Ben+Ogedegbe

=Ben Ogedegbe=



Major: Biology Experience with computers and software: Not much outside of owning a smartphone/laptop Experience with art: I've taken a couple ceramics classes Something interesting: I have both a Nigerian and an American passport Artistic Interests: I spend a lot of time searching for new music and movies

=Week 1 Homework:= To start, this article ended up being much more substance heavy than I was expecting based on the format. Seeing that it was a comic lead me to believe that it would not be very text heavy and would give one or two examples of copy right however, it ended up being incredibly informative and taught me a lot I did not already know about fair use and public domain. Before reading this article most of my knowledge about fair use and copy right came from following music because many of my favorite artists sample older songs to create new ones. This has led me to believe that there was very little in the public domain and I did not think much about fair use because generally speaking the use of a sample of another artist’s music has to be cleared if it is for commercial purposes. A couple years back there was a huge shakeup with Sound cloud, a popular music streaming service. Unlike apple music and Spotify, Soundcloud’s main attraction was that anyone could go make an account and upload music. This gave a lot of lesser known and up and coming artists a free platform to express themselves and gain notoriety. Unfortunately, this has been curtailed by a change in policy. Many artists, especially those making electronic music would sample and remix popular songs in order to get their name out and release the songs for free on SoundCloud. After a time, the record companies who held the rights to these songs complained to SoundCloud that their property was being used without permission and as a result starting a couple years ago SoundCloud began removing songs that remixed or sampled work that was licensed. This did a lot to change the face of the service because for the longest time it was an avenue for lesser known artists to publish free music and since this change traffic has decreased. And while I can understand why record labels would object to the deliberate use of their intellectual property even if I disagree with the way it’s handled and the results of their actions, I cannot understand some of the examples demonstrated in the comic specifically the one from the civil rights documentary “Eyes on the Prize.” The fact that a cell phone ringtone in a documentary could lead to a $10,000 clearance fee is insane especially considering that it was not intentional. This type of behavior ultimately will stifle creative expression due to fear of repercussion. Especially in the case of documentaries, because it is almost impossible to document anything without running into copyrighted material. In conclusion, I agree with the characters of the comic in that copyright laws are very important to protect people’s art and brand’s but at the same time if they are overused it can lead to a lack of suitable reference material from which to build on. Only by balancing between the two extremes can art and culture continue to be pushed forward.

=Exercise 1, Presence and Absence:=



= = =Exercise 2: Old Borrowed and Blue- Progress=



Final Image: =Exercise 3: Prep for AR and Video Project=

I thought the exhibit was really thought provoking. The centerpiece was a short film that begins in a very disjointed way as just short interviews with seemingly unconnected people until it later is shown to be centered on the last woman interviewed as she looks out of a window at the world passing by. I think the format of the film was really interesting because it was on all three walls of the small room making it incredibly immersive and impossible to see everything. I think the artists were trying to convey the feeling of insignificance. By starting with individual interviews in a dark room it places clear value on the individual but following the interviews the main character is shown to be increasingly distressed as she becomes swept up in the crowd and therefore less of an individual making her less and less significant.

=Exercise 4: Krauss Article Response= What would Krauss' thesis be, and how would it differ, if she were writing this article in 2017?

Well to begin, Krauss' thesis is essentially that the whole medium of film and video is inherently narcissistic. This conclusion was reached in the 1970s which as far as video is concerned was very different than it is today. The most obvious and I believe relevant difference between these time periods is the availability of recording devices. Back in the 1970s and even through the 1990s, in order to make a video a person had to specifically buy a video camera which in many ways made it a luxury and less accessible medium. However, today, almost all phones come with video capturing ability making this medium far more accessible to the masses. That being said, if we accept the premise that as a medium video is narcissistic then the proliferation of portable recording devices (i.e. mobile phones) has created a more narcissistic society.

I posit that Krauss’ thesis would not have changed in its meaning but instead that it would expand to capture narcissistic aspects of video culture as we have it today from being able to share videos through varying avenues on the internet, this is evident from the sentiment she displays in quotes such as this “The demand for instant replay in the media-in fact the creation of work that literally does not exist outside of that replay.” This was a cultural critique far ahead of its time. With the internet we in many ways mirror Vito Acconci in his video “Centers” (1971). The video consists of him pointing at the center of the screen (himself) as if to say look at me direct your attention here in the most obvious and narcissistic way possible. And in many ways this is exactly what we do with our online presence. Every post a reminder of our own self-importance and every selfie a reaffirmation of our existence. And those are the types of critique I would expect from Krauss. Another element that she would likely touch on is the ability to live stream video content.

However, I would like to offer a counterpoint to this thesis. One could look at the state of affairs of social media and video content and exclaim that it is narcissistic and that the world is becoming a more narcissistic place, and I would tend to disagree. While the medium is more easily available for widespread use I think that culturally video and social media have replaced the niche previously inhabited by journal’s and diaries. Instead of memoirs we have digital footprints stretching back to the purchase of our first iphone. Instead of a small note in a book of an event we have a feed of pictures, videos, and posts from our friends by which to remember. And ultimately I think for the purpose of art it has given a platform to the masses which just aids to push the culture forward and increase the standard for what we as a whole accept as art.

=**Cinemagraph:**=

= = =**Augmented Reality Response:**=

After reading "The Poetics of Augmented Space" by Lev Manovitch from the University of San Diego I felt a certain excitement that I had not felt in some time. I think having been born in 1995 most technology that is around today and that I use in my day to day life I take as a given and not necessarily as an advancement. But reading this paper which was published in 2006 by a professor gave me a new viewpoint, as Manovitch would have been at least of college age while virtual reality and augmented reality were being pioneered. To contrast this, at the same age, as Manovitch was when this technology was pioneered, I downloaded the biggest AR game as far as scale directly to my smartphone for free. I am of course talking about Pokemon GO!. This game was one of the first of its kind to reach the main stage and it took the world by storm. To explain in short, it was very similar to previous Pokemon games in that you were a trainer tasked with collecting wild Pokemon, battling with other trainers, and collecting items. What was so revolutionary however, was the fact that this all occurred in real time on a map where you actually had to walk into a park to capture an earth based Pokemon and you had to be close to a body of water to find a water based Pokemon. This was very diferent than the Pokemon games of the past, which encouraged stationary behavior where kids would sit in the same room, not communicating beyond the faintest grunt, as they plied their craft making advancements through the game. Through the use of AR developers changed the face of gaming across the world.

The game was a smash hit, article upon article gushed about the changes occurring across the country, and these were not geographically isolated. It was summertime and I was living in DC at the time and I couldn’t be outside for longer than a minute before seeing a group of 3-4 kids, teenagers, and even adults exclaiming over a found Pokemon or item. A game, which had traditionally taken place inside of closed walls, was then transferred out into the world and it fostered new friendships and real life experiences, in effect augmenting reality.

To get back to the article, Manovitch would likely share my opinion as seen in this quote “is through the interaction of the physical space and the data that some of the most amazing art of our time is being created.” (Manovitch 2006). Without question I believe that augmented reality can greatly improve the human experience and that extends far beyond simply video games. While Pokemon was good fun, this technology when applied to say, a historical site in a city, would allow historians to give additional information to passers by without needing huge signs and diagrams which detract from the aestheteics of a space. Every person would be able to read the captions in entirety without scrunching their eyes and huddling around a crowded space. However, my one concern with this technology is that it would become one available to only the most privileged. For those who do not have smartphones capable of rendering augmented reality their reality would become much more watered down. All of these advancements would in effect leave them behind and there would be great disparity in experience. Unfortunately, this disparity already exists to great effect but ideally with the proliferation of this technology over time it would become more affordable and accessible.