Author: admin

Posted on by admin news

Open Knowledge 1.0, 17th March 2007

Open Knowledge 1.0
Saturday 17th March 2007
Limehouse Town Hall
http://www.okfn.org/okforums/okcon/

Discussions of ‘Open Knowledge’ often end with licensing wars: legal arguments, technicalities, and ethics. While those debates rage on, Open Knowledge 1.0. will concentrate on two pragmatic and often-overlooked aspects of Open Knowledge: atomisation and commercial possibility.

Atomisation on a large scale (such as in the Debian ‘apt’ packaging system) has allowed large software projects to employ an amazing degree of decentralised, collaborative and incremental development. But what other kinds of knowledge can be atomised? What are the opportunities and problems of this approach for forms of knowledge other than Software?

Atomisation also holds a key to commercial opportunity: unrestricted access to an ever-changing, atomised landscape of knowledge creates commercial opportunities that are not available with proprietary
approaches. What examples are there of commercial systems that function with Open Knowledge, and how can those systems be shared?

Bringing together Open threads from Science, Geodata, Civic Information and Media, Open Knowledge 1.0 is an opportunity for people and projects to meet, talk and build things.

Each thread will have speakers to set the scene, with the rest of theday divided between open space formats and workshop activities.

If you have a presentation or a workshop you would like to give in the open space, or you would like to help organise Open Knowledge 1.0, please get in touch.

Atomization: the Fourth Principle of Open Data Development ==========================================================
Consider the way software has evolved to be highly atomized into
packages/libraries. Doing this allows one to "divide and
conquer" the organizational and conceptual problems of highly
complex systems. Even more importantly it allows for greatly increased
levels of reuse.

A request to install a single given package can result in the
automatic discovery and installation of all packages on which that one
depends. The result may be a list of tens  or even hundreds of
packages in a graphic demonstration of the way in which computer
programs have been broken down into interdependent components.

Atomization on a large scale (such as in the Debian apt packaging
system) has allowed large software projects to employ an amazing
degree of decentralised, collaborative and incremental development.
But what other kinds of knowledge can be atomised? What are the
opportunities and problems of this approach for forms of knowledge
other than Software?

Atomization also holds a key to commercial opportunity: unrestricted
access to an ever-changing, atomised landscape of knowledge creates
commercial opportunities that are not available with proprietary
approaches. What examples are there of commercial systems that
function with Open Knowledge, and how can those systems be shared?

OKFN is supporting software allowing the incremental, decentralised,
collaborative and atomised production of open data. KnowledgeForge is
one Open Knowledge Foundation project to provide a platform for
collaborative data development and distribution. The "Open
Shakespeare" project is a prototype distribution of public domain
information with utilities for annotating and cross-referencing it.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Letter from Geospatial: Open Standards, Open Data, Open Source
==============================================================

The "open standards, open data, open source" mantra is not unique to
the geospatial community, but is core to it. Due to our high degree of
specialisation, socialisation and closeness to data, the open source
geospatial community has "incubated" some concerns that are coming to
be apparent in domains where software, knowledge and scientists are
not yet so close together.

Our standards consortium is like a networking club for proprietary
interests; its recent specifications are baggy monsters, filled with
extensions largely concerning access rights, limits and payment
mechanisms. Their older, core standards for RESTful web services *are*
widely used, and have helped the geospatial community to a new level
of "interoperability", as it is still quaintly known.

The new wave of web-based "neogeography" drove the development of
community-based specifications for the simple exchange of geographic
information have become de facto standards. There has been an
implementation-driven focus from open source projects seeking to make
it easier to contribute, distribute and maintain open licensed
geographic information. Now our standards organisation has the bright
idea of a "mass market", "lightweight" standards programme to harness
the energy in this activity. Their established membership, with a lot
of time vested in the matter, are not happy with this.

In the decision-making bodies following the advice of traditional
domain experts, much issue is made of "discovery", "catalog services"
and "service discovery services". Among the "grassroots" at the nexus
of open source, open standards and open data there is a call for a
"geospatial web" approach, re-using as much as possible existing
distribution mechanisms and toolkits, RSS/Atom in particular.

ISO standards for information exchange are not solving the problems
faced by the geospatial community. Yet they are being embedded in
international law; "risk management" and disaster recovery provide a
big political drive for exchanging more geographic information.
Through the Open Source Geospatial Foundation, the community is
attempting to influence decision-making bodies through the strength of
the open source / open data approach. "Open" standards are a gateway
to this, and it is a sad day when our official specification for
metadata exchange is an "add to my shopping basket" page.

There's always a lack of emphasis on contribution; transaction and
feedback are an afterthought. The traditional theory of "Public
Participation GIS" comes closer to implementable reality.
"Collaborative mapping" projects producing open licensed data are
becoming the stuff of business plans. The ISO moves in glacial time;
it would be of benefit to shorten the circuit.

How can we bring good status to "complementary specifications"?
Can we use open source software to influence decision-makers?
Can we help provide a good data licensing precedent for others?
Do our distributed storage and query problems look like yours?
Posted on by admin news

future of film, 5th march 2007

1. General outline http://www.londonwestside.com/

The film and television industry is changing, but not fast enough. While
studios take fewer risks, fall back on old formulas and find their
traditional markets drying up, new, vibrant cultures and markets for
film are exploding all over the Internet: from video podcasting and
peer-to-peer networks to mobile media, live streaming and interactive
environments. For those with the imagination, curiosity, and passion for
film, there are more opportunities and niches for film-making than ever.

This four day programme will introduce film producers to emerging
techniques and technologies for creating, distributing and promoting
film on the Net. Mixing hands-on training with master-class
presentations, open discussions and public screenings, the focus will
shift from technological developments to creative potentials, and
crucially, to the economic realities: how to actually survive and make
money with all this stuff.

By taking these discussions and learning resources on-line through the
workshop website, the programme will create an ongoing forum for
information sharing and networking, and a showcase for the work of
participants.

———————————————————————

2 General Outline for workshops

Video blogging, alternative distribution, peer-to-peer: these are
phrases that set the TV, Film and music industry quaking in their
boots… but needlessly. Like ‘home taping’, VCRs and DVD recorders,
these technologies are not bogeymen, they are business opportunities.
These workshops will focus on how to create, promote, fund and
distribute film totally on-line, without the cumbersome middlemen of the
distributors and promoters – until your film gains sufficient notoriety
for it to go mainstream, of course!

2.1 Technical Workshop (Adnan Hadzi)
The workshop will introduce participants to tools, technologies and available services for encoding, uploading and sharing their films and video blogs online using free and open source software such as Broadcast Machine (RSS feed, Democracy Player, iTunes Vodcast, Bittorrent) and DyneBolic.
Participants will also be shown how to use x.264 technology (portable video devices iPod, sony PSP, Archor etc.) in order to encode and prepare their movies, in conjunction with encoding tools that they can download and take home.

2.2 Production Workshop (Penny Nagle)
The production workshop will introduce participants (briefly) to the
terminology and areas of interest they’ll need to understand to manage
projects in this area. It will then delve into the business issues
involved in using p2p technologies – the advantages, dangers, and
possibilities it opens up. There will also be an overview of the kinds
of business models that are flourishing online, with examples of
cross-overs between established film-industry and new, emerging markets
in online distribution.

Posted on by admin news, research

Deptford.TV workshops Phase II October – December 2006

The Deptford.TV workshops entered phase II. For the first time we started to use the database content directly in the editing suites. We used the commercial software Avid Xpress Pro as well as Final Cut Pro and imported the x.264 (x.264) files. Avid had problems with the importing of the files, they all came out asynchronous, forcing us to export and import the sounds seperately.

The next test will be with http://cinelerra.org embedded in the http://dynebolic.org live cd. Our goal is to have the editing process running on FLOSS software by spring / summer next year!

The films where premiered on the pirate boat (mind-sweeper) together with the presentation of our partners, bitnik’s Download Finished system.

stricly for true file-sharers & river bound culture vagabonds, YARRR!

– the premiere of the film “Strategies of Sharing”

– the premiere of four shorts “Pipes”, “streetworks”,

“Bookie Talks”, “Living Archive”

– and the premiere of “DOWNLOAD FINISHED”

friday 24th of november

screening starts 9pm

RSVP essential – places are limited – please book in advance by sending

email to info@deptford.tv !

media collective bitnik and sven koenig:

DOWNLOAD-FINISHED ­ MAKE PEER-2-PEER CINEMA!

DOWNLOAD-FINISHED is an assistant to transform and re-publish films from

p2p networks and online archives. found footage becomes rough material

for the transformation machine, translating data structure of the films

onto the surface of the screen. the original pictures dissolve into

pixels and overlap into a second layer, the hidden structure gets

visible. file-sharers are becoming authors through DOWNLOAD-FINISHED and

re-interpret their most beloved films.

it is the premiere of DOWNLOAD-FINISHED.

www.download-finished.com – the art of file-sharing

WARNING, entering of the premises on your own risk: be aware that you

will have to “squeeze” through the entrance gate (but we informed the

police and the owners of the industrial estate, set up a sign

“mindsweeper” and will set you guiding lights to the boat, so that you

get there…)

2 Comments Posted on by admin news, tools

transmission.cc, 13-15 october 2006, london, limehouse

At the transmission festival one of the discussions was around FLOSS manual (see also http://www.flossmanuals.net) the importance of documenting multimedia tools. One of the projects dealing with manuals is http://converge.org.uk looking at video distribution of the x.264 codec (vodcasts). We decided to hold a follow up event at the Limehouse on April 27, 2007.

(quoted from http://transmission.cc/About)

Re-transmission was a three day gathering of video makers, programmers and web producers developing online video distribution as a tool for social justice and media democracy. The two events at the British Film Institute were made up of presentations and screenings, firstly exploring citizen video reporting on the Net, secondly discussing how to collaborate and share content on the net in the new era of Open Source and WebTV. For the full Re-transmission program see

http://retransmission.org.uk

for documentation of the event see:

http://www.archive.org/details/retransmission the film

http://wiki.transmission.cc/index.php/London%2C_October_2006 the wiki

Online video, 10 years in.

Metadata process update

Thanks to some funding from the alt-media-res project, we now have a draft metadata standard PDF prepared by JJ King and Jan Gerber:

This report and proposal is under consultation within Transmission-connected networks until Monday November 6th;

We are looking for substantive responses, feedback, proposals, in particular direct inputs from the other Transmission working groups – eg Translation/Subtitling, DoNoHarm, Aggregator R&D, Documentation….

I am posting summaries of responses in the wiki and hope that people with experience of this field of work can suggest practical ways forward to finalise and then begin to implement the standard.

After 6th November we will gather the working group together to review and improve the schema, spec out next steps etc. please add to and improve the metadata to do list

As part of this process, JJ King and I have drafted a proposal for implementation of this standard.

28th October 2006 (zoe)

http://wiki.transmission.cc/index.php/Responses_to_draft_schema

http://www.shiftspace.cc/j/meta/tx_report_0.2.pdf

http://www.clearerchannel.org/transwiki/index.php?title=Proposal_for_further_funding_for_implementation_of_RDF_schema

Posted on by admin presentations

DIGITAL NARRATIVES

A presentation based on the Open the Space Guide produced by the Trace Online Writing Centre in 2002-2003, with many adaptations, additions and changes.

1. What is hypertext?

New Media Writing began as hypertext, which in turn began as a concept for the organisation of information.

In 1945, Vannevar Bush published an article entitled As We May Think in which he called for scientists to find new ways to store, process and access the massive amounts of knowledge available and constantly growing in the world. Libraries and their traditional methods of indexing and classification are no good for the navigation of such large data stores, he said, because they are not sufficiently intuitive: “The human mind operates by association. With one item in its grasp, it snaps instantly to the next that is suggested by the association of thoughts, in accordance with some intricate web of trails carried by the cells of the brain…”. (as quoted in http://tracearchive.ntu.ac.uk/transition/guide/origins.htm accessed 25/11/2006)

The concept was further developed twenty years later when American programmer and designer Ted Nelson invented a system called Xanadu because he realised that: “We need a way for people to store information not as individual “files” but as a connected literature.” (as quoted in http://tracearchive.ntu.ac.uk/transition/guide/origins.htm accessed 25/11/2006)

Nelson coined the terms hypertext and hypermedia:

“Hypertext was ‘nonsequential’ text, in which a reader was not constrained to read in any particular order, but could follow links and delve into the original document from a short quotation. Ted described a futuristic project, Xanadu, in which all the world’s information could be published in hypertext. (…) He had the dream of a utopian society in which all information would be shared among people who communicated as equals.”
[Berners-Lee, Tim Weaving the Web: the Past, Present and Future of the World Wide Web London and New York: Texere Publishing Ltd., 2000 (1st published: London: Orion Business, 1999), pp. 5-6]

In 1991 (26 years later) at Cern, in Switzerland, Tim Berners-Lee developed the first global hypertext: the World Wide Web.

“The fundamental principle behind the Web was that once someone somewhere made available a document, database, graphic, sound, video or screen at some stage in an interactive dialogue, it should be accessible (subject to authorisation, of course) by anyone, with any type of computer, in any country. And it should be possible to make a reference -a link- to that thing, so that others could find it. This was a philosophical change from the approach of previous computer systems. (…) Getting people to put data on the Web often was a question of getting them to change perspective, from thinking of the user’s access to it not as interaction with, say, an online library system, but as navigation through a set of virtual pages in some abstract space.” (Ibid, p. 40)

“When I proposed the Web in 1989, the driving force I had in mind was communication through shared knowledge, and the driving ‘market’ for it was collaboration among people at work and at home. By building a hypertext Web, groups of people of whatever size could easily express themselves, quickly acquire and convey knowledge, overcome misunderstandings and reduce duplication of effort. This would give people in a group a new power to build something together.” (Ibid, p. 174-174)

Today we talk about the Web 2.0, a second generation of Internet-based services –such as social networking sites, wikis, and communication tools– that emphasize online collaboration and sharing among users (Wikipedia, accessed 26/11/2006), and we continue to apply technology to art to make new meanings and to connect with each other.

2. Interactive storytelling

In recent years new forms of media writing have emerged, along with many different terms used to describe these: digital fiction; hypermedia; flash poetry; electronic literature; hypertexts; multi-media texts; web-based narratives . . . the list is long.

New media writing, being an emergent genre, does not even quite recognize itself yet. New media writers use different terms to refer to their work and to themselves. This is not unlike the broader debate about the terms and practices of new media art or media art or digital art or electronic art or art and new technologies….

Nevertheless, all new media writings have a least one thing in common: they must be viewed through the medium of an electronic display, usually a screen but sometimes just audio, via a computer, a PDA, mobile phone, data projector, or other. Their uniting characteristic is that the computer is an essential and inherent component of the writing, and without it the work would not exist.

Another common feature of much new media writing is the use of hypertext, which structures information in such a way that related items are connected, or threaded, together by links called hyperlinks. The items so linked may be text, but increasingly include other media, such as graphics, sound, animation or video. In this way hypertext becomes hypermedia.

Janet H. Murray, in her book Hamlet on the Holodeck talks about authorship in a new media context as ‘procedural’, which means that the author writes not only the text, but also the rules by which the text appears, that is, the rules for the readers/interactor’s involvement. I would add that, within such a context, the writer sometimes does not write the text at all. Instead, s/he creates the conditions for the interactors to produce the text themselves, and sets the context and rules for what can be produced and how. According to Murray: “The procedural author creates not just a set of scenes but a world of narrative possibilities.” (Murray, Janet H. Hamlet on the Holodeck: the Future of Narrative in Cyberspace Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1997, p. 153)

Another term Murray uses to describe the structure on new media writings is “kaleidoscopic”. This means that the structure allows for many actions to take place simultaneously, in multiple ways. (See ibid)

Finally, another element that Murray identifies as important for new media writing is the potential of enactment: the computer does not describe characters, like printed text does, nor does it observe them, like moving image does; instead, the computer “embodies and executes them” (ibid, p. 181), thus allowing us to explore this process of becoming. At the same time, the reader/interactor not only reads/ witnesses the story but, in some cases, s/he becomes its very protagonist.

3. Books vs. Electronic Media

According to the Trace guide, books have had several centuries to evolve and we have had all these centuries to become very sophisticated book-readers. We no longer ‘see’ the technology involved in book production, whereas we do ‘see’ the technology involved in the production of a hyper-novel or other piece of media writing.

When you see the physical object of a book, you know what to expect of this book from its very looks: its cover, the images and colours used, the type-face, the publishing company, along with the title and the name of the author, all convey information about what you should expect. In a glance you can judge if this is ‘serious’ fiction, a ‘thriller’, or an academic book.

In the same way, when reading a book you can easily assess where you are in the text overall. You know when you’ve just begun, you know when you’re half-way through, and you know how long it will take you to finish it.

We often think of interactive story-telling as something that can only happen on the web or through the use of a hypertext. This is not the case. Some examples of interactive pre-web literature books are:
– Jorge Luis Borges (1941) The Garden of Forking Paths, Labyrinths
– Milorad Pavic (1988) Dictionary of the Khazars

These conventions most often don’t apply to new media writing. This can make the life of a non-experienced new media reader fairly complicated to start with. For example, often there is no way of determining how large or complex a piece of writing is before you actually start navigating your way through it, so authors often provide tools such as help-files or site-maps to guide the reader. Once you begin to navigate through the text, the level of complexity becomes clear, but there is still no obvious way of assessing the length of a piece. In many cases this question does not even have an answer as, often, a hypertext is as ‘long’ as you want to make it. Length quickly becomes irrelevant because new media works often do not reach an ending or resolution in any conventional sense. Some narratives end by taking the reader back to the beginning; others do not end at all, but rely on the reader to find a sense of completion through exploring all the links via their own self-created pathways through the work.

New media writing relies on reader input to a far greater extent than print fiction. This is not true of all works –with some new media pieces the only ‘input’ the reader has is the electronic equivalent of turning pages, clicking the mouse to move forward or to begin an animation /film. Other pieces offer myriad alternate routes for the reader, whereas some depend on the community of their readers for their very existence (e.g. Wikis).

The range of new media writing available now is vast. There is non-fiction, short fiction, novels, poetry, journalism and works that fuse several forms. There are pieces that use sound as well as moving images, pieces that require the reader to contribute to the text, literary games, collaborative works, and works-in-process that are constantly changing.

As a reader, you may be asked to contribute something of your own –a fragment of text, a sound, or a memory. You may be asked to provide your email address so that the characters can interact with you after you have stopped ‘reading’ the work. Indeed, the text you’re reading may be written by hundreds of other people, sometimes anonymously, sometimes named. Some times there is no text at all until you have helped create it.

Reading new media writing is all about exploring –exploring the web to see what’s out there, exploring the new technologies and how to use them, exploring new ways of reading, new ways of telling stories.

Short Bibliography:

Berners-Lee, Tim Weaving the Web: the Past, Present and Future of the World Wide Web London and New York: Texere Publishing, 2000

Bush, Vannevar “As We May Think” in The Atlantic Monthly July 1945. Available at: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/194507/bush

Calvino, Italo Invisible Cities London: Harcourt, 1974

Calvino, Italo If On a Winter’s Night a Traveler London: Vintage, 1998

Murray, Janet H. Hamlet on the Holodeck: the Future of Narrative in Cyberspace Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1997

Pavic, Milorad Dictionary of the Khazars London: Penguin, 1989

Pavic, Milorad Last Love in Constantinople London: Peter Owen Publishers, 1998

Rieser, Martin and Zapp, Andrea (Eds) New Screen Media: Cinema / Art / Narrative London: BFI Publishing, 2002

Wardrp-Fruin, Noah and Harrigan, Pat (Eds) First Person: New Media as Sotyr, Performance and Game Cambridge, Mass. and London: MIT Press, 2004

Links for this presentation at:
http://del.icio.us/mariax/dnarratives

Posted on by admin Events

CHArt 2006

CHArt

Last week, on Thursday 9 and Friday 10 November, I spent two days at the CHArt 2006 conference. The title this year was Fast Forward – Art History, Curation and Practice after Media.

Previous CHArt conferences –CHArt has been taking place since 1985!– were concerned with the practice, history, and preservation of ‘computer arts’. Nevertheless this last event was broader, looking at current issues of curation along with questions of history and preservation. To have a look at the programme and abstracts visit http://www.chart.ac.uk/chart2006/index.html

1 Comment Posted on by admin Thursday Club

New Club Night on Thursday 16th Nov. with TIM HOPKINS

Thursday November 16, 6-8pm in the Seminar Rooms, Ben Pimlott Building, Goldsmiths, University of London, New Corss, SE14 6NW

FREE, ALL ARE WELCOME

*ELEPHANT AND CASTLE*

Tim Hopkins will introduce a new lyric theatre /digital media work-in-progress, called ELEPHANT AND CASTLE.

“Architecture is music, frozen.” Goethe

A new lyric theatre piece using the web to link audiences in two architectural spaces simultaneously, based at the Elephant and castle Shopping Centre and Aldeburgh Festival, Suffolk. This explores how human activity is directed by environment, in this case in two places that represent contrasting ideas of a designed society.

The Elephant was Britain’s first Drive-In Shopping Centre, opened in 1965, and along with many other buildings of its generation, is being redeveloped or effaced. The Snape Maltings concert hall was opened in 1967.

Commissioned by LONDON ARTISTS PROJECTS
Research Phase funded by ARTS COUNCIL (UK)

*Tim Hopkins* works in two related areas: opera production and making new lyric theatre works with multimedia elements. He began making work in Opera and Theatre as a director from 1989, and additionally as a scenic designer and filmmaker from 1998.

He has been commissioned to direct opera repertoire for WNO, English National Opera, The Royal Opera Covent Garden, Opera North, Glimmerglass, Teatro dell’Opera Roma, Bayerische Staatsoper Festspiel, Theatre Basel, Graz Oper, Staatsoper Hannover, Wexford Festival, ETO, Alternative Lyrique Paris, Almeida Opera, Aldeburgh Festival and others. He has been commissioned to make original works, involving lyric theatre, moving image and digital media by Opera North, Aldeburgh Festival, ROH2, The Sage Gateshead, Birmingham Contemporary Music Group, Channel 4 TV, LAP.

In 2001 he was awarded a NESTA Fellowship for personal artistic development.

Posted on by admin Uncategorized

ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONALE POUR L’APPLICATION DES DROITS SALARIÉS DE PIERRE BONGIOVANN

ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONALE POUR L’APPLICATION DES DROITS SALARIÉS DE PIERRE BONGIOVANNI
le temps de la désapprobation a passé, voici venu le temps d’agir.
Association Loi 1901

Madame, Monsieur,

Vous connaissez Pierre Bongiovanni.

Vous connaissez les conditions dans lesquelles la fermeture du CICV Pierre Schaeffer a été décidée, puis effectuée, en juillet 2004.

Mais vous ignorez certainement que le Liquidateur Judiciaire qui en fut chargé procéda de sorte que le directeur artistique du CICV, Pierre Bongiovanni, ne peut faire valoir ses droits salariaux et affronte la recherche d’emploi — à plus de cinquante ans — sans aucune compensation.

Depuis la fin du CICV, au motif que son lien de subordination au président de l’association du CICV ne serait pas certain, on refuse à Pierre Bongiovanni, non seulement son indemnité de licenciement, mais aussi la simple attestation de son emploi. À l’ancien directeur du CICV, l’on interdit, mais pourquoi ? la preuve technique de son emploi salarié de quatorze années. Il ne peut alors percevoir aucune aide de l’Assedic, caisse d’allocation chômage à laquelle il cotisa pourtant chaque mois durant 37 ans.

Nous cherchons à comprendre quoi justifie le refus obstiné du liquidateur à licencier normalement le directeur du CICV.

Depuis quelques semaines 150 artistes et acteurs culturels ont réagi à une lettre d’information publiée par Jean Michel Bruyère en s’associant au mouvement de réprobation lancé sur Internet et en rejoignant l’association que nous avons créée pour que soit engagée une série d’actions publiques dont le but unique est de voir Pierre Bongiovanni rétabli dans ses simples droits.

Nous disposons désormais d’un site (http://www.ads-pb.org) destiné à présenter l’affaire, à exposer nos objectifs et relayer nos initiatives la concernant.

Certains que vous aurez été sensible à notre démarche et conscient de notre détermination à voir le droit dit et respecté, nous espérons que vous accepterez de rejoindre notre Association.

le bureau de l’Association

MEMBRES DE L’ASSOCIATION :

    • Simon Messagier, Lougres, France
    • Francette messagier, Lougres, France
    • Christel Chapin, Paris, France
    • Gael Guyon, Paris, France
    • Brent Klinkum, Caen, France
    • Isabelle Arvers, St Genis Pouilly, France

 

    • Philippe Langlois, Paris, France
    • Michel Gaillot, Paris, France
    • Youness Anzane , Marseille, France
    • Thierry Destriez, Mons en Bareuil, France
    • Dodo Santorineos, Athenes, Grece
    • Laurent Dailleau, BROMMAT, France
    • Karin Vyncke , Bruxelles, Belgique
    • Claire Dehove, Paris, France
    • Mathieu Sanchez, Escrennes, France
    • Roland Cahen, Paris, France
    • Florent Jullien, Paris, France
    • Hervé Breuil, Paris, France
    • Laurent Lebourhis, Paris, France
    • Dragana Zarevac, Belgrade, Serbie
    • Hank Bull, Vancouver, Canada
    • Norbert Corsino, Marseille, France
    • Pascale Malaterre, Montréal, Quebec, Canada
    • Quentin Drouet, Longuyon, France
    • Sigolene Valax, Marly le Roi, France
    • Nathalie Garcia Ramos, Marseille, France
    • Isabelle Dufrêne, Mareuil-les-Meaux, France
    • Maurice Benayoun, Paris, France
    • Andrée Duchaine, Montréal Québec, Canada
    • Régine Feldgen, Montreuil, France
    • Charles-Henry Sicard, Mulhouse, France
    • Julien Gilles de la Londe, Paris, France
    • Jean-Claude Mocik, La Plaine Saint Denis, France
    • Martin Gersbach, Paris, France
    • Emilie Godreuil, le Havre, france
    • Antoine Librizzi, Paris, France
    • Arslonga, Paris, France
    • Vincent Guimas, Paris, France
    • Nathalie Magnan, Paris, France
    • Jean-Baptiste Barrière, Paris, France
    • IsabelleSeigneur, Bruxelles, Belgique
    • Coquenpot, Paris, France
    • Stéphane Trois Carrés, Paris, Europe
    • Pauline Lévêque, Paris, France
    • Olivier Goulet olivier, Boisset les Prévanches, France
    • Jean-Paul Curnier, Arles, France
    • Bruno Alacoque, Paris, France
    • Hugo Vermandel, Paris, France
    • Hadzi Adnan, London, UK
    • Nadine Lere, Paris, France
    • Xavier Perrot, Paris, France
    • Hervé Fischer, Montréal, Québec, Canada
    • Sebastian Gersbach, Barcelona, España
    • Manthos Santorineos, Athènes, Grèce
    • Thierry Coduys, Paris, France
    • Davide Grassi, Ljubljana, Slovenia
    • Emilie Fouilloux, Marseille, France
    • Hervé Nisic, Paris, France
    • Philippe Baudelot, Nice, France
    • Jean-marie Duhard, Saint-Mariens, France
    • Martin Fourat, Ecquevilly, France
    • Chrystel Mariani, Strasbourg, France
    • Manuela de Barros, Paris, France
    • Christophe Rolland, Pouilley-Français, France
    • Sébastien Pruvost, Paris, France
    • Tincuta Parv, Paris, France
    • Renée Maréchal, Froidefontaine, france
    • Colette Chevrier, Ivry sur Seine, France
    • Louise Poissant, Montréal, Canada
    • Coeurs Purs, Montreuil, France
    • Stéphane Cagnot, Paris, France
    • Gérard Morel, Tournon sur Rhône, France
    • Emmanuelle Jeanneney, Paris, France
    • Dominik Barbier, Marseille, France
    • wall°ich, Fontaines, France
    • Véronique Gode, Paris, France
    • Gilles Gervais, Bretigney, France

 

    • Jean Pierre Giovanelli, St Jeannet, France

 

    • Thierry Bardini, Montréal, Canada
    • Marie Maquaire, Bannalec, France
    • Anika Mignotte, Boulogne-Billancourt, France
    • Ivan Chabanaud, Marseille, France
    • Norbert Hillaire norbert, Nice, France
    • Yoris Van den houte , Bruxelles, Belgique
    • Louis Bec, Sorgues, France
    • Jean-Pierre Balpe, Paris, France
    • Marie-Solange Dubès, Paris, France
    • Jacqueline Mounier, Bordeaux, France
    • Jean Michel Bruyère, Marseille, France
    • Anne Roquigny, Paris, France, Trésorière

 

    • Thierry Arredondo, Pantin, France, Secrétaire

 

    • Du Zhenjun, Romainville, France, Président

 

 

 

Posted on by admin Thursday Club

Strategies of Sharing: the Deptford.TV Project

NEW CLUB NIGHT on Thursday 26th OCTOBER with ADNAN HADZI & MARIA X

Thursday October 26th, 6-8pm in the Seminar Rooms, Ben Pimlott Building, Goldsmiths, University of London, New Corss, SE14 6NW

FREE, ALL ARE WELCOME

STRATEGIES OF SHARING: THE DEPTFORD.TV PROJECT

How can we produce collaborative work within a creative or artistic context? Which are the complexities of such an undertaking? Which are the strategies of sharing?

Deptford.TV is a research project on collaborative film-making initiated by Adnan Hadzi in collaboration with the Deckspace media lab, Bitnik collective, Boundless project, Liquid Culture initiative, and Goldsmiths College. The project started on September 2005. It is an online media database documenting the regeneration process of Deptford, in South-East London. Deptford.TV functions as an open, collaborative platform that allows artists, filmmakers and people living and working around Deptford to store, share, re-edit and redistribute the documentation of the regeneration process.

Deptford.TV is an open, collaborative project, which means that:
a) audiences can become producers by submitting their own footage,
b) the interface that is being used enables the contributors to discuss and interact with each other through the database.

Deptford.TV is a form of ‘television’, since audiences are able to choose edited ‘timelines’ they would like to watch; at the same time they have the option to comment on or change the actual content. Deptford.TV makes use of licenses such as the Creative Commons and Gnu General Public License to allow and enhance this politics of sharing.

In the summer of 2006 we asked some of the contributors of the Deptford.TV project to give us feedback about their experience of working together and sharing the outcomes of this collaboration –whereas film, software, sound, live performance or other– not just with each other, but with everybody interested. Our aim was to understand and illuminate the strategies employed in various practices of sharing. As Deptford.TV is not affiliated with any one institution, we do not need to ensure any ‘politically correct’ answers. Instead, we aim to accommodate some raw, ‘un-beautified’ responses –just like the Deptford.TV database hosts rough, primary materials audiences do not normally have access to.

Adnan Hadzi is a filmmaker and media artist. He is currently a PhD candidate and Visiting Lecturer at Goldsmiths (Media and Communications).

Maria X [aka Maria Chatzichristostodoulou] is a performance theorist and curator of digital arts. She is currently a PhD candidate at Goldsmiths (Digital Studios and Drama), and Sessional Lecturer at Birkbeck (FCE) and WEA.

Posted on by admin news

**NEW CLUB NIGHT** on Thursday 26th OCTOBER

DTV presentation Paper as .pdf file

**STRATEGIES OF SHARING: THE DEPTFORD.TV PROJECT* *
How can we produce collaborative work within a creative or artistic context? Which are the complexities of such an undertaking? Which are the strategies of sharing?

Deptford.TV is a research project on collaborative film-making initiated by Adnan Hadzi in collaboration with the Deckspace media lab, Bitnik collective, Boundless project, Liquid Culture initiative, and Goldsmiths College. The project started on September 2005. It is an online media database documenting the regeneration process of Deptford, in South-East London. Deptford.TV functions as an open, collaborative platform that allows artists, filmmakers and people living and working around Deptford to store, share, re-edit and redistribute the documentation of the regeneration process.

Deptford.TV is an open, collaborative project, which means that:
a) audiences can become producers by submitting their own footage,
b) the interface that is being used enables the contributors to discuss and interact with each other through the database.

Deptford.TV is a form of ‘television’, since audiences are able to choose edited ‘timelines’ they would like to watch; at the same time they have the option to comment on or change the actual content. Deptford.TV makes use of licenses such as the Creative Commons and Gnu General Public License to allow and enhance this politics of sharing.

In the summer of 2006 we asked some of the contributors of the Deptford.TV project to give us feedback about their experience of working together and sharing the outcomes of this collaboration –whereas film, software, sound, live performance or other– not just with each other, but with everybody interested. Our aim was to understand and illuminate the strategies employed in various practices of sharing. As Deptford.TV is not affiliated with any one institution, we do not need to ensure any ‘politically correct’ answers. Instead, we aim to accommodate some raw, ‘un-beautified’ responses –just like the Deptford.TV database hosts rough, primary materials audiences do not normally have access to.
Visit http://www.deptford.tv

Adnan Hadzi is a filmmaker and media artist. He is currently a PhD candidate and Visiting Lecturer at Goldsmiths (Media and Communications).
Maria X [aka Maria Chatzichristostodoulou] is a performance theorist and curator of digital arts. She is currently a PhD candidate at Goldsmiths (Digital Studios and Drama), and Sessional Lecturer at Birkbeck (FCE) and WEA.