Work in progress

Moving on from Tuesday, and trying to think about how the device and the concepts behind it could be used on a larger scale (citywide) there were a couple of ideas which i am just putting  out there. Because as of this moment i am still trying to get a more concrete stand on the how and what.

On research i stumbled upon Panos Mavros, who asks the question of ‘Why do we go where we go?’ Also he goes onto say how when we are moving through space how that space activates different neural pathways.  What Panos does is, study the neural activity of different individuals moving through space based on those readings he creates what he calls ‘good’ space. He also states that we sometimes respond to space and environment in ways we may not even be aware of. His studies are Urban design based, but i thought i could kind off carry this idea forward, not literally but in a similar way.

I have tested the device like you said, on other individuals who havent been on the walk. And what ive learnt from there is that when Janet is walking through and just giving plain directions, the brain activity of most of the individuals was from a very Low Beta range to High Alpha. Which technically means that their brains could easily relate to those environments, The readings were smooth and compact, almost unwavering. Whereas when Janet begins to create the fictional environments the neural activity increased and was pretty much unstable. I have to put all of this readings and format them for the portfolio which will be done by tuesday.

Now these readings and with the studies of Panos Mavros, the concept develops into how our brains perceive factual elements as being stable/compact and how it perceives fictional elements as being unstable/porous. Thus the idea of Porocity vs Compacticity. Which i feel will also help me progress on my exploratory study on which i am pretty behind. Fact/Fiction which results in porocity/compacticity and this combined with a fictional material would be a good area to start with.

I have started formatting the portfolio. All the drawings should be in there by Tuesday. Ive just uploaded how much ever ive completed up till now.

For the site i was looking at abandoned NYC sites. Such as the buildings on Marine Park. On how  the idea of discovery and the provision of a journey that takes us through the lives of ordinary people living around the area, gives us a real insight into the past, and how we accumulate objects and memories that create who we are. ( This still needs work)

 

 

Upload for Friday

Portfolio for tuesday

One thought on “Work in progress

  1. Really great start on the drawings using both texture and linework – the the axo/planometric style seems to work well. Can you elaborate more on your choice of site? Its an interesting choice but we are curious as to why you chose such a remote area? What’s the story behind it being abandoned? How are you going to use the site to elaborate on your investigation into fact and fiction – how do you draw each in different ways? How do the brain waves start to map onto this space to reveal the facts and fictions of the site? What exists there now and what was there before?
    Panos Mavros’ research is interesting and totally relates to what you’re doing – good find! Looking forward to seeing how you map the brain data in your portfolio on Tuesday.
    As for the portfolio – why is the title of your project ‘Smoke’? You should start with an introduction text plus drawing of your project to set the tone for the work ahead before you launch into Janet Cardiff and the walk. Overall the layout is very clean and confident but you need to annotate and caption the drawings and images more than just writing descriptive paragraphs.
    All in all – great work – keep it up and we can’t wait to see your developed site drawing on Tuesday as well as a new draft of the portfolio!

Leave a Reply