Advertisement

Information Technology and Art: Concepts and State of the Practice

  • Salah Uddin Ahmed
  • Cristoforo Camerano
  • Luigi Fortuna
  • Mattia Frasca
  • Letizia Jaccheri
Chapter

Abstract

The interaction between information technology (IT) and art is an increasing trend. Science, art and technology have been connected since the 60’s, when scientists, artists, and inventors started to cooperate and use electronic instruments to create art. In 1960 Marshall McLuhan predicted the idea that the era of “machine-age” technology was next to close, and the electronic media were creating a new way to perform art [1]. The literature is full with examples of artists applying mathematics, robotic technology, and computing to the creation of art. The work in [2] is a good introduction to the merge of IT and art and introduces genetic art, algorithmic art, applications of complex systems and artificial intelligence. The intersection is drawing attention of people from diverse background and it is growing in size and scope. For these reasons, it is beneficiary for people interested in art and technology to know each other’s background and interests well. In a multidisciplinary collaboration, the success depends on how well the different actors in the project collaborate and understand each other. See [3] for an introduction about multidisciplinary issues. Meyer and others in [4] explains the collaboration process between artists and technologists.

Keywords

Mirror Neuron Strange Attractor Interactive Dialog Concurrent Versioning System Artistic Software 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    E. A. Shanken., “Art in the Information Age: Technology and Conceptual Art”, LEONARDO, Vol. 35, No. 4, 2002, pp. 433–438.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Ascott, “Behaviourist Art and the Cybernetic Vision in Cybernetica”: Journal of the International Association for Cybernetics (Namur), 1964.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Meyer, L. Staples, et al., “Artists and Technologists working together (panel)”. Proceedings of the 11th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and Technology, San Francisco, California, United States, ACM Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Trifonova, S. U. Ahmed, L. Jaccheri, “SArt: Towards Innovation at the intersection of Software engineering and art.” 16th International Conference on Information Systems Development. Galway, Ireland, Springer, 2007.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    F. Popper, “Art of the Electronic Age”, New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc, 1993.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    F. Popper, “From Technological to Visual Art”, The MIT Press, 2007.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    F. Popper, “Art: Action and Participation”, New York University Press, 1975.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    S.U. Ahmed., L. Jaccheri, A. Trifonova, G. Sindre, “Conceptual framework for the Intersection of Software and Art”. Handbook of Research on Computational Arts and Creative Informatics – A book edited by James Braman, Towson University, Towson, MD, USA, Giovanni Vincenti, Gruppo Vincenti, S.r.l., Rome, Italy, 2008.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. Bollinger, “The interplay of Art and Science in Software.” Computer 30(10), 1997, pp.128, 125–127.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. Bond, “Software as Art.” Communications of the ACM 48(8), 2005, pp. 118–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    F. Cramer, U. Gabriel, “Software Art and Writing.” American Book Review Vol. 22(6), 2001.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    O. Bertelsen, S. Pold, “Criticism as an Approach to Interface Aesthetics. Proceedings of the third Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction, Tampere, Finland, ACM Press, 2004.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    E. Edmonds, G. Turner, L. Candy, “Approaches to interactive art systems”. Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques in Australasia and South East Asia. New York, NY. USA, ACM Press, 2004, pp. 113–117Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. O. Chua, “CNN: A vision of complexity,” Int. J. Bifurcation and Chaos Vol. 7(12), 1997, pp. 2219–2426.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    M. Blassnigg, “Documentary Film at the Junction between Art and Digital Media Technologies.” Convergence-The International journal of New Media Technologies 11(3), 2005, pp. 104–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    “Ars Electronica Symposium”, Ars Electronica in Linz, Austria, 1979.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    C. Machin, “Digital artworks: bridging the Technology Gap”. Proceedings of the 20th Eurographics UK Conference, IEEE Computer Society, 2002.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. B. Gross, “Programming for Artists: a Visual Language for Expressive Lighting Design”. IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing, IEEE Computer Society, 2005.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    M. Cardini, “Arcus Pulcher Aetheri”, progetto sinfonico ‘Pittura Cibernetica e Musica’, musica di Heinrich Unterhofer, orchestra Haydn di Bolzano, Auditorium di Bolzano, Trento e del MART di Rovereto, 2004.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    L. Fortuna, M. Frasca, C. Camerano., “Strange Attractors, kinematic Trajectories and Synchronization”. International Journal Bifurcations and Chaos, Dec 2008.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    A. Buscarino, L. Fortuna, M. Frasca, G. Muscato., “Chaos does help motion control”, Int. J. Bifurcation and Chaos, Vol. 17, No. 10, 2007, pp. 3577–3581.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    M. Bucolo, L. Fortuna, M. Frasca, S. Giudice., “From Local Activity Lemma Beyond the Wave Computation Reaction Diffusion CNN based Networks”, International Journal of Bifurcations and Chaos, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2006, pp. 411–418.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    C. Adams, “Technological allusivity: appreciating and teaching the role of aesthetics in engineering design”. Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference, Atlanta, GA, IEEE Computer Society, 1995.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    G. Nalder, “Art in the Informational Mode”. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Information Visualization, IEEE Computer Society, 2003.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
  27. 27.
  28. 28.
  29. 29.
    G.Garvey, “Retrofitting fine Art and Design Education in the Age of Computer Technology”. ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, 31(3), 1997, pp. 29–32.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    C. Harris, “Art and Innovation: the Xerox PARC Artist-in-Residence program”. Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    L. Candy, “COSTART Project Artists Survey Report: Preliminary Results”, Loughborough University, 1999.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    L. Moura, “Robot Artist in Resident Project” 2006, http://www.leonelmoura.com
  33. 33.
    S. Jones, “A Cultural Systems Approach to Collaboration in Art & Technology”. In Proceedings of the 5th conference on Creativity & cognition, New York, NY, USA: ACM Press. 2005, pp. 76–85.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    E. Meisner, V. Isler, J. Trinkle, “Controller Design for Human-Robot Interaction”, Department of Computer Science Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, NY, 2007.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    P. Fishwick, T. Davis, J. Douglas, “Model representation with Aesthetic Computing: Method and Empirical study.” ACM Trans. Model. Comput. Simul., 15(3), 2005, pp. 254–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    P. Fishwick, “Aesthetic Computing: A Brief Tutorial. In F. Ferri (Ed.), Visual Languages for Interactive Computing: Definitions and Formalizations”, Idea Group Inc, 2007.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    C. Adams, “Technological Allusivity: Appreciating and Teaching the role of Aesthetics in Engineering Design”. Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference, 1995., Atlanta, GA, IEEE Computer Society, 1995.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    L. O. Chua, “The genesis of Chuas Circuit”, Arch. fur Elektron. Ubertragungstechnik, vol. 46, 1992, pp. 250–257.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    M. Bucolo, A. Buscarino, L. Fortuna, M. Frasca, “From Dynamical Emerging Patterns to Patterns in Visual Art”, International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, Vol. 18, No. 1, 2007, pp. 51–81CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    P. Arena, S. Baglio, L. Fortuna, G. Manganaro, “Generation of n-double scrolls via Cellular Neural Networks”. IEEE CAS Vol. 24, 1996, pp. 241–252.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    L. Moura, H. Pereira, “Man + Robots Symbiotic Art”. Villeurbanne: Institut d’Art Contemporain, 2004, pp. 111.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    J. Reichardt “Cybernetic Serendipity”, London, 1968, http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/exhibitions/serendipity/images/3/
  43. 43.
    P. Arena, M. Bucolo, S. Fazzino, L. Fortuna, M. Frasca, “The CNN paradigm: Shapes and Complexity”. Int. J. Bif. Chaos, 15, 2005, pp. 2063–2090.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    A. Buscarino, L. Fortuna, M. Frasca, A. Rizzo., “Dynamical network Interactions in distributed Control of Robots”, Chaos, Vol. 16, No. 1, 015116-1-10, 2006.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    S. Halme, T. Schnberg, Y. Wang, “Motion Control of a spherical Mobile Robot”. Proc. Int. Workshop on Advanced Motion Control, 1996.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    G. Metta, G. Sandini, L. Natale, L. Craighero, L. Fadiga, “Understanding Mirror Neurons: A bio-robotic Approach”. LIRA-lab DIST, University of Genova, and University of Ferrara, 2002.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    N. Ramnani, R. Miall, “A System in the Human Brain for Predicting the Actions of others”. Nature Neurosci., 7, 2004, pp. 85–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    D. Wolpert, Z. Ghahramani, J. Flanagan, “Perspectives and Problems in Motor learning”. Trends Cogn. Sci., 5, 2001, pp. 487–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    V. Gallese, A. Goldman, “Mirror Neurons and the Simulation Theory of Mind-reading”. Trends Cogn. Sci., 2, 1998, pp. 493–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    CAMeC (Centro Arte Moderna e Contemporanea della Spezia); http://camec.spezianet.it/opere_azione/tinguely.html
  51. 51.
    Museum of Modern Art (MOMA COLLECTION/P.HULTEN); http://www.moma.org/collection/browse_results.php?object_id = 81631
  52. 52.
    B. Oates, “New frontiers for Information Systems Research: Computer Art as an Information System.” European Journal of Information Systems 15(6), 2006, pp. 617–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    J. Grey, “Human-computer Interaction in Life Drawing, a fine artist’s Perspective”. In Sixth International Conference on Information Visualisation (IV’02). Los Alamitos, CA, USA: IEEE Computer Society, 2002, pp. 761–770.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    K. Walden, “Reviews : Peter Weibel and Timothy Druekrey (eds), Net_Condition: Art and Global Media”. Convergence The International journal of New Media Technologies, 8(1), 2002, pp. 114–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    K. Halonen, “Open Source and New Media Artists. Human Technology”, An Interdisciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT environments, 3(1), 2007, pp. 98–114.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    A. Trifonova, O. Brandtsegg, L. Jaccheri, “Software engineering for and with Artists: a case study”, 3rd International Conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts (DIMEA 2008), Athens, Greece, 2008.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    L. Jaccheri, A. Trifonova, G. Tufte, E. Gangvik, “The Open Wall”, The 3rd International Conference on Digital Live Art (re)Actor3, Liverpool, UK, 2–3 September 2008.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Salah Uddin Ahmed
    • 1
  • Cristoforo Camerano
    • 2
  • Luigi Fortuna
    • 2
  • Mattia Frasca
    • 2
  • Letizia Jaccheri
    • 1
  1. 1.Norwegian University of Science and TechnologyNorwegianNorway
  2. 2.Engineering Faculty, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Elettrica, Elettronica e dei Sistemi (DIEES)University of CataniaCataniaItaly

Personalised recommendations