The Flow of Data Captured in an Idyllic Scene
The Flow of Data Captured in an Idyllic Scene, is one part to a four part HD video series shown in the Museum of Glitch Aesthetics by Artist 2.0.
| The Flow of Data Captured in an Idyllic Scene | |
|---|---|
| |
| Artist | Artist 2.0 |
| Medium | High Definition Video |
| Date | unknown |
| URL | http://glitchmuseum.com/theflowofdatacaptured.html |
Summary
The Flow of Data Captured in an Idyllic Scene is about ten minutes long, capturing a single uninterrupted screen of flowing water in a natural setting. Artist 2.0 employs real-time streaming, as well as datamoshing techniques, to capture the natural scene and generated pixelated glitches, rendered primarily in the areas of flowing water. Furthering the glitch aesthetic and discontinuity, the video piece also lacks any audio components, unlike other pieces in the series.[1]
Conceptual Influences
In this piece, and the series as a whole, Artist 2.0 is heavily influenced by artificial data and the natural world.[2] More precisely though, Artist 2.0 is interested in the complex relationship between the natural and the resulting artificial copies through digitization. It is through this interest that Artist 2.0 explores the problematic effects that normalized digitizing behaviour has on social experience.
Interpretation
The Flow of Data Captured in an Idyllic Scene and The Water of Information (Data Flow Capture #36) are the only two pieces in the series that have absent audio components. In the other two pieces in the series, Falls from Grace and More Data Under the Bridge, audio components are used, and seem to also be processed through the glitch aesthetic.[3] The reason for the difference is potentially due to an intention to have viewers experience the pieces differently, and create meaning in the disconnect. The absence of audio creates an almost meditative rhythm, influencing viewers to infer the sounds of nature from visual stimulation, and thus lending a higher degree of natural representation. It is perhaps in this representation that Artist 2.0 is cynical towards the social laissez-faire attitude of ignoring the difference between the natural and the data artifice. It is also possible that perhaps Artist 2.0 is only attempting at simply drawing attention to the casual, and perpetual, blending of both real and unreal forces, permitting viewers to develop a deeper subjective connection to the relationship.