Mix n' Match

I admit, I was a little confused as to what to do with the cut-up project.

It was innovative. It was unique. It was something I hadn't done before. It was also very weird. I didn't accomplish much during the class in the computer lab. The magazine I brought in was a Sports Illustrated, which was not the best textual source to use due to it's numerous, ill-placed pictures, which unevenly parted the text. Nothing I tried in class was coherent, so I went back and tried again with some other magazines and old text books I had lying around. Using the method of taking half of each page, I did manage to make some coherent lines of text:

Modern day historians did not make committees to serve more than one purpose.
There were some partial exceptions to assign separate tasks to separate officials.

Yeah, although this doesn't exactly make the clearest of sense, it was the most coherent text I could produce.

All in all, I didn't expect much from doing this project, but it is always curious to physically see how language, words, and text can be intertwined and related, even when coming from seemingly different sources. "Such is the beauty of language."

It would have been maybe more beneficial to have spent more time on this, but I think that is something we all can do on our own as well.

Science of Rythm

My thoughts on the book we are reading in class, are mixed.

From one view, I do think that Spooky does present a somewhat compelling view or argument on sampling, albeit in a really abstract way. His use of scientific terms mixed in with philosophical ideas along with personal experiences and of course, his djing profession, combine to bring the reader a "unique" view of sampling and creativity concerning technology.

On the other side is the issue of the book, if you can call it that, being unreadable due to its lack of clarity, a clear argument, or a cohesiveness. I always thought that there should be a line drawn that seperates "art" from random abstract junk. I'm not saying this book is the latter, but I don't think it is the first, even thought it might represent a topic about the first. Is it different? Yes. Is it artistic? Probably. Should it pass for a book, a proper reading of "rhythm science"?

I don't know.

Remix

For this remix, I took Mandy's first picture and basically tried to find opposites or denials of each specific image that was in the whole picture. I made them a little transparent so one could see both the original and the covering denial of the image simultaneously. I know, I'm that good. (not really).

Sampling some sweet, sweet copyright.

So it's a sampling project you want.

As Sunday morning/night approached, I realized I had no clue what to do for this project. Thinking back to the graffiti example in class, I could feel the creative juices, with the help of some Red Bull, beginning to flow. I should never be confused for an artist, but I was determined to make copyright look good. Real good...Copyright never looked this good before.

Needless to say, that didn't really happen. With a full head of eccentric steam, I Google image-searched for "Copyright symbol", and didn't stop until .002 seconds later, when this crazy search was over. I chose a really neat symbol, because they all looked so different, and clicked "copy/paste" knowing I had the freedom to take at will anything I so desired.
After this, I spent about 10 hours on facebook.

Fresh off my google searching, I opened up adobe fireworks ready to dominate. Too bad "fireworks" dominated me. I had had very limited experience with photoshop in the past, but I mainly relied on any image editing via ms paint, which consisted of drawing lines all over the place. After tinkering around with various buttons and hoping for the best, I ended up with this:Yes, it's the Soviet hammer/sickle along with the scales of justice portraying some sort of conflict or balance, along with the US Flag and Constitution in the background reminding the viewer where copyright LAWS lie relative to our culture and freedom-concerning copyright.
I think.

Public Domain images aren't as nice as non-public domain images. That's why this looks like...not as good.

You can decide for yourself what that is "saying". (duh)

Getting to the real core of this overly long post, I did like this project a lot. Forcing us to use non-public domain images in the second picture made me realize the extent to which copyright stretches on the internet, and also why the second picture was harder to make. I personally liked the first picture the best, especially since it took me a good chunk of time just learning how to use the basic tools of adobe. My concept of copyright has not changed, just reinforced. This project brought abstract, visual elements to a highly literary, rigid, and lawful concept that is copyright. It was fun to do this and learn how to use the computer things at the same time. These class projects are continuing to surprise me, and I like it.

History Lesson

"To lose our long tradition of free culture, is to lose our freedom to create, our freedom to build, and ultimately, our freedom to imagine."

As a final word on Lessig, I do believe that the book is an important analysis of the constraints placed on society and "creativity". This issue might not have a huge impact on us now, but in a few years when someone down the road is an aspiring director/writer/musician/etc. and has to deal with copyright, these ideas will become all the more important.

I am a firm believer in the saying "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it". I don't think Lessig touched on how other civilizations or cultures handled the issue of creative property, but it would be worth a look into. What did they do? Where did they go wrong? How did they correct it? What are we doing wrong? Are we doing anything wrong? Asking these questions in relation to copyright is crucial in trying to understand our present and our future. The people that are asking these questions, such as Lessig, are why our future concerning creative property, is not hopeless.