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)
DISCUSSION

art for rhizome


here. this is more fun. woke up with an idea

instead of choosing 80 images from the artbase icons, changed a few
lines in the script and this version gets everyone's rhizome user
images. I'm leaving the title though, hope no one takes offence.

Available Art #2
http://plasmastudii.org/arch/available/available.html

(by the way, that sure was odd last night seeing a preview for
"herbie the love bug", before "the ninth day" (about a priest in a
nazi concentration camp). herbie is actually a possessed german car,
with an abusive personality. i hadn't noticed til tonight.)
--

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PLASMA STUDII
art non-profit
stages * galleries * the web
PO Box 1086
Cathedral Station
New York, USA 10025

(on-line press kit)
http://plasmastudii.org

DISCUSSION

Re:


>I get this:
>
>Warning: Cannot add header information - headers already sent by
>(output started at
>/home/judson/public_html/arch/available/getImgs.php:8) in
>/home/judson/public_html/arch/available/getImgs.php on line 40
>

sorry, just saw it, fixed now.

DISCUSSION

(no subject)


dig it. a quicky as i'm running out the door.

for rhizomers.
Available Art
http://plasmastudii.org/arch/available/available.html
(just a non-interactive animation)

DISCUSSION

RHIZOME_RAW: useful tips


here are handy tips for living with computers. getting rid of spam
(after doing this for a couple of years, i get about one a week now).
and common sense about upgrading.
http://plasmastudii.org/info/tips.html

here's the blog it came from (most for osX users)
http://www.rototillerman.com/C479732690/E1409946560/
--

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PLASMA STUDII
art non-profit
stages * galleries * the web
PO Box 1086
Cathedral Station
New York, USA 10025

(on-line press kit)
http://plasmastudii.org

+
-> post: list@rhizome.org
-> questions: info@rhizome.org
-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
-> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
+
Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php

DISCUSSION

the history of talkies all over again


Interesting reading "speed of sound". in the development of talkies,
the first attempts to synchronize 33 1/3 rpm fluid sound with 21 fps
stills, was a lot easier of a technical development, than the shift
in taste. The first attempts had what to theorists would seem like
trivial problems, to mechanics might be annoying glitches and to the
public were outrageous and infuriating effronteries. Why most took
these so personally, I don't get, but isn't it the same with computer
art.

With, talkies and interactivity both, even as the technology
"improved", people still resisted and sited their old
experience/impressions. When movies synching got better, the public
was prepped for angrily disliking it. Before things like faster CPU
speed, allow more calculations per sec, ambiguous feedback is still
interpreted as "it's broken. see these NEVER work".

Actually, talkies had been introduced years before they took over.
Weren't popular, gradually went from deplorable by all to a novelty
to a few. but when one version finally did take hold a few years
later, the path had been cleared, I guess. the whole thing spread
like wildfire, made silents obsolete over night.

Are we still at that in between stage? interactivity and public
space certainly are compatible (GUI problems keep getting ironed
out), but so many still resist the initial idea, computers being an
end not a means. (Though hopefully soon, just the opposite.
linearity will be all but extinct!) It's not about the machines at
all but changing our game plan to allow outside participation and
overcoming the limits of our brains. but they complain about the
machines, ignore participation, and end up comfortably limited.

Maybe folks get mad because they see their investments (of time, care
and money)/jobs are being threatened. However, they could easily
embrace audience participation or even ACTIVE machine participation
(right now people think "passive", such as outputting to printers and
tape is enough to call it "computer art"). Making excuses why they
can't, instead of getting their hands dirty and going ahead anyway.
or maybe they just get spooked by machines elbowing into what should
be the old organic creative world.

There's really nothing old or new about something like painting, only
the relevance of the context you give it. Each painter or painting
can be a part of interactivity or can remain a still object on a wall
to look at from a safe distance. an art object (that may or may not
use painting) needn't be related to any specific sense, or can remain
visual dictation. keeping the illusion of objectivity, is not
entirely "wrong". It's like the creationalism/evolutionism debate.
It probably doesn't actually effect most of us either way, only a few
actually working in the field have to deal with it in any concrete
way.

But eventually it becomes like atomic theory in the 40's. The Nazi's
wouldn't adopt theories made up by a bunch of jews (like einstein)
and wanted heisenberg to make an atomic bomb another way. Wasn't a
very smart move, to say the least. one of the biggest reasons we got
there first. (Sometimes flexibilty to change can save your ass.)

thanks to neurology, now we all know better, that ideas aren't any
one person's property or creation, so why keep re-drawing arbitrary
lines? copyright will die, but lawyers can choose to stick with this
wooly mammoth notion or move on to something else. these ideas are
entirely doomed but the people themselves can go down with them or
let go of them.

There's a clear neurological reason that people learn so much more
from a call and response at a Baptist revival meeting, than the top
of a preachers head as he reads from the bible. interactivity has
always been more effective. now we're getting why. but it's not a
gradual shift from traditional linear media to computer art. it's a
leap of faith. and we are going to leap a lot farther if we let go
of as much as we can.

up to you if you're a lilian gish or an eddie cantor. but since it's
no longer a surprise (as it was to many in the late 20's), this time
everyone does get that choice (and how painful it is, is up to you).
throw out those frames now.