BIO
Salvatore Iaconesi (xdxd.vs.xdxd@gmail.com) works with technology in several ways.
Starting out in the hacking and pirating scenes all over Europe at the beginning of the '90s, he used several digital identities to experiment in various areas: ANSI/ASCII art, software art, mxed-media.
Rave parties and engineering represent the two turning points of his evolution.
Through engineering he started creating projects on web and mobile technologies for both artistic and commercial purposes: games, mixed-media concepts for events and performances, location based systems, distributed systems, computer/human interaction, artificial intelligence, robotics.
Through raves and rave culture he focused on the performative aspects of art.
In 2004 he assembled in Rome a 3-months continuous festival of the digital arts, called Art is Open Source (AOS).
Since then he has been performing mainly on the network and on performances.
His recent work focuses on the theories of the virtual, extended and mixed realities, on software as art medium, on hacking and hacktivism.
Starting out in the hacking and pirating scenes all over Europe at the beginning of the '90s, he used several digital identities to experiment in various areas: ANSI/ASCII art, software art, mxed-media.
Rave parties and engineering represent the two turning points of his evolution.
Through engineering he started creating projects on web and mobile technologies for both artistic and commercial purposes: games, mixed-media concepts for events and performances, location based systems, distributed systems, computer/human interaction, artificial intelligence, robotics.
Through raves and rave culture he focused on the performative aspects of art.
In 2004 he assembled in Rome a 3-months continuous festival of the digital arts, called Art is Open Source (AOS).
Since then he has been performing mainly on the network and on performances.
His recent work focuses on the theories of the virtual, extended and mixed realities, on software as art medium, on hacking and hacktivism.
Re: Re: Commission Voting: Finalist Ranking
>Just from my myopic standpoint, I think there is money out there for artists
artists are *dead*
the guys'n girls making 2Million a piece are out of this time and live on
fetish for art and economical exploitation.
make your money by hacking a bank ;) ... then do your netart
salvatore
>-- Original Message --
>From: Patrick Lichty <voyd@voyd.com>
>To: Zev Robinson <zr@zrdesign.co.uk>, marc <marc.garrett@furtherfield.org>,
> <list@rhizome.org>
>Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Commission Voting: Finalist Ranking
>Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 16:08:40 -0500 (CDT)
>Reply-To: Patrick Lichty <voyd@voyd.com>
>
>
>A couple points to everyone:
>
>Just from my myopic standpoint, I think there is money out there for artists
>
>who can slide their work right into the media arts niche. In addition,
>artists who can give nervous curators something that will take their
>introduction to new media to their audiences just a step (like Simon,
>Villareal, etc,) can do the museum circuit.
>
>I think the misnomer is that the art world has to take new Media on its
terms.
>
>Not so for our genre, or any other, really... For other avant-gardes, it
>has
>often taken years for the wave to enter the art world; should we be any
>different?
>
>My hope is that there will be artists who will bridge the gap between awe
>and
>accessibility in New Media. The most amazing piece of work is often
>considered an overpriced gee-gaw if it doesn't elicit a response.
artists are *dead*
the guys'n girls making 2Million a piece are out of this time and live on
fetish for art and economical exploitation.
make your money by hacking a bank ;) ... then do your netart
salvatore
>-- Original Message --
>From: Patrick Lichty <voyd@voyd.com>
>To: Zev Robinson <zr@zrdesign.co.uk>, marc <marc.garrett@furtherfield.org>,
> <list@rhizome.org>
>Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Commission Voting: Finalist Ranking
>Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 16:08:40 -0500 (CDT)
>Reply-To: Patrick Lichty <voyd@voyd.com>
>
>
>A couple points to everyone:
>
>Just from my myopic standpoint, I think there is money out there for artists
>
>who can slide their work right into the media arts niche. In addition,
>artists who can give nervous curators something that will take their
>introduction to new media to their audiences just a step (like Simon,
>Villareal, etc,) can do the museum circuit.
>
>I think the misnomer is that the art world has to take new Media on its
terms.
>
>Not so for our genre, or any other, really... For other avant-gardes, it
>has
>often taken years for the wave to enter the art world; should we be any
>different?
>
>My hope is that there will be artists who will bridge the gap between awe
>and
>accessibility in New Media. The most amazing piece of work is often
>considered an overpriced gee-gaw if it doesn't elicit a response.
Re: g_i_o_c_a_t_t_O_l_O
thanks a lot!
made another one of the series today.
empty html tables dancing for a happier life :)
http://www.artisopensource.net/giocattolo/index2.html
un-imaginatively, it is called g_i_o_c_a_t_t_O_l_O_2
(and this one, too, seems to be pretty cpu-intensive... use it on firefox
:) )
salvatore [xDxD]
>-- Original Message --
>Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 12:38:05 -0300
>From: roberto echen <rechen@rechen.com>
>To: list@rhizome.org
>Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: g_i_o_c_a_t_t_O_l_O
>Reply-To: roberto echen <rechen@rechen.com>
>
>
>liked it very much
>best
>rechen
made another one of the series today.
empty html tables dancing for a happier life :)
http://www.artisopensource.net/giocattolo/index2.html
un-imaginatively, it is called g_i_o_c_a_t_t_O_l_O_2
(and this one, too, seems to be pretty cpu-intensive... use it on firefox
:) )
salvatore [xDxD]
>-- Original Message --
>Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 12:38:05 -0300
>From: roberto echen <rechen@rechen.com>
>To: list@rhizome.org
>Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: g_i_o_c_a_t_t_O_l_O
>Reply-To: roberto echen <rechen@rechen.com>
>
>
>liked it very much
>best
>rechen
g_i_o_c_a_t_t_O_l_O
g_i_o_c_a_t_t_O_l_O
a javascript gadget to please your eyes.
[maybe a bit heavy on CPU]
http://www.artisopensource.net/giocattolo/
[xDxD]
a javascript gadget to please your eyes.
[maybe a bit heavy on CPU]
http://www.artisopensource.net/giocattolo/
[xDxD]
Michelang_IO_lo
[ M i c h e l a n g _ IO _ l o ]
[ http://www.artisopensource.net/michelan_IO_lo/index.html ]
Michelang_IO_lo interprets images.
The algorythm uses the two images seen
by Michelang_IO_lo as that which is
seen by each of the two eyes.
But Software's physics is not the
same as the one found in human bodies,
and Michelang_IO_lo's two eyes can
simultaneously see totally different
things, two different points of view
of the same scenery, the "real" and
the "imaginary". Anything. That can
fit inside a JPEG image.
And software's vision does not aim to
visualize in the same way as the human
eyes do.
Michelang_IO_lo's sight is another one:
mathematical, noisy, digital.
Michelang_IO_lo is a software object:
it analyzes, processes, elaborates.
And it performs Input and Output.
Michelang_IO_lo processes its vision,
transofrming it into sound.
Vision gets sampled, and transformed
into a series of soundwaves that create
sound by superimposion.
[ http://www.artisopensource.net/michelan_IO_lo/index.html ]
[ http://www.artisopensource.net/michelan_IO_lo/index.html ]
Michelang_IO_lo interprets images.
The algorythm uses the two images seen
by Michelang_IO_lo as that which is
seen by each of the two eyes.
But Software's physics is not the
same as the one found in human bodies,
and Michelang_IO_lo's two eyes can
simultaneously see totally different
things, two different points of view
of the same scenery, the "real" and
the "imaginary". Anything. That can
fit inside a JPEG image.
And software's vision does not aim to
visualize in the same way as the human
eyes do.
Michelang_IO_lo's sight is another one:
mathematical, noisy, digital.
Michelang_IO_lo is a software object:
it analyzes, processes, elaborates.
And it performs Input and Output.
Michelang_IO_lo processes its vision,
transofrming it into sound.
Vision gets sampled, and transformed
into a series of soundwaves that create
sound by superimposion.
[ http://www.artisopensource.net/michelan_IO_lo/index.html ]
what if...
what if art took the place of technology and viceversa?
Art overlaps technology in more than one way: research, the "i was there
first" attitude, the evolution patterns.
As technology, art is fueled by research.
Artists constantly experiement on materials, on techniques, on the approaches
to technical practices, on the social and political issues that fill our
everyday life. On war, peace, communication, economy... Something "happens"
in technology and art will probabily use it in a way or another. And a new
idea applied by art will probabily be recycled right afterwards in technology
as well, and so on.
"I was there first!"
Technology and science live for their patents. But isn't art, in its possibly
more conceptual and spiritual way, characterized by the same attitude? Where
does video art start from? Where does netart start from? Was Nam June Paik
the first to make videoart? etecetera.
Art and technology evolve in patterns that are truly similar.
New tools, new social environments, new political situations, new desires,
new beliefs, new cultural setups. New minds.
Both art and technology live on humans; and humans conform to mental shapes
determined by the socio-political environmental reality in which they live
and by the sensibility through which they interpret it.
Art is in-context exactly as technology is.
New tools become available for art and technology each day. Ideas and approaches
merge, morph and switch context, naturally.
It all continuously happened in the past: in painting, sculpture, photography,
music, video, dance, theater, performance.
So where is the difference? Is it in the people? In the objectives? In the
absence of objectives?
In the desires?
salvatore.iaconesi [xDxD]
http://www.artisopensource.net
>-- Original Message --
>Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 00:57:04 -0700
>From: vijay@indusav.com
>Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: said it before, 'll say it again
>To: list@rhizome.org
>Reply-To: vijay@indusav.com
>
>"Art is technology."
>
>-Anthony Rother
>
>;-)
Art overlaps technology in more than one way: research, the "i was there
first" attitude, the evolution patterns.
As technology, art is fueled by research.
Artists constantly experiement on materials, on techniques, on the approaches
to technical practices, on the social and political issues that fill our
everyday life. On war, peace, communication, economy... Something "happens"
in technology and art will probabily use it in a way or another. And a new
idea applied by art will probabily be recycled right afterwards in technology
as well, and so on.
"I was there first!"
Technology and science live for their patents. But isn't art, in its possibly
more conceptual and spiritual way, characterized by the same attitude? Where
does video art start from? Where does netart start from? Was Nam June Paik
the first to make videoart? etecetera.
Art and technology evolve in patterns that are truly similar.
New tools, new social environments, new political situations, new desires,
new beliefs, new cultural setups. New minds.
Both art and technology live on humans; and humans conform to mental shapes
determined by the socio-political environmental reality in which they live
and by the sensibility through which they interpret it.
Art is in-context exactly as technology is.
New tools become available for art and technology each day. Ideas and approaches
merge, morph and switch context, naturally.
It all continuously happened in the past: in painting, sculpture, photography,
music, video, dance, theater, performance.
So where is the difference? Is it in the people? In the objectives? In the
absence of objectives?
In the desires?
salvatore.iaconesi [xDxD]
http://www.artisopensource.net
>-- Original Message --
>Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 00:57:04 -0700
>From: vijay@indusav.com
>Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: said it before, 'll say it again
>To: list@rhizome.org
>Reply-To: vijay@indusav.com
>
>"Art is technology."
>
>-Anthony Rother
>
>;-)
RSS FEED
