18/11 – 24/11

Looking at what I’ve created, all my current work this year is beginning to relate to this linkage of space. tying them together in any way even in a completely subconscious manner. These images above represent a flowing cycle as described in the previous week of space. With my ideas moving between all these facets of space, they gain traction and tangibility through their movement within it. As I immerse myself within digital space, I begin to feel its presence much less and it has over the past few years, really become a tool for me to define things and quantify them. This is a prime example of that. I believe I have transferred many of my standard human traits into digital dimensions over physical ones such as my materiality which I also touched upon previously. I’ve also been exploring other ways of converting processes into digital ones like my teapot experiment and through my code which digitised the viewing of objects, glorifying them and questioning our material ties heavily.

This material questioning, doubting our trust within the physical space as something steadfast is what really is driving my project. Digitality seems magical and untrustworthy due to the apparently undefined nature which it can posses. Space can be moves through in timeless fashions and with subverted or removed physical laws. Texture can be exaggerated or dissolved in moments, all the while mimicking and mocking our physical disposition. This is where we are going and where we are right now. The notion of ‘that is just how the world is’ a lie. The world was a certain way, is in a state now and is going somewhere totally different, we only have to look at the trajectory that it takes to extrapolate what lies within the future. It is evidently digital mimicry of the highest order, to the point of almost fracturing from physicality, but never quite as its origin will always be tethered to our understanding of 3D Physical space.

16/09 – 22/09

Reproduction of metaphysical concepts.

23/09 – 30/09

Reproducing the reproduced.

01/10 – 06/10

Reproductive Degradation of the every day.

07/10 – 13/10

Sculpturing common objects.

14/10 – 20/10

Reproducing intangible objects.

21/10 – 27/10

Digitising familiar spaces in digital perspective.

28/10 – 03/11

Digital mimicry, glorifying mundane experiences.

04/11 – 10/11

Digital objects and Materiality.

11/11 – 17/11

Clarifying subconscious space through reproduction.

18/11 – 24/11

Spacial Prejudices and Cliche.

Here I have tried to rationalise the subject which I felt I have explored each of the 10 weeks since I started looking at the idea of reproduction. This is in an attempt to rationalise what my main topic is and how I can begin to focus in what I am trying to grasp and say with my work. The way in which I create work can be very subconscious which leads to me often not realising what I am aiming to create in such a direct fashion. Every topic contains digitality, physicality and mental commentary on this, as well as often focusing on our object culture which could be where my project needs to go to. I still feel relatively untied by a singular conceptual message, which I feel is helpful for my exploratory practice. I want to aim to create some pieces which have some more honed commentary within them within the next few weeks.

I created these 2 drawings focusing on the idea of drawing completely without thought and only from the absent minded perspective. They are merely shape and colour to myself because I haven’t explored them enough for their subliminal connections to become evident as I did with the teapot shoe motif I have been exploring for a while.

Automatic drawing (distinguished from drawn expression of mediums) was developed by the surrealists, as a means of expressing the subconscious. In automatic drawing, the hand is allowed to move “randomly” across the paper. In applying chance and accident to mark-making, drawing is to a large extent freed of rational control. Hence the drawing produced may be attributed in part to the subconscious and may reveal something of the psyche, which would otherwise be repressed. Examples of automatic drawing were produced by mediums and practitioners of the psychic arts. It was thought by some Spiritualists to be a spirit control that was producing the drawing while physically taking control of the medium’s body.’

 André Masson‘s work along with the entire Surrealist automatism movement was born of similar nature to the drawings I created above. I feel these technique of drawing from the subconscious is extremely intriguing, but concepts similar can be digitised. Perhaps the material data I store within my computer could be processed into its own form of subconscious, freed of my constraints and developed in its own subconscious nature.

Looking back at the software of the grand perspective and the ideas of expressing digital data which quantifies it and makes it feel more materialistic, I created these mixture of graphical and 3D renders. Thinking about what it is that makes something feel tactile and tangible. Is it texture or three dimensionality. Here I have experimented with all these aspects in visual ways. I really enjoy the plain graphic white line version which is displayed in this video at the end. Even though this doesn’t have many of the features which make the work feel more real, it does graphically strike me, in ways similar to the autonomous drawing movements I talked about above. I could use some form of mechanical drawing system to replicate these over and over, from different angles, reconstituting the data in alternative forms.

These graphics are of my Interaction Design fourth year work folder, and the depth references the last access of the files. The tallest towers are the projects which I most recently worked on, with the large flatter areas being from the very beginning in september.

Here I have done something similar with the uncanny valley teapot concept I have been returning to throughout my work. With the addition of rotation, I have brought the model further into reality, even whilst being behind the screen. The different levels of renders each say something about the way we quantify reality within our own minds.