Looking through the eyes of machines as students by Paul Laidler

Looking through the eyes of machines as humans I

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

OLIVIA BECKETT

JAMIE BURNS

STUART CANNELL

ELEANOR ELLIOTT-RATHBONE

NICK GREENGLASS

TOM HANDY

RUTH IRVINE

JONO KAMESTER

JUDE LAU

STEVE MCCARTHY

EVANGELIA PAPADOPOULOS

JONO SANDILANDS

MATILDA SCOTT

STEPHANIE TURNBULL

MICA STUDENTS

PAUL LAIDLER

WILLEM PURDY

INTRODUCTION Looking through the eyes of machines as students: International Student Exchange Exhibition

In January 2016, fifteen students were selected from graphic arts disciplines at UWE’s School of Art and Design to contribute to an international student exchange exhibition with Maryland Institute College of Art, (MICA) in Baltimore USA. This exchange of artworks was developed as part of a touring exhibition (of American universities 2015 - 2017) I curated titled ‘Just Press Print’. The ‘Just Press Print’ exhibition ran parallel with a new 16-week course Print and Technology taught at MICA by Jonathan Thomas - current Chair of the Printmaking Department and Faculty lecturer, artist and curator Robert Tillman. The class examined how technology has expanded conceptual and procedural possibilities for making prints. The work generated by the MICA students during this class was used to produce a printed edition for the student exchange portfolio with UWE and formed part of the exchange exhibition in Bristol and Baltimore. The UWE student brief continued the technological approach to making from the MICA Print and Technology class and also borrowed from part of the conceptual narrative behind the ‘Just Press Print’ exhibition.

on ‘The New Aesthetic’ and technological-based statements by the author Bruce Sterling, whose writings encourage greater visual enquiry. For example, Sterling suggested in 2012 that: There truly are many forms of imagery nowadays that are modern, and unique to this period. We’re surrounded by systems, devices and machines generating heaps of raw graphic novelty. Students were asked to respond to one of the following quotes / ruminations below (that relate to many of the artists’ works in the ‘Just Press Print’ exhibition) by Bruce Sterling: ‘Looking through the eyes of machines as humans’ and ‘An eruption of the digital into the physical’. As part of the project, students were asked to produce a limited edition of six prints, document their making process and answer three questions that would prompt responses (as makers) to the relationships between concept, context and production. The significance of revealing the contributing factors involved in creating a printed artwork provides an educational component for the exhibition, but the narrative can also be enlightening and surprising in offering insights into the true nature of creative endeavours.

To develop a cohesive theme for the group, the fifteen invited students from UWE were given a technologically informed brief that would raise questions around a post-digital context for the printed image. The brief also asked how a specific graphic arts discipline such as Illustration, Graphic Design or Printmaking might contribute to this discourse. The narrative for the brief drew upon early writings

Dr Paul Laidler Senior Research Fellow, CFPR Senior Lecturer, BA Illustration & MA Printmaking

OLIVIA BECKETT Changing States Pigmented Inkjet Print

What course are you studying at UWE and why?

dimensionality of the canvas in abstract forms playing with perspective in response to a photographs ability to capture the realness of the world. They used still life’s as their subject and ultimately I wanted a studio space to represent the contemporary creator’s still life + build on their notions.

I study illustration because I enjoy creating concepts but also delving into how these ideas can be explored and best communicated.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? For example do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process?

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief?

My thinking and making process is always rooted in research. To get the ball rolling I’ll research as much around a topic as possible and it’s usually something vaguely related that I would never have thought about before the process that grabs me. I write a lot and that leads to sketches, but physically making mockups is when I make most of my realisations. I work in a multidisciplinary way as I aim to use materials that reflect and enhance my ideas and depending on where my research lands will dictate what materials I use.

I began by taking aerial shots of studio spaces that I then simplified into line drawings. From here I wanted to create something three-dimensional again. Starting with cardboard I played with simple shapes to build up something that had a throwaway aesthetic but I wasn’t seeing cardboard as the right surface for my final piece. As plastecine never dries I saw this as a more appropriate material to enhance the idea of everchanging technologies. I made a relief sculpture and smaller figures to then photograph as my final image.

It has been suggested that digital technologies have brought technical innovations to the field of graphic arts practice, but have also and most importantly, have provoked a ‘mental change’ in the creative process. As a student within a graphic arts field do you believe this statement to be true and if so could you offer any insights on what this ‘mental change’ could be?

I was thinking about the demand for new technology to be faster and simpler for users and wondered how far can we simplify until the physical ends up disappearing altogether? Putting this into a design context I looked at the spaces we work in as creators, filled with various tools + pieces that reflect our practice - will we need studio spaces in the future? Responding to ‘Eruptions of the digital into the physical’ I began with photographs and wanted to see how far I could simplify the first image into an analogue response. Cubist artists aimed to emphasise the two

With advances in technology I think the way we approach ideas and problems is far more ‘techconscious’ – on a simple level we can communicate quicker and share our ideas easier as well as speed up production. But the speed for these things also speeds up our reactions, this I would see as a change in our ‘mental process’, especially when thinking of how an audience will understand and observe our work.

JAMIE BURNS Digital Homes Screen Print & Sprayed Aluminium

What course are you studying at UWE and why? I currently study BA Hons Graphic Design because I enjoy the process of visually communicating self initiated concepts so that each process element involves reasoning. Graphic design incorporates all elements of art & design, it allows me to experiment and build my knowledge of techniques both traditional and contemporary.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? For example do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process? I believe that the initial idea must be well developed and explored to produce a successful concept, I heavily research and experiment so that I have several notions that I can compare and they usually influence each other and inspire my ideas. Considered materials are essential in portraying my concepts, I think this is why my projects generally elaborate into 3D outcomes because of their physicality, enhancing the understanding from the audience.

parallel between the privacy of our IP addresses and our physical homes,. I have chosen to use venetian blinds because of how we equip them within our homes to provide us with privacy, appearing on the front is my personal IP address that can be accessed by anyone online that has my home address and what I think is more worrying is that it works vice versa. The letterforms are inspired by the style of Victorian numbers that we attach to our doors to convey our house numbers. The decision to use red transparent acetate is to support the idea of a window in which the audience would be able to see through and hide by using the blind. I think red was appropriate because of its immediate connection to danger and endangerment. The statistic that reads, ‘124,922,662 IP addresses, 26,473,000 homes’ is to illustrate the rate in which we are being recorded digitally. Each individual IP address is mapped and easily accessible and I think the contrast in number to the amount of physical homes is staggering. My work communicates an example of how digital technology is merging into our physical environment by illustrating how our digital objects are supplying us with a second address that provides more information about ourselves online.

Please describe how the work submitted for the project responds to one or both of the proposed ruminations by Bruce Sterling, ‘Eruptions of the digital in to the physical & ‘Looking through the eyes of machines as humans’. My work responds to ‘Eruptions of the digital into the physical’. My area of interest considered internet censorship and privacy, I wanted to understand how our personal details are being infiltrated through online tactics that we are not aware of without further investigation. Through exploring this theme I was particularly interested in how our digital technology is mapped using IP addresses. My piece is looking at the

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief?

concept of my work and its fabrication enhance the notion of human experience.

I wanted the outcome to represent our digital IP addresses as a physical object relating to our physical houses, this is my reasoning for using blinds as their purpose is for use within a household environment. I cut down the blinds to size using a hacksaw. To produce the numbers on the blinds I adapted a font into a vector which was then laser cut into plastic vinyl, using the vinyl as a stencil I spray painted onto the aluminum blinds. I think the aesthetic of the hands on approach using spray paint supports the notion of substance and human interaction. Using silk screen, I printed the statistics onto the transparent acetate, again to provoke the clarity of a humans sensitivity that proves an aura unable digitally. My ambition was to avoid digital printing techniques so to support the concept of physicality and demonstrate the contrast between digital and material. Within a majority of the aspects of my work there is evidence of my interaction constructing the piece, whether it be an out of line cut or excess spray. I feel that these elements support the

I think this statement is apparent in how we now approach a concept, we are aware of the digital technologies that we can equip as tools to create ambitious and innovative work. I think historically craftsmanship has been appreciated the most respected area within creative subjects, but at new technology integrates itself within art & design it is intellectuals that can excel. The parameters of art & design are constantly widening and I feel the art lies within the intelligence of inventing new ways in which to arm our new technologies.

STUART CANNELL Mona Low Battery Screen Print

What course are you studying at UWE and why?

The original image was taken from the internet and distorted through appropriate software to give the pixelated aesthetic and respective size. This was then brought into the physical world through the use of screen-printing. The image was printed using the process of four-colour separation. Instead of using a small dot structure I chose to enlarge it so the viewer is able to see the process more clearly. This was also to create a juxtaposition between the clean looking digital screen, that the piece references, and the dotted structured of a printed image.

I was a student on the MA Multidisciplinary course, which was funded through the 3D3 scholarship programme. The course enabled me to fully explore the limitations of developments of contemporary and traditional printmaking, ultimately leading my work to reference both digital and analogue concepts and processes.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? i.e. do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process?

The process relates to the theme through the combination of digital and analogue processes and the referencing of the digital through the pixelated aesthetic and respective size of the image. This combination invites the viewer into considering the relationship between digital and analogue in relation to how one views and interacts with an image in today’s (western) society.

My working process begins with an concept, however, the process is still crucially relevant. There has to be a relationship between the process and the concept, otherwise the end result will be jarring. It is the cohesion between the two that I strive to achieve within my work.

It has been suggested that digital technologies have brought technical innovations to the filed of graphic arts practice, but have also and most importantly, have provoked a ‘mental change’ in the creative process. As a student within the Graphic Arts field do you believe this statement to be true and if so could you offer any insights on what this ‘mental change’ could be?

The piece I have created can be aligned with both of these proposed ruminations. Firstly, the piece is based on the infamous Mona Lisa. Although this is physical painting, I have used a digital file and working method to pixelate the image. This has then been worked back into a physically space through the method of screenprinting.

Since the beginning of my artistic endeavour I have been in contact in some form with digital technologies. This has usually been through software that I have used to alter images, however, it has also been used within the actual creation of artwork. Thus the idea of the digital has always been part of my mindset. I find it hard to comment that there has been any sort of mental change within myself that I have noticed.

Secondly, the size and format of the piece makes reference to the size of an iPad screen and modern day issues that one has using these machines - the potential lack of battery and wi-fi. Although you are looking at the Mona Lisa on a piece of paper, it has been distorted as if you were looking at it through the eyes of a digital device.

I do believe that the development of digital innovations provide artists with a larger platform in which to develop and realise their concepts. Most notable this has been through the accessibility of 3D printing technologies and their relationship to mould making and casting. Although these technologies have existed for over 20 years, it has now developed to the point were they are more affordable and easier to use for all interested persons.

Please describe how you made the work for the project (use images to illustrate where appropriate) and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief?

ELEANOR ELLIOTT-RATHBONE ‘Lovingly Handmade trademarked’ Digital Embroidery

What course are you studying at UWE and why?

have too. Once you go beyond the first 30, you start to think more creatively’. The rest of the process is made up of mocking up ideas from sketches, and receiving feedback from my peers. Without that feedback and critique, I think I’d be lost.

I’m currently in my second year of studies, undertaking a BA in Graphic Design. I’ve always had an interest in both digital technology and design as well as art history. Not being much of a fine artist, graphic design seemed to be the natural next step forward. Studying Design at UWE gives me the ability to develop and explore my own interests in the realms of my design practice. It can be trying at times, but the result is nearly always a satisfying one. The facilities at the Bower Ashton campus are excellent. The print centre, fabrication, letterpress, photography studios and screenprinting studios all encourage us artists to use them while we can. As a design student, I’m increasingly expanding my own knowledge of the types of techniques I can use to improve my work. These facilities facilitate that.

Please describe how the work submitted for the project responds to one or both of the proposed ruminations by Bruce Sterling, ‘Eruptions of the digital in to the physical’ & ‘Looking through the eyes of machines as humans’. My piece is a response to Sterling’s ‘Eruptions of the digital into the physical’. As an individual who grew up with both digital and physical technologies, just when the digital was beginning to assert its dominance in modern day life, Sterling’s words brought back a lot of memories of this particular period of my life. It made me reflect on objects in my life that had been designed to look and feel the opposite of what they actually were. Particularly old design trends - like the illusion of drop shadows, or those fake screenprinting ‘mistakes’ that you could buy as a textures pack on various Photoshop tutorial sites.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? For example do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process? When I start a new project, a flurry of ideas and concepts come to me that are quite overwhelming. Some of them are rubbish and cliché, and the odd few are worth a bit more thought. I usually write continuously to help inform my ideas, sketching them out comes later once I’ve decided on the direction. I develop my thoughts more when I ask myself questions as a way to challenge myself. ‘How is the form relevant to it’s function?’ is one I often ask. If my answer doesn’t hold enough weight, I re-evaluate. After I decide the direction of the project, I usually research to see if it has been done similarly, or at all by other designers or artists. If it has, I force myself to go back to the drawing board and come up with something more refined. My tutor Gabriel Solomons often sets class tasks about idea generation. ‘The first 15 ideas you come up with are ideas everyone else would

I was keenly reminded of Walter Benjamin’s In The Age of Mechanical Reproduction - how a piece of art can lose its aura, its religiosity and truthfulness once it is reproduced. In other words, its value becomes conflicted once it is commodified. It’s my belief that in the age of digital mimicking the physical, we cannot live without a certain handcrafted aesthetic. Perhaps without it, the world can feel cold and somewhat clinical. In any home department store, the justification for this belief can be found. TK Maxx is littered with ‘Home Sweet Home’ hanging signs, crafted only to complement an otherwise warm and ‘homey’ house. It’s odd to witness people buying these things, and even odder when you begin to ponder why they choose not to actually make

it themselves. I believe we care far more about the final product and finish, than the craftsmanship or process that helped make it into what it is.

to have various hand-drawn nuances (e.g. uneven and inconsistent curves). This observation, applied with the phrase ‘Lovingly Handmade TM’ provides audiences with enough cues to interpret the question the ideas I’ve tried to convey.

The sentimentality of post-digital Britain today inspires and motivates us to desire fast digital processes, so long as they have a traditional aesthetic. This understanding motivated the design and format of my piece – a digital embroidery.

Ironically, this wasn’t the difficult and time-consuming part of the process. One would think that a digital embroidery would be considerably easier, faster, less stressful, and cheaper to accomplish. I was very wrong to think any of these things would be true; the process of digital production was the most time-consuming and costly experience I’ve had this year. I contacted over five embroidery companies until one company said they would be up to the job. It took over 10 phone calls, constant to-and-from emails until I got what I wanted. That, and the project became confused when another colleague of the company became involved – so much so that it delayed the production and I missed my initial deadline. It became so stressful and financially crippling that at one point, I was genuinely considering replacing my flowers with blank boxes with a faint X in them with the type ‘This cost £150 to produce’. Thankfully I held back. Perhaps this story illustrates the pitfalls of the digital, and we still have some time until the world is without the physical.

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief? I wanted my piece to illustrate how consumer culture is aided by the eruption of digital into the physical, or vice versa. In this case, I wanted to create something that could be used or even misconstrued for a piece of decoration, similar to the ‘home sweet home’ signs I mentioned previously. I also wanted to choose a process that had a very nostalgic, done-by-hand aesthetic, but distort this meaning through the process used. Collage might spring to mind, but after a little thinking, I came to the decision of presenting my ideas in the form of an embroidery - a digital embroidery to be specific. I wanted my response to be hung with string, with one dowel through the top and bottom to stretch and flatten the design accordingly. With this presentation in mind, I began researching hand embroidery, trying to understand the sense of style and colouring many use. Hand embroidery designs have a very mumsy, slightly dated feel to them. I imagined symmetrical flowers, leaves, and petals with the occasional bird thrown into the mix. That is exactly what I observed.

It has been suggested that digital technologies have brought technical innovations to the field of graphic arts practice, but have also and most importantly, provoked a ‘mental change’ in the creative process. As a student within a graphic arts field do you believe this statement to be true and if so could you offer any insights on what this ‘mental change’ could be?

After some sketching, mock-ups and feedback received, I had sorted the flower design. The secondary elements of the design to consider were the phrasing and the type. I had written no less than 30 phrases that would act as motivators for the audience to question the authenticity of my artefact’s process of creation. These ranged from ‘We’re living in an age where we can’t tell the difference between our hands and our software’ to the slightly more direct ‘Don’t trust this to be handmade’. However, I found most of the phrases to be too wordy, too direct, or too déclassé. That wasn’t until I utilised the significance of the TM trademarked sign, and the phrase ‘Lovingly Handmade’ – which I felt was questionable in its phrasing enough to make a viewer consider the question, ‘why “lovingly” and why include the TM sign?’

On a base level, I think the statement is true. Web design and development is becoming increasingly focused on the user experience and its relation to content, rather than content presented with an accompanying navigation bar - the users are expected to navigate through the site themselves. Today, design is all about taking care of the viewer, and making their experience sensory and memorable. In book design, you’ll find the resurgence of uncoated papers and the freedom it gives designers to communicate the content they’re working with through touch. Another observation would be 3D projection mapping and its incorporation into many designers’ practices. In truth, I feel this advancement in digital technology has only given designers and artists the freedom to experiment with their ideas in mediums they’ve never before been able to work in. The mental change is the shift in attitudes between the content, and presentation of that content. It’s a thrilling experience for some, and a daunting experience for others. For me, it’s definitely exciting.

In terms of type, my choices varied considerably through experimentation and asking myself why each one was appropriate to the concept. The function of the type was to encourage audiences to question if the piece was really handmade or not. The chosen typeface’s first impression is that it seems professional. However, upon closer inspection the typeface appears

NICK GREENGLASS Low-res Glitch Relief Print

What course are you studying at UWE and why?

My thought process starts from a mix of inspirations and ideas that I play around with in sketchbooks and journals before I think about any kind of technical process. I’ll then often start to look for ways to develop an idea in an unusual direction, this could be by mixing in something that I have seen from the art world or industry or culture thats at odds with the idea in someway, I’ll then go back and sketch or take more photographs, or make collages. once I start running with an idea I’ll begin a making process, at this stage I’ll sometimes see links between ideas as I look back on experimentations, I may go back to re-develop images or alternatively stay with something but develop it in multiple ways. An openness of direction is a big part of the process and I like to keep a sense of development as I work, there isn’t necessarily a feeling like I am making a final piece, more a continuation of an idea.

Having previously studied for a BA in Illustration and coming from that background printmaking appealed to me as a technical craft. I was interested in studying the MA in Multi-Disciplinary Printmaking at UWE as it offered a platform to experiment with a technically focused side of art that was at the same time very open conceptually, it could be geared towards various art forms, fine art, graphics and illustration, photography, digital art and so on. My own practice was at this time very broad and I wanted to find a way of working that gelled my differing approaches together. I planned to give my practice this technical base and then explore what I could do from that starting point of printmaking. I find printmaking intriguing and exciting for the way it sits very much between two worlds, one foot in the past with early printing presses having such a big impact on the world, and yet those traditional techniques still being used in art now. With new technologies in digital, 3D and hybrid printmaking there seems to be a place to explore tradition and cutting edge technology within the same field. As an artist I have found myself drawn to printmaking for its combination of these polarities and wanted to explore this in my own work.

Please describe how the work submitted for the project responds to one or both of the proposed ruminations by Bruce Sterling, ‘Eruptions of the digital in to the physical & ‘Looking through the eyes of machines as humans’. ‘Eruptions of the digital into the physical’ This quote by Bruce Sterling for me brought up images and ideas connected with a blurring of environments, space and specifically a blurring of boundaries between digital and physical realities. I started thinking about the new ways in which we communicate, socialise and present ourselves online and how in a way these digital aspects of our daily lives could be seen as

How would you describe your thinking and making process? For example do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process?

“From an artistic and graphic point of view I wanted to illustrate this idea of a digital identity manifesting itself physically.”

having an etheric nature to them. The illumination of the computer screen, the voice that comes to us from afar via a telephone conversation, the part of us that is disembodied and transported into a digitally constructed space when playing a video game or the replication of our physical self in images and videos, creating digital doubles or non-physical version of ourself. All these seemed to be ways in which our image or voice are replicated and then brought into a digital and etheric space or reality.

I planned to bring this digital self into a physical form by hand carving the vector lines and polygons that I had used to build the face. With this method of hand carving I could replicate a machine-like laser cut process. This created a really interesting element to the project for me and one that linked into the second of Sterlings quotes, ‘Looking through the eyes of machines as humans’, an odd loop of an artist imitating a machine, in this case a laser cutter, that itself imitates a physical process or craft. So there was a nice albeit strange synergy between the concept of the image – a digital machine’s replication and imitation of identity, and too with the making process - an artist’s imitation of a machine.

I began to explore an idea of being re-constructed digitally and having a digital identity. I looked at examples like online avatars, social media profiles and digital doubles. Some of these could be seen as flattening identity. For example, a Facebook profile that the user has generated can never show all the complexities that make us who we are, instead it could be seen as a flattened version of our full self, flattered in the same way that a computer drawing of a face is flattened and represented on a screen in pixels or vector lines.

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief? With Identity being a central focus I decided to use fashion photography as a starting point and specifically looked at headshot portraiture. I selected a couple of images, a black and white Yves Saint Laurent advert of a male model and a screen shot from a Nikki Minaj video. I wanted to use fashion photography with something time-based, something that would appear online in the form of say a Youtube video.

From an artistic and graphic point of view I wanted to illustrate this idea of a digital identity manifesting itself physically. Further more the relationship between physical and digital construction both in terms of aesthetics and technical method became important factors in my thinking and making process.

Nikki Minaj’s overly expressive (and possibly in this case digitally worked) face is almost cartoon-like and hyper-real. She could almost be from a computer game or exist as a avatar. The male model from the YSL shot was more ambiguous, androgynous and in a sense less individualistic.

I wanted the print to convey an idea of identity being de-constructed and re-built in digital space and then that digital identity, like a ghost in the machine manifesting again physically on the other end. I liked the idea of using vector lines to illustrate this identity of being re-constructed and fragmented, I designed to create an image that immediately looked very digitally constructed, comprising of polygons and straight lines, a portrait that had construction itself as an aesthetic element, just as a building has a structural element under the outer design or a computer animated character may contain a digital armature underneath its finished form.

During a creative process I’ll develop my ideas as I’m working and early on my initially thought process was to look at digital identity as a mishmash of culture and style, with the ability to choose and design identity. I constructed a collage of features from these two sources to make this new digital person. I then digitally draw on vector lines and created polygon shapes, like

in the creative process. As a student within a graphic arts field do you believe this statement to be true and if so could you offer any insights on what this ‘mental change’ could be?

a 3D structural maquette that suggested the look of digital construction. By using this very precise process I found myself again thinking about the concept and design of a digital identity and I wanted to bring the digital non-human aspect of it more to the fore. As I experimented and played around with the design I felt drawn towards erasing and glitching areas of features, eyes and nose began disappearing into the surrounding polygon shapes and vector lines, adding to the concept of digital fragmentation, re-construction and an idea of a digital copy.

There seems to be an immediacy and fluidity about using digital technologies to make artwork, software like Photoshop for example puts the artist in a role of editor, as work can be dramatically changed back and forth infinite times. This perhaps existed to some extent before, but in a less fluid way and certainly not in such an endless way. Much like how writing has changed from a series of hand written or typed drafts to a continual writing and editing process on computer, the same could be said for digital creative processes and certainly I have often felt like I am at once making a preliminary sketch and rendering a final piece. This could be said to have lead also to a change in the idea of the finished piece. An artwork can be changed through out the process, but also be brought back once it has been completed and reworked or remade. These are not new methods but have been exaggerated or brought more to the fore, so could affect the way artists approach the creative process.

Once the polygon/vector line process was completed I made a digital print of the image to transpose onto engraving plastic. Keeping to these strait vector lines I carved the gridded face and features as precisely as possible to give the impression of having been cut on a machine, though when the viewer looks closer they’d be able to see the more natural imperfections of a hand carving. I filled in the background with very strait lines to evoke movement, of scan lines and the kind of look that happens sometimes with a poor computer print out. Finally I extended these lines vertically at the bottom of the image to suggest printer slip and glitch. After I had finished the engraving process I used an oilbased relief ink to coat the plate and printed my edition of 6 on an Albion press. These presses have changed very little over the decades or even the centuries. I felt this added to the whole process to be printing an image related to a new digital media and its affects on one of these machines. A machine very similar to those used in the past that had brought in a new media of newspapers, printed books and propaganda posters and that themselves changed the cultural landscape so dramatically. This new dramatic change happening again now and with greater speed through digital media.

New aesthetics that relate to the digital are being used in both digital and non-digital works and much like the way photography changed painting the same could be said with digital media. When photography developed, artists either began to use it to replicate new levels of light and detail or the opposite and moved away from it, in the form of abstraction. The same could be said now with digital media affecting graphic artworks, perhaps new technical approaches and digitally inspired imagery at one end and possibly a return to craft based arts or using primal materials at the other. A big aspect of technology now is the interconnectedness of everything and there is I think a desire also to cross disciplines and techniques in art. From hybrid techniques to the incorporation of sound and visuals and the participation of the audience, art is perhaps more interactive, like technology is.

It has been suggested that digital technologies have brought technical innovations to the field of graphic arts practice, but have also and most importantly, have provoked a ‘mental change’

TOM HANDY “Print?” Pigmented Inkjet Print

What course are you studying at UWE and why?

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief?

I’m studying Illustration at UWE because I love to make images that communicate an idea and wanted to learn how to make a living out of doing so, while advancing my practice in the process.

I based the content of my illustrations on the different stages of printmaking technology throughout history, and went through my usual process of drawing, scanning and digitally editing. I then 3D modelled and rendered the letters using google sketchup, to be a platform built on the capabilities of 3D print technology. The letters host the overlaid illustrated history of print technology which culminates with the very process used to generate those letters.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? For example do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process? I would describe my thinking and making process as fairly linear in its execution. I tend to have a few main ideas that I work with and then when I’ve come to a final idea I’m happy with I work out how to show it in the rigid drawing style that I use. The idea comes first and then I translate it into my specific style of drawing, before scanning and digitally colouring.

I do agree with the first statement but have never really thought about a “mental change” in the creative process. I think that, if anything, digital technologies have just unlocked a massive variety of possibilities within creative processes that allows for almost endless experimentation with the relationship between traditional and new digital processes. I can’t really say if there’s been a mental change but I think new technologies will always open up new possibilities and cause innovation through the ways people play with the interaction between new and old.

The piece I have submitted responds mainly to the quote “Eruptions of the digital into the physical” by focusing on 3D printing as an example of the current stage of print technology. The rough history of printmaking technology is illustrated atop “physical” letters that have been generated by digital means. Ideally I would have liked to actually 3D print each letter and then photograph them because then they would have actually been physical “eruptions” - but it wasn’t possible within the timescale, but this is definitely something I’m interested in exploring in the future.

RUTH IRVINE Coded Blind Emboss

What course are you studying at UWE and why? As I reflected on the quotes I became fascinated by the idea of immediacy within digital art that can’t be translated to physical methods. I also played with the concept of copy and paste looking at current methods e.g. ‘cmd c’, ‘cmd v’ then working backwards towards older methods used by printers, designers and artists. As well as this, I researched theories, journals and essays surrounding immediacy. I wanted to find out if immediacy de-valued art. I also wanted to investigate the gap between digital and physical print and how this relationship could work together.

I am studying Graphic Design at UWE because it encourages socially engaged projects as well as creative problem solving. Graphic Design is so much more than just logos and websites.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? i.e. do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process? When embarking on a project I like to let my thoughts and ideas guide my making process. I believe that without clear motive my work loses relevance and just becomes something pretty to look at. That being said, the relevance of my idea could be how it is made or what it is made from.

As I explored older print making methods I found that once set up, countless copies could be made of a single image or type from letterpress to screen-printing and embossing etc. However, it is the setting up that takes so much time. Digital print is immediate, a piece of code is run and a printed page is produced. In my piece Coded I explore the tangibility of code and analogue printing. The embossed letters are code written to replace the time consuming set up of embossing. Coded is a representation of digital working with physical print as a physical printed piece.

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief? I started with initial sketch and written ideas which I translated onto InDesign and Photoshop. As I was conscious of my heavy use of typography I wanted to see what my design would look like in specific fonts and sizes as I tested out different styles and layouts. As I developed the idea of using code, I dabbled in experimenting with copied code from the Internet but none of it really conveyed my message so I wrote my own. In doing so, it allowed me to add my own comments on the process into the code. Once I had my typed code and chosen layout I printed onto A3 folex and exposed the negative onto the embossing plate. I then experimented embossing onto three different paper stocks, my preferred choice being 250gsm velvet satin. It turns out that embossing text as fine as mine means the rollers need to be at the tightest setting which makes it hard work for me embossing six pages. However, there is a playfulness between the content I am printing and my physical struggles producing it that brings Coded to life.

Please describe how the work submitted for the project responds to one or both of the proposed ruminations by Bruce Sterling, ‘Eruptions of the digital in to the physical & ‘Looking through the eyes of machines as humans’. ‘Eruptions of the digital in to the physical’ & ‘Looking through the eyes of machines as humans’ made me begin to question the bridge between heritage and progression that’s only resonated recently through digital technology. I’ve read a lot about new forms of art activism that attempt to preserve damaged artefacts and locations by digitally mapping and recreating them within an artistic practice, my work for the upcoming exhibition draws on these influences in a more illustrative practice.

JONO KAMESTER Untitled Pigmented Inkjet Print

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief? For this project I chose not to create many roughs of my ideal outcome, like most projects I started with my mechanical pencil and began to draw shapes and curves until I started to discover something within the image that I liked. Then I used the lightbox to make separate layers of the same image, different coloured versions painted using acrylic to then scan in and assemble with Photoshop. Transfer to Illustrator and create a new layer of clean lines to overlap the image with for the finished effect. Using traditional materials and new-media technology to finish the piece seemed appropriate for the way I was tackling the brief.

What course are you studying at UWE and why? I study Illustration at UWE currently, I’ve always communicated best through drawing and the course in Bristol allowed me to pursue narrative and visual language. My influences lie in film and literature so Illustration just seemed to be the most appropriate discipline to deconstruct texts and explore them in my own practice.

It’s interesting to see what other disciplines digital skills can expand into within a creative practice. When I started University I was primarily using my drawing tablet and keeping everything safe from error within Photoshop, then I started experimenting with laser-cutting, printing, painting and sketching more frequently. Digital technology has always played a part in my work however, I experiment and try different ways of mark making and colour all the time but it always leads back to a digital outcome. Having the utility of technology, the way it’s in a constant state of expanding and improving, it just creates a whole new perception on design.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? For example do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process? I tend to have my own routines for collecting and organising ideas, so many projects start out in the same way but I always let the concept drive the aesthetic outcome. My work usually focuses around figures and portraits, for instance I created a book cover recently for a competition for ‘A Clockwork Orange’ so I took influence from Estonian children’s books and Russian design in an attempt to match the language of the novel.

Even online culture promotes this change, being immersed in such a high quantity of images daily directs the way we approach our work, it’s almost become core to creative practice in all stages. I think this change has already internalised, I think the best work currently circulating originates from artists who are skilled in both digital and traditional disciplines, finding their own style and constantly applying it to new technologies.

My style is always noticeable, but I try to keep a diverse portfolio otherwise I lose interest in my work, repeating the same aesthetic

JUDE LAU Untitled Interactive Screen Print

What course are you studying and why?

context of contemporary print. I would describe myself as more of a problem-solver and somewhat agnostic as to what type of process I use to realise my ideas. My work prior to the student exchange largely exists as code, renderings and sound bites, as precursors to 3D objects. They were my enquiries into what constitutes a print and the position of the artist’s hand. I believe it is more attributable to the nature of my original question - that allowed for the range of processes to produce the work in the first instance - more than it being a conscious choice.

MA Printmaking. It was just a natural ‘next step’ sort of thing. I studied print at undergraduate level, have worked in the print industry for the better part of a decade and co-founded an independent print studio.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? For example do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process?

I would consider myself an artist who works in 2D and 3D, with a strong interest in sound works. I’ve come to think about print simply as the development of process - and that process can involve just about anything within the

The work is an interactive screenprinted animation of the robot, Maria, from the 1920s cult-classic, ‘Metropolis’, as a signifier towards the underlying theme of Transhumanism. It is a manifestation of “digital into physical” and the irony in viewing the completed work is that our response as humans remains unchanged. In spite of the fact that the work is produced using digitally-mediated means but intentionally mimicking an entirely analogue process. This process predates cinema and works around exactly the same principles as a regular TV screen:

another)”. Woodford, C: Explain that stuﬀ: [http://www. explainthatstuﬀ.com/television.html]: para. 3: [March 13, 2016]

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief? The work took just over two months, using a combination of processes: drawing, stop-motion, screenprint, design, mechanics, carpentry, engineering and a little bit of electronics work. Each part went through a rigorous proofing/prototype phase: the flow of the animation in its “paper stage”, the mechanics of the sliding screen, the size of frame (which is directly connected to the inner mechanisms), testing

“Think of TV as an electronic flick-book. The images are flickering on the screen so fast they fuse together in your brain to make a moving picture (really, though they’re really lots of still pictures displayed one after

the adhesion and opacity of inks (as it was printing onto a notoriously troublesome surface, acetate and acrylic Perspex), the fidelity of line quality whilst screenprinting, the functionality of the work once it was all dry, had time to settle and was all put back together. It was a really intense period!

The figure after the decimal point refers to the diameter of the filament and .27 was being “phased out because it was prone to breaking and mostly used by people who screenprinted CDs and circuit boards”. It was a casualty of sorts, relating to one effect of digital technology within such an analogue process as screenprinting.

One part in particular brought up an unusual and unexpected effect. The screen element was drawn using Photoshop as it would literally be impossible to do by any other means. Imagine trying to consistently and consecutively draw perfect straight lines exactly 1.06mm wide, spaced exactly 0.26mm apart, across the area of an A3 page. Even a laser cutter could not achieve the fidelity needed in this instance. On screen it was simple, if a tad monotonous.

No point crying over spilt milk, I had a brand new screen (165.35) and work to do. My solution was a reversal of digital into physical - by thinking in terms of what we are telling the computer to do when we input frequencies and angles into boxes. I basically acted out what a computer does on screen. I offset the artwork on the physical screen.

The point at which this immaculate accumulation of lines metamorphosised came when introducing it to the physical plane. In short, it created a Moiré effect onscreen. “Moiré effect is a visual perception that occurs when viewing a set of lines or dots that is superimposed on another set of lines or dots, where the sets differ in relative size, angle, or spacing.” Farley. K: Moiré effect [http://whatis.techtarget.com/ definition/moire-effect]: para 1: [March 21 2016]

It’s almost a moot question to ask if digital technology has brought technical innovation. One would only need to look over the history of print, too see just how much the two are completely intertwined. On the other hand, it still comes to down to a matter of choice. In my year group, I could testify to particular individuals who will avoid digital media in their practice whenever possible. Then there are those (myself included) who most certainly welcome it. Either way, that new tool, new way of thinking, new technique etc. etc. has such a tenuous relation to being truly innovative.

Adding to this, the texture of the printing substrate itself (e.g. paper/fabric) qualifies as another set of lines and angles. In this way, it struck me as very extraordinary that Moiré occurred at all. I was only dealing with one layer of straight lines and printing onto substrates that don’t have a visible weave or texture (e.g. acetate and acrylic Perspex). The conflict was caused not by the thread count, but the actual diameter of the thread itself. I discovered this to be the case purely through chance. I popped my one compatible screen (165.27).

“Immature poets imitate, mature poets steal”! T.S.Elliot The Sacred Woods: Essays on Poetry and Criticism.1920.

The groundbreaking poet of the early 20th century, T.S. Elliot, eloquently describes a state of being, which was reflective of our nature then and still true now. There is debate around who cut to the chase first or even if it was said at all (https://www.quora.com/What-didPicasso-mean-when-he-said-good-artists-copy-greatartists-steal). Was it Picasso or was it W.H Davenport Adams (19th century magazine journalist)? Regardless, by “stealing” each other’s words, they demonstrate perfectly the sentiment of the message. The fact that it is being debated nearly a century later pays credence to their artistic integrity. Further to this, all of the authors in question would have made these observations before the digital age began. Before the first computer was made. Are we so bold too - thinking that we are really that much different from those who came before us, just because we have new tools?

One of the changes that I find to be most interesting is the idea that through our so-called mindless surfing of the net, we are actually increasing our brain’s capacity. We’re priming ourselves to be sponges for information and re-learning how to learn. Considering the rate at which technologies are being developed and made accessible, it seems to me that a bit of ‘mindless’ surfing is actually quite the opposite. “The human brain is exquisitely sensitive to any and every event: we cannot take it as an article of faith that it will remain inviolate and that ways of learning and thinking will remain constant.” Susan Greenfield, neuroscientist and Professor of Pharmacology (2006)! These words relate to the generation gap between our predecessors and us. Namely Generation X (born early 1960s to early 1980s) and Generation Y (born in the 80s and 90s). The World Wide Web was only allowed to be freely used by all in 1993, enter Generation Z. Those really born into a technologically informed environment will inevitably form a set of sensibilities based upon that. Taking the education system now, which introduces school kids to coding as a form of play, whereas for me (sitting between generation X and Y) coding has been something that I’ve had to seek out and only just started to learn.

In the strictest sense of the word, I don’t believe digital technology has brought technical innovation. Instead, I believe it has given us a greater ability to “steal” and in turn provoked alternative schools of thought around what it means to be innovative. Respectively of the time we are in now, innovation seems to translate as enriching traditional processes, adding to the conversation or in more techy speak, augmenting our reality. In each of these instances we are only really building upon inherited or “stolen” knowledge.

The paper and pen too them, will become what quill and parchment are to us. The idea of craft will move further towards a digital plane and away from the hand. So becoming immersed in an imagined state of existence. The further down the rabbit hole we go, we’ll be faced with questioning our existing ideas of materiality and physicality. Of course this is something that is already starting to happen and as such has been well documented by the philosopher Jean Baudrillard in his book “Simulacra and simulation”.

When I think about digital technology, the biggest facet would have to be the influence of the World Wide Web, as it directly effects how we research and communicate. The fact that “we”, equates to 3.2 billion people (and rising) extends its reach way above that of any religion, music, science, literature, art, or philosophy. In fact it is the biggest cultural phenomenon the world has ever known.

STEVE MCCARTHY Untitled 4 Pigmented Inkjet Print

What course are you studying at UWE and why?

I have an archive of prints, photos and other raw materials I like to scan in and composite into my outcomes. Then at a later point, I make more specific pieces to play into the greater narrative of the piece. While the pieces start using traditional prints, the bulk of the work is done in Photoshop using digital collage to combine the elements on top of each other.

I’m studying Illustration, although I do have a background in animation. After I started my Foundation Degree and completed an illustration module, I found this process itself resonated with me. What I enjoy about illustration is that it isn’t just a sum of many parts like animation; the outcome is focused and more immediate. Especially within UWE where there is no house style, I feel comfortable moving through different mediums and coming together with the way I want my visual language to develop.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? For example do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process?

‘Untitled 4’ was in response to “Eruptions of the digital into the physical” by Bruce Sterling. I was, in particular, examining the way satellites process images through several different spectrums of light. From that, I wanted the piece to be about the transition between more traditional techniques and then bring them into a digital, distorted world.

My thought process defines my making process; it starts from scatter-brained perpetual thoughts, which I try to scribble into thumbnails and fractured sentences. Through my process I mix traditional pieces and bring them into a digital space to composite them and give them a new context.

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief?

I do prefer the projects where I can be a little looser in the development phase, as long as the idea is clear. The looseness brings in room to create in unseen ways, therefore elements develop naturally throughout, dictated by my visual language. This way I can be more experimental and find new ways around issues I wouldn’t have used otherwise, making the process more fulfilling.

I found a picture of an abandoned Brutalist hotel which I thought had an intimidating feel to it, so I saved it for my archive because I thought it would make a good image to collage with. To make the background I took four layered monoprints and other items, such as watercolours or sandpaper. I then layered shapes

“...digital technologies are invaluable, but they can also be quite dangerous for a creator. It’s like an abyss; the further you use it in your process, the more options it creates to the point of infinity.”

using dissolve fills, erased bits and then used contentaware on areas to add a more random element to the background. After that I manipulated the building to warp its perspective and angle, to enhance its impact.

length of time the takes can last. Broadly a 1000ft roll of 35mm film lasts around nine and a half minutes before running out, while a digital tape or recording card or hard drive can last from 40 minutes to over an hour and a half. This translates to a very different rhythm on the floor: the pressure to “cut” to save film is alleviated.” He mentioned when using film it felt it was, “important and intense.” As if “Something is at stake.” I think the same can be said within the art realm.

I then made a Glitched version of the original through distortion techniques but it was too strong on its own, so I then decided to layer over the top of the original piece. I messed around with how much glitch I wanted to show through, added in lights coming from the building and then a foggy area to add to the atmosphere. I coloured the backdrop; originally it was warmer, but ultimately the colour was cooled to add more depth to the background so I could modify the colour in the main building to give it a rustier, warmer feel.

Digital is faster, cheaper and easier to use for the masses. It creates an environment where you have a lack of fear of ‘messing up’ because of the lower risks. In my work this has helped me create many variations of an idea faster and experiment, benefitting my process and changing it in ways I couldn’t have done traditionally.

As a tool, digital technologies are invaluable, but they can also be quite dangerous for a creator. It’s like an abyss; the further you use it in your process, the more options it creates to the point of infinity. It can distil your original intentions and make it harder for you to tell what is successful as the chances of overworking something increases dramatically. Learning when to stop and take breaks is invaluable in the digital realm and it is not a lesson easily learnt. You can really tell the effect digital technology can have on your eyes and work when you print it off and it feels that it has jumped realties. Because of this, I feel I’ve started to use more traditional techniques when it comes to patching my work together as this way there is less chance of falling into those pit traps.

Technology has changed the outlook of making for the creative. Keanu Reeves has spoken about the change from the perspective of an actor: “The biggest difference I have found when working photochemical versus digitally on motion pictures is the

EVANGELIA PAPADOPOULOS ‘Placeholder’ Pigmented Inkjet Print

What course are you studying at UWE and why?

digital in to the physical’ & ‘Looking through the eyes of machines as humans’.

I’m studying Graphic Design because I like thinking that there is a reason behind everything looking the way that it does.

The work that I have submitted responds to the proposed rumination by Bruce Sterling, ‘Eruptions of the digital in to the physical’. I have looked at the relationship between digital pixels and physical pixels. In particular, how enlarging and zooming into pixels can really shift the narrative and meaning of an image, contrasting with physical pixels, which never lose their meaning.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? For example do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process? My thinking and making process I suppose would be described as very ‘non-linear’ in the sense that I skip backwards and forwards between making and thinking a lot. My work is strongly concept driven - I wouldn’t say I have a particular ‘style’, more a particular way of thinking.

Another aspect I am playing with in this piece of work is how the physical act of ‘zooming’ in or out of a digital screen can seem so different when it is taken out of context. The text indicator that will be placed on the floor will indicate to the viewer that this distance will bring the experience of the print in focus. Anywhere else around the gallery - for example, the usual viewpoint of directly in front of the print - the pixels will be very

Please describe how the work submitted for the project responds to one or both of the proposed ruminations by Bruce Sterling, ‘Eruptions of the

prominent and the narrative lost. This will force the viewer to physically zoom out of the image in order to be able to gain the narrative of the print.

make it out of a physical material and it made sense to construct it out of something that holds plenty of narrative within it, for example something natural, like wood. I also wanted to play around with the kind of materials we are so used to seeing in the physical world, onscreen. Furthermore, I wanted to comment on the history and beginnings of typography in technology, so wood seemed to be the correct material to use.

The title of the print ‘Placeholder’ is not only a direct response to the term ‘Lorem Ipsum’ but also to the people viewing the print in the gallery, in terms of where people place themselves in order to experience the print. In other words, I am creating a physical-digital narrative.

I needed the pixels to all be the same dimensions. So I hand cut 1300, 5 x 5 x 5 mm wooden blocks and hand sanded them down. I then assembled, glued and pressed them in the correct places. When they had set, I sanded them down as the full letterform to make sure they were all at the same height, and no glue could be seen.

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief? I began thinking about what I found interesting between the different elements of the digital world in relation to the physical. Once I had found my concept, I began looking more at the differences between alias and anti-aliased type when enlarging. What the difference was and the difference it made, etc. I knew I wanted to

Once the letters had been constructed, I took them to the photography studio and photographed them, taking time to ensure they were level. I then edited the photographs

“I think that in this capitalist consumer reality that we all live in, we are beginning to understand the value of craftsmanship and production.”

to make sure the background wasn’t visible, and to mimic the visual aesthetic of a digital screen.

Finally, I designed and prepared the text indicator ready for the laser cut process, and cut them out of black vinyl. The dimensions of the text indicator worked out the same as the total distance between the focused image and viewer.

The beauty of technology is that there is a constant change in the way things work, especially in the arts field, some might call this change an improvement. Others may like the way things worked before, and arguably it is much more natural and pure to produce work without the aid of digital technologies. In terms of a ‘mental change’ I suppose you’re referring to how we think and process things creatively. In which case, of course it is true, as we consume and experience the world entirely differently, so a mental change is inevitable in terms of making a more immediate response to things. The Internet in particular, gives us a platform of a participatory nature; we can all upload information and disseminate it, so in effect we are all distributors.

I think that in this capitalist consumer reality that we all live in, we are beginning to understand the value of craftsmanship and production. I think it’s important to note that perhaps this ‘mental change’ could be directly relatable to this notion of understanding. The digital era allows us to immediately produce, but we understand that the process is not as valuable as the hand crafted, which we associate with a different era.

I then took time to harden the pixels of the image so that it can only be seen in focus from a distance. I played around with different versions of the image, to see which ones were too pixelated in contrast with ones which were too easily readable.

WILLEM PURDY Untitled Pigmented Inkjet Print

What course are you studying at UWE and why?

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief?

I am studying Illustration at UWE. Illustration for me is a really good balance between good design and playful design. Personally illustration fits the way I like to work best, which is to experiment with different graphic outcomes that still hold a strong sense of working design.

The method I used to create my piece was to bring the work in and out of digital and analogue processes as much as possible. The reason for this was to see if anything was lost or gained in using opposing ways of creating art. I started with a hand painted image of a Romanesque statue, which was then transferred into Photoshop and edited down to three colours to be made into a physical screenprint. Sticking with the theme of natural looking, but fake environments, I photographed the piece in a studio using sand and plants to replicate its natural setting. I then went on to create another physical piece from the digital photo, which again was another painting. Repeating my first process I transferred the image into Photoshop and created a screenprint which was then photographed on my smartphone and created as another digital print.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? For example do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process? I would say that my ideas definitely come first and my making process complements the idea afterwards. I try to develop a certain idea as far as it can possibly go before it becomes so diluted and abstract that it doesn’t make sense. However, having a strong print and painting style to my work I think there is always a certain underlining factor of how I could produce that idea with the way I create, which in turn alters the idea slightly.

Please describe how the work submitted for the project responds to one or both of the proposed ruminations by Bruce Sterling, ‘Eruptions of the digital in to the physical’ & ‘Looking through the eyes of machines as humans’. My work responds to the quote ‘eruptions of the digital into the physical’ by looking at how art is viewed through digital and technological means. I’m always interested in how people perceive art in its different environments and what that means for the artwork itself. Especially with today’s extremely technological lifestyle, I wanted to play with the idea of how a limited screen can alter the overall view of the artwork. Bringing this limitation into a physical print shows how a current popular way of viewing and enjoying art can be deceiving and misinforming.

I can see why people believe that digital advancements would alter the way in which people approach briefs and produce artwork but I personally don’t think it should. The technology is there to act as a helping tool to create artwork but shouldn’t dictate what is created. As my artwork aims to show, technology still has many limitations, and solely using it to sculpt your ideas and your creative process is automatically limiting your own abilities.

JONO SANDILANDS Pinball Screen Print & Raspberry Pi LCD

What course are you studying at UWE and why?

colour screenprint with a section removed, revealing a neatly concealed digital screen, which loops gameplay footage from a real pinball machine.

I’m a Graphic Artist making work at the intersection of design, printmaking and screen-based technology; the relationship between the tangible and digital, and in the process, exploring interaction and play. I am currently in my final year of studying MA Multidisciplinary Printmaking at UWE Bristol (which is known for its experimental, forward-thinking approach to printmaking). Along with over 5 years experience working as a graphic designer, my practice revolves print, physical objects and materials around digital technology.

The physical pinball machine is making a resurgence despite heavy competition from a world of digital games. The beauty is the physicality of the game, LED-lit screenprinted playfield and a heavy steel ball hurtling, bouncing and smashing against plastic targets controlled digitally by complex electronics and mechanisms. Inspired by this unique crossover of components, I’ve been using 3D software as a drawing tool to explore how a digital object can have a physical presence as a 2D print.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? For example do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process?

The screen is controlled by a Raspberry Pi, setup to automatically loop the video when the power is on. It’s seamlessly embedded below the mounted print within a box frame.

I am interested in how the two worlds of virtual and physical meet, contrast and intertwine with one another - questioning our current use of technology in order to create alternative methods of design and image making.

The use of live gameplay footage is from an observation of how viewers are changing how they consume content online; our real lives are much more controlled by our virtual lives contained within tiny screens. The gameplay video used is from YouTube and Twitch, where there is a phenomenon of gamers who are recording themselves playing. At first it appears strange that people are watching these rather than playing the games themselves, but the growing live streaming audience enjoy watching skilled and amateur game players in order to learn and be entertained just like any other media.

Please describe how the work submitted for the project responds to one or both of the proposed ruminations by Bruce Sterling, ‘Eruptions of the digital in to the physical’ & ‘Looking through the eyes of machines as humans’. “Pinball” is a crossover of traditional printmaking and embedded digital media. The artwork consists of a four-

“...our real lives are much more controlled by our virtual lives contained within tiny screens.”

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief?

into believing 2D sprites are complex 3D objects. The location of the screen is carefully planned out to fit seamlessly into the print.

Upon receiving the brief I was keen for my contribution to tie in with my current pinball related project and explorations into the presence of digital objects in the real world, as well as push my work forward.

The artwork is screenprinted using four-colour process, to achieve a retro print style in reference to classic pinball machines. It became evident that sound was a really important part of the print, and since it was something originally overlooked, was a challenge to integrate due to power restrictions. In the end a very simple solution was found with off the shelf USB powered speakers.

Conceptually I was interested in physically embedding an element of digital into my print, directly answering the ‘Eruptions of the digital into the physical’ question in the brief. On contemplating and researching how to add this layer of digital into my prints - the initial reaction was to use a tiny screen, or digital projection onto a print to create a digital world within the paper. There were obvious technical barriers: to make an edition of 6, the exhibition is overseas and will be set-up by exhibition staff at the location. I’d like it to be plug and play, no technical setup.

It is becoming more accessible to purchase small screens for microcontrollers. My basic setup only needs to loop a video file, easy to do using a Raspberry Pi.

We’re aware how the Internet is feeding into research and ability to generate work. In terms of physically integrating digital technologies, I think we’re just finding our feet. It boils down to the fact there has certainly been a gap in education of technology. Thankfully schools have been introducing programming as part of the curriculum at primary school level. A gradual shift will come with a new generation, but it doesn’t leave us sitting around doing nothing.

The first obvious barrier to cross is the built up area on the reverse to house the microcontroller and screen, which I eventually decided could be cleverly disguised in a frame. The electronics need to be powered from mains (so making sure the plug is internationally universal). Cost was always an issue, and it was something that could have stopped the project going ahead for me. Thankfully I was able to focus on completing a limited edition of two with embedded digital screen for exhibition. The remaining four prints are the non-digital version of the same print.

As artists we are free to explore, question, hack, and experiment how we use technology in our work to pave the way for the future. In the case of this project, I’ve integrated electronics into a screenprint which is bringing up questions about what we call these types of technology-integrated artworks. Are they prints? No? OK, they must be sculpture, right? For now it can be nothing more than a gimmick, I believe it’s an important one, and a stepping-stone to working out the next chapter.

The pinball machine is recreated in 3D from source imagery found online. This translation is a mix of accurate technical drawing and freestyling camera trickery. As I plan to render a certain viewport I only need to draw what I want the viewer to see. A similar method called 2.5D is commonly used in computer games to trick the viewer

MATILDA SCOTT To Be Is To Be Connected Blind Emboss & Screen Print

What course are you studying at UWE and why?

I chose the brief ‘Eruptions of the digital into the physical’, as I’m already quite interested in the advances in technology we are experiencing in this day and age. As well as how these advances affect us as designers, with advancements in print and the capability of such technologies such as Adobe, they affect us hugely in our everyday lives. We use smartphones to keep us connected - they are now a constant companion to us, keeping us immediately connected with a mere click of a button.

I’m studying Graphic Design at UWE. The reason I chose this course is because I have a passion for all things visual, and I thought that the best course suited for me to learn more about how I can communicate these things through media I love, like print and film.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? i.e. do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process?

When I was given the brief I had recently seen a film, Dreams Rewired, at The Cube cinema in Stokes Croft. The film told the history of how our technologies have advanced to make us more connected, from when the telephone was first invented, up to now. Of course it is human nature to be connected, it’s what makes us feel human, so when you bring an immediate possibility of contact into the mix which is ever evolving and non-human, does this distance us from our human connection?

My making process usually consists of idea generation for the smaller period of time, then developing that specific idea further through media and imagery best suited to the brief in order to communicate the idea well. In this case we had to think about the print process we used, therefore I wanted to make the print process relevant to the idea as well as the whole ideology of this exhibition.

This is what I wanted to explore in my print. Using binary to type out the phrase ‘To be is to be connected’ I wanted to illustrate that we are using a technology that the majority of us don’t understand and is not noticeable

“...when you bring an immediate possibility of contact into the mix which is ever evolving and non-human, does this distance us from our human connection?”

to the naked eye. I further illustrated this with blind embossing the type into the page. I used the arranged text and the nerve which connects them to show the contrasting human side to connection.

doing felt more human rather than just letting my print run through a printer at the click of a button.

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief? I initially used Adobe Illustrator to arrange my graphics, and to draw out the nerve etc. I then separated my layers and printed them both out onto Folex. Once I had them printed out I exposed my first layer onto a screen, then washed away the area my image would be. I used the electric guillotine to cut down the paper I had bought for the prints (German Etch 350gsm). When my screen had dried I screenprinted the first layer with a dark red acrylic ink.

I believe it is completely true. It almost changes the entire process in some cases I think, with being able to literally research, design and send something to print all off the screen and not have any interaction with it until it is finished is a ‘mental change’ in itself. I feel that these days people receive more praise for doing things which involve interacting with ‘real life’ more in the arts, like the journeys they take, or even something as simple as going to a library rather than sitting at your computer. Although this was something everyone already had to do before we were gifted with such technology.

I waited for the prints to dry for a while before taking them over to embossing. I used a Flexo plate to expose my binary onto, then scrubbed away the excess. After waiting for the plate to dry we spent a while making a sheet to ensure the plate sat at the right place on the page (as it was A4 on A3). I then submerged my prints into water to then emboss, and went on to printing them after drying them off slightly.

We live in a very screen-based society that’s moving very fast, we now can learn faster because of the immediacy we have with these technologies which is also something I think raises a lot of pressure in the graphic arts industry.

It was nice to use more traditional methods of print, I felt like it contrasted well with my idea in that what I was

STEPHANIE TURNBULL Untitled Lithograph

What course are you studying at UWE and Why?

interaction between the printers and the presses they were using. The idea was to create a photomontage that represented the physicality of collaborative printing. I digitally manipulated the selected photographs by altering the contrast and putting them into a half-tone dot pattern. The actual photomontage was created by printing the photos and arranging them through cut and paste. Once I had come up with a composition and photocopied the collage onto film, I worked back into it trying to create a sense of movement and energy through the action of scratching. I exposed the film onto a photo plate, creating three test plates in order to find the optimum exposure time, which was 15 seconds.

As my background is firmly based within printmaking I am currently doing an MA in Multidisciplinary Printmaking in order to focus and develop my practice further.

How would you describe your thinking and making process? For example do you work with a particular process to develop ideas or do your ideas dictate a particular process? I would have to say both. When I am making artists’ books the idea dictates the process. However, I am a collaborative lithographic printer - one of those traditional, nerdy, technical printers - interested in process and the technicalities of printing. My thinking and making process normally goes along the lines of: ‘I wonder what would happen if I...?, or ‘How can I create this effect?’… and then I go and figure it out.

For me, when I think of a lithograph I think of washes so I also included two washes created in a less traditional way. These washes were ones that I already had on photo plates, created from cleaning wooden letter blocks with water and wet & dry paper. At the time I took an impression of the ‘mess’ created and later exposed them onto plates. Washes also link the process to water which is vital for the lithographic process to work. For me, creating an image completely out of photo plates is about as digital as I get. The proofing is where all the decisions were made in regards to colour and composition.

Please describe how the work submitted for the project responds to one or both of the proposed ruminations by Bruce Sterling, ‘Eruptions of the digital in to the physical’ & ‘Looking through the eyes of machines as humans’. The print I made responds to the quote ‘Looking through the eyes of machines as humans’. As a printmaker and more importantly as a collaborative printer, repetition is a given. Only the artwork changes our movements - our process stays the same. Collaborative printers have to be just as efficient as machines and Ken Tyler is one the most renowned collaborative printers of our time. The projects Ken Tyler and his printers took on were ambitious, often working on a large scale with multiple techniques and runs. When thinking about this idea of machines being human and humans being machines, it was the repetition and blurring of people and machines that inspired this print. If the pencil or brush is an extension of the artist, then the roller is an extension of the printer. The printer and the ‘machine’ (press) become one and the same thing.

I also had multiple registration marks on my wash plates numbered 1-3, and each proof was printed to a different registration mark until the best composition was found. Once the proofing was finished it was simply a case of looking at what worked in terms of both composition and colour, before selecting the final image.

Please describe how you made the work for the project and how this making processes relates to the theme of the brief?

Yes I would say this is true but I am not sure I could offer any insights as I am no expert when it comes to digital technologies. I draw on stones and use the ‘old school’ method of cut-and-paste when creating films and layouts. There are a lot of technological and material developments that influence and ‘mentally change’ the way we view our creative practice. Digital technologies are simply another tool in our ever-expanding toolbox.

I started this process by scouring the Ken Tyler Collection website for photographs of his collaborations. To narrow it down I wanted to find photographs where the inking roller was present or incorporated with the

LOOKING THROUGH THE EYES OF MA GALLERY TWENTY TWO Bristol, UK

ACHINES AS STUDENTS EXHIBITION

MICA STUDENTS

BFA Printmaking at MICA The BFA Printmaking program at MICA is a fine arts based program that encourages each student to undertake and realize a personal vision through the medium of print. The department provides a wide exposure to traditional and contemporary techniques, offering courses in computerassisted printmaking and book arts as well as encouraging interdisciplinary combinations of printmaking with other media or installations. Print media can be combined with other forms or follow interdisciplinary directions such as book concepts, photo and digital printmaking, sculptural printmaking, and print as public art.

The print and technology strand of the course examines the various ways technology has expanded conceptual and procedural possibilities for making prints. New print media, digital applications, photographic processes, alternate presentation formats and the resources of MICAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s art tech centre and digital fabrication lab play an instrumental role in the students realisation process. Students undertake critical research alongside their studio practice as a means to discuss specific technological developments in printmaking and interdisciplinary thinking.

Amber Rhein, Being a Physical Presence in a Digit

tal World, Handmade cotton paper

Aida Ramirez, Like.Share Screenprint & laser engrave

Kaitlyn Conte, Stigma Part 4 Releif print & laser engrave

Jackson Farley, Mates Forever Spray paint on laser cut chipboard

Morgan Strahorn, L.H. Jr / Grown Child Screenprint, lithograph

Alexandria Harmel, Lot A Intaglio, screenprint, laser engraving

M. McCallum Dickens, Continuum Relief from laser engraved chipboard

Dan Longston, Gateway Laser engraving & screenprint

Isabel Rosen-Hamilton, Untitled Blind embossing

Alexandria Henry, I Canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Speel Inkjet, screenprint, glitter on laser cut paper

Amelia Bombace, Silkyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Releif print from laser engraved masonite

Evan Christopherson, Mirror Principles Photoetching

Dasom Kim, Pia Digital print, sceenprint, laser engraving

Madison Scillian, Lightcase Inkjet, letterpress, screenprint

Kaitlin Beebe, Forever Six Relief print from laser engraved wood, screenprint

Ema Koch, Mind Math Screenprint, intaglio from engraved plexiglass

PAUL LAIDLER Mapping a Mental Change: Beginnings and departure points

impact of printmaking on communication. The process enabled access to - and storage of - information on an unprecedented scale, one that would go on to revolutionise how we understood, saw and described the world. Digital technology has further extended the proliferation possibilities of the printed artefact and offered attributes such as computational speed, interactivity and networked content.

As a student lecturer within a graphic arts field do you believe this statement to be true and if so could you offer any insights on what this ‘mental change’ could be? It has been suggested by a range of established commentators that digital technology may have potentially created a ‘mental change’ within the creative process of making images and objects. Although this statement is somewhat broad and our ability to understand change often requires a certain amount of time to have passed (before the significance of an event may be better understood) the compulsion to begin considering these ruminations became central to the ‘Looking Through The Eyes Of Machines As Students’ project.

Within a visual arts context the early incarnations of a digital presence can often be identified through the technology’s associated aesthetic. These visual cues refer to the construction of images and artefacts through the use of pixels or in a 3D environment, the voxel. Today the former tends to invoke a retro feel with a nostalgic outlook whereas the revealing of the digital building blocks in glitch art (where an image is purposely degraded or corrupted) promotes an aestheticisation of malfunction in a slick and seamless image world. For the majority of people who were born in the pre-digital period these image associations were originally encountered on screen as far back as the 1980s. The period is often referred to as the ‘digital revolution’, when the technology became mainstream and entered our visual consciousness with the first personal computers. The proceeding years would see advancements in graphic user interfaces, design software packages followed by output devices such as the desktop printer. The connecting of hardware and software tools alongside affordability provided a framework for artists and designers to begin extending mechanical production methods and establish a screen-based environment for art and design disciplines.

As the originator of the project, my interest stems from a practice-based perspective within the field of graphic arts, leaning towards the process-led discipline of printmaking. The root of this inquiry has predominantly developed through my teaching experience in the graphic arts, and what it means to think through an established discipline in a technological age of multifaceted practice and outcomes. Beginnings: To shed some light on this idea of a ‘mental change’ or a shift in consciousness we may consider the historical

These technological possibilities describe some of the inherent qualities that digital tools offer, yet it is not how we technically master these tools that concerns me. Instead it is the consequences of how these tools permeate into our thinking as makers and provide some clues about this ‘mental change’… perhaps!

subscribe to the technologically enabled mind-set. The opposing route is perhaps best summarised in the shift of questioning from ‘what can I do/’, to ‘why am I doing this?’. One example of a slightly more critical view of technology that consists of digitally=informed practitioners is the Internet Yami-Ichi group. Internet Yami-Ichi (that translates from Japanese as ‘black market’) is a small art/flea market showcasing online and digital themes that have been translated into physical works with a dystopian edge. The event essentially flips the ‘Internet of Things’ and its utopian outlook on its head. Internet Yami-Ichi provokes critical reflection on our ever-increasing digital dependencies by employing humour, uselessness and absurdity to draw attention to the darker side of the Internet. The Japanese word Yami literally translates as ‘dark side’ and can also mean “sick for” or “addicted to”. Productions from the market’s vendors include; bottled Mac Book Air ‘air’, Internet explorer tattoos, handwritten spam letters and binary porn, to name but a few. The outlook is one that seeks to make work that asks questions rather than designing products that provide answers.

Postdigital variations: In more recent years the relationship with digital technology has seen a return to the physical and tactile. This development is epitomised in schemes such as ‘The Internet of Things’ that seeks to create applications for real world objects by augmenting and connecting them with the Internet. Projects that fall within this area tend to foster design-led questions that create new products for an ever-increasing digital market place. The approach is predominantly utopian in its outlook and nurtures a kind of homecoming that could be considered as a humanising of digital technology. Work of this nature also falls within a post-digital period where we have overcome the shock of digital technology as a disruptive force and are now indifferent to whether or not something is digital or physical. Conversely being ‘post’ something also foregrounds a period of self-reflexivity and questioning about ‘progress’ under the previous regime. This is not necessarily an anti-digital movement but rather a place where ideas arise from a digitally-informed scene.

Mediating the Mediated: Similar critical reflections on today’s increasingly digitally-mediated world are touched upon in the 2015 exhibition Mut Mut curated by Illustration academics Darryl Clifton and Rachel Gannon. The curators considered the illustration industry’s predominant mode of reception through print and screen as the departure point for the exhibition. The curatorial

Post-digital work can be found in a return to the physical through augmentation but there are also post-digital persuasions that do not necessarily

“...it is not how we technically master these tools that concerns me. Instead it is the consequences of how these tools permeate into our thinking as makers...”

decision to deliberately fabricate one-off, bespoke or sculptural pieces in a temporal and spatial setting, sought to discard industry-driven formats and reconsider communicative relationships with its audience. Similarly the conscious decision to adopt a visual language that engages with craft and materiality questions why we would continue to make physical things in an age of automation and dematerialisation? From this perspective, digital technology has helped reinvigorate traditional crafts by allowing us to revaluate their significance - as a carrier and conveyer of information.

The Nimble Digital: The manipulability of digital information is probably one of the defining qualities of the technology. Sean Cubitt (Professor in Media and Communications at Goldsmiths University, London) considers the new possibilities for rendering digital information as a pivotal shift between analogue and digital processes. Cubitt explains that from the standpoint of the computer, any input will always appear as mathematical and any data can be output in any format. For example an audio input can be output as a video image, as text, as a 3D model or a printed artefact. The ability to render information in numerous ways shifts from a fixed analogue system (that dictates the treatment of information for a specific process and therefore limits the outcome) to a situation where information is supple and has potential to instantly shift into different spaces, materials and disciplines.

Although the exhibition still relies upon digital dissemination (cause I wouldn’t have known about it otherwise) the nature of documenting work for online platforms has begun to influence the making of an actual artefact or event. For this type of practitioner, the question ‘does it look good online’ is far more likely to be considered at a much earlier stage in the making process. Here the selection of materials and colours are based upon the image’s success onscreen whilst the designing of situation and presentation may yield greater coverage and dissemination for the work. Today’s preoccupation with the screen-based representation and sharing of imagery via social media has (to some degree) become a testing ground for the success of the physical/original. This feedback loop appears to have usurped the original work and its aura, or like the Mut Mut curators, this maybe a timely opportunity to unplug and ‘reconnect’!

This situation also offers some potentially interesting positions on established art and design disciplines – especially when considering their associations with materials and artefacts. For instance, historically within art and design the connotation of the word ‘material’ refers to the physicality of something that has a direct relationship with the hand, and a traditional dialogue with craft. In a digital context the word could also prompt conversations where ‘material’ is discussed as information, albeit an immaterial material - where physical touch becomes a haptic interface and craft extends to programming. Similarly, the rendered outcome of digital information questions traditional

associations with, and expectations of products and artefacts that are attributed to a specific discipline. For example, if the entire cohort of a printmaking degree suddenly began producing films, one might wonder why they would choose to study printmaking and not film? This does not mean that film is off limits to printmakers but like it or not, disciplines exist for a reason – namely specialism, heritage and disposition.

who possess a very deep knowledge in one discipline (the vertical bar of the T) but are promiscuous enough to have the grace and confidence to move across disciplines (the horizontal part of the T). The T-shaped person is by no means a new concept; similar attributes can be found as far back as the Renaissance and the idea of the ‘Renaissance Man’ – the example often being the work of Leonardo Da Vinci who could demonstrate a high level of proficiency in a number of different subject areas.

The T-Shaped: In essence, digital technology has predominantly been utilised as a tool for optimising existing processes and later extending the boundaries of established practices. Digital technology is a medium (that differs from all others) and facilitates new forms of communication and interaction that change how we think. This is epitomised in Marshall McLuhan’s famous quote on the impact of new technology where he stated, “First we shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us”. The interesting questions begin when we attempt to describe the disposition of a technologically-informed individual who may extend established practice or offer a complete departure from it.

It is also worth noting that the discipline of fine art does not necessarily consign itself to a particular process, medium or outcome - especially since the inception of conceptual art in the early part of the 20th century. The prominence of idea before outcome enables the discipline to actively borrow from and enter into other fields. That said, graphic arts disciplines have, and also do produce conceptually-led and interdisciplinary works, but the field is historically associated with the design industry and the applied nature of this practice. Today I believe that the vertical bar of deep knowledge is still grounded in an established pre-digital discipline that retains its heritage – and so it should. Increased activity on the horizontal bar is perhaps another indicator that the pervasive nature of digital technology is seeping into the mindsets of graphic arts practitioners where transferability, mutability and something else with ‘ility’ on the end is becoming more predominant with each generation.

Perhaps some of the technologically-informed characteristics of these individuals may engender the ubiquitous and connected nature of digital. In this context they would have no problem with working across different disciplines. The approach also resonates with the concept of ‘T-shaped people’, a metaphor mainly used in the recruitment industry (not my best ever reference) that describes individuals