[OT] hrm, this is right up any maxers alley



    • Nov 08 2006 | 10:12 am
      i think it is actually NOT written in max (as I remember correctly
      there was some serious amount of beer involved on the presentation)
      but it's a nice concept the net-performance was also very intriging
      On 08 Nov 2006, at 10:42, DrSbaitso wrote:
      >
      > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h-RhyopUmc&mode=related
      >
    • Nov 08 2006 | 10:25 am
      hrm, well of course it probably wasn't written in max. Did I say it was?
    • Nov 08 2006 | 10:52 am
      no didn't want to dis you about it
      it has some coding in pd, so it's max-like at least for a part
      grtz
      p
      On 08 Nov 2006, at 11:25, DrSbaitso wrote:
      >
      > hrm, well of course it probably wasn't written in max. Did I say
      > it was?
      >
    • Nov 08 2006 | 4:28 pm
      as long as we're off topic, is anyone else getting a little
      frustrated with art-technology whose only impressive trait is cool
      factor? the only way I could see things like this working on an
      expressive level is in conjunction with a traditional computer.
      just a thought. I'm just a plain old boring musician.
      -matt
    • Nov 08 2006 | 5:20 pm
      the cool factor is always a bit of a problem I think. I've seen so
      many things that are very cool looking but have not that much to say.
      The cool factor and complexity kind of ruin the way people interact
      (feel) the installation
      my two cents though
      On 08 Nov 2006, at 17:28, matthew aidekman wrote:
      > as long as we're off topic, is anyone else getting a little
      > frustrated with art-technology whose only impressive trait is cool
      > factor? the only way I could see things like this working on an
      > expressive level is in conjunction with a traditional computer.
      >
      > just a thought. I'm just a plain old boring musician.
      > -matt
      >
    • Nov 08 2006 | 6:36 pm
      Quote: DrSbaitso wrote on Wed, 08 November 2006 03:25
      ----------------------------------------------------
      > hrm, well of course it probably wasn't written in max. Did I say it was?
      ----------------------------------------------------
      you posted it uncommented to a max forum.
    • Nov 08 2006 | 7:44 pm
      ... installations that depend on cutting-edge technology are fine the
      first year,
      out of date the second and embarrasing for ever afterwards ...
      (Steward Brand in Brian Eno's Diary)
      The interesting thing is that this set up makes the act of
      manipulating sound so much more visible
      to the audience. To me that is a value beyond cutting-edge technology.
      2 more cents
      -jennek
      On 8-nov-2006, at 16:20, Pieter Coussement wrote:
      > the cool factor is always a bit of a problem I think. I've seen so
      > many things that are very cool looking but have not that much to
      > say. The cool factor and complexity kind of ruin the way people
      > interact(feel) the installation
      >
      > my two cents though
      >
      >
      > On 08 Nov 2006, at 17:28, matthew aidekman wrote:
      >
      >> as long as we're off topic, is anyone else getting a little
      >> frustrated with art-technology whose only impressive trait is cool
      >> factor? the only way I could see things like this working on an
      >> expressive level is in conjunction with a traditional computer.
      >>
      >> just a thought. I'm just a plain old boring musician.
      >> -matt
      >>
      >
      >
    • Nov 08 2006 | 9:15 pm
      matt- context is everything no matter what the art
      form-
      the emotional context--without it the art form is
      cold-
      like a machine!
      --- matthew aidekman wrote:
      > as long as we're off topic, is anyone else getting
      > a little
      > frustrated with art-technology whose only impressive
      > trait is cool
      > factor? the only way I could see things like this
      > working on an
      > expressive level is in conjunction with a
      > traditional computer.
      >
      > just a thought. I'm just a plain old boring
      > musician.
      > -matt
      >
      :: better media through mischief::
      Josephine LiPuma aka VJ jl pooky
      ----links to residences/work/festivals/shows::
      http://www.foliodvd.org/
      http://uralncca.ru/outvideo_en_cinema
      http://www.le-musee-divisioniste.org/mediacentre/video_channel/index.html
      http://www.detroitmona.com
      http://www.project59.org/59seconds/
      http://josephinelipuma.blogspot.com/
      http://www.genomart.org/genomart_artedallarete.asp
      http://www.brigantino.org/appnov059.htm
      http://www.evl.uic.edu/puma/jl_pooky.html
      http://www.flickr.com/photos/vj_jl_pooky/
      Do you Yahoo!?
      Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.
    • Nov 08 2006 | 10:27 pm
      matt- context is everything no matter what the art form-
      the emotional context--without it the art form is cold- like a machine!
      point well taken. I'll meditate on that tonight.
    • Nov 10 2006 | 2:30 pm
      to play devil's advocate, that's almost true but i have issues with
      "forever"
      the cutting-edge tech of today is the nostalgia or "history" of
      tomorrow - Muybridge is still interesting after all these years, even
      if easy duplicated nowadays.
      -evan
      On Nov 8, 2006, at 9:41 PM, jennek geels wrote:
      > ... installations that depend on cutting-edge technology are fine
      > the first year,
      > out of date the second and embarrasing for ever afterwards ...
      > (Steward Brand in Brian Eno's Diary)
      >
      > The interesting thing is that this set up makes the act of
      > manipulating sound so much more visible
      > to the audience. To me that is a value beyond cutting-edge technology.
      >
      > 2 more cents
      > -jennek
      >
      > On 8-nov-2006, at 16:20, Pieter Coussement wrote:
      >
      >> the cool factor is always a bit of a problem I think. I've seen so
      >> many things that are very cool looking but have not that much to
      >> say. The cool factor and complexity kind of ruin the way people
      >> interact(feel) the installation
      >>
      >> my two cents though
      >>
      >>
      >> On 08 Nov 2006, at 17:28, matthew aidekman wrote:
      >>
      >>> as long as we're off topic, is anyone else getting a little
      >>> frustrated with art-technology whose only impressive trait is
      >>> cool factor? the only way I could see things like this working
      >>> on an expressive level is in conjunction with a traditional
      >>> computer.
      >>>
      >>> just a thought. I'm just a plain old boring musician.
      >>> -matt
      >>>
      >>
      >>
      >