Dear Zach,

Many thanks for this, I think it's a really useful outline of different  
kinds of projects - I'll respond in more detail next week, but one  
thing I wanted to ask you about as a short question is the Interactivos  
project which I think will be a really interesting study in different  
collaboration styles as it's in Spain and the USA.

I was interested that on the Eyebeam site it says that the New York bit  
of the series "was initiated by current R&D OpenLab fellow Zach  
Lieberman, and will be curated and produced by Eyebeam staff, fellows  
and residents." So it's always interesting I think that an initiator  
quite often ends up somehow 'responsible' throughout a process, even if  
a lot of other people are involved. I think every project needs some  
kind of initiator role, but could you say a but more about your role in  
this case?

cheers

beryl



On 3 Jun 2008, at 15:39, Zachary Lieberman wrote:

> Greetings all,
>
> I first wanted to say hello -- I've been lurking a bit on the list, and
> happy to have an opportunity to jump in.   I'm currently involved in  
> several
> collaboration projects and I can see right away it will be useful to  
> write
> about them and also, to engage in a dialog with folks here.
>
> I thought I would compile a quick list of things I've been working on,  
> as
> relate to collaboration and then try to answer the questions posed by  
> sarah
> and refer to them if I can..   I don't mean this to sound like a CV or
> anything, just wanted to try to identify things in these projects that  
> are
> interesting and see if I can relate them:
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ---------------------------------------
>
> a) interactivos workshop -- organized by medialab prado (formerly  
> medialab
> madrid) this workshop, as sarah mentioned, is centered around creating  
> new
> works from young artists and more specifically, about trying to foster
> collaboration.  there is a short video from last years event here  
> (it's half
> english / spanish).  The theme of that interactivos was magic and
> technology:
>
> http://youtube.com/watch?v=CPZb9EJkK9M
>
> I've been teaching the last two years and this year teaching and  
> organizing
> several of the workshops (NY, mexico and bogota)
>
> b) personal artwork, including collaborations with Golan Levin (tmema)  
> and
> Theo Watson - such as :
>
> tmema.org/messa
> tmema.org/mis
> openframeworks.cc/liners
>
> c) working with experts, such as choregraphers or magicians:
>
> http://thesystemis.com/rotosketch
> http://thesystemis.com/opensourcery
>
> d) doing a fellowship in the Eyebeam openlab --
>
> good description here:
> http://lunchbuffet.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!880F7BACD6654F3C!388.entry
>
> e) working with theo watson on an open source toolkit in c++ for making
> creative works called openframeworks --
> info & movie is here:
> openframeworks.cc
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ---------------------------------------
>
>
>
>> * Can collaboration exist without openness?
>
>
> I think it can, but I've found that openness is often times helpful,  
> since
> it means the work is better understood by all parties.  For example,  
> in (c)
> above, I made a performance with a magician, and he was very reluctant  
> to
> open up his tricks -- he wouldn't explain to me how things worked.
> Obviously, he had to tell me some things, but in general, there was a  
> code
> of secrecy about how his magic worked.  Sometimes, actually, I would  
> figure
> out tricks on my own, and the moment I told him he'd be totally  
> relieved,
> and show me everything, but we worked together in a sort of open/closed
> way.  My stuff / software, etc was all open source, and I tried to  
> bring him
> in as much as I could.
>
> I've pesonally found the best way of collaborating with other artists  
> (b) is
> to be as open as possible, just because the more we trust each other  
> and can
> evaluate each others work, the better the quality is.  We often times
> program over each other's shoulder -- peer coding I think it's called  
> - and
> that level of flexibility and comfort has helped immensely.
>
>
> * Is collaboration 'hardcoded' into the lab model, and what are the
> implications when the lab's philosophy embodies open source-ness or
> releasing work into the public domain? (as is the case with the  
> Eyebeam R&D
> OpenLab)
>
> One thing about this, is that I'm not entirely sure that focusing a lab
> entirely about open source is a good thing.  from my experience with  
> (e),
> I've seen that community and the public is way more important then just
> dumping your code somewhere.  if it's not maintained, if it's not  
> shown that
> it's really a living growing thing with love from above (sound cheesy,  
> but
> it's true) then I don't think people will find it that useful.  The net
> (sourceforge, for example) is full of abandoned open source projects,  
> and
> thought I'm not a curator, I'm sure there are tons of abandoned  
> open-source
> models, etc, which really serve little value but just to be remnants of
> older energy.  I'm not a fan of that as a model for publishing.
>
> I do think it's great to open source / open-ness as one of the goals /
> motivations of the lab, but others things in addition, like public  
> outreach,
> community building, etc seem to me to be as, or more important.
>
> * Is it necessary or helpful to have a creative commons mentality when
>> engaged in collaborative projects?
>
>
> I'm not sure what a creative commons mentality really is ?  for me, I  
> see
> open-ness and creative commons as parallel, and somewhat overlapping,  
> but
> not entirely sure about this.  One thing I've felt with OF (e)  
> especially is
> a sort of apathy as it relates to copyright, gpl, licensing, etc.  I  
> believe
> in public domain, and trying to get people to do good, etc, but the  
> license
> stuff really bores me I think.  Maybe I am of the generation that is  
> tired
> of license debates?  We put it up, and let people do what they want.    
> for
> me, it seems to slow things down to geek out about licenses.
>
> I would argue that there is a public domain mentality -- like, this  
> stuff
> should be free and open -- and a legislate to freedom mentality, like,  
> lets
> make sure it's free but with clauses.  I can understand both, but my  
> heart
> is really with the former.  anyway, I think this is a may  
> conversation, not
> june.
>
>  I do think it's helpful to imagine the projects going into public  
> domain,
> or least in some sense getting into a dialogue with people, so that  
> things
> can be maintained. The problem is that these collaborations range from
> artists works (b) to tools (e) and there level of open-ness I think in  
> some
> way ought to be proportional by the amount of annoyance you might have  
> with
> someone saying "I think it should do this" or "here's my patch".  Part  
> of
> making work is stimulating brains and if you can use openness as a  
> tool to
> get other peoples brains into your work, it can be very helpful.
>
> also, some works, like the liners project (b) are centered about  
> open-ness
> and bringing people in -- for me these kinds of projects are great  
> because
> they are a nice way to engage a community to make a larger work.  It's  
> also
> just fun to be able to work with people you don't know.
>
> hope that's helpful start -- look forward to hearing more and jumping  
> in
> when I can.  Thanks sarah for getting this topic going....
>
> take care!
> zach
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Beryl Graham, Professor of New Media Art
School of Arts, Design, Media and Culture, University of Sunderland
Ashburne House,
Ryhope Road
Sunderland
SR2 7EE
Tel: +44 191 515 2896    [log in to unmask]

CRUMB web resource for new media art curators
http://www.crumbweb.org