"Resistance of the Archetype"
Invited Professor: Bruno Juricic.
With Gabriel Esquivel.
Team:Lyly Huyen, Adrian Martinez, Stefani Johnson,
Video Link:
Resistance of the Archetype
Our project explores the notion of ungrounding
through a combining of the graphic realm
with the scientific image. The graphic nature of our project investigates
how application of generated patterns start to exacerbate the object as a way
of testing limitations of the digital
medium. Consequently, the object in question declares its autonomy by
overcoming that which can be achieved through digital means. What is supposed
to be an argument of Raw and Synthetic, becomes more of a conflict as the patterned synthetic is trapped in a state of tension with the raw object it
is projected onto. This static moment captured in a continuous flux becomes the
ultimate moment of ungrounding where Raw and Synthetic reach ultimate chaos and equal autonomy
before either takes over.
The Raw, as stated before, is the
object that is fluctuating between a
hard and a decayed condition. The decayed, “soft” surface is created by external, unknown forces acting upon it
by degrading the mesh. Its original, hardened condition is articulated by the
stalactite-like surface found on the edges as well as underneath. It is called
“original” because the hard surfaces are derived from the initial ground from
which the object was excavated. Now floating and devoid of ground, the object
is in constant search and yearning for another placement while simultaneously
eating away at itself.
The
Synthetic is derived from generated patterns applied as a way of
differentiating various surface typologies (hard + soft). Similar to the
raw surface, the two patterns were created with both articulating different
things: high-fi and low-fi. The
high-fi pattern we determined was the sinuous graphic applied to the “simple”
soft surface as a way of adding complexity. It starts interacting and becoming
an active graphic dependent on
saturation values with the white areas reverting the mesh to its concentrated
original form. The low-fi pattern is a reticulation
of the hi-fi pattern used to codify the hard mesh. This hyper-synthetic glitch graphic works
dependent upon the angle at which you see it. From certain perspectives, the
pattern’s geometric quality starts to simplify the mesh underneath, while at
other times, you can see the textural quality of the mesh further pixelating
the pattern at a micro-scale articulation.
The cartographic method fails when the patterns become so layered and
complex that it ends up distorting the very surface it was supposed to define.
Consequently, the object declares its autonomy since it is only perceptible
because of the limitations of the medium. The pattern acts as a way of exacerbating the surface rather than
blurring it. Similar to Alexander
McQueen’s “Plato’s Atlantis”, the application or projection of the pattern
onto a surface starts to distort depth perception and material reading and vice
versa where the surface articulation starts distorting the graphic. Not only
that, but the pattern adds another level of complexity that the raw fails to achieve. As discussed in
Murakami’s concept of “Superflat”,
the layering and scaling of certain portions of the pattern begin to allude to
a two-dimensional depth that adds to the existing three-dimensional.
Video is used as a way of presenting a
two-dimensional + three-dimensional representation of the object. Because of
its graphic nature, the object in question is able to mix a comic book-like
appearance with the scientific image. Through use of projection mapping
techniques, we will be able to animate the 3D prints with the existing pattern
as a way of showing that the raw object is in a continuous flux in its
hard+soft raw form as well as its patterned, synthetic form (lifecycle condition).
[video]
