Authorship & Control in Generative Design

Authorship & Controlin Generative Design

Field Of Study Generative design is a design method that uses

an algorithm or a set of rules to create an output.

The algorithm/rules allows the design to create

complex forms with the means of creating

permutations and selecting outputs though a set

of rules or variables. Today’s technological ability

allows artists and designers to create something

new and surpass the human hand and create

works that are generated at least in part by

some process that is not under the artist’s direct

control. Control can come from a multitude of

factors such as; the variables within the system

which can be controlled via users, therefore

creating a relationship between user and art.

Interaction and Generative design has been

combined together which has caused authorship

of design to involve the users. This project will

explore the relationship between designer and

user in design and how much of an effect and

uniqueness a user can have on the design.

Focus

Context Generative design can allow the audience or a

user to get involved and create alternatives to the

current settings of a certain project, removing the

control of perception from the designer to the

audience. Roland Bathes challenged the concept

of authorship altogether by suggesting there is

a new authorial structure through “the death of

the author” where he disconnected the creation

from the author and “assigns to it autonomous

voice in the realm of a multi- dimensional space,

where it is in the consciousness of its interpreters

to be attributing a meaning. Once the creation

comes to light, the author, according to Barthes,

“enters into his own death”. [Barthes, 1977, p.142]”

(Theodoropoulou, 2007). This implies that once

the user or audiences receive the messages from

the artefact it is the perception of the individual

that is considered the connection, not author

to audience. This is supported by the idea that

“early models of graphic design were built on

ideals of anonymity, not authorship.” (Armstrong,

2009) and how technology has allowed the

development of design to put “…creation,

production and distribution into the hands of the

designer, enabling such bold assertions of artistic

presence. These acts of the graphic authorship

fit within a broader evolving model of collective

authorship that is fundamentally changing the

producer-consumer relationship.” (Armstrong,

2009). The development of collective authorship

has enabled the ‘free culture’ to grow to allow

individuals to become generators or producers

of content. Laser Tag – Graffiti Research Lab

(2007), Video Grid (2009), We Feel Fine (2005),

Study of a Mirror (2008), and House of Cards

(2008). All these examples use set designs and

then allows the user to apply their ‘preferences’.

With all this in mind the examples still leave

a graphic mark. “As a designer working with

generative processes, one may still wish to leave

a recognizable mark on a creation” (McCormack,

2004).

The history of generative design is believed to

be as old as art itself. There are many examples

of historical persona who have used generative

design towards production of their artefacts.

“Mozart developed a “musical game of dice“… …

Mozart composed 176 bars of music, from which

sixteen were chosen from a list using dice, which

then produced a new piece when performed

on a piano. Sixteen bars, each with eleven

possibilities, can result in 1,116 unique pieces of

music.” (Ihmels, 2011). Similarly John Cage laid

out rhythms and sequences using traditional

notation. His performances were unplanned and

were produced through the elements of chance

and variation, differing the results. “Through the

performance process, the individual’s freedom to

modify the structure results in a social interaction

in the group of musicians. This non-hierarchic form

of creativity can be compared with the ‘bottom-

up’ structure by which an open source software

such as Linux is constantly further developed by

its users. In either case, it is possible to vary and

re-interpret a specified code with the result that

the boundary between author and user become

fluid.” (Daniels, 2000).

Rationale Looking into control and authorship is important

to me because I have always been interested

in creating interactive products and this study

will allow myself to understand the relationship

between the user and the designer. Hopefully it

will allow me to understand how to control this

relationship, of users and designer, for the future.

This is an important problem within Graphic

Design: New Media because interaction and

generative designers need to know how to relate

to the audience sufficiently.

Two exhibitions that influenced my original

interest in interaction and generative design the

most were V&A Decode and the Offf Festival in

Lisbon. The Offf festival was the first experience

of seeing major designers in one place, and it

enabled me to see work from Joshua Davis,

Karsten Schmidt, Multitouch Barcelona and

lots more. Before that festival I did not know a

lot about interaction within design and how it

could be represented. The Decode exhibition

allowed me to see more designers and the range

of different types of interaction. Over the past

few years projects have appeared on Creative

Applications website that have inspired me in

previous projects.

Methods Throughout this project I will need to research

and revisit sources because of the amount project

being shown to the public allowing possible

influence and enabling my project not to go in

one direction once the development stage has

begun.

The project will have to begin with experimenting

and generating prototypes that challenges

authorship of the artefact and I will need to find

ways of doing this. There are many types of

interactions that can be looked into such as; the

human-computer interaction and self-regulating

systems. Also, the varieties of user experience

design could inspire branches that this project

could go down. Testing the final result will be

vital because of the variations that the artefacts

could produce.

Skills Practical Skills

Empathy (“the power of entering into another’s

personality and imaginatively experiencing his

experiences” [Beardsley, 2004])

Learn coding within Processing or some other

programming package.

Testing and recording feedback.

Time keeping and organisation.

Theoretical Skills

Understanding of the types of interaction.

Revisiting research from previous project and

applying it to this project.

Break down the relationship of the designer, user

and design.

Understanding the feedback from experiments

and applying it to a final outcome.

PredictedResolution

I am aspiring to generate artefacts that

investigates or shows a relationship between the

designer, user and design. As I am dealing with

the aspect of the ‘user’ it may have an interactive

component to show the results of the findings of

how much of an effect and uniqueness a user can

have on the design.

Whatever the outcome of the major project, a

designed booklet containing research, processes,

experiments and the final outcome will be

produced. This will show the progression of the

project and promote the design problem and the

resolution.

Armstrong, Helen. (2009). Graphic Design

Theory. Princeton Architectural Press.

Beardsley, Sally (2004). Interactive generative

design: A living language? AsiaLink Seminar on

Generative Design.

Craemer, A (2010). Can information design create

social change? (And should it even try?). Central

Saint Martins College of Art and Design

Cramer, F. (2002). Concepts, Notations, Software,

Art.

Creative Applications (2011)

http://www.creativeapplications.net/

Cox, G. (2006). Generator: about Generative Art

and/or Software Art.

Daniels, Dieter. (2000). Media Art Interaction,

The 1980s and 1990s in Germany. Springer.

Dubberly, H., Haque, U., Pangaro, P. (2009) What

is interaction?

Freyer, Conny., Noel, Sebastien., Ruck, Eva. (2011).

Digital By Design. Thames & Hudson.

Galanter, P. (2003). What is Generative Art?

Complexity Theory as a Context for Art Theory.

New York University, New York.

Heller, Steven. (2007). Become a Digital Designer.

Wiley.

Ihmels, T,. Riedel, J. (2011). The Methodology of

Generative Art. http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/

themes/generative-tools/generative-art/

Bibliography

Kitchen Budapest. (2011).

http://www.kitchenbudapest.hu/en

Maeda, John. (2004). Creative Code: Aesthetics

+ Computation. Thames & Hudson

Maeda, John. (2006). The Laws of Simplicity. MIT

Press

McCormack, J., Dorin, A., and Innocent, T. (2004).

‘Generative design: a paradigm for design

research’. Proceedings of Futureground, Design

Research Society, Melbourne.

Noble, Ian., Bestley, Russell. (2004). Visual

Research. AVA Publishing

Offf Festival. (2011). http://www.offf.ws/2011/

Osbourne, P. (2002). Conceptual Art. Phaidon

Press.

Reas, Casey., McWilliams, Chandler. (2010).

Form+Code in Design, Art, and Architecture.

Princeton Architectural Press.

Reas, Casey. Fry, Ben. (2010). Getting Started

with Processing. Make.

Theodoropoulou, A. (2007) Architectural

Authorship in Generative Design. University

College London.

V&A Decode Exhibition (2011)

http://www.vam.ac.uk/microsites/decode/

Ward, Adrian., Cox, Geoff. (1999) The Authorship

of Generative Art. Sidestream, London & CAiiA-

STAR, School of Computing, University of

Plymouth, UK.

Project Deadline12 May

EasterStarts

16 Apr

EasterEnds

3 May

Research/Development

SectionsCompleted

16 Apr

Budapest Trip

13 Apr - 18 Apr

ImageMaking

Workshop 28, 29 Mar +

5, 7 Apr

Mid PointCrit 4 Apr

FMP Briefing24 Feb

FinaliseProposal

11 Mar

IdentifyProblem

25 Feb

Work in Progress

Crit24 Mar

Experiments15 - 23 Mar

SubjectResearch

1 Mar

ListExperiments

2 Mar

Timetable

Project Deadline12 May

EasterStarts

16 Apr

EasterEnds

3 May

Research/Development

SectionsCompleted

16 Apr

Budapest Trip

13 Apr - 18 Apr

ImageMaking

Workshop 28, 29 Mar +

5, 7 Apr

Mid PointCrit 4 Apr

FMP Briefing24 Feb

FinaliseProposal

11 Mar

IdentifyProblem

25 Feb

Work in Progress

Crit24 Mar

Experiments15 - 23 Mar

SubjectResearch

1 Mar

ListExperiments

2 Mar

Generative Design

The method of generative design was first

introduced to me by Joshua Davis during his

presentation during the Offf festival in Lisbon

2009. Joshua Davis’ style within his designs are

not what I am most interested in but more on the

methods and processes he used to produce his

work. His presentations of showing his step by

step methods towards his final pieces was very

impressive. The reason that I liked his methods

was because it created something new with

endless variations and did not always have a

producers control over the outcome.

Its well worth looking at the history and future

of generative design to see where it began and

what possible directions the future of this design

area could take. The history of generative design

is believed to be as old as art itself. There are

many examples of historical persona who have

used generative design towards production of

their artefacts. “Mozart developed a “musical

game of dice“… …Mozart composed 176 bars of

music, from which sixteen were chosen from a

list using dice, which then produced a new piece

when performed on a piano. Sixteen bars, each

with eleven possibilities, can result in 1,116 unique

pieces of music.” (Ihmels, 2011).

Similarly John Cage laid out rhythms and

sequences using traditional notation. His

performances were unplanned and were produced

through the elements of chance and variation,

differing the results. “Through the performance

process, the individual’s freedom to modify the

structure results in a social interaction in the

group of musicians. This non-hierarchic form of

creativity can be compared with the ‘bottom-

up’ structure by which an open source software




the boundary between author and user become

fluid.” (Daniels, 2000).

In the 80’s, John Whitney who was an inventor,

animator and early computer art pioneer was

able to produce a generative piece that visualised

music and it was called ‘Permutations’.

Generative Design

Output = Image / Sound / Animation

Generated by Algorithms / Rules

Design Method

Implemented in Art, Architechture, Communication Design, Product Design

1. A Design Schema2. Means of creating variation3. Means of selecting output

“There is broad agreement that generative art is a term

applied to artwork that is automated by the use of

instructions or rules by which the artwork is executed.“

(Cox, 2006).

Joshua Davis is one of the leading designers

within generative design and was a pioneer by

developing an area previously unexplored within

graphic design. Although, Davis’ primary tool is

action scripting and flash because he is a graphic

web designer his influence to generative design

development over the past ten years have been

vital. Programming environments are the reason

that generative design is becoming more and

more important and have made it very easy for

designers with little programming experience to

implement their ideas.

Idea

Rule/Algorithm

Source Code

Output

Designer

Abstraction

Formalisation andstarting parameters

Interpretationby the computer

Designer judgesthe output

Modifiessource code or parameters

Modifies rules

Idea

Rule/Algorithm

Source Code

Output

Designer

Abstraction

Formalisation andstarting parameters

Interpretationby the computer

Designer judgesthe output

Modifiessource code or parameters

Modifies rules

Generative Design Process

The generative design process allows me to

visualise the stages of development that a

product will require. I will be able to show the

development through these stages and will know

where to go from each stage by having a choice

of modification.

Ben FryCasey ReasJohn MaedaGolan LevinToxiEskimobloodJonathan HarrisMarius WatzEd Burton

PuristUsing codeto createthe visuals

Ben FryCasey ReasJohn MaedaGolan LevinToxiEskimobloodJonathan HarrisMarius WatzEd Burton

PuristUsing codeto createthe visuals

HybridMapping artworkto code

HybridMapping artworkto code

During my first year of Graphic Design: New

Media I had the opportunity to go to the design

festival Offf. The year that I went it took place

in Lisbon which has a great design culture. This

festival was important to my own development

because it allowed me to hear from designers

that have already mastered the industry just as I

was entering it. Also, the breadth of the festival

enlightened and expanded my view within design.

From different types of motion, interaction, print

and more...

The festival topic was quite useful to me as a

student because it was all about trying new

things with the possibility of failing, an aspect of

design that I did not recognise until then.

Although, the festival topic was about the failures

that the speaker have had, it was also about how

these failures could become innovative pieces

of design. I attended presentations from Neville

Brody, Multitouch Barcelona, Karsten Schmidt,

Joshua Davis, Paula Scher and PES. Before

attending I did not know who they were as my

knowledge of design was very limited although I

had seen some of their works around.

“OFFF is an entity in continuous transformation, alive and evolutionary. More

than a decade ago, it was born as a post-digital culture festival; a meeting place to host

contemporary creation through an in depth programme of conferences, workshops and

performances by the most relevant artists of our time.” - Offf

Davis states that the code is his artwork although

all the components in his design are drawn

in illustrator and coded together to produce

a many pieces of art. His development and

decision making throughout a project is what I

find impressive as at each stage it is not possible

to tell what the final outcome will be.

His presentation at Offf showed step by step

his approach and it was similar to John Maeda’s

Laws of Simplicity by breaking the project into

really small tasks. For example he had to create

interesting stream of colours and shapes around

the canvas. He started the project by having a

ball and making it ping from point A to point B.

His development to this was creating methods

that changes the path.

Joshua DavisAs stated before I first noticed Davis’ work and

methods at the Offf festival in Lisbon. Visually, I

really like the work that Joshua Davis’ produces

but I that is not what intrigues me the most about

his work. The processes and methods that he has

and applied it with code.

On his website he has the quote “Among modern

artists, I conceptually identify with Jackson

Pollock — not that I’m a particular fan of his

visual style, but because he always identified

himself as a painter, even though a lot of the time

his brush never hit the canvas. There’s something

in that disconnect — not using a brush or tool in

traditional methods.” This probably sums up what

I like about his work; that avoiding traditional

methods in creating something new.

“20 years ago... Computing couldn’t replicate what human

hand could achieve.

Today... Technology wielded by artists and designers surpasses

the human hand.“ - Joshua Davis

The Decode exhibition was something I heard

about from a tutor and decided to check it out.

The festival had three different sections within it;

code, interactivity and network.

This exhibition was very interesting to me because

of the focus on works that were “innovative, often

interactive, displays use generative software,

animation and other responsive technologies to

instil a ‘live’ element into contemporary artworks.

Some works exist in a state of perpetual

evolution other are altered by the behaviours

of the spectator.” - V&A Decode. This was

interesting to me then and is very important to

this project because of the relationship between

the exhibition manifesto and this project.

The relationship that exists between Decode and

this project is that the themes are related such

as this project focuses on control and authorship

with generative design and these have themes

of coding, interactivity, networking, behaviour

modification.

“Code presents pieces that use computer code

to create new works and looks at how code can

be programmed to create constantly fluid and

ever-changing works.

Interactivity looks at works that are directly

influenced by the viewer. Visitors will be invited to

interact with and contribute to the development

of the exhibits.

Network focuses on works that comment on and

utilise the digital traces left behind by everyday

communications and looks at how advanced

technologies and the internet have enabled new

types of social interaction and mediums of self-

expression.” - V&A Decode Website.

V&A Decode

Karsten SchmidtAs part of the University of Creative Arts designer

lecture program, Karsten gave a presentation

about his works and methods. Karsten uses

a unique way of producing his content which

merges various fields towards a project using

code, design, art & craft skills. During his talk he

suggests that society has created experts within

fields and that there should be more designers

that have skills in many fields. The reason for this

is because experts see problems from their own

niche.

Karsten introduced toxiclibs which is a library

that can be used within processing. Also, he

explained how easy it was to get a varied image

of a tree through three simple rules. This was

done on Context Free.

Postspectacular Manifesto

Learn by doing.

Become literate in systems thinking

Use the right tool for the right job - make those

tools!

Encourage creative flow in your process

Be part of networks

Allow for recombination of ideas by adopting

modular development

Be open to new influences

Benefit from and accept that you’re working

towards moving targets (caused by your own

doing and that of others)

Use clear language without hype & buzzwords

Be self-critical to promote quality & positiveness

Ask the important, uneasy questions if you’re in

doubt

Attempt to move away from isolated projects

towards a continuous flow of activity

Aaron Koblin

Aaron Koblin is an artist who specialises in

combining data and digital technologies. The

House of Cards project for Radiohead was the

first piece that I saw of his work and was really

interested on how he was able to capture the data

and then turn it into two pieces of work; a video

and an interactive piece. This method was made

available to download and has been developed

into other projects such as electro artist Krause’s

music video -

(http://www.optixdigital.de/followme/).

“Aaron’s work takes real-world and community

generated data and uses it to reflect on cultural trends and

the changing relationship between humans and

technology.“

The second trip that I was able to attend with the

Graphic Design: New Media course was to a new

media festival called Transmediale which takes

place in Berlin. I was also fortunate to revisit the

festival a year later with the course. The first

year the festivals theme was called ‘Futurity

Now!’. The aim of the festival was to see what we

have in store for the future, not what the future

has in store for us. Talks that really interested

me was the one that was called ‘Art 2.0’ which

involved Michelle Teran, Jens Wunderling, Jamie

Wilkinson, Aaron Koblin and Daniel Massey. The

main focus of this talk was ‘different strategies

of artistic appropriation such as crowdsourcing,

the direct invitation of a group of people to

participate in an artwork, or retroactive gathering

and recycling of foreign contents and forms.’

The second years theme was called ‘Response:

Ability’ and it explored “...the qualities of liveness

that are fundamental elements of our digital

culture and discusses the ability required to

respond to the social, political and economical

processes formed by the intensity of our

participation and interaction.” The performances

this year were really good and I enjoyed

performances from Eboman with the SenSor Suit

and Ei Wada with the Braun Tube Jazz Band. The

Sensor Suit investigates the possibilities opened

up by the medium of sampling by capturing it

audiences and then remixing it to a collection.

The Braun Tube Jazz Band works by tapping

the TV screens and it produces primitive, cosmic

electrical music. You could say that these are

very similar to John Cage and how he produced

his works.

This mini documentary was produced during the

Transmediale festival 2011 to discuss the issues

of the future of art. I’m sure this discussion could

go on for many hours and in many directions but

these are the questions that were answered by

these participants.

Ken Wahl discusses how that if you have a set of

data which could be interpreted in many ways

such as through different mediums or different

techniques it brings in the question what is the

art as the only original thing is the set of data.

So, what is the artwork? Is it the data or the

produced outputs?

In interaction design, this is a problem because if

there is confusion on what the art is, it is going to

raise questions about the authorship especially

when the interactive piece will be generated by

a participant.

“What are the defining aesthetics of art in the

networked era?

How is mass collaboration changing notions of

ownership in art?

How does micropatronage change the way artists produce and distribute

artwork?”

Jamie Wilkinson

Jamie Wilkinson is an internet culture researcher

and software engineer, who I saw at the

Transmediale festival presented his pieces of art

that involved participants.

His most famous piece of work would be Star

Wars Uncut which won an Emmy for ‘Outstanding

Creative Achievement in Interactive Media -

Fiction‘. He has also produced ‘Know Your Meme’

which is a database of viral internet memes. He

later introduced what Free Art and Technology

Lab are about, what they produce and how he is

involved (See next page).

“The Free Art and Technology Lab is an

organization dedicated to enriching the

public domain through the research and

development of creative technologies

and media. The entire FAT network of

artists, engineers, scientists, lawyers,

musicians and Bornas are committed to

supporting open values and the public

domain through the use of emerging

open licenses, support for open

entrepreneurship and the admonishment

of secrecy, copyright monopolies and

patents.”

The Free Art and Technology Lab’s

attitude towards their target is

something to be appreciated and their

work relates to my investigation as they

give the control back to the people.

“Dedicated to enriching the public domain one mutha-fuckin LOL at a time”

Graffiti Research Lab

The Graffiti Research Lab is something I came

across while looking at the Digital By Design

book. “…Graffiti Research Lab explore how

technology can contribute to street art and

urban communication and empower individuals

creatively to alto and reclaim their surroundings.”

This enables users to show their creativity

through the technology allowing the control

to be with the user, this in turn gives the user

a majority of the authorship because they are

creating the message and using the technology

as a tool similarly as designers use Photoshop or

any other design package.

Strategies of Interactivity

While this project is about investigating

authorship and control in generative design, we

must look at the strategies that are available to a

designer on how a participant can interact with

a process using the Strategies of Interactivity by

Dieter Daniels’ Media Art Interaction book.

“Most of Cage’s compositions do not define a

precise musical human-instrument interaction,

but open up a field of possibilities to be

interpreted by the performer of his composition

and producing each time, through elements of

chance and variation, differing results. Some

pieces modify the instruments (prepared

piano) or leave the choice of instruments up

to the performers. Through the performance

process, the individual’s freedom to modify the

structure results in a social interaction in the

group of musicians. This non-hierarchic form of

creativity can be compared with the ‘bottom-

up’ structure by which an open-source software




the boundary between author and user becomes

fluid. The opposite model would be a ‘top-

down’ structure as represented by the precise

notation of a classical composition as well as the

proprietary software developed by Bill Gates’

Microsoft Corporation, for which the secrecy

of the source code is the basis of a capitalist

monopoly. Program users work in line with the

patterns of interaction decreed by the software

industry, just as the classical musical composition

specifies as exactly as possible the usage of

musical instruments.

The purpose of composition, as Cage saw it, was

not to deliver an optimum ‘operating system’ for

musical instruments, but to initiate an individual

and social creative process which successively

detaches itself from the intentions of its author.

By contrast, the software of Bill Gates and other

proprietary systems keeps users in the dark about

the structures ‘inscribed’ by its writers. A model

derived from the time-honoured, idealistic notion

of art — that of the deep mystery inherent to all

creativity — is being kept alive solely by artificial

secrecy. Instead of serving the sacred goals of the

genius, it panders to the mammon of monopolists.

Cage’s concept of interactivity stems from an

aesthetic and ideology leading to the dissolution

of the boundary between author, performance

and audience. That was why he deployed media

technologies like radio, record, tape and, later,

computer — through the information structures

of such apparatus, the interference of musical

production and reception became possible.

Technology could not only replace human labour,

but also open up a creative sphere. For Gates,

by contrast, interactivity is an economically and

technologically determined pattern according

to whose specifications millions structure their

workflow — a view he pinpointed in an in-house

paper stating that Microsoft treats human users

like it does computers: it programs them. While

the computer is indisputably replacing the

piano as the most-used keyboard instrument

in the home, liberation from the often tortuous

obligation to practise has not reached young

people in an open, Cagean form but instead in

the voluntary self-conditioning of interaction

with industrial software such as computer

games. This admittedly bold comparison serves

to bridge the gap between Cage’s art and Gates’

technology in order to show that ultimately their

conflicting models of interactivity stand for two

different blueprints of society. The respective

principles of openness and closedness could act

as a leitmotif for the changing meaning of the

term ‘interactivity’ from the ’60s to the ’90s.”

Using the ‘bottom-up’ model with this project

would be perfect as it will allow users to become

part of the authorship. Also, as the main property

of interaction design is the user, it means that

designers must understand humans and human

behaviour. “One of the essential skills of an

interaction designer is empathy. Empathy: The

power of entering into another’s personality

and imaginatively experiencing his experiences:

the power of entering into the feeling or spirit

of something... and so appreciating it fully.”

(Beardsley)

Fluxus

Fluxus designers use the intersection of medias

and see what reaction that results from it. Most

results are simple and use everyday object to

create new combinations. Fluxus designers

worked through instructions to produce their

works. Yoko Ono exhibited ‘instructions’ for

paintings which allowed the audience to complete

the artwork through certain methods.

The Museum of Contemporary Art, Roskilde

curated an exhibition called ‘Fluxus Scores and

Instructions The Transformative Years.

“Most of the scores and instructions are

complete original manuscripts or the earliest

printed versions of the works. There are also

performances of scores recorded in photographs

and realizations presented in other forms,

alongside scratchy audio from the 1960s and

blurry films of early Fluxus performances. The

exhibition will also include germinal pre-Fluxus

scores by George Brecht, John Cage, Marcel

Duchamp, Yves Klein, Walter de Maria, Yoko Ono,

Karlheinz Stockhausen, and La Monte Young.”

(E-flux, 2008).

Fluxus allows a participation which causes me to

query the role of the designer because of how

much input the participant could have on these

pieces allowing the authorship to shift. This piece

was set through Ono’s set of instruction therefore

becoming a ‘bottom-up’ model and allowing a

collective authorship.

Role of the Designer

Looking at the role of the designer is important

because it allows us to see how over time the

role has changed and why it has changed. The

development of collective authorship and open

source has allowed the designer to become more

of an author to start a product or a process.

Due to the emergence of open source and

collective authorship this has had to happen as

“...designers position and reposition themselves

in relation to the discourse of design and the

broader society.“ - Armstrong. Heller states

that the basic goal of the designer is to “...help

people understand the world through the visual

interpretation of complex information“ and this

is still case whether the designer is part author,

part translator or part director. For example; a

designer who codes, sets parameters and rules

for a participant or system to abide by which will

most likely not change (unless it is in by another

coder in open source) and the participant will be

able to interact or change these parameters to

get an output they produce. This is very similar to

what Yoko Ono did with her instructions.

“The role of the Graphic Designer expanded in the last decades. In times of information explosion,

climate change, obesity and the financial crisis stepping

into the forefront of common interest, the influence of

the contemporary Graphic Designer addressing these

issues has been raised.”- Craemer.

Role of the Designer

by Anna Craemer

Collective Authorship

Collective Authorship is an evolution from the

development in digital technology where “...

content generation by individuals has never been

easier. (Consider the popularity of the DIY and the

“Free Culture“ movements.) As more and more

designers, along with the general population

become initiators and producers of content, a

leveling is occuring.“ - Armstrong.

Wordpress is a prime example of collective

authorship as user are able to download or sign

up to a service and upload content similarly

to the content within Jamie Wilkinson’s Know

Your Meme. More directly with this project and

generative design we could look at Karsten

Schmidt’s Toxiclib as it uses libraries collectively

built and developed to improve the outcomes of

the project.

In an interview with Joshua Davis, he explain why

he shares his knowledge and code. He states

that if he were Rembrandt and showed you his

methods and ways he mixes his pallets you still

would get the same result as the original author

but you would get a recognisable creation. “As a

designer working with generative processes, one

may still wish to leave a recognizable mark on a

creation.” - McCormack.

Death of the AuthorRoland Barthes theory on the ‘Death of the

Author’ is something that I was taught during

Contextual Studies during first and second years

of the degree and it probably a major theory

that should be recognised. “Roland Barthes in

“the death of the author” in 1968, challenges the

notion of authorship altogether. Barthes suggests

the emergence of a new authorial persona. He

disconnects the creation from the Author and

assigns to it autonomous voice in the realm of

a multi- dimensional space, where it is in the

consciousness of its interpreters to be attributing

a meaning. Once the creation comes to light, the

author, according to Barthes, “enters into his own

death”. [Barthes, 1977, p.142]” - Theodoropoulou.

This theory could be connected to collective

authorship where there is no one author but

many and that “once published, the text is no

longer under the control of the author” making

the author have a limited control on the future

of the text. Although, this can be argued within

generative design where the designer can

set parameters to leave his mark on the work

therefore displaying that his original code is the

art not the outcome.

Behavioural Influence

As designers it is our job to ultimately sell,

influence and create behaviour. I was unaware

to look at this subject until I saw a video of

Dan Ariely on TED. “Behavioural economist

Dan Ariely, the author of Predictably Irrational,

uses classic visual illusions and his own counter

intuitive (and sometimes shocking) research

findings to show how we’re not as rational as we

think when we make decisions.” This video was

very interesting and I was able to find out how to

previous designs have thought about controlling

the user to outcome by using various methods

like adding additional preferences that causes

our perception to change

“Dan Lockton is a designer and researcher from

the UK, and has come to specialise in design for

behaviour change – applying techniques from a

range of psychological and technical disciplines

to the problems of influencing human behaviour

for social benefit, via the design of products,

systems, services and environments.” (http://

architectures.danlockton.co.uk/dan-lockton/).

Through the design with intent website I found

about Dan Lockton who specialises in design

that influences user behaviour. This presentation

progresses the talk from Dan Ariely. Although

Dan Lockton discusses about architectural

products but the issues are the same.

Dan Ariely

Dan Lockton

Behavioural Influence

“In his 2003 book Persuasive Technology, BJ

Fogg lists some reasons why using technology to

influence behaviour is different from persuading

people using other forms of media like traditional

advertising. For example the anonymity of

interacting with a machine can encourage people

to be more open in their responses to questions

which could allow a computer to present more

tailored responses. Computers can also sift

through enormous volumes of data to present

people with an overpowering case – or find the

one fact in millions that they find most persuasive.

Another reason Fogg gives that I find convincing

is that computers can present people with a rich

variety of text, video, audio and the ability to

interact and simulate, allowing people to select

the media that they find most engaging.”

Decode wasn’t an exhibition about changing

behaviour of course, but it was interesting to read

an interview with one of the artists, Golan Levin,

who when asked “what do digital technologies

allow you to do or investigate that other tools do

not?” replied “I can create ‘behaviour’”.

BJ Fogg

Golan Levin

History of Processing“Processing is a programming language,

development environment, and online community

that since 2001 has promoted software literacy

within the visual arts. Initially created to serve as a

software sketchbook and to teach fundamentals

of computer programming within a visual

context, Processing quickly developed into a tool

for creating finished professional work as well.”

“Processing was founded by Ben Fry and

Casey Reas in 2001 while both were John

Maeda’s students at the MIT Media Lab. Further

development has taken place at the Interaction

Design Institute Ivrea, Carnegie Mellon

University, and the UCLA, where Reas is chair of

the Department of Design | Media Arts. Miami

University, Oblong Industries, and the Rockefeller

Foundation have generously contributed funding

to the project.”

Reas “Casey Reas is an associate professor and chair

of the Department of Design Media Arts at UCLA.

His classes provide a foundation for thinking

about software as a dynamic visual medium

and set a structure for inquiry into synthesis of

culture, technology, and aesthetics. With Ben Fry,

Reas initiated Processing.org in 2001. Processing

is an open source programming language and

environment for creating images, animation, and

interaction. In September 2007, they published

Processing: A Programming Handbook for

Visual Designers and Artists, a comprehensive

introduction to programming within the context

of visual media (MIT Press). Reas’ essays have

appeared in the books Network Practices

(Princeton Architectural Press), Aesthetic

Computing (MIT Press), Code: The Language of

Our Time (Hatje Cantz), and the Programming

Cultures issue of Architectural Design (Wiley).”

Fry“Ben Fry received his doctoral degree from the

Aesthetics + Computation Group at the MIT

Media Laboratory, where his research focused

on combining fields such as Computer Science,

Statistics, Graphic Design, and Data Visualization

as a means for understanding complex data.

After completing his thesis, he spent time

developing tools for visualization of genetic data

as a postdoc with Eric Lander at the Eli & Edythe

L. Broad Insitute of MIT & Harvard. During the

2006-2007 school year, Ben was the Nierenberg

Chair of Design for the Carnegie Mellon School of

Design. At the end of 2007, he finished the book

Visualizing Data for O’Reilly. He currently works

as a designer in Cambridge, MA.”

Image Making Workshop

This workshop was preparation tool to make our

knowledge of Processing and Arduino ready for

a workshop with Kitchen Budapest. I was very

fortunate to have this workshop on processing

as my project will probably be primarily based

within that programming environment.

The workshop started with showing us the

basics to processing and common programming

techniques. We learnt the basics to processing

such as; setting the canvas size, drawing shapes,

use of variables and the different types, integers,

floats, boolean, the structure of a sketch and

more. We then were put through various small

projects to develop our coding skills.

The Brief

We want you to design and prototype a

mechanical or computational image making

machine. Neither the input nor the output is

required to be photographic, and in fact we

urge you to avoid this. You are free to let your

imagination go wild so long as you produce a

mechanical or computationally generated image

at the end.

Serial Communication

Serial Communication II

Import Library

Declare movie capture

Integer ‘space’ = 13

Project Setup

Canvas Size

Smooth Quality

Movie capture information

Background = white

Circle sizes with int space

Stroke colour = random

Stroke weight = random

Add a frame to movie

If space bar pressed finish movie capture

Declare properties for x, y, px, py

Project Setup

Canvas Size

Smooth Quality

x & y = mouse with easing

If left clickdistWeight = distance of x, y, px, py propertiesdraw stroke with distWeight class properties

If right click fill screen with background colour

Draw line

Declare properties for x, y, px, py

Declare easing property

Project Setup

Canvas Size

Smooth Quality

x = (mouseX co-ord - x) * easing

y = (mouseY co-ord - y) * easing

Print Line

The Drawing Machine

The Drawing Machine & Outcome

Kitchen Budapest

The Graphic Design: New Media course provided

the opportunity to go to a workshop run by

Kitchen Budapest that was to involve noise

production. The workshop were led by László

Kiss and Márton András Juhász.

The first day we did not know what to expect and

we were introduced to what they produced and

what they were about. After that we discussed

individual ideas in what object could make

interesting sounds. With nearly everyone filling

pages full of ideas the best were selected and

then we chose what groups we wanted to be

in to produce an instrument for a performance.

The rest of the day was experimenting with the

making of the instruments with everyday objects.

We found it quite difficult to locate certain

objects as we did not know the area well (until

the last day!).

On the last it was time for the performance and

the nerves were alive and kicking. We originally

had the idea to perform in an underground

station but had to move due to being moved

along! Some instruments out performed others

and gained some interest from the public.

Kitchen Budapest were very kind with giving us a

free bag and book on all the projects.

“Detach them from their usual habitat and they can

push that envelope into the endless depth of Ligeti’s

Volumina! At first they were a little bit skeptical, of course, but when they all started building their

instruments the following day, they really got the taste of it. Black and white pattern

recognizing noise baggage, bit crushed salad spinner

guitar, 4 channel scratch-able book cover tower, gesture

controlled compressed air canister whistles and

recorders, ultrasound acid harmonica, spinning Pringle’s

machine! They were loving it!”

Why is this topic important within wider design?

The importance of this project in wider design

is quite interesting as it helps to explain many

issues that designers must be aware of. All types

of design are able to influence our behaviour

but the designer must know how to do this; for

instances in advertising the design must influence

the viewer to buy the product. Technologies are

also effecting behaviour and designer have the

opportunity to influence behaviour by using

them to their advantage.

Also, looking at how participants can effect or

control interfaces and understanding why choices

are made will allow the designer to effectively

control the direction that the participant will take.

The growth of open source and collective

authorship has allowed the issue of a participant

to become apart of the piece of art which

provides a new avenue of design possibilities.

Creating something from code shows that

designers do not have to depend on traditional

tools and that an coded approach can create

something unique and very different to what

could be produced by hand.

How to capture and show permutationsThis task was about finding out how it was

possible to export the outcome of the code so it

would be possible view the development. Also,

working with generative designs it would be

sensible to have a record of it as it would not be

able to replicate exactly the same image.

Stills Permutations

Using the nested for loops example from the

image making workshop I was able to find out

how to capture permutations. The PDF export

function is really good as I can export one

image to 100. (http://processing.org/reference/

libraries/pdf/index.html)

Video Permuations

I was able to export to video using the

moviemaker function. It is possible to export in

high definition to publish designs with motion.

(http://processing.org/reference/libraries/video/

MovieMaker.html)

Even though these two capture methods do not

have a lot to resemble my project it has allowed

develop my technical skills.

Find a method of creating algorithms/rules and can be easily changed

Originally I was over thinking the method of

creating algorithms and rules that a system must

abide by. I was shown the Concepts, Notations,

Software, Art article by Florian Cramer which

breaks down the way of making an algorithm.

Basically, it states that we should look at it as a

set of instructions.

“Imagine a Dadaist poem which makes random

variations of Hugo Ball’s sound poem ̀ `Karawane’’

(``Caravan’’):

KARAWANE

jolifanto bambla ô falli bambla

grossiga m’pfa habla horem

égiga goramen

higo bloiko russula huju

hollaka hollala

anlogo bung

blago bung

blago bung

bosso fataka

ü üü ü

schampa wulla wussa ólobo

hej taat gôrem

eschige zunbada

wulebu ssubudu uluw ssubudu

tumba ba-umpf

kusagauma

ba-umpf

The new Dada poem could simply consists of

eight variations of the line ``tumba ba-umpf’’.

The author/performer could throw a coin twice

for each line and, depending on the result, choose

to write down either the word ``tumba’’ or ``ba-

umpf’’, so that the result would look like:

tumba tumba

ba-umpf tumba

tumba ba-umpf

tumba ba-umpf

ba-umpf ba-umpf

ba-umpf tumba

tumba ba-umpf

tumba ba-umpf

The instruction code for this poem could be

written as follows:

Take a coin of any kind with two distinct sides.

Repeat the following set of instructions eight

times:

Repeat the following set of instructions twice:

Throw the coin. Catch it with your palm so that

it lands on one side. If the coin shows the upper

side, do the following:

Say “tumba”

Else do the following:

Say “ba-umpf”

Make a brief pause to indicate the end of the

line. Make a long pause to indicate the end of the

poem.

Since these instructions are formal and precise

enough to be as well executed by a machine

(imagine this poem implemented into a modified

cuckoo clock), they can be translated line by

line into a computer program. Just as the above

instruction looks different depending on the

language it is written in, a computer program

looks different depending on the programming

language used. Here I choose the popular

language ``Perl’’ whose basic instructions are

rather simple to read:

for $lines (1 .. 8)

{

for $word (1 .. 2)

{

$random_number = int(rand(2));

if ($random_number == 0)

{

print “tumba”

}

else

{

print “ba-umpf”

}

print “ “

}

print “\n”

}”

After looking at this I have developed the

knowledge that not all systems are going to be

the same and that I will have to take these step

when producing systems. I also was trying to

think about a final product that the generative

design would be and how it would be interacted

with. I read John Maeda’s The Laws of Simplicity

and I discovered that it is better to break down

the project into simpler pieces, especially when

coding can become so complex.

Also, to have good organisation which will save

time, learning will make tasks simpler, therefore

practicing sketches in processing will allow

programming skills to develop and speed up

tasks. These were some points I found on the

page ‘Ten Laws’ and the rest are below.

“1. REDUCEThe simplest way to achieve simplicity

2. ORGANISEMakes many appear fewer

3. TIMESavings in time

4. LEARNKnowledge makes everything simpler

5. DIFFERENCESSimplicity and complexity need each other

6. CONTEXTWhat lies in the periphery of simplicity is definitely

not peripheral

7. EMOTIONMore emotions are better than less

8. TRUSTIn simplicity we trust

9. FAILURESome things can never be made simple

10. THE ONESimplicity is about subtracting the obvious, and

adding the meaningful”

Investigate types of systems

This task was to find out whether I could use

different systems to create news ways of

processing a generative piece or how it could

be interacted with. Taking into account that the

knowledge level within processing is beginner

I would probably only be able to use a simple

system but it would be good to know what

developments could be done with my skill or with

the project. Most of this information is from the

article ‘What is interaction? Are there different

types?’ by Hugh Dubberly, Usman Haque and

Paul Pangaro.

“All man-made objects offer the possibility

for interaction, and all design activities can be

viewed as design for interaction. The same is true

not only of objects but also of spaces, messages,

and systems.”

Man-Machine System

“In 1964 the HfG Ulm published a model of

interaction depicting an information loop running

from system through human and back through

the system.”

Gulf of Execution and Evaluation

“The user turns intention to action via an input

device connected to the physical system. The

physical system presents signals, which the user

interprets and evaluates—presumably in relation

to intention.”

Seven Stages of Action

“Norman has also proposed a “seven stages of

action” model, a variation and elaboration on the

gulf model. Norman points out that “behaviour

can be bottom up, in which an event in the world

triggers the cycle...”

Linear System

“A linear system sets the goal of a self-regulating

system. In this case, the linear system may be

seen as part of the self-regulating system—a sort

of dial.”

Self Regulating System

“A self-regulating system has a goal. The goal

defines a relationship between the system and

its environment, which the system seeks to attain

and maintain. This relationship is what the system

regulates, what it seeks to keep constant in the

face of external forces.”

Learning System

“Learning systems nest a first self-regulating

system inside a second self-regulating system.

The second system measures the effect of the

first system on the environment and adjusts the

first system’s goal according to how well its own

second-order goal is being met. The second

system sets the goal of the first, based on external

action. We may call this learning—modification

of goals based on the effect of actions. Learning

systems are also called second-order systems.”

Man-MachineSystem

Man

ControlsD

isplays

Mechanisms

Input / Output

E�ectorsReceptors

Use

rP

hysi

cal

Syst

em

Gu

lf o

f E

valu

atio

n

Gu

lf o

f E

xecu

tio

n

Inp

ut D

evic

es

Act

ion

Sp

ecifi

cati

on

Inte

ntio

ns

Eva

luat

ion

Inte

rpre

tati

on

Inte

rfac

e d

isp

lay

Systems

can be Static or Dynamic

which can be Linear or Closed-Loop

which can be Recirculating or Self-Regulatory

which can be First or Second-order

which can be Self-adjusting or Learning

Create a inspiration book

This task was about developing my editorial skills

and to do this I decided to find the best or most

intriguing to me design. Most of these appeared

through my Google Reader account (http://

feeds.feedburner.com/massinghamcraig) over

the past three years and I was able to scroll back

and save the images that I thought that could be

an addition to this projects book.

Build a facial detection systemWhile researching for facial detection within

processing I found a project called ‘I am Einstein’

that was made for the British Science Festival

in Birmingham. The code was open source so I

has a browse on how they created it. I changed

the graphic image to a smile face I designed. The

code was very complex and is probably just a bit

advanced for now.

Interview a group into the understanding of the projectBackground project information for interviewee

Generative design is a design method that uses

an algorithm or a set of rules to create an output.

The algorithm/rules allows the design to create

complex forms with the means of creating

permutations and selecting outputs though a set

of rules or variables. Today’s technological ability

allows artists and designers to create something

new and surpass the human hand and create

works that are generated at least in part by

some process that is not under the artist’s direct

control. Control can come from a multitude of

factors such as; the variables within the system

which can be controlled via users, therefore

creating a relationship between user and art.

Interaction and Generative design has been

combined together which has caused authorship

of design to involve the users. This project will

explore the relationship between designer and

user in design and how much of an effect and

uniqueness a user can have on the design.

Questions

1) What is your understanding of generative

design?

2) How do you perceive something being

generative?

3) Describe a piece of interactive generative

design that you have seen lately and why do you

like it?

4) Name some generative designers that have

interested you.

5) Select one and describe a project and why you

like it.

6) How can looking into authorship and control

affect all types of design?

7) Can design control our behaviour? Explain

why.

8) How do you personally measure the authorship

of a design [between user and designer]?

9) Do you believe their can be a collective

authorship between user and design? And why?

10) Can you think of an examples of authorship

or control issues within generative design that

you have seen?

11) Has the open source community removed the

idea of authorship?

Project continued onhttp://fmp.craigmassingham.co.uk

Create uniquenessThe definition of uniqueness “...is the property of

model or program transformations to deliver a

unique result upon termination.” - wiki.ercim.eu/

wg/SoftwareEvolution/index.php/Terminology.

This definition is leaning towards a programming

context which is perfect for this project. Examples

of uniqueness could be the identity of each

person in terms of people or a QR code in terms

of visualising data. Through this development it

would be an idea to make a project that produces

a visual code through peoples identity.


Create permutating typography


Write a algorithm of a permutating shape and test

Step 1- Shapes

The first stage allowed me to create a system that

can easily flick from a circle to infinity, although

there is no progression between them.

Step 2 – Conversion

Olly showed me how to make the conversion

between the two shapes…

int r = 200;

void setup(){

size( 600, 600 );smooth();strokeWeight(5);

}

void draw(){

background(255);

translate(width/2,height/2);

for(int i = 0; i < 360; i+=5){

//we use map the mouse value from -1 to

1, to use it as a controller for the//cosine modulation of the points (the part that creates the infinity symbol)float p = map(mouseX, 0, width, -1, 1);

//we calculate the cosine and map it based on the mouse position//if mouseX is 0 then p= -1 so cos(radians(i)) will be mapped between -1 and 1//which is its normal range anyway. If mouseX is width, then p=1 so//cos(radians(i)) will be mapped between 1 and 1, so it can only equal 1.//This means that when we multiply the radius by this mapped value it will//result in it staying the same and therefore draw a circle.float infinityMaker = map(cos(radians(i)), -1, 1, p, 1);

//float infinityMaker = cos(radians(i));

float cX = cos(radians(i)) * r;float cY = sin(radians(i)) * r * (infinityMaker);

point(cY,cX);

}

}

During an interview from the V&A Decode exhibit

Golan Levin stated that he ....can create ‘behaviour’

through digital technologies that other design

tool can not. The definition of behaviour “refers

to the actions or reactions of an object or

organism, usually in relation to the environment.

Behaviour can be conscious or subconscious...” -

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behaviour.

Control variations & behaviour


ControlP5ControlP5 is a GUI and controller library for

processing that can be used in authoring,

application, and applet mode. Controllers such

as Sliders, Buttons, Toggles, Knobs, Textfields,

RadioButtons, Checkboxes amongst others are

easily added to a processing sketch.

Generative PieceI noticed that Joshua Davis sometimes created

outlines with his generative art and then filled it

with a colour pallet. This is quite a good method

that I could try.

I was watching a video which was a presentation

by Jared Tarbell at Flash on the Beach 2010 and

he discussed the process of recursion which

I found it a really interesting way of producing

visual of a subject. I searched openProcessing

for recursion and found a sketch that uses basic

circles and varies the size by where you click on

the screen. The position and colours are random.


Export a project onto iPhoneThis task was all about getting a previous project

and uploading to an iPhone. First of all I decided

to look at the different methods of uploading to

the iPhone. I have three options, use my coding

from Processing and amend it for iProcessing.

Secondly, upload through flash and thirdly, using

xCode. Using the examples from iProcessing

it took quite a while to figure out the xCode

application but eventually got there and the

coding it slightly different to Processing and

iProcessing uses an integration of the Processing.

js library and a Javascript application framework

for iPhone. The first thing I had to do in xCode

using iProcessing was to change the current

project settings and change the Base SDK to

Latest iOS (found in Base tab) and create a

organisation name (found in General tab). I used

com.massinghamcraig as that is my Apple ID and

read that you must have com. at the beginning.



Craig Massinghamfmp.craigmassingham.co.uk

080041507944096092

Documents

Authorship & Control in Generative Design