Forum Replies Created
05.12.2012 at 18:37 in reply to: theme 2: Artifacts –> Luncheon on the Grass, inheritance / gender, sex, others #840
well, isn’t that timely… someone on tumblr just asked me “why do you glitch porn?”
dave: would love to take you up on your offer but need to talk to you about travel, parking, etc… get at me email@example.com or facebook.com/stallio
made a minor breakthrough with ghost frames: found some mp4s that the process works on, which means it’s not strictly tied to proprietary wtv files. but i’m not sure yet why it works for these particular mp4s and not others. if i don’t figure this out before next week then this may be something to look at during the workshop.
i’ve also confirmed that it definitely doesn’t work in 2.6. it does work in 2.5.4 in both windows 7 and XP. need to check whether it works on other OSs; this would be good to do in workshop.
i’ll have some wtv and mp4 files for people to play around with. (ironically the only mp4s i’ve found so far that work are porn, so if i give you porn files it’s not a political statement.)
a lot of text-based glitch work is in the form of images or other media:
so there’s a distinction to be made between glitch art that is text-based or -derived, work that is text-dependent but ancillary (such as the aforementioned glitch fonts), and works of glitch text as text. now, whether this distinction is important is up for debate.
also, due to the nature of glitch, text-derived glitch work won’t necessarily be recognizable as text. for example, this piece by arratik is a transcoded copy of mein kampf:30.11.2012 at 07:03 in reply to: theme 2: Artifacts –> Luncheon on the Grass, inheritance / gender, sex, others #735
If one employs a single image and “glitches” it to complete abstraction, does it matter what the original image was at all? (I’m thinking this theory of new materialism would argue that if it is really all pixels that can transform into physical/non-physical things, none of the semiotic/semantic theory we have of images would apply. This to me is a huge crutch for ignoring social context. Then again, I don’t fully understand New Materialism.) This follows the logic of “If the (average tumblr follower) viewer doesn’t know, then it doesn’t matter. Well then why choose porn in the first place at all when it can be anything else?
some people will glitch the things they hate — political enemies and such — just as some will glitch their heroes. in these cases obviously the source matters even if it’s unrecognizable (perhaps the whole point is that it’s unrecognizable: destroy your enemies digitally because you can’t destroy them in real life). likewise, if you name your tumblr something like “porn-glitch” and devote it to that subject, then the fact that it’s porn is important even if a few of your gifs aren’t recognizable as such.
most of my own work in this area probably falls under this description: i made a conscious decision for one reason or another to glitch erotic material, then sought out content that fit my requirements.
at the other end of the spectrum, there is a more freewheeling attitude toward appropriation and remixing of content. data is data, there to be sampled, remixed, and transcoded. in this context, the artist may not give much thought to or even care what they are remixing. (i do this a lot in my music practice: pulling content at random, processing it, reworking it such that i don’t even know where a lot of it came from. does it matter where a sample came from if i as the artist don’t even know?)
and then there’s the matter i mentioned earlier of composition — looking at an image strictly in terms of pixels to be rearranged. sometimes i’ve glitched images primarily because i could tell (or hoped) that a particular glitch process would suit the image well. does it matter what the original image was of if the artist doesn’t care? perhaps this would depend on whether the image is recognizable at the end.
Personally I find some of the more completely abstract, pulsating and undulating gifs more erotic and curiously arousing than the representational ones…but maybe I’m just accustomed to seeing the same damn thing all the time in gonzo netporn. Furthermore a loop of a jackhammering penis seems to accentuate hardcore penetration more than mocking it–which is what repetition often does to speeches.
the “tease” vs “giving it all away”. suggestive vs explicit.
i can accommodate a glitch-er or two but it will cost u a six-pack of beer(we’re not sharing it).
sounds like a reasonable exchange.
i’d be down with this… i can get my data sounds up & running pretty quickly.
i need to do some more experimenting, install avidemux on my laptop to try to reproduce some of these glitches, etc.
i was able to get my ghost frames processes to run on my laptop, but not in version 2.6; i had to install 2.5.4. unfortunately this process currently begins with a microsoft-proprietary format (wtv) but we may be able to tweak it somehow to work with open formats to make it more shareable. i need to try working with other formats; i’m not sure yet what it is about wtv that makes the process work.
i can elaborate more later; right now i really should be in bed…
i seem to recall that last year there was some sort of exchange where glitch-friendly chicago residents offered up couch/crash space to those who were visiting from out of town. (my memory of this is fuzzy because my wife & i just got a hotel room, but she can’t attend this year.)
i plan to be there next week but haven’t sorted where i’m staying yet… i have buddies in the area that i could stay with, but it would obviously be more convenient to stay with a fellow glitcher. and i suspect there may be others in a similar situation.
I’m still grasping the concept, but could the movement of the “points” be controlled by random data?
use transcoded data for the control movements.
is PD vector synthesis limited to just oscillators? if you could use waveforms then you could import sonified or other “glitch” sounds for the sound sources. it would be even more interesting if the sound sources could loop, and more interesting still if the loops could be different lengths and/or could be hot-swapped in/out… the piece would basically compose itself.
i have a quad-core gateway running win7. my laptop is old as shit (still on XP) but i haven’t installed avidemux on it yet.17.11.2012 at 18:58 in reply to: theme 2: Artifacts –> Luncheon on the Grass, inheritance / gender, sex, others #494
another thought: for me (and i suspect many of my generation), glitch and porn have long been intertwined. in the days of analog tv, US cable systems often included porn channels, but these and other “premium” channels were scrambled and couldn’t be viewed clearly without a special box to decrypt them. but the encryption wasn’t perfect so the result was an endless stream of glitch porn piped straight to your tv, often no more than static but sometimes surprisingly colorful, fluid, and at times very explicit though always warped and distorted.
one of my earliest glitch art works, the eggify video from 1999, incorporated scrambled porn. in making that video i recorded 10-15 minutes of scrambled porn and i’m glad i did because cable companies phased out scrambling not too long after.
i’m guessing the datamosh workshop will involve avidemux? i’ve encountered some other glitchy behaviors in this app, but they may be unique to my workflow and/or even to the installation on my desktop machine. (cutting and pasting frames doesn’t work properly, for example, which makes traditional datamoshing more difficult.)
i need to do some more experimenting, install avidemux on my laptop to try to reproduce some of these glitches, etc.17.11.2012 at 16:23 in reply to: theme 2: Artifacts –> Luncheon on the Grass, inheritance / gender, sex, others #489
i’ve seen my share of glitch porn while maintaining the glitchgifs tumblr over the last year, and yes, a lot of it doesn’t go any deeper than pixellated brightly-colored dickslaps. i’m not too interested in that; when i consume porn i’m not into the dickslap-type stuff, and running it through the same glitch process i’ve seen hundreds of times doesn’t make it any more compelling.
but contra theo’s suggestion that the very idea of glitch porn should be “thrown out”, i do think it’s possible to create interesting work in that context. for one thing, in glitch art the content of the original source isn’t necessarily even important. if i’m glitching content from, say, old videotapes, then fundamentally there’s not a lot of difference between taking it from an ’80s porno or from a used copy of back to the future. when selecting content to glitch, i usually pay at least as much attention to things like composition and color than to “content”.
even when a deliberate choice is made to use erotic content, there can still be value there depending on what the artist is trying to say/do. is there something more going on than thoughtlessly running porn through a filter? which part is more important: the glitch or the porn?
i remember one time i reblogged a gif from porn-glitch in which the glitch was destructive enough that you really had to look closely to make out the sex (rare for that blog), and someone reblogged it with a note complaining that “i can’t see the porn!” for that person, there was no point in glitch porn if it wasn’t actually usable as pornography.