their data, copy it before it deteriorates and port >> it >> > to other formats and operating systems. There is a reason why banks >> > (certainly one of the most powerful entities on this planet) stick for >> so >> > long to old generations of machines, languages and operating systems for >> > decades way beyond where the technology industry has moved the rest of >> the >> > world; or why they even print their data out on acid-free paper and >> store >> > it deep in a mountain. >> > >> > I was hired to the US to build an ³Experimental Media and Performing >> Arts >> > Center² (EMPAC) as part of the oldest technical university in the US, >> > Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. I worked with architects and engineers >> > to define parameters and functionality for an eventually - $220 >> million >> > project, which did not have any museums, but which was to be focused on >> > ³time-based arts² and creating a common infrastructure and program that >> > would span the digital (computer) and the physical (experiential) realms >> > and that would support arts, science and engineering to use the >> facilities >> > under the same roof with the hope for serendipity to bridge between the >> > different motivations, goals and methodologies of arts, science and >> > engineering. At the same time I was enabled to create a team of four >> > curators (covering time-based arts from the visual arts to music, dance >> > and theater) years before the center opened its doors. >> > >> > ³All of the sudden² a center was created that stands in contradiction to >> > the main stream of how culture is viewed in this society (which is >> > detrimental to the European perspectives and that is one reason why >> > Oliver¹s arguments sound totally different here in the US). And this >> > center for some mysterious reason has developed in a first phase the >> ³arts >> > side² to its full potential with residencies, commissions, technical >> > development and events and installations, while the ³research side² >> > (science) is now catching up - quite the opposite to other such projects >> > at universities. (It should be mentioned that EMPAC is a university-wide >> > center and is not part of any department or school and there are no >> > regular classes or teaching at EMPAC as there is no faculty, but a staff >> > of professionals dedicated to the mission and program of EMPAC). >> > >> > This now brings me to my ³different perspective² in contraposition to >> > Oliver¹s. >> > >> > Indeed culture is only possible by tradition that which is passed from >> > one to the other. And there are different paths for passing things, for >> > changing histories, for preserving that what was done, for >> > re-interpretation etc. like oral, making objects, symbolic (writing or >> > math or digital encoding), and there are different media that are or >> carry >> > that what can get passed on (from papyrus to stone to paint to >> engravings, >> > etc), digital being the latest addition. >> > >> > And the major difference being, that digital ³stuff² is not an object we >> > can perceive without it being ³brought back² through intermediary >> > materials (machines) into the realm of our senses the only way we can >> > perceive and interpret that which is encoded in the ³invisible, mute, >> > intangible² mode of the digital is the mapping of the ²invisible² into >> the >> > realm of our senses, seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, tasting Š >> > >> > So it might be worthwhile to regard all art that involves digital >> > technology as time-based art. It is not ³an object², it needs at least >> > conversion from the ³intangible² into the realm of our perception. So >> even >> > a digital image or just a text that gets displayed on a monitor or >> screen >> > would be time-based (remember flickering screens that might interact >> with >> > fluorescent lights); time as a constituent of the machine and of the >> > conversion (I/O) and of what appears. >> > >> > And most certainly all executions of any computer program are time >> based. >> > Because the computer is time-based not on a perceivable way for sure, >> > for if you want to see if a chip functions on the electrical level you >> > have to use a logic analyzer which slows ³things² down for our senses so >> > we can figure out if a transistor functions properly again the digital >> > operations needs to be converted to the bandwidth / resolution / speed >> of >> > our senses to be able to determine ³what it is doing². >> > >> > Every piece of net-art is time-based art. Every digital video is >> > time-based art in a dual sense it is something moving that needs to >> get >> > moved (converted) to be perceived, experienced and interpreted as >> moving. >> > (Movies on acetate substrate are time-based in a single sense, since we >> > can look at each individual frame and they are meant to get >> accelerated). >> > >> > Every work that involves digital technology is not only time-based >> because >> > the machine itself is time-based in its operational mode, but also on >> the >> > next higher level in the sense that the machine itself (including >> > operating systems, programming languages, video or audio standards etc.) >> > is time-based in an economic sense. Its ever-changing ³embodiment² gets >> > changed continuously by powers outside of those who use it (us). This is >> > different from a sculpture deteriorating over time or a painting >> building >> > up grime on its surface or an acetate film fading. It is also different >> > from printing technology moving to the next generation of printing >> > machines. The book once printed, is an object. But a new computer system >> > may render that, which previously could be executed and converted for >> our >> > senses as being impossible to get done. The ³instructions² need to be >> > ³executed². >> > >> > To look at ³digital² art as tangible objects misses fundamentally the >> > properties of computers and thus of the work itself. (I am using >> ³digital² >> > in this context as short hand for ³computer based² certainly there are >> > non-computer based digital modes). >> > >> > The declaration or viewing of all ³digital² art as time-based arts >> changes >> > the perspective on such art radically. It is now part of ³performing >> > arts², it needs to be ³performed² or in the digital realm ³executed² >> (i.e. >> > put on a time-line) to ³come to live², to be perceived, experienced and >> > interpreted. >> > >> > (Just to not get side-tracked too much: certainly viewing a painting is >> > also ³time-based² as is the deterioration of a sculpture but I am >> > referencing the mode of the ³object² and ³non-object² and not the mode >> of >> > us as living beings who cannot be but time-based and are born and will >> > die, with many heart beats in between.) >> > >> > So museums as institutions based on collecting art in the form of >> tangible >> > objects may or are not be the appropriate place for time-based arts. As >> > for exhibiting time-based art museums certainly have a ³function² and >> > offer opportunities. But the recent boom in tying performing arts and >> > performance art into the program of museums shows the great, well: >> > incapability, lack of expertise and understanding of museums to deal >> with >> > time-based art. Museums built in the past decades do not meet any >> criteria >> > for ³time-based media art², ³digital² art or leave alone for ³performing >> > arts². >> > >> > Even at ZKM where it was the program of the museums to show such art, it >> > was extremely difficult during the design process to integrate at least >> a >> > few elements that would allow the exhibition of such art in an >> appropriate >> > and easily manageable way. The lack of understanding came from those in >> > power who had little of an idea or experience with ³media² art even of >> the >> > eightiesŠ leave alone interactive installations and their conditions And >> > most of you who are curating ³media² or ³digital² art in such >> institutions >> > will know best the difficulties you are up against on the >> > institutional-political as well as on the production side to for >> instance >> > get that large spaces can be dark, that projectors are not noisier than >> > the potentially subtle sounds of an installation, that there is no sound >> > spilling over form a neighboring installation, that adequate projection >> > surfaces are installed, that the lighting does not interfere or does >> > supports sensor technology etc. It is ³absolutely maddening² for people >> > who are coming from the time-based arts to realize how little >> sensitivity >> > and expertise such institutions have allowed to grow within their walls >> to >> > show time-based art, not mentioning the design of new museums >> integrating >> > these arts. >> > >> > Likewise the arts market: time-based art does not accumulate ³added >> value² >> > over time. Musicians, dancers and actors have understood that forever >> > their art is gone as soon as it is performed (²executed²) and >> experienced >> > and it is needs a new performance to enter the realm of perception, to >> > meet an audience. ³Media², ³digital² art falls into the same category. >> > Only tangible objects accumulate value and can be market driven. >> > >> > Why does a major museum like MoMA pay a pittance for the screening of a >> > video or for acquiring videos (unless you are a star)? Because the value >> > is time-based and ³expires after use². It cannot accumulate value wile >> > sitting on a shelf, because time cannot sit still. >> > >> > So the argument that museums have a cultural mission and one could >> > pressure them to accommodate and preserve ³digital² art, can at best be >> > valid for central European countries. But even that direction of thought >> > may be flawed because as I tried to point out museums are not >> > institutions that were ever meant to deal with time-based ³entities². >> They >> > are deeply rooted in the 19th century as a successor to arts collections >> > by the courts and churches. And as containers for the trophies of >> colonial >> > enterprises. >> > Before, courts and churches had, besides their arts collections and >> > libraries, a separate entity for time-based arts their musicians, >> > composers, dancers, actors, writers. And under an institutional >> > perspective, the visual and the time-based arts were all part of the >> same >> > entity and were paid from the same source. But then these organizational >> > structures were separated out in the 19th century when the museums took >> > over the public viewing of objects and viewing of time-based arts moved >> to >> > ever growing numbers of opera houses and theaters, and then to movie >> > theaters, and then to Biennials and Š Disney Land : ) >> > >> > >> > So we can view and position all ³digital² arts as time-based arts and as >> > being connected to the cultural and economic model of the ³old² >> performing >> > arts and NOT as being part of the traditional visual arts canon and >> the >> > related institutions. If museum show such ³digital² art great for >> > whatever reason they might do it. As it is equally ³great² if they put >> on >> > performances. We wish all time-based artists to find such opportunities. >> > But one will observe that, as mentioned before, there is little >> observance >> > of the needed requirements in details (which are carefully observed when >> > presenting ³static² art) to put such works or shows on. >> > >> > ³Digital media artists² produce time-based arts as their art needs to be >> > ³executed², ³performed², with machines, operating systems, programs and >> > I/O devices and maybe by the audience in ³interactive² and >> ³participatory² >> > art or be it in performing arts integrating digital technology or be it >> as >> > a large slide show on the side of a building. (This certainly does not >> > apply to all artists using digital technology, like those creating >> ³still² >> > objects with prints of digital photographs or 3-d printing or >> > algorithmically developed static objects). >> > >> > And indeed I think such artists and their work do underlie the same >> > economic conditions like all time-based arts. I have not heard of many >> > artists who made a fortune from such a time-based ³digital² works being >> > bought by museums or individuals (besides video installations from a few >> > stars). >> > >> > Now to take this a step further: ³digital² art works will have to die, >> > fade away, maybe being restored at some later point in time but they >> are >> > an acceleration of the changes traditional performing arts undergo. >> > >> > It is the signature characteristic of ³digital² art that it¹s life cycle >> > is indeed very brief. It almost approaches the time-scale of oral >> > tradition. The survival in the >> > ³cloud² is a myth once any kind of programming is involved in the >> > ³performance² of a digital art work. The documentation of such an >> artwork >> > may be around for a while in the cloud (or on your computer) that is >> why >> > documentation is the only way to keep such works in some way accessible >> in >> > the future. This documentation may include program code, screen captures >> > or video documentation with maybe multi cameras, either edited into a >> > single video or where the material form each camera is kept. But the >> > documentation is not ³the work² and it will hardly ever lead to anyone >> > reconstructing a work from its documentation. >> > >> > Looked at from the traditional perspective, the artist of ³digital art² >> is >> > confronted with being the most vulnerable artist. We know that texts >> only >> > survived if they were copied by hand on sturdy material or printed on >> > (hopefully) acid-free paper. We have no idea how music pieces from the >> > 12th or 17th or 19th century sounded, where we still have a symbolic >> > notation, but where tradition has changed ³the sound² once it gets >> > performed. Dance tries to cope with their specific problem that there is >> > no common notation they try it now with the help of digital >> technology. >> > And theater (words) never minded to have all their texts being edited, >> > augmented, cut for whatever performance a director was aiming for. >> > >> > Or the artist of ³digital art² is the most avant-garde because the >> > inherent properties of the work make clear what digital technology >> offers >> > us contrary to what we are told: The reality of a fast and quick >> > obsolescence and disappearance of ³anything digital² that does not get >> > maintained continuously (!) by a highly expensive and labor-intensive >> > system. And such systems as mentioned before are in our world only >> > created by those who see a financial or military interest. Even one of >> the >> > greatest (largest and of high importance) collections of data, the one >> in >> > the scientific community, has no way to be all ³saved². >> > >> > Not to speak of the programs and algorithms, which are used and modified >> > and programmed to create art as part of an interactive work or of >> > live-processing. Again, here we have an important example in music with >> > live-electronics, be they analog or be they digital. They simply >> disappear >> > very rapidly unless an institution (like IRCAM) invests to port programs >> > and patches to new system, to keep old computers alive or to document in >> > flow-charts and with mark-ups in the scores what actually is supposed to >> > happen. And the decisions, which works will be elevated to this level of >> > care, is a matter of politics, of money and of ³stature² and of power >> > like in the old days, when it was decided, which manuscript was worth to >> > be copied by hand on a new set of vellum with new ink. >> > >> > Maybe the ³digital artist² has to understand her/himself like performing >> > artists do: once you cannot perform a piece anymore, once the hardware >> or >> > software does not run anymore, once you cannot dance anymore, once you >> > die, your work disappears with you. Is that not a great perspective? >> Being >> > freed from reaching eternal relevance creating for the ³here and now², >> > the actual realm of the arts of the performing arts? >> > >> > And this will not make culture get less rich and will not result in >> > tradition being eroded. It is the indication of what digital culture >> > actually means and does contradictory to what seems to be the standard >> > anthem sung by the choir: Digital culture makes it incredibly clear that >> > it is the owners of resources who determine how history and tradition >> are >> > shaped, interpreted and used. (You might say: Nothing has changed. And >> > indeed digital technology has not resulted in a change in this aspect, >> but >> > has made it sharper, more apparent: digital technology maybe >> democratizing >> > a wide range of areas, but it certainly closed off an after-life for >> more >> > and more people. I am not sure this makes a difference but it does >> make >> > a difference if we are told and we believe it IS different). We all have >> > digital ³devices² but we do not have the power to even port data and >> > programs through more than 3-5 generations of devices or through 2-3 >> > generations of new operating systems. >> > >> > As we know from theater, music and dance, most works disappear with >> their >> > creator or performer they still continue to live for a while in >> > ³trans-substantiated² form in some individual or collective memory, they >> > may contribute to a fertile ground for new works. But they will >> disappear >> > eventually. Which indeed is not bad at all. >> > >> > Was that not the goal of performance art to get out of the white cube, >> > to put things on a time-line, which could not be replicated? And is it >> not >> > amazing that we now revive inside the white-cube that which was meant to >> > be outside of the institutional-temporal structure of museums? Are we >> > building mausoleums? >> > >> > How great (seriously) now we have digital art, which has an inherent >> > expiration date. Maybe that is what is meant by ³artificial life². >> > >> > We should welcome the ³digital² artists to the performing arts world >> and >> > work on the unifying understanding of time-based arts. >> > >> > And you ³digital² artists, you may dive deep into the tradition of >> > performing and time-based arts from a new perspective namely that here >> > may be your (new) roots. >> > >> > The gatekeepers to history and museums need not be convinced to take on >> > ³digital² art. Either they get it or they don¹t. They have the power to >> > support me or to turn me away. But, once again, that is the fate in >> > performing, in time-based arts, that cannot accumulate value but lives >> > only with and through the audience in the moment if enters time. >> > >> > It is a necessary luxury that we have academics, thinkers, writers, >> > curators who reflect on all this we do need this intellectual work >> > because it keeps culture alive as a complex environment and it enables >> to >> > go into different directions within a cultural context. To stop and then >> > continue to stumble, walk or run. >> > >> > What I am proposing is that we need to support the artists even more so >> >> > because what will the academics, thinkers, writers, curators do if there >> > are no artists creating new works :) >> > >> > The ³digital² artists wake up as time-based artists, as part of >> performing >> > artists and the authors in these fields. The real challenge is not how >> we >> > enter institutions, which are petrified or have an ³incompatible >> agenda² >> > I have been trying that approach for ever and I will continue to do so >> for >> > the sake of creating new opportunities for new works and their >> reception, >> > to support the artists and their work but not for the sake of these >> > institutions or for the sake of history or my contribution to history >> > (haha). It¹s only for the moment I want to experience with an art work >> > someone created to share time with me in its own moving through time. >> > >> > ====================================== >> > >> > >> > On Restoration, Preservation and Documentation >> > >> > As I mentioned above, dealing with vanishing media has absorbed quite a >> > chunk of my professional life and keeping works afloat that are >> inherently >> > based on digital technology. >> > >> > These experiences have contributed greatly to the thoughts I sketched >> > above. >> > >> > The earliest experience was using the then new technology of Audio-CDs >> to >> > create the first CD series, which pulled ³digital music² (music only >> > possible with a computer) together and made it available in digital >> format >> > through a label which had started to move form vinyl to CD. >> > At that time there were a wide variety of digital audio formats. So the >> > actual mastering process was to convert all the pieces submitted in a >> > variety of formats to the Audio-CD standard. A nightmare. This taught me >> > what everyone knows but does not want to consider when they are creating >> > new works: The actual digital formats dictate how long we can keep ³the >> > work². The only way out is to analyze which format will most likely >> > survive the longest and which format will be supported by mass-market >> > devices in millions of clones (which one may cheaply buy and which one >> > will find on dumps even in a hundred years to reverse-engineer them). >> The >> > Audio-CD format fulfills this criterion. With compatible DVD players >> (and >> > maybe, maybe Blu-ray players) extending this strain of devices. >> > >> > As part of this process I had to re-create a piece form the early >> > seventies, which had never existed in a digital copy, but only spliced >> on >> > analog tape. We dug up an old 9-track data tape on a dusty attic and >> then >> > found a still existing digital tape drive, to get the bits off not the >> > audio bits, but the program that created the audio. The compiler for >> this >> > program did not exist anymore, but a more recent version. The composer >> and >> > I had to sit together and adapt the old program structure to the new >> > compiler and then we had to go by the memory of the composer if what >> we >> > cobbled together was the ³original² piece. This taught me that there is >> > absolutely no way to maintain programs (leave alone specific hardware) >> to >> > reconstruct pieces later on. Many experts are involved in porting >> programs >> > to new machines and operating systems. The ³arts world² cannot support >> > such approach but has to rely on individual fanatics who dedicate their >> > life to such endeavor. >> > >> > An example of pre-digital machines is the Labor für antiquierte >> > Videosysteme at the ZKM, which has more than 300 pieces of equipment to >> be >> > able to play videos from the fifties to the eighties and to digitize >> them. >> > Which is important but it reveals that the next question will be how >> to >> > preserve and copy now the content in the digital domain. A continuous >> > effort without end. Which does not mean one should not start. But it >> shows >> > clearly how time-based arts underlies different conditions than >> > non-time-based arts. >> > >> > The next larger project was the International Digital Electronic Music >> > Archive (IDEAMA), collaboration with Stanford University between 1989 >> and >> > 1996. More than 600 works of electro-acoustic music were collected >> > worldwide. Besides the mountain of collecting the pieces, the >> information >> > and the legal issues, the question was how to store the digitized data. >> At >> > the time the first professional CD-Writer had entered the market with a >> > professional program to edit and burn Audio-CDs on writable CDs that >> would >> > not get destroyed easily by UV-light, temperature and humidity. Already >> > then it was known how ³regular² writable CDs would get destroyed over a >> > rather brief period of time because of the organic material used in >> them. >> > >> > The archive was distributed world-wide on such archival CDs. Then later >> on >> > the distribution was switched to hard discs because it was easier to >> copy >> > than to produce individual CDs. This was actually a step in the wrong >> > direction, because hard discs do not have the longevity of CDs. >> > >> > I do not know how many of you have experience with keeping a rather >> large >> > complex installation alive over an extended period. Here at EMPAC we >> > produced between 2003 and 2008 an interactive film installation with the >> > Wooster Group / New York City. The work is based on Jeffrey Shaw¹s >> > panoramic screen system having augmented some parameters. This >> > installation consists of a very large panoramic screen (12m diameter, >> 4.5m >> > high), panoramic projection with first 6, now 5 video projectors, an >> > interactive chair, 32 channels of audio and a 20 minute video the viewer >> > can navigate through. To maintain the hardware and software over just >> the >> > past 6 years, to port to new systems etc. has been a major challenge and >> > demanded expertise, labor and finances, which I cannot imagine many >> > institutions would invest (Jeffrey certainly is probably the most >> > knowledgeable in this area since he has a large number of different >> > installations set-up in Hong Kong and has diligently maintained his >> > works.) I could not imagine any museum (but the Media Museum at ZKM) >> > maintaining such a work and updating it. The hardware and software >> > expertise to update all the integrated systems and to make such a work >> > portable is quite difficult to find in one place (Bernd Linterman at ZKM >> > certainly being an expert in many aspects of this.) The accumulation of >> > this knowledge in a new team like here at EMPAC which would need to be >> > the case if Oliver¹s proposal to have museums take on such work is >> > especially complicated. I wonder if such pragmatic examples are taken >> into >> > consideration in the conferences and discussions, Roger Malina mentioned >> > in his recent contribution to this list. And what the conclusions and >> > resulting strategies might be. >> > >> > As I proposed above, the only way might be to have a video/audio >> > documentation of such work instead of keeping the work itself >> functioning. >> > The video formats will certainly be kept supported for an extended >> period >> > of time, especially if they are used by commercial studios. >> > >> > Which brings me to the final consideration: How do we store the >> resulting >> > documentation without having to constantly monitor the state of >> corruption >> > of the data stored on some medium. Again, we in the art world cannot >> > afford complex systems of automated error checks and automated >> replication >> > processes. And museum certainly will never be able to create and support >> > such automated systems. >> > >> > It is always good to go with standards, which some important business is >> > relying on like Hollywood. So we went with LTO-5 tapes to back up our >> > productions. Having been through many generations of back-up >> > considerations, I still felt uneasy about tapes or in a generalized >> way >> > about media, which have moving parts integral to their functioning - >> which >> > can crash (heads on hard disks), stretch or tear (tape) or have a >> magnetic >> > storage life, which will run out at some point in time (hard disks, >> SSD). >> > >> > For all these reasons, I have been ³fond² of writable optical media like >> > CDs, DVDs and maybe Blu-ray discs. The only shortcoming of these media >> was >> > (maybe so far) that they used organic material, which will deteriorate >> and >> > eventually make it impossible to read the disc. The reflective layer >> will >> > peel off if exposed to UV-light and they don¹t like high temperature and >> > humidity. >> > >> > I used at ZKM high quality archival CDs, which have been available now >> for >> > almost 25 years. The seem to stand up to their advertised 100 year >> > life-span Š >> > >> > Recently I came across the Millennium Disc (DVD and Blu-ray), which is >> > supposed to not have any organic materials as part of its make-up and >> > which withstood reportedly tests by the US-army in excellent shape >> > (nowhere comparable to standard discs). >> > >> > I would like to hear feedback on my current strategy (for video, audio, >> > images and documents in a format that will most likely be kept around to >> > convert to then newer formats) : >> > >> > Put everything on these Millennium discs; buy a few computers and a few >> > disc reading devices and put them on a shelf, maybe restart them once a >> > year and replace batteries on the mother board Š) and otherwise just let >> > them sit there. The investment might be $5,000. But I can be certain >> that >> > this is the cheapest way to keep the documentation and documents >> available >> > for say the next 30 years, maybe 50 or until someone decides to throw >> them >> > out - without the constant need for ³checking the state of the bits². >> > >> > >> > ============================= >> > >> > >> > Ending on this pragmatic note, >> > >> > Johannes >> >> ==== >> Paul Brown - based in the UK March to May 2014 >> http://www.paul-brown.com == http://www.brown-and-son.com >> UK Mobile +44 (0)794 104 8228 >> Skype paul-g-brown >> ==== >> Honorary Visiting Professor - Sussex University >> http://www.cogs.susx.ac.uk/ccnr/research/creativity.html >> ==== >> > > > -- > Bronaċ > > Reviews of some recent projects at: > > > http://we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2014/06/wandering-snail.php#.U6xNitq9KSM > & > www.caldaria.org > > -- Bronaċ Reviews of some recent projects at: http://we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2014/06/wandering-snail.php#.U6xNitq9KSM & <http://we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2014/06/wandering-snail.php#.U6xNitq9KSM &> www.caldaria.org