Respons to Ono

Response to Ono:

If taken without context, I find a lot of the phrasing and imagery quite appealing.  The work opens, for example, demanding the reader attempt to "capture moonight on water in a bucket", which I have to admit made me smile.  Later, the phrase "It takes willpower to overpowe the will to power" similarly effected me.

However, I disliked the entire premise of the work.  The idea of an artist striving to be original is, frankly, unoriginal.  Had the focus been on how Ono was original, perhaps I would have enjoyed it more, because that is potentially interesting.  Demanding that "we need more impossible in our culture" nothing new.

Micro-Assignment 1

The first ten pictures can be found here:

http://thau4arteduc2520.blogspot.com/2013/01/blog-post.html

The ten new pictures are:

Assymetrical:

 Symmetrical:

 

 Radial:

  

 Person and their surroundings space:

  

Person up close:

  

Image from the point of view of an ant:

 

Image from the point of view of a bird:

 

Stable image:

 

 Unstable Image:

 

My name on campus:

Experiences with first ten pictures:

I enjoyed taking the first ten pictures more than I had expected I would.  The freedom to take a picture of anything forced me to reflect on what truly interested me.  However, I do not think the pictures went over well with my peers.  They did not say, out-right, that they disliked the pictures, but I expect they were being courteous.  This lead me to think about them more, and I realized that what I had initially found interesting in the items I took photographs of was the message behind the pictures - what they were about - rather than the images themselves.  The images themselves, without explanation, were evidentally dull.  One of the pictures, for example, is of a brick in a wall in my room.  My eyes have likely spent more time scanning across that brick rather than staring at it, and I thought it would be interesting to actually look at the brick.  Perhaps others did not agree - perhaps there is a reason my eyes always scanned across the brick without ever really looking at it.

Experiences with second ten pictures:

The second experience was more challenging, in that I made a point of making the pictures more visually interesing - remove the need for an explanation behind them - while retaining some story so that they kept the same interest to me, personally, without the visual asthetic.  For example, I've always had an interest in the way man-made light stands out in an otherwise dark night - the way it signifies that there is life there, warmth, in both a figurative and very literal sense.  This may or may not come across in the photographs from the "ant's view" and "bird's view", but if it does not, I expect the two images are visually interesting anyways.  Walking to class, I consciously notice the people around me doing the same, and I often contemplate on that.   I really like the way the sidewalk is visible, twisting and turning and forking, along the path the individual is taking in the "close up" picture, and hope that viewers - who've never been in my head - will see the sidewalk and similarly wonder about where this individual is going.

What was the same about the experience?  What was different?

It was mostly the same experience.  The restrictions placed on me had very little effect on the items I chose to photograph; it simply dictated how to frame them.  My primary interests in the pictures (ie, things I found interesting in all of them and things others may find interesting sans-explanation in the latter ten) were largely uneffected by the differing requirements.

Which process was more enjoyable for you and why?

Since the process itself had no real effect on my pictures, neither process was more or less enjoyable than the other.

Which images are your favorites?  Why?

My favorite from the first ten pictures was almost blank computer screen on its side, because that is how people will describe it, when the image is dominated by the shadow of me taking the picture.  The empty screen is ready, just about to be filled with content, and at the same time it is the content of a picture.  I find such thoughts interesting.  However, I worry this is overly obtuse.

Of the second set, my favorite is picture of the person up close, because of all of the pictures in the second set it is the one I feel is most likely to instill the same effect on the viewer - where is he going? - as it does on me, personally.

Ten pictures:

Response to Walker:

If we must define a "Big Idea" as something new (I will explain below why I
dislike doing so), I applaud the effort to differentiate it from closely
defined terminology.  This serves a double duty of avoiding confusion with
these other terms as well as gives something similar enough to serve as a
reference point.

I admit my knowledge of specific terminology in the field of art may be
limited, which could throw off my opinion here.  I know the term "space" has a
very specific definition in film theory, for example.  However, I don't see why
we have to define "Big Idea" as something new.  As I understand the article, it
is simply a theme that "persists throughout an artists body of work".  That's
it.  This does not need a new term; one could easily suffice with "over-arching
theme".  While it is an interesting topic which may be worthy of discussion,
there is no need to define a new term for this as I understand it.

Response to Barret:

I usually find it amusing when subconscious things which I do are brought to my
attention.  I type all of my notes, and I often study by/with my computer; as a
result, I apparently move my fingers as though I am typing when I am attempting
to recall information I learned in this fashion.  I find this interesting.  The
main point in the article - that we subconsciously interpret connotation and
denotation in visual imagery - fits this perfectly.  As the article points out,
I've likely been doing this since at least preschool - and rarely have I given
it conscious thought.

If I had to find a complaint with this article, I would say that more examples
are used than truly necessary.  I got the point well before the final page.
While the preschool children item is one of the more important ones, as it
helps frame the entire work, other examples could easily have been dropped
without a serious negative effect on the article.

Response to Kidd:

I absolutely loved this article.  I'm not completely sure I understand what it
is trying to say, but whatever it is, it says it extremely well.  What
immediately struck me about this article - presumably the most obvious thing,
but notable nonetheless - is that it barely gives you enough information to
figure out what is going on.  After the first page it is impossible to really
grasp the scene or follow the symbolism.  The result of this, for me, was
immediate intrigue.  I was challenged, and determined to read on until I pieced
things together.  It wasn't until a few seconds after I had reached the end of
the article, after I had figured out what was going on, after I had felt so
victorious, that I had learned something.  While I searched so determinedly for
one thing, something else had slipped - without my conscious awareness - into
my pocket.

I, personally, found nothing difficult or problematic with the article.
However, I suspect others may find the very thing I enjoyed so much about the
article off-putting.  Not everyone enjoys a puzzle as much as I do, and I
suspect some may become flustered at the context-less information.

Response to Hicky:

The most interesting thing I found about this article was in fact at the very
beginning and far from any point the author was trying to make.  After reading
the first paragraph, I realized that I had not only visualized the movements of
the basketball players in my mind, but also their pacing.  The movements were
quick.  Yet at no time did Hickey actually write to explicitly say this.  I
suspect that part of this was due to the fact that I was already familiar with
how such scenes play out in reality and played back this knowledge while
reading.  It seems that was not all: the author appears to have purposefully
used short sentences or sentences composed of short segments.  The staccato
rhythm of reading the work seems to contribute to the staccato motion of the
players in my mind.

Again I am hard pressed to find anything that I found difficult or problematic
with the article.  Since I have to say something, I will point out that some of
the enjoyment of this work hinges on sharing an interest with the author.
While I've seen numerous basketball games, I have yet to find myself able to
get swept up in excitement as others do and, thus, have a difficult time
relating to the author, making most of the article slightly boring where it was
explicitly intended to be exciting.

Response to Weschler:

The entire article was about the nuances of pictures of which, I found,
only one was shown.  This seems like it would be hugely detrimental.  I was
pleasantly surprised to find my pessimism about the feasibility of this work
was misplaced, as the author did manage to conjure up the images in my mind
with adequately textual description.

The author noted several times that he did not believe the goal of creating a
realistically looking computer generated image character was attainable,
without ever putting any justification forward other than the fact that - at
the time of writing - people are still having some difficulty with some parts
of it.  I found this off-putting.  How could anyone see the tremendous progress
the industry has made and come to the same conclusion?  I'm okay with a
differing opinion, but the lack of justification threw me off.

Oh, and the Final Fantasy film to which the article was referring was
significantly lacking in respect other than graphical prowess.  I'd look at
issues such as plot and character development first before making any claims
about it failing due to not providing sufficiently realistic-looking images.

Introduction

Hello, my name is Daniel.  From a young age, my interests have typically revolved round computers, such as but not limited to: computer hardware, computer programming, science fiction (primarily literature, but also movies), and computer games.  My major is in Electrical Engineering, specifically with a focus on (yes, you guessed it) computers.  I also work in OSU's Math Department's IT department where I often lead the student workers in various programming projects as needed by the department.  In addition to programming both for my academic career as well as in my current employment, I code as a hobby as well.  I am best known for a novel operating system I am working on called "Bedrock Linux".  The exact details of what makes this worthwhile can be a bit technical, but a simple explanation would be that it attempts to borrow the best aspects of similar projects in a transparent manner.  I am an active member of OSU's Open Source Club, a club based around a specific computer-focused philosophy/movement.

My top favorite books (in no specific order) are:

- Dune, by Frank Herbert
- A Deepness in the Sky, by Vernor Vinge
- Anathem, by Neal Stephenson
- The Silmarillion, by JRR Tolkien
- Grendel, by John Gardner

Lastly, a photo of me at a videogame tournament can be found below.  I am in the middleground, just behind the individual with the earring in the foreground.  I case anyone is curious, I am happy to say I secured third place, ensuring OSU students took the top three spots.