April Greiman

After looking at book on April Greiman an idea I have been thinking about for a while now was confirmed, that is that some aesthetics in design and art are dictated by the technology of the time (I know this is obvious) and that video technology arrived just before computers in terms of easily available image generation/manipulation tools. The book showed some images Greiman created just before she got access to a Mac using Calarts Grassvally switcher and some video/audio synthesisers. Greiman's work went on to become incredibly influential, she is one of the designers credited with brining 'New Wave' style to America and her unique experimental work influenced many other designers for the next decade and beyond, her utilisation of pixelation and other digitization errors was also ahead of her time.

http://aprilgreiman.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Greiman
http://nicolajaynesullivan.blogspot.co.uk

Peter Ciccariello

David Fodel

http://www.davidfodel.com/
https://www.youtube.com/user/davidfodel

L'Enregistreur

Great blog and fellow Pixel Vision Lover L'Enregistreur

runningtimeblog.blogspot.fr

Presents some beautiful feedback in these two videos
check his blog and viemo for more great work

The Electronic Palette

The Electronic Palette by Paul Gardener featured in Art News February 1985 is a typical article of the time that talks about electronic imaging. At the time real time computer imaging was a rare and costly proposition so the electronic artists studio (and many commercial imaging and effects suites) also contained analogue processors that offered real time image control. At the time this approach was a necessity and each section of the electronic studio used the least costly technology to achieve it's purpose because that was the path of least resistance. Digital and analogue, hardware and software sat together part of a combined work flow. I feel looking back on this approach from the point of view of the post digital electronic artists studio we can see how each technology can be valued for it's inherent qualities and physical manifestation. The physical realisation of the analogue video processor (or in fact the computer) and their interfaces both inform the artists approach and result in a unique finger print. It is futile to attempt simulation of both limitations, qualities and approach if you require the qualities of a specific technology. This is because simulation will result in a different experience for both the artist and observer as it is adding yet further layers of physical limitations and idiosyncrasies. In the post digital artists studio hopefully we can appreciate and utilise each technology and it's limitations with the goal of a more honest less flawed aproach to working with technologies. These are complicated issues :p

Here is a selection of scanned images form the article with credits to the respective artists.
If you are one of the artists and would like work removed or are from Art News,
please contact me and I will do so ASAP.

from the top,
Kenneth Snelson-Studies for Portrait of an Atom,
Lyn Blumenthal,Carol Ann Klonarides and Ed Panschke -Still from Arcade,
Robert Mallary-Variation #1,
J. Michael O' Rourke-Sahara II,
Michael Brakke-I Am Scared,
Kenneth Snelson, Image from Portrait of an Atom,
Michael Ardent-Effel Tower.

Audio Visualisation Tests

So I have been working on a new live set up and a new more minimal aesthetic inspired by the films of the visual music pioneers and video synthesizer artists. I want to bring together the video synthesis, visual music and drawn sound worlds in to a cohesive intermedia performance. Hopefully some of this work will also find it's way in to recorded pieces. I am doing a few more live performances where I will be testing some of the new work. On the 13th I'm playing at the Wreck in Camberwell doing visuals for my bro Taki's awesome band Spring Yard  and doing a full A/V Performance with Gary for The Gravy/Cinerama at Total Refreshment Centre  on the 15th.

Videomoog 3.0 Otolab/Peppolasagna

http://www.otolab.net
"Videomoog 3.0 was born as a joint project between Otolab
and Peppolasagna on the basis of the latter’s former
projects (Videomoog and Videomoog 2.0), partly resumed
and modified so as to correspond to specific aesthetical,
technical and performative needs.

Videomoog 3.0 features four oscillators, each generating
a separate audio-video signal and several filters which allow
modification, following typical analog-synth modalities.
As the same circuits generate both audio and video, any action
on any sound parameter triggers a real-time synchronized
video variation, and viceversa.
The Videomoog 3.0 control knobs are hosted on three separate
panels. Each panel is controlled by a performer so as to affect
the audio and video signal generated by the other two.
The oscillator-generated signal is controlled by an internal
analog sequencer whose sequences, bpm and pitch are
managed separetely on the three panels so that, for instance,
a perfomer may control the rythmical sequence while another
performer is controlling the pitch for each of the four sources."