Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Software Class
On Monday I attended the Photoshop 1 software training class. The reason I chose to take photoshop instead of Dreamweaver or Fireworks is because next year I am taking ETD 327, Textile Design: Manual/Computer Generated Imagery and Pattern. In this class we work with photoshop, illustrator and euphoria to create patterns on the computer. At one point we will print one of the patterns we have created on fabric. I wanted to at least know a little bit about photoshop so I wouldn't be completely clueless in class next fall. The class taught me how to work with multiple layers, how to blend two different layers together, how to cut an image in three different ways and much more. I'm glad I took this class because I now feel more comfortable using photoshop.
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Stitched-Pinked
This week we read part of the book Emergence by Steven Johnson. The book discusses the theory of emergence. Steven Johnson defines emergence as the low level rules, like behavior and interaction, to form higher level order. There are three examples of emergence that were discussed in the reading. They are an ant colony, Manchester and computer software.
An ant colony has no pacemaker, it is general, a monarch. Every ant has their own specific job and that ant will always do its specific job, no matter what. For some reason the ants all work together and come together by each one doing their own job. They are able to form order. There was one example in the book about how a specific ant colony that was under observation was able to create a “cemetery” and a “landfill.” No one knows if this concept is instilled in the ants brains, but for some reason every ant knew to put the “cemetery” as far away from the colony as possible and to put the “landfill” as far away as possible but opposite the “cemetery.” I just think it’s interesting that the ants knew to have a “cemetery” and a “landfill.” Ant colonies seem to be unplanned, but by looking at the “cemetery” and the “landfill” they seem to have patterns of organization. I was very intrigued by this part of the reading because when I was younger, it’s really dorky, I always thought that there was an ant for every person in the world; like that ant lived the same life as the human. I had a big imagination as a child.
In class we started discussing Manchester and how it was unplanned but had patterns of organization, like the ant colony. However, we quickly switched to discussing suburbia and if it was a form of emergence. I still can’t decide if I think suburbia is a form of emergence. The developments do start as a bottom-up instead of a top-down, I’m just still a little confused. I guess they are because it is its own community that is unplanned. When making suburbia I don’t think the builders are thinking that everyone is going to work together and form this community, but it happens. We also then said that if suburbia is emergence than a trailer park is as well. I’m just wondering about the inner ring of suburbs, the ones that were built first, but then have suburbs past them. I live in an inner ring of suburbs at home. My town was one of the first formed, but now my town feels more apart of Minneapolis than its own town. We have every major highway running through the town. Are these suburbs part of emergence? I guess they could be on some way because they have emerged into the large city even though they started out as small suburbia.
The last topic we discussed was computer software, for example, facebook, and wikipedia. Facebook has emerged into this huge program. It started out simplistic but has evolved and is constantly evolving. Wikipedia is another form of emergence. Anyone can edit wikipedia and the content is a compilation of different sources and materials. The last thing we discussed and actually tried was the book recommendation part of amazon.com. Once you are a registered user you find your favorite book on amazon.com and say you own it. Then you go to the recommendation tab and see what books “they” recommend. If there is a book on the list that you already own then you click own it and refresh the page. The program will automatically recommend more books based on what you own. You can also take the book off of your recommendation list if you know you won’t like it. Eventually the program will change and will know your preferences automatically. We used this in class and it was crazy how accurate the program was at picking books that I would want to read. Some of the books were actually books that I had considered buying.
An ant colony has no pacemaker, it is general, a monarch. Every ant has their own specific job and that ant will always do its specific job, no matter what. For some reason the ants all work together and come together by each one doing their own job. They are able to form order. There was one example in the book about how a specific ant colony that was under observation was able to create a “cemetery” and a “landfill.” No one knows if this concept is instilled in the ants brains, but for some reason every ant knew to put the “cemetery” as far away from the colony as possible and to put the “landfill” as far away as possible but opposite the “cemetery.” I just think it’s interesting that the ants knew to have a “cemetery” and a “landfill.” Ant colonies seem to be unplanned, but by looking at the “cemetery” and the “landfill” they seem to have patterns of organization. I was very intrigued by this part of the reading because when I was younger, it’s really dorky, I always thought that there was an ant for every person in the world; like that ant lived the same life as the human. I had a big imagination as a child.
In class we started discussing Manchester and how it was unplanned but had patterns of organization, like the ant colony. However, we quickly switched to discussing suburbia and if it was a form of emergence. I still can’t decide if I think suburbia is a form of emergence. The developments do start as a bottom-up instead of a top-down, I’m just still a little confused. I guess they are because it is its own community that is unplanned. When making suburbia I don’t think the builders are thinking that everyone is going to work together and form this community, but it happens. We also then said that if suburbia is emergence than a trailer park is as well. I’m just wondering about the inner ring of suburbs, the ones that were built first, but then have suburbs past them. I live in an inner ring of suburbs at home. My town was one of the first formed, but now my town feels more apart of Minneapolis than its own town. We have every major highway running through the town. Are these suburbs part of emergence? I guess they could be on some way because they have emerged into the large city even though they started out as small suburbia.
The last topic we discussed was computer software, for example, facebook, and wikipedia. Facebook has emerged into this huge program. It started out simplistic but has evolved and is constantly evolving. Wikipedia is another form of emergence. Anyone can edit wikipedia and the content is a compilation of different sources and materials. The last thing we discussed and actually tried was the book recommendation part of amazon.com. Once you are a registered user you find your favorite book on amazon.com and say you own it. Then you go to the recommendation tab and see what books “they” recommend. If there is a book on the list that you already own then you click own it and refresh the page. The program will automatically recommend more books based on what you own. You can also take the book off of your recommendation list if you know you won’t like it. Eventually the program will change and will know your preferences automatically. We used this in class and it was crazy how accurate the program was at picking books that I would want to read. Some of the books were actually books that I had considered buying.
Monday, April 23, 2007
Net-bound
Last Tuesday we finished watching Lost in Translation by Sofia Coppola. I had already seen the movie (I saw it in theaters.) It was interesting to watch the movie again. I am definitely one of those people who can watch movies over and over again because I always miss something. What I missed this time I actually didn’t notice right away but someone else in the class had written about it on their blog. In the movie when people say “I love you” there is never a response from the other person (the person that is being loved.) We have been talking about places and non-places and Lost in Translation has some great examples of non-places but what about the missing dialog? Another one of my classmates had responded to the “I love you” phrase and said that maybe instead of non-places the phrase is a “non-word.” I find this interesting because I think that this actually is a “non-word” or rather a non-place that isn’t an actual place.
Normally when someone says “I love you” there is a response of “I love you too.” Maybe the “non-word” has no response because, like a non-place, people are just passing by, doing their own thing. A person feels that maybe they don’t have an identity, there is no substantial history. Yes there is history, but maybe the other person doesn’t feel it or maybe they say it out of habit. I’m not sure exactly what this “non-word” means but I’m interested to find out.
We had also discussed how in the movie there are scenes with no dialog and that maybe it meant something. I’m not sure if it meant something but I do know that in a few of Sofia Coppola’s movies she has those same scenes. I just recently saw Marie Antoinette and the movie had very similar scenes. Someone is just standing there with emotion, they don’t say anything, there is no music and then the movie goes to the next scene. Maybe it means something or maybe it is just Sofia Coppola’s style or signature mark.
Normally when someone says “I love you” there is a response of “I love you too.” Maybe the “non-word” has no response because, like a non-place, people are just passing by, doing their own thing. A person feels that maybe they don’t have an identity, there is no substantial history. Yes there is history, but maybe the other person doesn’t feel it or maybe they say it out of habit. I’m not sure exactly what this “non-word” means but I’m interested to find out.
We had also discussed how in the movie there are scenes with no dialog and that maybe it meant something. I’m not sure if it meant something but I do know that in a few of Sofia Coppola’s movies she has those same scenes. I just recently saw Marie Antoinette and the movie had very similar scenes. Someone is just standing there with emotion, they don’t say anything, there is no music and then the movie goes to the next scene. Maybe it means something or maybe it is just Sofia Coppola’s style or signature mark.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Hand-overcast
Last week we read Non-Places: From Places to Non-Places by Marc Auge’. The reading describes what a non-place is and how it is actually related to a place. To understand how this relationship works we first need to define a place and a non-pace.
Auge’ defines a place as “relational, historical and concerned with identity.” These places are towns or village centers and lively urban neighborhoods. We feel close and comfortable to our neighbors and history, it’s what we search for in a place. He defines a non-place as “a space that cannot be defined as relational, or historical, or concerned with identity,” also “non-place designates two complementary but distinct realities: space formed in relation to certain ends (transport, transit, commerce, leisure), and the relations that individuals have with these spaces.” Non-places then are airports, hotels, restaurants, supermarkets and highways. In these non-places one has a clearer sense if identity, singularity. One does just what they want to do and doesn’t have concerns for other people in the non-place. When one is in a place there is a sense of community, it is what makes the place a place. However, when one is in a non-place movement is overpowering tradition.
Since non-places and places are so different, how then are they related to each other? They are related by the fact that whenever you have a non-place there is always some aspect of a place and vice versa. As Auge’ states “[a place] is formed by individual identities, through complicities of language, local references, the unformulated rules of living know-how; non-place creates the shared identity of passengers, costumers or Sunday drivers.” For example, in an airport everyone is going in their own direction, their own destination but they have shared identities because they all have a destination. Some people’s destinations might be the same (the same gate, airplane or baggage claim), while others is just a destination somewhere (a gate, restaurant, starbucks, ticket counter, etc.) Everyone has a personal identity, but they are all shared in some way. Auge’ also says that “certain places exist only through the words that evoke them, in this sense they are non-places, or rather, imaginary places: banal utopias, clichés.” For example, the signs that lead one to rest stops create the illusion of a place, but in fact it is a non-place because you have all of these people going in their own direction. Yes they are all stopping at the same place to do the same thing, but the only reason this happens is because of the sign that states that the “place” is a rest stop
Auge’ defines a place as “relational, historical and concerned with identity.” These places are towns or village centers and lively urban neighborhoods. We feel close and comfortable to our neighbors and history, it’s what we search for in a place. He defines a non-place as “a space that cannot be defined as relational, or historical, or concerned with identity,” also “non-place designates two complementary but distinct realities: space formed in relation to certain ends (transport, transit, commerce, leisure), and the relations that individuals have with these spaces.” Non-places then are airports, hotels, restaurants, supermarkets and highways. In these non-places one has a clearer sense if identity, singularity. One does just what they want to do and doesn’t have concerns for other people in the non-place. When one is in a place there is a sense of community, it is what makes the place a place. However, when one is in a non-place movement is overpowering tradition.
Since non-places and places are so different, how then are they related to each other? They are related by the fact that whenever you have a non-place there is always some aspect of a place and vice versa. As Auge’ states “[a place] is formed by individual identities, through complicities of language, local references, the unformulated rules of living know-how; non-place creates the shared identity of passengers, costumers or Sunday drivers.” For example, in an airport everyone is going in their own direction, their own destination but they have shared identities because they all have a destination. Some people’s destinations might be the same (the same gate, airplane or baggage claim), while others is just a destination somewhere (a gate, restaurant, starbucks, ticket counter, etc.) Everyone has a personal identity, but they are all shared in some way. Auge’ also says that “certain places exist only through the words that evoke them, in this sense they are non-places, or rather, imaginary places: banal utopias, clichés.” For example, the signs that lead one to rest stops create the illusion of a place, but in fact it is a non-place because you have all of these people going in their own direction. Yes they are all stopping at the same place to do the same thing, but the only reason this happens is because of the sign that states that the “place” is a rest stop
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Specialty Finish
Since I was in an airport for two hours on Tuesday I decided to write about the airport for my non-place. What I observed was while in the waiting area (at the gate) people were reading a book or magazine. Some people were doing homework, which makes me consider them students. People were talking to one another, have it be with people they know and are traveling with, people who they just met and are getting to know (making small talk) or people talking on the phone. Some who were talking on the phone were actually holding the phone to their ear, while others had the ear piece in where you couldn’t tell if they were talking to themselves or talking on the phone. There were also people working on their computers, either sitting by an outlet or using the battery life of the computer.
The people that were not sitting at the gate were constantly walking, sometimes they would stop to grab their phone or make sure they didn’t drop anything. Everyone looked rushed, in a hurry. Some people were running while others were speed walking and still others were meandering. The meandering people were normally with small children. There were also people boarding planes and getting off planes on their way, in a hurry, to baggage claim. Also, some were buying food or magazines or books or just browsing. The airport was interesting because in the reading it said that most of the time there is always a place in a non-place. I don’t know if I necessarily found the place in my non-place but I did realize that although everyone is going in their own direction and doing their own thing everyone has a destination. Everyone is similar in the fact that we are all going somewhere; no matter how we arrive to our destination we all have a destination.
The people that were not sitting at the gate were constantly walking, sometimes they would stop to grab their phone or make sure they didn’t drop anything. Everyone looked rushed, in a hurry. Some people were running while others were speed walking and still others were meandering. The meandering people were normally with small children. There were also people boarding planes and getting off planes on their way, in a hurry, to baggage claim. Also, some were buying food or magazines or books or just browsing. The airport was interesting because in the reading it said that most of the time there is always a place in a non-place. I don’t know if I necessarily found the place in my non-place but I did realize that although everyone is going in their own direction and doing their own thing everyone has a destination. Everyone is similar in the fact that we are all going somewhere; no matter how we arrive to our destination we all have a destination.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Hong Kong Finish
Today I had my midterm project due for my off-loom class. We had to make something using plaiting, twining or coiling. I chose to use pliating and bad a belt out of ostridge leather and paper yarn. It's pretty cool. I also have a project due tomorrow in my structural class. We had to pick something in the room to cover. I chose to cover one of the lights in the room. Hopefully it will work. I leave for spring break tomorrow and I am really excited to have a week off. I also have an interview with Kenneth Cole ON April 10th in New York. The interview is for a sumer internship. Wish me luck.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Pinked
This week we discussed our concerns about our dependence on technology. It was a really interesting discussion because everyone has different opinions about it. Some people think that our dependence on technology isn’t harming anyone while others think it is. I’m stuck in the middle but leaning more towards the dependence as a bad thing.
One of the concerns that we discussed was a person’s loss of control/sense of self. We rely on technology so much, for example, we can’t do simple math problems without using a calculator. People also create faux people on the internet through MUDs. Some would argue that if creating this person on the internet helps them than why look down at them, why think it’s this horrible thing. I’m torn but if the person does not become dependent on this faux person then it isn’t troublesome.
We also discussed the difference between regulated technology and unregulated technology. Regulated technology is hearing aids or contacts, good technology. Unregulated technology is the internet, bad technology. I think that people rely on the internet so much that it has become a drug, bad technology. For example, when dating online people say they do this because they don’t have the nerve to talk to someone at a bar. If people continue to date online because they feel insecure or don’t think they can talk to someone in public these people will never change, they will never evolve. They find that dating online works so they will always use it. It’s like if you think you can’t fall asleep without a sleeping pill, even if eventually you can, your mind will always think this, and you will become dependent on the sleeping pill. It is the same for the internet (dating online).
The same is true about anything we use the internet for. I always hear people say that they are addicted to facebook or myspace or u tube. The internet has changed the way we live, some good and some bad. The good would be we are able to find information faster; the bad would be we have become so dependent on it that we are addicted. I wonder if anyone can go one day without checking there e-mail (if checking it just to check it) or going on facebook. It would be interesting to see how many people can go one day without using the internet for enjoyment.
One of the concerns that we discussed was a person’s loss of control/sense of self. We rely on technology so much, for example, we can’t do simple math problems without using a calculator. People also create faux people on the internet through MUDs. Some would argue that if creating this person on the internet helps them than why look down at them, why think it’s this horrible thing. I’m torn but if the person does not become dependent on this faux person then it isn’t troublesome.
We also discussed the difference between regulated technology and unregulated technology. Regulated technology is hearing aids or contacts, good technology. Unregulated technology is the internet, bad technology. I think that people rely on the internet so much that it has become a drug, bad technology. For example, when dating online people say they do this because they don’t have the nerve to talk to someone at a bar. If people continue to date online because they feel insecure or don’t think they can talk to someone in public these people will never change, they will never evolve. They find that dating online works so they will always use it. It’s like if you think you can’t fall asleep without a sleeping pill, even if eventually you can, your mind will always think this, and you will become dependent on the sleeping pill. It is the same for the internet (dating online).
The same is true about anything we use the internet for. I always hear people say that they are addicted to facebook or myspace or u tube. The internet has changed the way we live, some good and some bad. The good would be we are able to find information faster; the bad would be we have become so dependent on it that we are addicted. I wonder if anyone can go one day without checking there e-mail (if checking it just to check it) or going on facebook. It would be interesting to see how many people can go one day without using the internet for enjoyment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)