Draconaei’s Blog

Our current technological abilities will (or in some cases, already have) surpassed a shared definition of “ideal beauty.”

Consider HD TV’s.  Thus far, the higher resolutions we develop appear increasingly more beautiful.  I propose that someday, the resolution will be SO good, that in order for the image to look “ideal” and “the most beautiful” that we will have to filter OUT information instead of revealing more information.

Consider photographs in magazines, where this phenomenon already takes place.  Not only are “imperfections” airbrushed away, but examine any photograph of any model in any advertisement.  Skin texture is flattened, and made perfectly uniform.  Color is perfectly homogenized.  Every surface appears smooth, with high lighting contrast and brighter-than-life colors.  With every single PhotoShop touch-up, information is filtered OUT of the original photograph, dressing the image in a veil of unrealistic uniformity and simplicity.

Beautiful as the model may be, her in-person appearance to your eyes will never strike the same charming composure as her flawless and now far-removed digital image.  We are already filtering out information to make already beautiful people more beautiful.  How long until other forms of technology do the same, not just in individual cases such as advertisements, by by default?

Current HD TV’s may have impressive resolution already, but their displays still simplify and smooth reality enough to not need artificial filtering.  Someday they will, and the progression of technology will be entirely redirected from realism to idealism.

(cross-posted in my Borrowing Light class blog.)

After a few failed attempts, I found out that making “glow liquid” out of Mountain Dew is a hoax.  It’s disappointing, but makes me feel a little better about the ingredients in Mountain Dew.

There is a way to make glow liquid yourself, but the chemicals are expensive, so I caved in and ordered larger glow sticks with more liquid in them.

In the meantime, I’ve been thinking about the core of my glow stick project.  I’m fascinated with embodying light in a liquid, and the surreal quality of actually experiencing it as a liquid no longer trapped within a container.  This has led to countless broken glow sticks in my apartment.  Here’s a video of me pouring “liquid light” into a glass:

Dripping Light

This sparked the train of thought that led me to where I am now:

Fascination with glow sticks –> ordering a lot of bendy glow bracelets online –> twisting glow sticks into different shapes –> realizing these bracelets could be twisted to look like compact fluorescent light bulbs –> realizing that actually, they didn’t look anything like light bulbs after all.  sadness.  –> decided to create a hollow light bulb, fill it with glow liquid, and drain it –> acquired a hollow light bulb look-alike from a glassblower –> fill, drain, record the change over time… but what happens after it leaves the light bulb?

This can challenge the way we view light- it starts as a familiar form (the light bulb) and over time the bulb is drained, and the light only exists in splatters on the floor.  It also embodies the energy we use, oddly quantifying the light by its escape over time.  It thinking of how to push the project further, I’m currently pondering a setup like this:

The light still runs and gathers, and the form on which it drips is very simple (basically a half-sphere, with raised edges so the liquid doesn’t run all over the floor) but the patterns the liquid will form won’t be simple.  They won’t be predictable either.  It’s controlled in some ways, but random enough that I won’t actually know what the final product will look like until it’s happening.  As soon as my larger glow sticks arrive in the mail, I can start experimenting.

The assignment:
Demonstrate various properties of light through an intervention.

The hardware:
100W (equivalent) compact fluorescent bulb, socket, wire, plug

The natural material: wood
My ever-present desire to create harmony with opposites came through in my material choices here.  I chose to use on natural and one unnatural material, the natural one being basswood.  Wood is a material not usually seen as having much of a relationship with light.  However, when thin enough, light transmits through it.  Because wood is an organic material, the light is not transmitted evenly, and we can see woodgrain, knots, and other “imperfections” in the wood by different levels of transparency.

Layering these thin slices (1/32″) of wood on top of each other created an entirely opaque layer, which served a structural purpose as well as an aesthetic one of contrast.

The unnatural material: fiber optics
Fiber optics redirect the path of light through total internal reflection. Therefore, if the fiber optic is bent at a sharp angle or cut in any way, light will escape.  In this case, the fiber optic cable has been notched in a number of places, which appear to be glowing “spots” of light in the photograph.  The effect is more subtle next to the glowing wood.

The difference between the lit and unlit forms shows some potential for light as a design material, though the focus is still on the non-light components here.  The next assignment will focus on the light itself.

A not uncommon scenario:

“I am happy that _____.”
“Why?  Of course that would happen.”

Why should we be unable to appreciate the expected?

I lead a lifestyle where I expect to have my own apartment, to always have enough food, to have access to amenities like heat and electricity and internet.  Even though I am surrounded by others with similar lifestyles and expectations, I understand that all of these conditions make me incredibly fortunate, and they make me happy. The very existence of these expectations, of the minimum standards it my day-to-day experience, show that I lead a privileged life and have been blessed with much.

If we can never be happy with the expected, then we are only happy when life exceeds our expectations.  If our expectations are realistic, then how rarely must we experience happiness!

How much happier would people be if they drew happiness from their surroundings, instead of understanding joy as only what surpasses the norm, regardless of what the norm is?  We tend to view happiness as an abundance of positives, relative to a center line drawn at our individual expectations.  Why narrow our perspective so much when we exist within a whole world of circumstances?

Flavoring vodka with skittles is delicious and easy (and looks really cool too!)  I originally found the instructions here.

Here’s a list of the items you will need:

• non-flavored vodka (I use Smirnoff)
• skittles
• 5 bowls to separate out Skittles flavors
• funnel
• coffee filters
• 5 water bottles (or any containers to hold the Skittles vodka during the infusion.  Mine are actually little cranberry juice bottles.)

Step 1: Separate the skittles into their individual flavors, and count up the number of skittles you need of each color.

You will want ~10 skittles per oz. of vodka you mix them with, so plan accordingly.

Step 2: Pour the skittles and the vodka into the water bottles, and give them a good shake.  You’ll already be able to see the colors mixing into the vodka- these bright colors will stay!

Step 3: Let the mixtures sit overnight.  Shake the bottles again to un-stick any mostly-dissolved skittles from the bottom of the bottles, and then filter out the excess sugar using the funnel and coffee filters.  I found that I either needed to filter through two coffee filters together, or filter the entire liquid twice, but this will depend on the filters you use.

Step 4: Once your flavored vodka is free free from goop and clumps of sugar, place in your fridge to chill.  Beware that even though the mixture may not taste strong, it is nearly pure vodka.  Don’t be deceived!

Skittles vodka can be mixed with many things, but I would recommend a clear mixer to enjoy the full color effect (I personally enjoy really sweet drinks, so I use cream soda.)  Mix and enjoy!

Graphics are a language.  Some ideas can only be conveyed through images, and not at all through words- or clumsily, at best.

(As a side note, if you have never read Rice Boy, the story is a beautiful example of what I’m describing.  Go. Read. Now.)

A single image can use many visual devices that give it more significance than its surface-level appearance.  To give some simple examples: flat images can give the illusion of depth.  Overlapping shapes- or rather, a graphic with a break in continuity, which alludes to one shape overlapping another- appear to be layers in space, where changing color intensity implies nearness or farness.

Still images can hint at movement.  The repetition of similar shapes implies a connection, and as our eyes are drawn across them, we can infer the connection is time.  We even project aspects of reality into images, such as the implication of gravity when looking from up to down.

After already labeling words a clumsy means of explaining the language of graphics, it would seem silly to type much more right now.  Instead, I will share a small graphic I designed as a phone decal for a friend:

So, what is this image?  I have no idea.  I only know the image I saw in my mind as I began, and the graphic evolution that took place as I drew.  Yet this simple, still, 2-D image seems to have depth, to imply motion, to imply some kind of evolution over time, even if only in a whimsical sort of way.

If a simple phone decal can do that - using only a basic graphic vocabulary - what could someone speaking fluently in graphics say?

The first of what I hope to be many images to spread the message of To Write Love On Her Arms.

Tell me what you think when you see this.