Plasma Studii
Since the beginning
Works in New York United States of America

PORTFOLIO (8)
BIO
judsoN = computer artist for shows internationally on stages, galleries and the web, and the Artistic Director of Plasma Studii, a non-profit arts organization in New York. His goal is to use technology as a tool to fuse arbitrary distinctions in art, such as dance and sculpture, color and sound frequencies, stages and web sites. His live interactive pieces appear in such venues as plays in circus tents across Europe, installations for places like the Arts Council of Mildura, Australia, on web sites at ISCAM (in Istanbul) and cTheory for Cornell University (twice). His artwork published in books (US, Europe, South America) and on CD-Roms worldwide. Studied choreography under Doug Elkins, music composition with a student of Stockhausen.
Discussions (278) Opportunities (1) Events (3) Jobs (0)
EVENT

Here c omes Funky Momma


Dates:
Sat Jul 01, 2006 00:00 - Mon Jun 12, 2006

what is the most exciting thing you can possibly imagine?

.. well, this is similar.

the web art collection (including the dynamic self-organizing and voting features)
at Plasma Studii is now at (drumroll, please)
funkymomma.org

if you wanna see some cool web art, come on by. don't be shy.

if you have any links to plasmastudii.org,
just switch the domain name to funkymomma.org.
the file structure is the same. the files are all there now.

have a happy,
judsoN

* i'm updating this mailing list now, so if you want to be removed,
just send a note to judson@funkymomma.org


DISCUSSION

emotions


here's a cool article.

henry james in the 1880s. mentions people who don't feel in reaction to what the perceive, but still process sensory input (art?). though seems the opposite is common too. feelings about art, but not much input from senses.

http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/James/emotion.htm

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: AJAX for artists


well you sound bored with it and i definitely am, so i'll just say this and i'm taking off.

my responce is same as my initial responce, to what end benefit? Folks seem to be talking from the perspective that a web page is and can only be code + design. that's the common view now and has been for a few years. Totally agree it's the status quo, but am saying there's also a different way to look at it, more common in the 90's. HTML can be about delivery not packaging.

"web design" exists now anyway, obviously. but design, although popular, does not need to be a crucial part of the concept, just as leashes are not an essential feature in dogs. HTML gives a rough idea of the order of media placement and download scheduling, but the resulting look has been confused with imperfect layout of graphics. in that way, the difference in the amount of control available with CSS, as opposed to HTML is an artifact of a print perspective, not a file delivery perspective. and from either perspective, CSS certainly doesn't simplify the task of writing it nor helps significantly in downloading it. it's a lousy solution, even if there were a real problem.

you may see a benefit, i don't. ok fine. both the art world and web world somehow attract a lot of folks who appreciate what looks to me just like hype. it may be something real but no one can both see it and articulate it to someone who can't.

whid wrote:

> (why, oh why do i get into these ridiculous args online... one day
> i'll learn...)
>
>
> On 2/6/06, Plasma Studii <office@plasmastudii.org> wrote:
> > >>> You don't see the utility of CSS?
> >
> > >> nope. just the opposite. think it does more harm than good.
> because it forces people to think of "web pages" as pages, not simply
> collections of data (in some order, but not a layout)
> >
> > > argh! That's what CSS does!
> >
> > ??? (maybe you thought we were referring to XML here?)
> >
>
> do you just want to be difficult? This is totally ridiculous!
>
> ah no, xml in the form of XHTML is the strucure, what allows this
> structure to be presented? Currently on the web it's done with CSS.
>
> >
> > >>> CSS's value in a nutshell: separate the structure of the data
> > from it's presentation.
> >
> > >> that's a great goal, but not what styles ultimately do. they
> neither simplify the design process (a supposed benefit of separating
> it from the HTML (which was designed so anyone could easily learn
> it)), nor speed up the processing.
> >
> > > You make this statement 'not what styles ultimately do' but you
> don't
> > back it up with any examples or any reasoning whatsoever. See
> > http://www.csszengarden.com/ for an example of how different styles
> > can completely change the way an XHTML file, using the same exact
> > mark-up, can be presented.
> >
> > use a browser for the blind. content is not just design. and
> design isn't the only vehicle for content.
> >
>
> ARGH! THAT'S MY POINT! The CONTENT, ie, MARKED-UP DATA is separate
> from the presentation. So a blind person can use a screen reader
> without a bunch of tabular hacky cruft and someone with a nice big
> monitor can see a beautiful layout. This is precisely what CSS media
> types are for (http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_mediatypes.asp)!
>
> Why you continue not to access this simple idea is beyond me.
>
> >
> >
> > >> div tags alone would be great. but styles make for "spaghetti
> code" and put far too much emphasis on print-like rigid layout. that
> much layout control isn't neccessary, it's a chosen addition. serves
> no actual purpose, just an inability to see things without it.
> >
> > > How do styles make 'spaghetti code?' A well marked-up XHTML file
> > combined with a well-structured stylesheet is very simple to read.
> No
> > ziti, no spaghetti, not even a caeser salad to start.
> >
> > the style declarations are in the header or sometimes in a separate
> file. then often referred to in the javascript. then again in the
> body. then there's #def section that is often after the script. why
> remember?
> >
>
> to each his own i suppose, i guess it's a subjective thing. it seems
> you're talking more about all the diff web tech than CSS in
> particular.
>
> > Flash is far worse in this respect, but i like to know where all the
> code is in one consistent spot without hunting around. the BASIC
> command GOTO usually instigates complaints about encouraging
> "speghetti code". you have to follow it as it jumps from section to
> section.
> >
> > makes debugging more clear when you don't have to guess where some
> code would be. i'm sure CSS can be done neatly, but usually isn't.
> but that's hardly the worst problem. the worst is the conceptuaol
> page layout vs. screenful of info thing.
> >
> >
> > >>> If I had known about it
> > when making '1 year performance video,' it would have helped with
> > sending data to the server to increment viewer's time (it used a
> > hidden iframe to do it -- a bad hack IMO).
> >
> > >> trivia: actually, the whole thing could have easily been done
> with a couple lines of code. assumed that's the way you used. But
> whatever works.
> >
> > > Please elaborate -- I had to talk to the DB on the server, it
> wasn't
> > much data to send, but I couldn't reload the page everytime, it
> would
> > have completely destroyed the viewer experience (I probably could
> have
> > and should have done it in the flash movie, but I didn't). So I
> ended
> > up sending it thru a hidden frame. XMLHTTPRequest would have worked
> > better but the techniques hadn't been developed fully at the time.
> >
>
> I have no idea what you were tryiing to communicate with that little
> PHP script below..
>
> > the wonderful thing about PHP is it is so readable. The actual
> mechanics of this aren't crucial to get the idea...
> >
> > ---
> >
> > <html> <! <- you don't really need this or it's end tag, but this
> illustraters the idea>
> > <body>
> >
> > check out the artists now!<p>
> >
> > <?
> >
> > $Now = date("h"); // or whatever letter for hour in military is, but
> you get a number 0-23
> > $RandomNo = rand(1,9); // for fun
> > print ("<embed src=clips/$RandomNo/clip$Now.mov width$0
> height0><p>");
> >
> > ?>
> >
> > </body>
> > </html>
> >
>
> Perhaps you've never seen the piece? That's fair. It has two videos
> playing in flash embedded in an XHTML page. These videos are loaded
> dynamically by talking to a php script on the server. Part of the
> piece is that a user is supposed to watch it for a year. The site
> keeps track of how long they've watched it. How does it keep track?
> Every minute the client needs to tell the server that the page is
> still open and being viewed. If the page refreshes, that could do it,
> but that would ruin the streaming video effect. So i use hidden frame
> to load a php script that increments the veiwer's time in the db. My
> point was simply that it would have been better to do it with
> XMLHTTPRequest instead of the hidden frame for reasons i don't feel
> like going into.
>
> --
> <twhid>www.mteww.com</twhid>
>

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: AJAX for artists


>>> You don't see the utility of CSS?

>> nope. just the opposite. think it does more harm than good. because it forces people to think of "web pages" as pages, not simply collections of data (in some order, but not a layout)

> argh! That's what CSS does!

??? (maybe you thought we were referring to XML here?)

>>> CSS's value in a nutshell: separate the structure of the data
from it's presentation.

>> that's a great goal, but not what styles ultimately do. they neither simplify the design process (a supposed benefit of separating it from the HTML (which was designed so anyone could easily learn it)), nor speed up the processing.

> You make this statement 'not what styles ultimately do' but you don't
back it up with any examples or any reasoning whatsoever. See
http://www.csszengarden.com/ for an example of how different styles
can completely change the way an XHTML file, using the same exact
mark-up, can be presented.

use a browser for the blind. content is not just design. and design isn't the only vehicle for content.

>> div tags alone would be great. but styles make for "spaghetti code" and put far too much emphasis on print-like rigid layout. that much layout control isn't neccessary, it's a chosen addition. serves no actual purpose, just an inability to see things without it.

> How do styles make 'spaghetti code?' A well marked-up XHTML file
combined with a well-structured stylesheet is very simple to read. No
ziti, no spaghetti, not even a caeser salad to start.

the style declarations are in the header or sometimes in a separate file. then often referred to in the javascript. then again in the body. then there's #def section that is often after the script. why remember?

Flash is far worse in this respect, but i like to know where all the code is in one consistent spot without hunting around. the BASIC command GOTO usually instigates complaints about encouraging "speghetti code". you have to follow it as it jumps from section to section.

makes debugging more clear when you don't have to guess where some code would be. i'm sure CSS can be done neatly, but usually isn't. but that's hardly the worst problem. the worst is the conceptuaol page layout vs. screenful of info thing.

>>> If I had known about it
when making '1 year performance video,' it would have helped with
sending data to the server to increment viewer's time (it used a
hidden iframe to do it -- a bad hack IMO).

>> trivia: actually, the whole thing could have easily been done with a couple lines of code. assumed that's the way you used. But whatever works.

> Please elaborate -- I had to talk to the DB on the server, it wasn't
much data to send, but I couldn't reload the page everytime, it would
have completely destroyed the viewer experience (I probably could have
and should have done it in the flash movie, but I didn't). So I ended
up sending it thru a hidden frame. XMLHTTPRequest would have worked
better but the techniques hadn't been developed fully at the time.

the wonderful thing about PHP is it is so readable. The actual mechanics of this aren't crucial to get the idea...

---

<html> <! <- you don't really need this or it's end tag, but this illustraters the idea>
<body>

check out the artists now!<p>

<?

$Now = date("h"); // or whatever letter for hour in military is, but you get a number 0-23
$RandomNo = rand(1,9); // for fun
print ("<embed src=clips/$RandomNo/clip$Now.mov width$0 height0><p>");

?>

</body>
</html>

generally, on the web, a db doesn't contain media, so much as refers to where it's stored, and some searchable tag-like text. you can often skip em, by just using variables when you specify the path. why i was saying databases really only start to become handy, when you have a humongous amount of data and organization becomes more important (as in google maps or a big inventory).

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: AJAX for artists


t.whid wrote:
> <this may be flame-ish>

no prob. from anyone else, i might be taken aback. but i've known you smell funny for a while, so i don't take it personally!

>
> +++
>
> quoting plasma:
> In many cases, like CSS, there was no problem, but a new wave of users
> (in about '99-'02), were impatient to make HTML more like print,
> rather than see they are very different animals.
>
> +++
>
> You don't see the utility of CSS?

nope. just the opposite. think it does more harm than good. because it forces people to think of "web pages" as pages, not simply collections of data (in some order, but not a layout)

> CSS's value in a nutshell: separate the structure of the data
> from it's presentation.

that's a great goal, but not what styles ultimately do. they neither simplify the design process (a supposed benefit of separating it from the HTML (which was designed so anyone could easily learn it)), nor speed up the processing.

Apples data fork is genius. does both. also seperates text for multiple languages. obvioously not all designers will read C, so they can use res-edit. the reason macs were so much faster at graphics and audio for so many years, is different parts of the computer handle different tasks, with different efficiency. (though nowadays the over-all parts have all gotten so much better, a little inefficiency hardly shows.) that' could be another reason to split them up.

div tags alone would be great. but styles make for "spaghetti code" and put far too much emphasis on print-like rigid layout. that much layout control isn't neccessary, it's a chosen addition. serves no actual purpose, just an inability to see things without it.

> If I had known about it
> when making '1 year performance video,' it would have helped with
> sending data to the server to increment viewer's time (it used a
> hidden iframe to do it -- a bad hack IMO).

trivia: actually, the whole thing could have easily been done with a couple lines of code. assumed that's the way you used. But whatever works.