Pictures!

Who doesn't love pictures?

WHO ARE WE?

The team members are:

TRAVIS STEBBINS: Team Director, Lead Designer and Purchaser
IVAN CHEW: Glass Blower and Engineering Specialist
VALERIE McNEAL: Creative Director
For a brief moment in time, we also had JENENE CASTLE on our team.

Alternative Timeline

Oct. 6th: Google Group established, all members on board.
Oct. 22nd: Jenene drops the course
Oct. 30th: First draft of Audio completed
Nov. 4th: First drafts of sketches and concept art completed, group consent
Nov. 11th: Integration of external project, splits direction of project
Nov. 13th: Acquisition of major materials (crib, bedding, audio exciter, etc)
Nov. 18th: Additional drafts/sketches and concept art completed
Nov. 18th: Second draft of concept art and sketches completed, final concept and theory consolidated
Nov. 30th: Motor and System acquisition.
Dec. 8th: First presentation of the piece.
Dec. 9th: Updates and upgrades begin as per requests of class and instructors.
Dec. 15th: Completion of project

General Timeline

(NOTE: Due to the casual and personal nature of some of the discussion that took place in the Google Group, the entire transcript will not be posted. The transcript itself is available upon request.)

Part 1: Confusion and Brainstorming

            In the first chunk of the project’s time, our group began to brainstorm ideas for the project. Would we attach an audio exciter to a glass bell? Would we cover a dancer in lights and create a system of choreographed movements? Would we combine bells and solenoids to create a visual and audible landscape? This was the week we tussled with the scope of the project— how far were we able to go with the time allotted? It was also during this time that we learned each other’s strengths and weaknesses, and began to first grow as a team.
             NOTABLE MOMENTS/QUOTATIONS: 

             • "Do you guys have any ideas for the systems project? We have to be
realistic, and do with the resources we have among the 4 of us." (October 5th)
             • "Orb-like glass objects, using audio exciter to for lights  as bells
and could be projected onto a surface. Rythym to lights..." (October 11th)

Part 2: Focusing In on a Winning Point

            While sadly we had to bid farewell to Jenene Castle, we were still charged when we found and settled-upon a new direction for the piece— a commentary on childhood and the role that systems/electronics play in it. Though at the time we did not have a clear idea of exactly what parts and pieces would be involved, we had a general sense of what our piece would mean and represent. With that in mind we began drafting ideas for an art piece that would encapsulate our new direction.
             NOTABLE MOMENTS/QUOTATIONS:
             • "I believe we can pull this project off in a 3 person group... Planning and constant communication is the key to making time..." (Ivan, October 26th)
             • First Draft of Audio for the piece: http://www.mediafire.com/?r93xpa5eh5y99s7 (October 30th)

Part 3: Increased Development and Productivity

            The next chunk of our time together involved a great deal of focus on the physical manifestation of our idea. The first audio piece for the project was created, and the first sketches and materials-lists were compiled. We settled on a rather elaborate piece that involved the use of gravity/potential energy, thinly blown glass to represent fragility, and an audio exciter to pipe in unsettling audio.
             NOTABLE MOMENTS/QUOTATIONS:

             • Sketches and Concept Art of the piece emerge (this list includes later developments) :
                          ° http://s80.photobucket.com/albums/j168/zoupzuop2/?action=view&current=Photoon11-4-11at640PM.jpg
                          ° http://sjsudigitalglass.googlegroups.com/attach/f43f7053c654fab4/photo.JPG?view=1&part=2&hl=en

http://sjsudigitalglass.googlegroups.com/attach/f43f7053c654fab4/photo.JPG?view=1&part=2&hl=en
                          ° http://s80.photobucket.com/albums/j168/zoupzuop2/?action=view&current=Photoon11-18-11at1219PM.jpg
                          ° http://s80.photobucket.com/albums/j168/zoupzuop2/?action=view&current=Photoon11-18-11at1219PM2.jpg

Part 4: Miscommunication and Stumbling

            At this point a decision was made to change the direction of the piece. Loose use of confirmations for one project was taken to mean confirmation for both, and work split into two directions. It was also during this period of time in which Ivan sadly injured himself in a martial arts tournament, so whatever progress had taken place began to slow for the week. When asked to present either piece, we found ourselves inadequately prepared for either. Frustrated with the lack of communication, the team knuckled down, came together, and agreed unanimously on an approach that involved a very specific set of materials and elements.
             NOTABLE MOMENTS/QUOTATIONS:

            • "I wish we could have met sooner because in junction with the crib idea, I
found that the audio exciter works very well on a spring mattress..."(November 11th)
            • "First I must begin with an immense apology... Frustrated as I was it was neither my intention nor my place to give you disrespect." (November 17th)
            • "...just slapping an audio exciter into the project was not enough." (November 19th)
            • Updated Audio for the piece: http://www.mediafire.com/?kmsg441fv5dlitz
(November 18th) 

Part 5: Improved Focus and Less Stress

            With the new model of the project now largely complete, the next presentation with the instructors demonstrated… that we had taken on too much! The use of fewer elements would have accomplished the same goal, without requiring such a large amount of effort from a group with less manpower than the rest of the project’s groups. We immediately began to narrow the required elements down to a simple yet effective list that expressed the meaning of the piece while remaining simple to work with and display.

Part 6: One Last Surprise and the Final Presentation

            Our first display of the finished piece was underwhelming. The system, while present and expressive, was underwhelming in its delivery. Immediately we set forth on improving the potency of the piece, through the use of an additional geared motor, an amplifier/volume doubler for the audio exciter, and a larger presence of wires and machinery in the visual facet of the piece. Additionally, the inside of the piece itself grew simpler and more effective as we took feedback/advice from the first demonstration and simplified the contents. All that remained was some minor fine-tuning, some quick thinking with materials, and… the piece that stands before many in the gallery reflects the fruits of such labor. With improved aesthetics and potency, this piece is an expressive exception amongst its peers and stands proud as a work of art.

              NOTABLE MOMENTS/QUOTATIONS:

              • "If we are to comment on the fragility of children and the impact of machines/
technology, these modifications will streamline the work into simple
and effective steps that will make the piece less subtle." (December 9th)
              • Final version of Audio: http://www.mediafire.com/?whp5ti2ahokhg59

INTRODUCTION: Group 6 Final Statement

Travis Stebbins, Valerie McNeal, Ivan Chew

Glass/DMA Group 6

Final Statement

The basic research and point of interest in our project was the newfound role of machinery and electronics in the process of raising children. In addition to the resource of child-related objects being available at the time of the brainstorming session, we all also found the subject to be a unique challenge to the assigned task at hand.

The ‘system’ in this piece is reflected in the audio exciter and motor duo underneath the crib; these electronics come together for the purpose, essentially, of rocking whatever is in the cradle above it to sleep. The artistic focus, then, was not on the system itself, but what the system represented in a larger standpoint, particularly in the context of raising children and the role non-human entities play in it.

The piece itself attempts to present the juxtaposition of non-human, soulless machines and the fragility of childhood and youth. Ultimately, if a question must be found, it asks, “are we (human parents) relinquishing control of our children to the machines on which we ourselves so often depend? Can machines and electronics do the same jobs, or with the same success?” The piece does not attempt to answer with a ‘yes’ or ‘no’, but instead brings up one of the tenets and examples of where technology usurps a role previously held by human hands— rocking a child to sleep. Raising children is neither an easy nor small feat, and requires a great deal of work. Even simply putting a child to bed requires much effort from parents. However, are the subtle nuances and accounts for inter-human relationships equally important, or can they be cast aside for the sake of simply getting the job done? The piece, in whole, is meant to present an unsettling viewpoint on the matter from one perspective.

We in Group 6 have undergone several trials, from losing members for the semester (or for about a week) to miscommunications between members to outright not having things done on time.  Even the first showing of what should have been the final display of the piece did not go successfully. However, because we have pulled through and learned from the lower moments of the project, we have managed to create an expressive piece that poses a question unlike most in the Glass/DMA collaborative project. It is a poignant and provocative piece that ultimately succeeds at representing an abstract and difficult concept for glass OR digital media to convey, and we feel that we have succeeded in the completion of our piece.