Position 01
Appropriate Response by Mario Klingemann, 2020. Image taken from https://www.artsy.net/artwork/mario-klingemann-appropriate-response-1
During a video interview on his project Appropriate Response, Mario Klingemann states, “My work is actually about systems and information, and the way we perceive it.” (2020). In a nutshell, I’m interested in the same thing - just within the context of graphic design. Everything I’m going to say from this point onwards is purely elaboration.
The 100 (+5) screengrabs project was really an extension of the computational(){GCD} (elaborate) project. They both looked at the tools of graphic design - images, type, layout - and examined how they can be manipulated through creative coding. The principal difference is that 100 (+5) screengrabs attempted to somewhat contextualise and focus the relationship through iteration, asking how these generated visuals could be used practically. Could they, for example, be the building blocks for a promotional campaign advertising the film? How successful this endeavour was is somewhat debatable, however the increasing complexity of the imagery is testament to how sticking with a narrow set of limitations can lead to interesting results if you keep at it long enough.
Much of modern-day graphic design deals with digital interfaces either in regard to the actual product of the work or the process of creating it. However analogue a designer’s tendencies may be, the reality for most is that at some point in their workflow they will turn to a computer screen of some kind. This transition, often unconscious, introduces the notion of computational working and the reduction of visual projects to binary numbers. As Friedrich Kittler is quoted in Daniel Rubinstein and Katrina Sluis’ The Photographic Image in Digital Culture, “images on computer monitors … do not reproduce any extant things, surfaces or spaces at all. They emerge on the surface of the monitor through the application of mathematical systems of equations” (2013, p. 34). Working with code is enticing because it entails engaging more closely with the basic building blocks of what is actually being generated on screen. Instead of emulating the way designers would work in traditional (now largely absent) analogue ways, it forces one to regard visual work more in line with the way a computer does. This transition does not come without its compromises. In Plain Text: The Poetics of Computation, Dennis Tenendiscusses how format within digital representation emerges “as a political construct that governs the physical affordances of communication.” (2017, p. 192). He argues that formatting information almost necessarily prioritises certain affordances whilst limiting others. I would argue the same can be said for the tools involved in formatting said information, be it textual or visual. Designing visuals through code means that accomplishing relatively simple tasks within other programmes like Photoshop or Illustrator is immensely difficult (if not impossible). It also means that working algorithmically allows a designer to generate immensely complex visuals and animations with just a few lines of code.
Appropriate Response by Mario Klingemann, 2020.
Ultimately what I keep returning to is this concept of tools and systems. Working through these projects has uncovered a process of designing an interface or a system rather than a single fixed visual outcome. The code allows me to generate a sketch, which has affordances for the input of an external user, in order to generate outcomes that are both complex and unpredictable. I have found a strong parallel for this in the work of Mario Klingemann. Through interviews on his works Appropriate Response (Onkaos, 2020, 06:43) and Memories of Passersby (Onkaos, 2018, 01:40), he discusses the importance of randomness and unpredictability in the work. As an artist he is responsible for the creation of a system of information - a type of self-contained interface - which then itself produces visual or textual outcomes which are beyond his control. This randomness is the major vehicle to generating work that leads to new perspectives, avenues, and outcomes that would not be feasible under the sole authorship of the artist.
My position is therefore to posit that computational methods of working within a graphic design practice can lead to unexplored visual and interactive territories. My question is can this kind of practice be aligned with more practical outcomes? Computational design can certainly be used for digital interfaces, but can it be applied to broader practices such as publishing, branding, or film in a meaningful way?
Memories of Passersby I by Mario Klingemann, 2018.
References
Onkaos (2020) Appropriate Response by Mario Klingemann. 28 February. Available at https://vimeo.com/394544451
Onkaos (2018) Memories of Passersby I by Mario Klingemann. 30 October. Available at https://vimeo.com/298000366
Rubenstein, D. and Sluis, K. (2013) 'Algorithmic Photography and the Crisis of Representation', The Photographic Image in Digital Culture. London: Routledge, pp. 22–40.
Tenen, D. (2017) 'Literature down to a pixel', Plain Text: The Poetics of Computation. Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 165-195.
