een STT toekomstverkenning

Archive for the month “October, 2012”

Call for Papers: Art and Atoms

“The modern world of chemistry is vast and its connection to art strong. From nanocars and extraterrestrial materials to DNA origami and biofuels, chemistry, like art, expresses its transformative, material essence.  Chemistry’s unique connection to art – a science simultaneously steeped in abstraction and application, process and product – is the focus of this special section. We especially seek submissions related to topics on the cutting edge of chemistry, including nanoscience, synthetic biology, fuel cells, and neurochemistry.

We encourage artists, scientists, engineers, and scholars exploring the connection between chemistry and art to submit artwork with artist’s statement or manuscripts to the Leonardo editorial office:

Guest Editor: Tami I. Spector
211 Sutter Street
Suite 501
San Francisco, CA 94108

E-mail: isast@leonardo.info

GO TO: http://artandatoms.com/


Fearless symmetries

“Sciences and the arts are re-entering each other’s orbits in a burst of boundary-blurring creativity, Arthur I. Miller observes

Fearless symmetries

Credit: Miles Cole


Sciart – science-inspired art – still retains something of the cachet of the underground, but it now seems poised to emerge into the light of day.

Take, for example, this year’s Ars Electronica, the leading annual festival of digital art, which took place from 30 August to 3 September in Linz, Austria. It was overflowing with participants and spectators eager to see the latest electronic art, including Seiko Mikami’s breathtaking installation Desire of Codes, a room filled with robotic search arms, sensors and video feedback, sweeping the viewer into another universe of being …”

READ THE ENTIRE ATICLE AT TIMES HIGHER EDUCATION: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=421555&c=1



Art and Knowledge in Pre-Modern Europe

“This research group investigates how artists invented and appropriated knowledge, conceived and categorized knowledge, and transmitted and circulated knowledge in the visual and decorative arts in the pre-modern period. Did they distinguish artists’ knowledge from other types of knowledge, and if so, what kind of knowledge did they consider within their remit? How did the epistemic requirements for artists change between 1350 and 1750? Was this connected to the training and education of artists and to art theory? How was knowledge shared between artists and patrons, and which role did knowledge play in the collecting of art?

The production of objects of art is based on diverse fields of knowledge, from history to theology, from knowledge of materials and techniques to mathematics, from natural history to anatomy, from optics to alchemy. This research group is writing an epistemic history of art that focuses on the mediation of the circulation of knowledge within the artists’s workshop and beyond as it travelled in other domains more familiar to historians of science, medicine and technology. By focusing on the epistemic dimensions of the production and consumption of art this project readdresses the long-standing question in the history of science on the contribution of the arts to the emergence of early modern science. ….”

READ MORE AT: http://www.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/en/research/projects/MRGdupre/index_html


Max Planck Institute for the History of Science


100,000 reasons to replace ads in Times Square with art.

GO TO: http://artsquare.co/

A few short hours ago, we launched a really
ambitious $100,000 Kickstarter (http://kck.st/PabNK0) campaign. For it to succeed, we need your
help and we need it now. Please make a pledge, spread the word and sign

Times Square Art Square

Leaders in Software and Art Conference 2012

LISA Conference 2012

LISA 2012 is the Leaders in Software and Art conference at the Guggenheim in New York City, Tuesday October 16th, 2012.  We’ll have keynote speeches from Laurie Anderson, pioneering electronic artist, and Scott Snibbe, creator of Bjork’s Biophilia App, and panels on crowdsourced and social media art and the popular generative art toolkits openFrameworks, Processing, Cinder and Max/MSP. If you work with or care about new media, technology and interactive art, there’s still time to buy a ticket. Come meet and get inspired by some of the top artists and art experts in the field.

Here’s our list of presenters so far.

Alice Gray Stites – Director and Curator, Art Without Walls21c Museum
Amanda McDonald Crowley – New media and contemporary art curator, former executive director, Eyebeam
Andrew Bell – Interactive designer; co-author, Cinder
Anne Spalter – New media artist, author and educator
Bang-Geul Han – Media Artist, Assistant professor for the Digital Arts and Sciences program at Clarkson University
Barbara London – video and media curator, the Museum of Modern Art, New York
Bryce Wolkowitz – Owner and Director, Bryce Wolkowitz Gallery
Christiane Paul – Associate Professor, School of Media Studies, The New School; Adjunct Curator of New Media Arts, Whitney Museum
Claudia Hart – Media artist, art critic, Associate Professor, School of the Art Institute of Chicago
Daniel Shiffman – Assistant arts professor at NYU ITP; co-founder, Processing Foundation
Erik Sanner – Media artist, creator of “paintings that move”
Fernanda Viegas – Computational designer, co-leader of Google’s data visualization group
Georgia Krantz – Senior education manager, adult and access programs at the Guggenheim Museum and adjunct professor, The New School and NYU ITP
Glenn Marshall – electronic, digital and generative artist
Golan Levin – New media artist, composer, performer and engineer, associate professor of time-based art at CMU
Jake Barton – Interactive and media designer, founder of Local Projects
Jason Eppink – Artist, assistant curator of digital media at the Museum of the Moving Image
Julia Kaganskiy – Founder, ArtsTech Meetup and global editor, The Creators Project
Karoline Sobecka – New media artist, interactive designer, animator
Ken Johnson – Art critic, New York Times
Kenji Williams – Filmmaker, music producer, composer, violinist, and founder, Bella Gaia project
Kurt Ralske – Artist, programmer and musician
Laurie Anderson – Experimental performance artist, composer, inventor, musician
Lesley Flanigan – Vocalist, artist, electronic composer and performer
Marius Watz – Electronic and generative artist, computational designer
Mark Shepard (tentative)- Artist, architect, and new media and information technologies researcher
Mary Huang – Interactive designer, programmer, fashion designer
Melissa Mongiat – Designer, storyteller, and founder of Daily tous les jours
Michael Spalter – Digital art collector and chairman of the board, Rhode Island School of Design
Mouna Andraos – Designer, maker and founder of Daily tous les jours
Phil Stearns – Electronic Artist, light and sound artist
R. Luke DuBois – Composer, performer, conceptual new media artist, programmer, record producer and pedagogue
Scott Draves – Software artist, programmer, creator of The Electric Sheep
Scott Snibbe – Media artist, filmmaker, entrepreneur; app designer, Biophilia
Sophie Kahn – Digital and electronic artist
Steven Perelman – Contemporary art collector
Tristan Perich – Electronic and sound artist and composer
Ursula Endlicher – New media, internet art and performance artist
Yael Kanarek – Artist, Net Art expert, founder of TheUpgrade!
Zach Lieberman – Artist, programmer, co-creator of openFrameworks, Golden Nica prizewinner

And more!

GO TO: http://softwareandart.com/?page_id=953

PhD Thesis: Generation of abstract geometric art based on exact aesthetics, gestalt theory and graphic design principles

M.W. Kauw-A-Tjoe


“In this thesis artificial intelligence ideas are applied to the domain of fine arts and especially modern art. First, we take a closer look at avant garde art movements of the late 19th and first half of the 20th century. After that, we make an analysis of the knowledge on which this art movement is partly based by considering the fields of aesthetics, gestalt psychology and graphic design. Having formalised general ideas about what a well-formed painting should consist of, we then look at ways of incorporate these ideas in a model for generating a composition. We design a formal framework to which we map the domain concepts. Based on the framework, we make a top-down knowledge decomposition. To demonstrate how our ideas can be applied in a practical situation, we have implemented a prototype system. Theoretically, this system is split up into the front-end part, in which the actual output is generated, and the back-end part, in which artificial intelligence techniques are applied to the actual concepts of composing an artwork. The front-end is partly based on the multimedia generation system called Cuypers, which was developed at the Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica (CWI) in Amsterdam. Cuypers was made to generate dynamic presentations and therefore generates XML, which subsequently is transformed into a desired format (XHTML, TIME, SMIL) using XSLT transformation stylesheets. Our system generates output in the Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) format, which is an XML based standard for vector graphics and animation. The backend part is based on the formal ideas about art described above. It is implemented in Eclipse Prolog. Finally, we discuss the artistic significance of our results. We conclude this thesis by discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the conceptual decisions, as well as suggesting directions for future research, including ideas for the evaluation of the generated compositions”

GO READ IT AT: http://oai.cwi.nl/oai/asset/10978/10978D.pdf



A working conference organized by Baltan Laboratories in collaboration with the Van Abbemuseum
Eindhoven, 14 – 15 December 2012

Why is it still easier to get an entire museum collection on the Internet than to get a single work of Internet-based Art in a museum space?”

This question was posed during a book launch of the Viennese curator’s collective Context in August 2011. It very clearly points to one of the sore spots in the discussion of why there is so little digital art in museums collections. Although it is common to use digital technologies for information exchange both inside the museum and outside, through distributing content through their websites and social media platforms, the presentation and presence of digital art in museum collections is still rare.

This conference will address significant changes in contemporary artistic production by facilitating knowledge exchange between different art worlds. Through this we aim to increase understanding of each others content, aesthetics, art historical links, prejudices and technical challenges.

While there is a growing understanding around the use of technological tools for dissemination or mediation in the museum, artistic experiences that are facilitated by new technologies are less familiar. As an art discipline, the language is new and theory is still being written. The technical knowledge required to facilitate the production of this type of art or art research is not usually in-house. In order to better produce, present and preserve this type of work, an understanding of its history and the material is required in order to undertake any in-depth inquiry into the subject.

Media arts organisations and labs are recognised as spaces that facilitate new ideas and critical thinking around contemporary art and technological culture, but there is often little knowledge and experience with the economic and structural systems inherent to the contemporary art world. The full chain of research, development, presentation and discourse/theory around digital artworks is not fully developed and  interdisciplinary dialogue is needed as a step to move forward. By bringing together museums, galleries and media labs, bridges will be built between the different worlds in order to address these issues.


The working conference will address five main themes:

1. Writing histories, or staging a different future
2. Aesthetics: from formalism to networked and social
3. Exhibiting: including production and presentation
4. Collecting: about contracts, registration and preservation
5. Advancing collaboration, or developing organisational structures

Case studies will be used within each theme in order to explain the stakes and explore the different themes. Underlying the themes are issues around the challenges of production, presentation, collecting, economies, distribution and participation.

The sessions will be led by:
Christiane Berndes (Van Abbemuseum), Steve Carroll (Carroll / Fletcher gallery), Sarah Cook (CRUMB), Galit Eilat (Van Abbemuseum), Annie Fletcher (Van Abbemuseum) Paulien ’t Hoen and Gaby Wijers (SBMK/NIMk), Christiane Paul (Whitney Museum of American Art), Edward Shanken (University of Memphis) and Jill Sterrett (SFMoma).

Two days of intensive talks and discussions with some plenary discussion, but with a focus on small group conversations around specific issues and case studies brought from various collections.

* more detailed information will be given once your application has been approved. *


We like to invite anyone with a profound interest in collecting and presenting born-digital art to sign up. There is a limited number of seats available, therefore a selection process will take place.
In order to participate we’d like you to write a statement of max 500 words describing why you want to participate and what you would like to get out of the conference. Application for participation can be send together with a short biography before 15 November 2012 to : info[at]baltanlaboratories.org.


We are also looking for students that like to help us facilitate the event, the discussions and the outcomes. If you’re interested please write a motivation + short resume to info[at]baltanlaboratories.org
Volunteering means free access to the working conference! Get inspired, be part of it!


The two-day programme is 45,- euros, and includes lunch and drinks. There is a special student price of 25,- euros.
A public event takes place on Friday evening 14 December in Plaza Futura. More information will follow shortly.

This project is initiated by Angela Plohman and further conceptualised by Annet Dekker (http://aaaan.net).

This project is supported by:

GO TO: http://www.baltanlaboratories.org/borndigital/

C. P. Snow: The Two Cultures

C.P. Snow, the essayist who coined the “two culture” cliché, proposed a simple solution to the problem of divided cultures. He argued that we needed a “third culture,” which would close the “communications gap” between scientists and artists. Each side, Snow said, would benefit from an understanding of the other, as writers learned about the second law of thermodynamics and scientists read Shakespeare.”

C. P. Snow:  The Two Cultures … Read it here: http://classes.dma.ucla.edu/Fall07/9-1/pdfs/week1/TwoCultures.pdf

Leonardo, Vol. 23, No. 2/3, New Foundations: Classroom Lessons in Art/Science/Technology for
the 1990s. (1990), pp. 169-173.

Last Event @ NIMk … 19 oktober 2012: 20.00 – 00.00

“Op 19 oktober vindt toch echt ‘the last event’ van NIMk aan de Keizersgracht plaats. Op deze avond is er geen enkele tentoonstelling meer te zien, maar dat betekent niet dat er geen kunst meer te ervaren is. In het ‘lege’ gebouw worden performances opgevoerd door de kunstenaars Mark Bain, Justin Bennett, JODI, Germaine Kruip, Pawel Kruk, Rosa Menkman en Emile Zile. En van Leonard van Munster is er een sculptuur te zien.

Geluidsherinneringen, verontschuldigingen, een performatieve app, het gebouw als sonisch instrument, een simulatie van een vallende ster, het laatste signaal en meer….    ”




“In the early 1920s, Niels Bohr was struggling to reimagine the structure of matter. Previous generations of physicists had thought the inner space of an atom looked like a miniature solar system with the atomic nucleus as the sun and the whirring electrons as planets in orbit. This was the classical model.

But Bohr had spent time analyzing the radiation emitted by electrons, and he realized that science needed a new metaphor. The behavior of electrons seemed to defy every conventional explanation. As Bohr said, “When it comes to atoms, language can be used only as in poetry.” Ordinary words couldn’t capture the data.

Bohr had long been fascinated by cubist paintings. As the intellectual historian Arthur Miller notes, he later filled his study with abstract still lifes and enjoyed explaining his interpretation of the art to visitors. For Bohr, the allure of cubism was that it shattered the certainty of the object. The art revealed the fissures in everything, turning the solidity of matter into a surreal blur.

Bohr’s discerning conviction was that the invisible world of the electron was essentially a cubist world. By 1923, de Broglie had already determined that electrons could exist as either particles or waves. What Bohr maintained was that the form they took depended on how you looked at them. Their very nature was a consequence of our observation. This meant that electrons weren’t like little planets at all. Instead, they were like one of Picasso’s deconstructed guitars, a blur of brushstrokes that only made sense once you stared at it. The art that looked so strange was actually telling the truth.

It’s hard to believe that a work of abstract art might have actually affected the history of science. Cubism seems to have nothing in common with modern physics. When we think about the scientific process, a specific vocabulary comes to mind: objectivity, experiments, facts. In the passive tense of the scientific paper, we imagine a perfect reflection of the real world. Paintings can be profound, but they are always pretend. ….”

CONTINUE READING AT http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/the_future_of_science_is_art/


 Black Peacock, 1950

This mobile is a powerful example of how an art form can be tailored to the physiology of a specific area in the brain. Calder’s composition anticipated, artistically, the physiological properties of the cells of an area called V5, which are selectively responsive to motion and its direction. Viewed from a distance, the separate pieces of the mobile appear as static spots of varying sizes. But as the pieces move in different directions, each one stimulates only the category of cell that is selectively responsive to the direction in which the spot is moving. —Semir Zeki, Neuroscientist, University College London © Christie’s Images/Corbis


Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: