application sensitivity revisited: the results

note: this post will be updated if/when i receive more results

here are the results from the experiment in my previous post. this is a collaborative experiment that requires audience participation to work, so if you haven't taken part yet, please read about the experiment and follow the directions—it should only take a few minutes.

our first batch of results come from iriXx, who is running mac OS X Lion (10.7.2). here is the glitched image in safari:

mac-safari.jpg

as you can see, this is virtually indistinguishable from bollybend3mac (which was captured using OS X 10.4 and looks the same on my ipad). the only real difference here is that the colors are brighter; this may not even be a difference in the rendering engine—it could be explained by using different encoding options or codecs when creating the JPEGs.

here it is in firefox on OS X 10.7.2:

mac-firefox.jpg

this looks pretty much like it did in firefox on my wife's machine, except for the green bar at the bottom.

most interesting is this screenshot, generated using the mac program preview, which shows that the image thumbnail renders very differently from the image when viewed in that same app full-size:

mac-preview.jpg



(click to view larger)

iriXx also tried it in android "(running CyanogenMod 7.1, in default Browser and in Dolphin)", but couldn't get it to open. this likely means that damaged JPEGs won't open in android at all, but we need more results before we can conclude whether this is the case.

please join in the experiment! i'll give you a shout-out and post any interesting screenshots here (and eventually on the results page). ¶

application sensitivity revisited: an experiment

i finally got around to reading hugh s manon's and daniel temkin's excellent "notes on glitch" (it took me a while to get to it, despite the fact that it cites my work and i consulted briefly with daniel about sonification while he was working on it). overall, it's a great essay full of glitch art insight, but i wanted to quibble with one bit, and use that as a springboard to revisit one of my early experiments. from the essay:

12. During the process of its creation, glitch art appears stochastic. It is difficult to foresee which alteration of data will metastasize, which will instantaneously kill the file, and which will have no discernible effect. However, from the point of view of the file, whose "genetic predispositions" are rigid and fixed, there is nothing random about glitching. "Open 57904.jpg >> replace all Q with 9hJ" produces exactly the same results every time. Alternately, we could say that glitch practice is pseudo-aleatory, since results which appear random are in fact entirely reproducible.

though it's true that glitches aren't "random" in the sense that they do follow rules, no matter how incomprehensible to us those rules may be, it's an oversimplification to say that any given glitch "produces exactly the same results every time". to say this is to ignore the role that the rendering engine plays in visualizing the glitch.

different rendering engines sometimes render the same glitched data in different ways. this is what i call application sensitivity (for want of a better term). examples:

• a file that is too corrupted to open in one application may open in another—adobe photoshop generally won't open damaged JPEGs, but others (including many web browsers) will
• some corrupted files will render in different ways depending on the application that's reading them—compare a glitched PSD file opened in its native photoshop to the same file opened in gimp (or even in a different version of photoshop)
• glitched files may even render differently when opened in the same application but on different hardware (though this could still be a software issue related to subtly different codecs etc being installed on the different machines)

so let's revisit my bollybend experiment from 2005. in that experiment, i posted an actual glitched JPEG which i knew rendered differently on different software, and i asked my readers to submit screenshots of what it looked like on their systems. i then reposted all of the different versions here.

software and hardware have changed a lot since i first did that experiment, to the point that this same file renders differently on modern systems than it did on 2005's systems.

here is the actual bent JPEG:

the file above will not even open in internet explorer. here's what it looks like in chrome on my computer (running windows 7):

bollybend3-chrome.jpg

here's what it looks like on my wife's machine (firefox 9.0.1 on win7):

bollybend3-ffox.jpg

here's how it looks in microsoft paint on my machine:

bollybend3-paint.jpg

here's how it looks when i insert it into a word 2003 document:

bollybend3b.jpg

here's how it looks on our ipad (running i think iOS 4.3):

bollybend3mac.jpg

and here's how it looks in firefox on my several-year-old laptop:

bollybend3c.jpg

compared to the results from last time, i got three brand-new variations, just by opening the file on newer systems. there are surely more variations out there—in addition to whole new browsers and operating systems on the market now (such as chrome and win7 above), there are also a lot more smartphones and tablets out there. i'm curious how the file might render on an android phone or on web os, for example. but to find out, i'll need your help!

how you can help with this experiment

scroll up to look at the glitched JPEG at the top of this post. compare it to the other versions. if it doesn't match any of them, take a screenshot* and email it to me along with information about what browser and OS you're running. you don't need to crop it for me, but you're welcome to if you like (the image should be 333x485).

submitted images will be posted here on the blog as well as on the results page, and you will of course be credited for your contribution.

extra credit: for bonus points, save the glitched file to your machine and try opening it in other image editors (it probably won't open in photoshop), insert it into word processing files or other types of documents, etc and send me screenshots of any interesting results you get.¶


*(here's how to take screenshots in windows and how to do it in OS X.)

new ventures: active listening radio & glitch gifs

obviously i haven't been posting to this blog too often lately, and i don't expect that to change anytime soon because i'm taking on even more new projects this year (on top of 2-3 albums in the works, ongoing glitch art experiments, etc).

first, i've started a tumblr blog devoted entirely to glitch gifs. there you'll find awesome glitch art animated gifs created by myself and dozens of other artists. the URL, shockingly, is glitchgifs.tumblr.com.

i'm also starting a brand-new net radio show called Active Listening / The Act of Listening. the show takes its name from an essay by john oswald:

As a listener my own preference is the option to experiment. My listening system has a mixer instead of a receiver, an infinitely variable speed turntable, filters, reverse capability, and a pair of ears.

An active listener might speed up a piece of music in order to perceive more clearly its macrostructure, or slow it down to hear articulation and detail more precisely. Portions of pieces are juxtaposed for comparison or played simultaneously, tracing "the motifs of the Indian raga Darbar over Senegalese drumming recording in Paris and a background mosaic of frozen moments from an exotic Hollywood orchestration of the 1950's (a sonic texture like a "Mona Lisa" which in close-up, reveals itself to be made up of tiny reproductions of the Taj Mahal.")

each week i'll play music and sound art somehow related to this theme (glitch, remix culture, prepared records, etc) as well as do some active listening experiments here in the studio, shining new light on old records by playing them in nonstandard ways.

tune in each sunday night at 9:38 pm eastern on http://numbers.fm/! if you're good, i may even archive old episodes somewhere. ¶

stAllio! glitches in front magazine

i'm pleased to announce that some of my glitches were published in the latest issue (#163) of the british magazine front. specifically, i glitched some photos for their feature on dubstep artist joker.

front is a lifestyle magazine that covers music, video games, culture, and—like all british publications—includes photos of nude women (specifically "alt" women with natural busts). you can buy paper copies from their web shop to be shipped anywhere in the world, or if you prefer virtual magazines that can only be viewed using proprietary software, they have that, too. they even have a censored "SFW" digital version for smartphones and tablets, so if you have an ipad and/or want to avoid any risk of seeing an exposed nipple, you're in luck!

i haven't received my copies yet, but here's a taste of the first two pages, courtesy of antonio roberts, who nipped on down to the newstand to snap some photos for me:



i am also available to do glitches at parties or glitch your wedding photos. ¶

upset about the mote in his brother's eye

gary welsh is frothing at the mouth because a democratic politician said mike pence "is like a rabid dog" in his pursuit of an immigration law for indiana.

gary himself is well-known for using laughably over-the-top language such as his claim last month that "The entire Obama presidency is based on a series of forgeries", so it's odd that he is so upset about the words rabid dog, which are pretty tame as far as political insults go. but perhaps he's not so upset by the words themselves, but by the unforgivable rhetorical offense of name-calling.

People can disagree on the answer to any problem with which we are confronted without resorting to name-calling, but if you are a liberal, it's much easier to resort to the demonization of your political counterparts than debate the merits of your argument.

he concludes his post with this:

If you can't win on the merits of the debate, let the name-calling begin. It takes much less effort to name call than debate the substance of your arguments.

indeed, name-calling takes way less effort than rational debate, which is probably why gary routinely uses it in his own writing. just in the past three weeks, gary:

• wrote that county clerk beth white is "totally unethical" and "can't be trusted to run impartial elections"
• in the same post, called lobbyist greg hahn "a highly partisan [...] sleazeball attorney"
• said of city-council candidate kostas poulakidas, "What a total sleazebag!"
• wrote that "the [Indianapolis] Star is the best friend the corrupt politicians in this state have" and columnist "Matt Tully is just a tool for the corrupt political insiders in this town"
• complained that "the Star's editors and reporters are too stupid to realize" that poulakidas was guilty of a felony for sending out a mailer that gary didn't like

to be sure, sifting through gary's blog for ad hominem insults and fallacious reasoning is like picking fleas off a rabid dog—it's easy, but the longer you do it, the more likely you'll end up getting sick.

so when gary complains about name-calling as if it's not his bread and butter, is he being deliberately hypocritical, or just demonstrating his typical lack of self-awareness? ¶

this weekend in chicago: GLI.TC/H 20111

i'm pleased to announce that i will once again be performing in chicago as part of GLI.TC/H! GLI.TC/H is an international glitch art conference and festival, with events and exhibitions in chicago, amsterdam, birmingham, and online. i'll be performing friday night, november 4, at the enemy.

this year i have a special treat: an entire set of all-new, never-before-heard datasound music—my first new material in this vein since true data—with live video accompaniment by video artist glitchard nixon!

also on the bill that night: performances by i ♥ presets, morgan higby-flowers, and cracked ray tube, as well as video screenings and something called glitch karaoke. and that's just one night: GLI.TC/H will be in chicago all weekend, so check the full schedule for more info.

did i mention that all GLI.TC/H events are free? so if you're in the chicago area, you really have no excuse not to show up.

here's a video bumper i put together to promote the conference, with a sneak preview of a few seconds of one of my new tunes... if you want to hear more, you'll either have to show up friday night or wait for the release (tentatively titled does not compute, with possible release next spring):

difficult populations

from the indy star:

Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard's words about minority unemployment -- words he says have since been twisted -- found new life this week in a Democratic Party-funded radio ad and during the latest mayoral debate.

Ballard used his opening statement at Friday's debate to call on Democratic challenger Melina Kennedy to yank the ad. The 60-second spot seizes on his use of the phrase "difficult population," uttered during the previous debate Oct. 15 while the mayor was describing the city's efforts to address high unemployment among racial minorities.

The ad -- placed by the Marion County Democratic Party, not Kennedy's campaign -- took his words out of context, Ballard said.

the star complains that they weren't provided a transcript of the debate, and apparently they don't have the reporting manpower to spend 10 minutes on google looking for the video, which is online at WTHR. sadly, WTHR's javascript embed code doesn't seem to work, so you'll have to click the link to go to their site and view it. the question about unemployment starts at about 3:00. kennedy responds first, then mayor ballard; he refers to blacks and other difficult populations at about 4:50. he uses the phrase twice.

watch the video decide for yourself whether the comments were inappropriate. i don't think the context helps him much here; at the least, the mayor is guilty of very poor word choice. ¶