This panel explores the dialog and interplay between artists and technologists. In the process, the panelists aim to bring considerations of art and the artistic process to the attention of the technology-oriented UIST community. We invite readers to think about how your work relates to art. We encourage the research community to look for ways to integrate art and artists within their own programs, for example, by starting artist-in-residence activities, introducing courses on art and design into CS curricula, or inviting artists to participate in projects.
Art and technology, Interdisciplinary teams, The Two Cultures.
Art and technology can be powerful companions, but all too often collaborations between artists and technologists result in sparks, not synergy. In this panel, speakers from a wide range of backgrounds address the topic of what happens when artists and technologists work together. The discussion will be illustrated using examples of products which successfully merge art and technology, and also examples of failures. Panelists will relate their experiences working in mixed teams, and talk about the role of mediation.
Finally, the panelists suggest ways to encourage a richer interaction between artists and technologists.
Jon Meyer is a research scientist at NYU’s Media Research Lab. With a background in Artificial Intelligence and Computer Science, Jon has spent a number of years working on AI-based multimedia systems, zooming interfaces, and real-time animation. He has spent nearly ten years collaborating with both artists and technologists.
What role does art play in the development of technology? Purists could argue that technology development is an applied science - an engineering activity that stands independent of art. It is certainly true that the computer research community consists mostly of people trained in science. However there are growing numbers of computer researchers who present their work in an artistic framework, using images and multimedia to communicate concepts and ask questions. How, then, are these artistic approaches to be accepted and understood within the scientific research community?
On a business front, it is clear that art and technology are becoming more closely intertwined. Many technology companies now hire artists and designers to work alongside programmers to develop products. For these companies it is quite simple: consumers are demanding richer interactive experiences, and artists seem to know how to deliver.
This tight integration of artists and technologists is a necessary step. C.P. Snow [1] touched a nerve when he stated in 1959 that the Western educational system was broken because it created artists with almost no knowledge of the workings of science, and scientists who had little interest in learning about art. Snow felt this was an enormous loss to individuals, and also to society as a whole. He argued that it is essential to bring artists and scientists together if we are to create human-based solutions to looming problems such as the poverty gap, overpopulation and starvation.
A major challenge is that, while there is no biological tag labeling individuals as artists or technologists, the two cultures are very different. As a result, cross-discipline collaborations are not always smooth. Problems can arise because of very simple miscommunications. For example, a graphic designer might create a set of color icons, only to discover later on that the programmer has only implemented support for two-color bitmap icons. It is probably unclear to the artist why handling lots of colors is harder than handling two. Likewise, the programmer may find it hard to grasp why more than two colors are necessary in the design. As another example, a programmer might notice a problem the animation team is having, spend several weeks implementing a nice generalized mechanism for handling the problem, and then discover that the animators don't want to use the new tool because it doesn't fit their model of the task.
These sorts of miscommunications occur frequently, and result in team disruption, loss of respect, communication meltdowns, and project delays.
To create long term solutions to these problems, we must develop bridges between the artistic and scientific cultures, map common ground understand differences, and create a more integrated model of technology development. This is not easy. Artists are reluctant to study science, and science teachers rarely incorporate a consideration of Art in their curricula.
I believe that the science research community needs to be proactive in addressing this situation. The World Wide Web demonstrates that easy-to-use technology can make information available to masses. We must leverage on this position, by embracing artists in our projects and courses, by starting Artists-in-Residence programs, and by using the Web to make technology and science easier for non-scientists to learn and understand. Slowly, these things are happening. I encourage you to join in and accelerate this process.
Andrew Glassner develops new techniques for creative expression using computer graphics. He has invented tools that give artists new opportunities for exploring 3D shapes and motions that would be difficult or impossible to actually build. He has written many articles and books on graphics; his book "3D Computer Graphics: A Handbook for Artists and Designers" has taught a generation of artists, his "Graphics Gems" series has helped programmers worldwide, and his text "Principles of Digital Image Synthesis" organizes today's rendering theory. He directed the short film "Chicken Crossing", and designed the highly participatory internet-based murder-mystery game "Dead Air". A popular speaker, Glassner believes passionately that computer graphics can help creative people share ideas in ways that were previously impossible; he pursues ways to do this at Microsoft Research in Seattle.
As a working scientist and artist, I am often surprised at the many barriers that people create for themselves to prevent any accidental slippage from one label to the other. While directing an animated film that was based on some novel technology, I found that the art and technical teams were somewhat suspicious of each other. In addition to directing the film, I also acted as a bridge between the two groups, and found some unexpected but strongly-held beliefs on both sides. I'll present some of these surprising barriers and how they affected our work. I'll also discuss how my current work in media seems to be an embodiment of the old story of the blind men and the elephant, each of whom perceives only a disembodied leg or tail. Explaining the rest of the animal can present a major challenge; I'll discuss some ways I've tried to encourage artists and technologists to see projects from a wider, and more unified, point of view.
Scott Minneman is a Research Scientist in the Research on Experimental Documents group at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center. At PARC since 1987, he has explored the nature of the design process and the potential for video/audio/computing systems to support the design process, focusing on design communications and shared drawing. He holds a bachelor's degree in Architecture and a master's degree in Mechanical Engineering from MIT. His doctoral work was conducted at the Center for Design Research in the Mechanical Engineering Department at Stanford University. His thesis, entitled "The Social Construction of a Technical Reality: empirical studies of group engineering design practice", focuses on understanding and improving the communications within and among design groups collaborating on large engineering projects. For the past 4 years, Scott has been involved in the PARC Artists in Residence Program, working as part of the foursome CMMW (Margaret Crane, Dale MacDonald, Scott Minneman, and Jon Winet).
As a participant in, and member of the organizing board of, the Xerox PARC Artist in Residence Program (PAIR), I have experienced first-hand some of the issues that arise when artists and scientists are working in close collaboration. In this panel I will briefly describe how the PAIR program was designed to work, and tell some stories about how differently it has actually turned out. I'll present some examples of the difficulties that artists and technologists in the PAIR program had while they were learning to work together. I'll describe various practices that emerged in our PAIRing, CMMW, and briefly show a couple of the novel projects that resulted. Finally, I'll provide some words of wisdom for others who are attempting similar collaborations, with artists, or even in the course of more routine interdisciplinary teamwork.
Michael Naimark spent twelve years as an independent media artist before joining Interval Research Corporation in 1992. He was instrumental in making the first interactive laser discs in the late 1970s at MIT and has worked extensively with projection and immersive virtual environments. He has consulted on new media for various institutions and his artwork has been exhibited internationally. His most recent project, “BE NOW HERE (Welcome to the Neighborhood)”[2], is a 3D panoramic installation about public plazas in global danger zones and was supported by Interval Research with the cooperation of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre in Paris.
For some of us, sometimes, the artmaking obsession channels itself into particular issues, in my case - technology. It is my observation and belief that technology, particularly computer and media technology, is having an increasingly profound effect on everyone on the planet. And that if artists don’t jump in and pro-actively help shape these powerful new tools, it will be left by default to advertisers, the military, organized religion, and sex peddlers. Some of us believe the stakes are high.
That’s been my attitude for the past twenty years. I’ve had the good fortune during that time of working inside a variety of institutions with similar beliefs (or which at least tolerated mine). These places supported my own work and for this I am grateful.
But it wasn’t always a cakewalk. Sometimes it felt like the “art” and the “technology” forces were in opposition. Though the potential for symbiosis may seem great, it is interconnected with the cultural and economic climates of the moment.
In this panel I will offer observations and reflections on some of these issues. Examples of work produced in this context will be shown and discussed. The purpose here is to learn from the past.
With over 15 years of experience in visual communications, Loretta Staples has practiced as a graphic, exhibit, and interaction designer. She has focused exclusively on the design of graphical user interfaces for the past nine years, both at Apple Computer and in her own consultancy, U dot I. Currently, she is Assistant Professor of Art at the University of Michigan School of Art and Design, where she teaches graphic and interaction design. Her work has focused on specialized applications, conceptual models, and prototypes for emerging technologies.
Artists, designers, and technologists bring different sets of values to the act of creation. Artists (to paraphrase James Baldwin) seek the questions usually obscured by answers, technologists seek "the answers," and designers seek to mediate between those two poles, negotiating the issues of how and why. The interplay between these creative communities has the potential to enrich and humanize the development of technology through the consideration of a wider range of values -- values that are ultimately embedded in what we make. Our various value systems, taken together, naturally confict. Their resolution ultimately demands considerable struggle -- moral struggle -- and it is this struggle that is lacking in technological development today.
In this panel, I'll describe some of these conflicting values as I see them, and give examples of how the absence (and presence) of particular values can be felt in certain technology products.
The authors would like to thank Ben Bederson for his help in organizing this panel.
1. Snow, C.P., The Two Cultures, Cambridge University Press, 1959.
2. Naimark, M., BE NOW HERE (Welcome to the Neighborhood), http://www.interval.com/projects/be_now_here/.