Photo on 1-19-14 at 3.38 PM.jpg
Alexandria Poitier

Majors: Biology and Religion

Experience with computers/software: Very Basic

Experience with art: Minimal

Fun Fact: I'm vegan

Artistic interests: I like tumblr, pinterest and makeup blogs



Presence/Absence

ansence7.jpg

absence11.jpg
absence2.jpg
absence12.jpg
absence3.jpg

class
Untitled-1.jpg




MASKPROJECT1111.jpg



staryyyy.jpg
mlkmonumentwithflag.jpg
waterssss.jpgwedingss.jpg

After Effect by Lev Manovich Response
The “After Effect” article by Manovich was very fascinating. I never really thought about the combination of different types of media in order to create a final project. I also didn’t realize that this topic has not been frequently discussed considering the fact that this “hybrid” media made such an influential impact on media in today’s world. For example, in the article Manovich mentions that commercials, music videos, motion graphics and other types of moving image sequences that are produced are “hybrid” media. I honestly had never thought about this. Obviously, most things pictured today have been edited to some degree but, this article opened my eyes to the degree to which this editing happens.

The article also explained that almost all of this editing takes place via computer programming. The programs that we use in class (which are easily accessible) have the capability to make editing that would’ve taken countless hours and ridiculous amounts of money a couple of decades ago, practically instantaneous. The introduction of After Effects in 1993 drastically changed the game of computer software. It allowed, for the first time, people to do animation, special effects and compositing on their personal computers. From the article, it seems that After Effects was an earlier version of programs used today like Photoshop.

Another interesting part of the article was the author’s implementation and explanation of what he called the “Velvet Revolution.” The author used this phrase to explain the transformations that happened between 1993 and 1998 surrounding moving images. Motion graphics is also discussed in the article as an example of the changes that happened during this revolution. I did not know that things such as music videos and documentary films are considered to be motion graphics so this was of particular interest to me. I thought it was really fascinating that the author used an example of a music video that uses transitions with computer graphics because I have seen this video numerous times and had never thought about its use of computers before reading this article.

Throughout the article, the Manovich continued to list some general as well as specific instances where multiple forms of media are used together and I realized that I see this daily. I guess it never occurred to me that the things I see on my computer and on tv everyday have multiple components that involve different types of media. I also never took into consideration how the use of multiple forms of media can come together and still be very aesthetically pleasing despite the differences.

The last part of the article that I found were particularly interesting was the author’s description of the interaction between different types of media. The “cross-over” between media described in the article was really cool. I particularly like the fact that a variety of media techniques can now be applied to other media instead of just being used in relation to their original media form. All in all, I thought the article was very eye-opening. It made me realize how much of an effect that graphics and editing have in everyday life, even though it may sometimes go unnoticed. I also thought is was very cool that the introduction of one program completely changed how editing was viewed.

Digital Sketchbook:


http://youtu.be/ls9yJTphLxg

url.jpg
tumblr_m3ivrop2TA1qf5do9o1_500.gif
moon-5day-1807.jpg

images.jpg
maxresdefault.jpg
clock-alarm.gif
-moon-a.jpg
cool_text___thrash_by_devianttyl1-d6beop8.png
Cool-Text-Effect-450x182.jpg

Lev Manovich: Augmented Reality

I really enjoyed the article, it was a bit complex in terms of putting an idea into words. However, after continuing on in the article, a lot of easy examples were portrayed in order that the reader would be able to understand the concept. It's very interesting to me that this concept is not as new as I had imagined. It's cool to think that people have been thinking about this concept of art since the 90s(particularly since I had never heard of it before). In the same token, I was surprised to realize that I am being affected by augmented reality and see it everyday despite the fact that I just don't notice it. I do think that some of the forms of augmented reality noted in the article were a little far-fetched at times and do not really seem realistic but, considering most of them are already in existence I feel as though this form of art is quickly moving along with the times, if not moving faster than it.
Do you think that all forms of augmentation bring along an augmentation of space or influence our experience of the immediate surrounding space?
  • I do not necessarily agree that what is augmented depends on what the additional content relates to. The object that is augmented does not necessarily need to have any particular relation to the additional content. The surrounding area of what is being augmented oftentimes does not relate to the object being augmented and therefore, does not affect the space surrounding the object. I think that takes away from the main purpose of augmented reality.
  • In my opinion, augmentation of an object is specific to that object, not the surrounding area simply because the purpose of the augmentation serves as an altered perception of the current object, not an augmentation of the immediate surrounding space of the object. Nor does is it able to influence the experience of the immediate surrounding space. These forms of augmentation are unable to do so because the augmentation of solely the object is what augmented reality refers to.