A labor-saving device for graffiti artists. An assistive tool or telematic proxy for taggers working in harsh environments. Long-needed relief for graffiti artists with RSI. Or simply, pure research into as-yet-untrammeled intersections of automation and architecture. We give you: the ROBOTAGGER, an industrial robot arm programmed with GML, the new “Graffiti Markup Language” created by Evan Roth and pals at the F.A.T. Lab:
(グラフィティの共通マークアップ言語GMLを書き出すロボットアーム「ROBOTAGGER」)
This quick project came together over the past weekend in CMU’s Digital Fabrication Laboratory (dFAB), directed by my friend and colleague, Professor Jeremy Ficca. Inspired by a tweet from Evan Roth, one of the co-creators of GML, we reckoned it would be easy to transcode GML into a file format suitable for robotic CAD/CAM machining. The result is a small Processing utility that converts GML into DXF and CSV (you can download the GML-to-DXF source code here). After tinkering around for a while we developed a pipeline for converting the GML/DXF strokes from 000000book.com into machining paths for the dFAB’s ABB IRB-4400, an eight foot tall industrial robot arm. Our first test was a “hello world” scrawl which, not coincidentally, was also one of the first GML files ever created (148.GML at 000000book.com). But our real objective, which you can see in the video above, was to give physical form to GML tags produced by TEMPT ONE (Tony Quan), a graffiti writer with Lou Gehrig’s disease who produced the digital GML recording with the FAT Lab’s well-known EyeWriter software. Although there’s been a lot of data loss and translation along the way, it’s not completely unreasonable to think of the Robotagger as a prosthesis for Tony. I hope we can pursue this possibility a little further.
Speaking of future directions, there are lots of interesting research topics latent here in automated calligraphy. We were astonished to realize just how important the force-feedback of pressure is to the visual quality of the drawings. (The first 20 seconds of the video shows what I mean in an extreme way – we shattered a marker and sent ink everywhere when our estimate of the Z-plane turned out to be off by a quarter-inch. Looks like we need to get that force-measuring software extension that ABB sells.) Going forward, we’re interested in exploring robotic performances of higher-dimensional gesture data, such as that produced by Wacom tablets, which provides high-resolution information about the pressure, azimuth and elevation (yaw and pitch) of the tagger’s stylus. Watch this space — I’ll be developing some tools to help the next version of GML encode this information.
The Robotagger Unmanned Graffiti System is a collaboration of Jeremy Ficca’s dFAB at CMU; the STUDIO for Creative Inquiry at Carnegie Mellon, which I direct; and the FAT Lab’s GML initiative. We used the Sharpie Magnum and the wonderful 2-inch Montana Hardcore markers, which (AFAIK) are the largest magic markers in commercial production. (And of course, for the deep history of prior work blending graffiti and automation, don’t forget to check out the spraycan-enabled Graffiti Writer robot [1998-2000] by the Institute for Applied Autonomy, and Jürg Lehni’s wall-spraying Hektor robot [2002].) [Extra links: RoboTagger on Youtube]
Maps represent, maps reveal, maps entice, maps distort. They selectively omit, they unwittingly exaggerate, and they even make outright lies. Though maps strive to project authority and objectivity, they cannot help but embed the biases, blind-spots and idiosyncrasies of their human authors. As our lives are played out in increasingly networked realms, we have become carto-literate as never before; we read maps produced by governments and corporate interests, yes, but also collaboratively author maps online, inscribing new representations of ourselves and our priorities. Contestational Cartographies introduces the thoughts of leading “experimental geographers” who employ mapping techniques in new modes of critical practice and cultural research and, in so doing, help us “read between the lines” of the world around us.
“Opto-Isolator” is an interactive robot which returns the visitor’s gaze, and responds with a variety of uncanny eye gestures. Last week, I installed a new version of the project in the “Decode: Digital Design Sensations” exhibition at the Victoria & Albert Museum, in London. The BBC has kindly provided this interview video about Opto-Isolator II, recorded while I was preparing the installation. The Opto-Isolator artwork series was produced with the assistance of Standard Robot, Inc. and with support from bitforms gallery NYC, the Creative Capital Foundation, the Berkman Faculty Development Fund, and the Pennsylvania Counil on the Arts.
Image Retouching: A Critical Approach for Media Arts Educators
I developed the following course unit on image tampering, retouching and manipulation for my Introduction to the Electronic Media Studio (EMS1) class at Carnegie Mellon. The semester course is intended for first-year students with little or no computer experience, and serves the purpose of introducing students to basic media-editing tools. The emphasis in the course is not on technical mastery but on understanding digital media technologies as tools for creative cultural practice.
The loosely-organized materials I’ve cited below provide starting points for discussions about image manipulation from several perspectives, including: photojournalistic standards of truthtelling; the construction of idealized beauty in vernacular advertising; and the early history of 19th-century photocollages as an extension of narrative romantic painting. I’m grateful to Paolo Pedercini and Rich Pell for their pointers to some of the resources below.
Unit Learning Outcomes:
To demonstrate development of skills in the use of techniques for pixel-based (bitmap) image acquisition, editing, compositing, and output. To demonstrate an awareness of the issues surrounding photographic “truth” and verifiability in the digital era.
Farid, Hany. “Photo Tampering Throughout History“. Web site. A thorough chronological compilation of photo-tampering examples, and one of the best classroom resources of its kind.
Roth, Evan (fi5e). Detouch. Interactive Processing applet. (+blog post). An interactive applet which allows the viewer to see exactly which pixels have been modified in a before/after retouching comparison.
Assignments:
Questions for Students
In your opinion, what sorts of image manipulation techniques should be permissible in news images and photojournalism? Which ones shouldn’t? Why? Be specific.
Suppose an interview article about you is being written for a major magazine, and the editors intend to print an accompanying full-page photograph of you. Would you prefer that the magazine professionally (that is, undetectably) retouch your image? If yes, to what extent — is there a limit?
Identify an artwork (image) which was clearly produced through digital manipulations of photographic source materials. Work to find one that you admire. In your opinion, what makes the image effective as an artwork?
Photograph yourself in front-on close up view using a digital camera.
Retouch the image to look as “beautiful” or “handsome” as possible according to the glossy magazine standards of beauty.
Age your original portrait to look at least 20 years older. Take inspiration from your parents.
Assignment 2. A Fiction or A Forgery
Create your choice of (A) a fiction or (B) a forgery. Be clear about which of these you have chosen. For the purposes of this assignment: A fiction is a depiction of something derived from your imagination. It depicts something we all would agree is not true, but for which we nonetheless happily suspend our disbelief, because the “reality” it portrays is so interesting or provocative. A fiction asks the question: “What if….?” A forgery is an image which tells a lie. It depicts something which could indeed be true, and it attempts to hid or conceal any evidence or artifacts that would give away the lie. A viewer may doubt the truthfulness of the forgery, but would need to build an argument using external evidence to disprove it. A forgery asks the question: “Did you know….?” Note: The most important challenge of this assignment is to tell a story with an image you’re constructing. Whether that story is from your imagination (a fiction) or is a lie (a forgery) is less critical — since some images could be both a fiction and a forgery.
Consider the following strategies for how you might create your fiction/forgery:
Adding an element
Removing an element
Moving or dislocating an element
Duplicating an element
Modifying an element
Exchanging an element with something else
Looking for ideas? If you’re not certain where to begin, you could consider making a “chimera” — a creature which is composed of parts of other animals, such as a minotaur (bull+human), griffin (lion+eagle), or something of your own invention. Situate your chimera in its “natural” habitat, etc. Note: this does not imply that you are required to make a chimera.
Additional Recommendations: Unless you have a better idea, your image should involve you, somehow. Please use images from photographic sources. These could come from sources like: the web, your camera, a scanner, etc. I recommend that you use images from at least two different photographs to create your fiction/forgery. However, if your concept is very strong, it is conceivable that you could create your fiction/forgery by rearranging elements within a single source image. Develop your image at the highest resolution possible. A recommended final image size is at least 1600×1200, and preferably closer to 3000×2000. To be on the safe side, keep all of your original source files, as well as your Photoshop .PSD project file, until after the assignment has been submitted. Keep these somewhere safe, such as your “workfiles” directory!
To do well on this assignment, you’ll need to make a provocative fiction or a convincing forgery. Apart from your image, however, your work will also be judged on how completely you fulfilled the following checklist:
Your fiction/forgery image is done at high resolution.
You created a small, low-resolution thumbnail image.
You correctly linked your thumbnail image to your large image.
You wrote an accompanying text about your assignment.
