Chimera Getting Close

Here are some updated pictures of the chimera. It's close to done.

Another Update

Here's another update on the chimera.

Chimera Update

Here are a few images of my model as it stands now. I hope to have it complete by tomorrow evening.

The Cultures of Collecting

This particular Jean Baudrillard reading was much easier to read than the last one. Not only could I understand more of what he was saying, but I also found myself relating the reading to my own habits that I have experienced throughout my life. I thought that his ideas surrounding the acts of collecting objects were very interesting. I have never really given much thought as to how prone mankind is to collecting objects. This reading made me wonder what people choose to collect, as well as my own choices of collectibles.
I, myself have always collected things. I have, throughout my life, had many different collections. The earliest collection that I can remember having was a My Little Pony figurine collection that I began when I was three. At the time, I was absolutely obsessed with the television show My Little Pony. My parents gave me my first My Little Pony for my birthday. After I received my first one, I realized that there were so many others that existed in the world, and I suddenly wanted them all. By the time I was six, I believe I had acquired fourteen My Little Ponys. To this day, I still have every single one of them, and still treasure them as I did when I was little.
Even though I am older now, I still have ongoing collections that I tend to. For the last eight years I have had a Lord of the Rings action figure collection that has been growing with time. The only reason that I has continued to grow is because I have still been unable to physically own all of the figurines. I constantly collect books that interest me, many of which I have never even read. There is a satisfying feeling that comes from keeping collected objects on a shelf to admire from a distance. Probably the worst collecting habit that I have developed is my tendency to collect art supplies. I am particularly bad at collecting sketchbooks and drawing utensils. For some reason, it gives me a sense of pride that I have so many unused sketchbooks at my disposal for whenever I would need one. But I never tend to use them. I just admire them.
Baudrillard explains all of these characteristics of collections and the act of collecting, that I (and I’m sure almost everyone else in the world) have experienced in his article. What I am not particularly sure of is how sexual Baudrillard makes collecting out to be. I do, though, understand the level of narcissism that Baudrillard explains collecting encapsulates. For me, acquiring a new addition to a collection is the equivalent of awarding myself a gold star of achievement. It is the pat on the back for the work that was put into finding the object. In a sick way, it is akin to an addiction; the need to praise oneself for one’s own achievement. The addition is placed with the rest of the collection on display so that others may admire, if not envy your prizes. Maybe others would not even understand what they mean to the proud individual.
So, how does this article compare to contemporary art? I am not precisely sure. Perhaps there is a desire for artists to develop an object that suddenly becomes a highly desired collector’s item. I am not exactly sure why that would be desired, though. Too many times collector’s items have been placed on shelves never to be used again. I am sure that a product designer would never wish for that to happen to an object they had designed. Fine artists’ works are collected by museums and by individuals alike. Some artists work are so well sought after that even a napkin that the artist had scribbled on could be placed in a museum if found. I find that performance art is particularly fascinating in the context of collecting objects. Unless documentation of the performance is made, there is no real way to collect the piece. It exists only for a moment, and then is never seen again. It is a very unique style of art, in that context.

Re-Design Trial

Here is a trial for the re-design animation.

Final Paper Proposal

For my final paper in this class, I intend to write about animator Chuck Jones and his impact on the world of animation. Working for Warner Bros., he is responsible for creating such memorable characters as Pepe Le Pew, The Road Runner and Wile E. Coyote. He is also known for directing some of the most famous episodes of the Looney Toons, such as, What’s Opera, Doc?
I selected Chuck Jones because he is one of the most influential character animators. His work redefined cartoon animation, and practically invented the “short subject comedy.” Many of the animation world’s most beloved characters sprang from his mind, which is quite a feat considering the only dialogue shared between his most popular duo is “meep meep.” Chuck Jones is also a compelling subject because he is not as well-known as Walt Disney, and he is not from the first generations of early, seminal animators such as Emile Cohl.
I have already planned on including pictures not only of Chuck Jones himself, but of his creations and modern animations influenced by his work.
As Chuck Jones is not as well-known as Walt Disney, there is far less material on him. Finding enough sources to write a good paper on him could be a challenge. For sources, I have already acquired Chuck Amuck, Chuck Jones’ autobiography. This is a great starting point, and I hope that I can find more analysis of his work, as well as interviews with him.
Although not as influential as Walt Disney, Chuck Jones practically invented the animated slapstick short subject, and the effects of his work can be seen even in today’s full feature-length films from Pixar and DreamWorks. I intend to discuss how exactly his work has added to and influenced the evolution of animation.

Design Re-Mix

Here is an still image from my Design Re-Mix animation. It's not there yet, but it will be by Wednesday.

Character Figure Sketch

Here is the main figure design I developed for my Chimera.

Another interesting animation

http://www.bagtaggar.com/NSS_renders/Tug_undocking.mov

Wow, this guy is cool!

Take a look at Mathieu Gerard's work.

Steel Life from Mathieu Gérard on Vimeo.

Spider Man

Here are the first arm sketches that I've done of my first Chimera. I'm not sure which one I like the most.

Alessi Design

The “Italian Style” article was extremely short, but it was also interesting. It was about Alberto Alessi, a product designer, whose family has long been in the design business. For centuries, the Alessi family has designed house wares that have been used throughout Italy and the rest of the world. They have, in fact, been designing for so long that they even have an Alessi Museum containing an archive of all the designs they have created. The author makes a point to mention, “nothing much has changed” in the years that the Alessi family has been designing.
What I find interesting about Alessi design is the method used to create their products. Everything that they create is developed through a process of experiments. The “Alessi Way” claims to design by a laboratory approach. By conducting experiments to create the best design, a fusion of art and science takes place. The Scientific Method is used to create the most desirable result. I have always found this process of creativity very useful in my own work as well, particularly with the 3D animations and models that I create.
What is particularly fascinating about the “Alessi” approach though, is that functionality does not come first in their considerations of a design. Aesthetics is thought to be of much higher value than functionality. I find this developmental method of design very strange, especially for product design. Usually, I would think that the functionality of an object would be the primary concern of the artist. This appears to not be the case with Alessi design. Alberto Alessi designs his products by working on the aesthetics of an object first, then through experimentation, discovering whether the object is functional or not. I find this method to be completely backwards. I am unsure of how successful a design technique this could be I cannot imagine how many times Alessi has to go through aesthetic designs just to get something remotely functional out of it. Then again, if Alessi design has lasted through the last few centuries using this process and is still in demand today, it has to at least work for them.
I have worked this way before, valuing aesthetics before functionality. I suppose this technique can be useful in some areas of design. I am using it right now actually on my BFA project for the end of the term. I am creating a character that, at the moment, requires the correct appearance. So, for now, I am working on the “look” of the character. Eventually though, this aesthetic idea is going to have to be modeled and rigged for animation. When that time comes, the idea may not work so well as a rigged, animated character.
I have difficulty though using this method when thinking about product design. The point of product design is to create an object that suits the need of the individual. Usually this is through the success of the functional aspect of the object. An object can be made to be beautiful, but not work half as well as an object built for the purpose of being functional. I do not understand why this design process is valued to Alessi design.

Full Chinook Trial Video

Here is the full Salmon run trial video that was tested on Thursday night.

Chinook Right Turn

Here is the Chinook making a right turn. There are still a few bugs in the animation. They should be out soon.

Baudrillard

Jean Baudrillard may be one of the most difficult reads I have ever encountered. His writing is nearly unintelligible to a point of being cryptic. It took many times reading through the article to understand what he was trying to say. I am still not certain of his exact meaning of the paper. The article also did not have much context to accompany the excerpt, which contributed to its difficulty. With that said, here is what I believe he was trying to say.
Baudrillard is making an argument that mankind has always had a fascination with ‘spectacle’, and our personal selves have often provided this ‘spectacle’. We were once obsessed with mirrors, and the idea of examining ourselves. Now in modern days, that mirror has become the screen. We are now obsessed with any technological object that includes a screen, such as televisions, computers, and cell phones. We want to watch ourselves. He also brings up, in his example of the Polaroid camera, that humanity is more interested in the representation of ourselves via some magical medium than our selves in actuality.
What Baudrillard claims is that these representations through the use of screens are images of ourselves as human beings. We are the images that we see in the screen. Baudrillard’s entire paper debates the same question Rene Magritte states in his famous painting, The Treachery of Images, a portrait of a smoking pipe. “Ceci n’est pas une pipe,” or, “This is not a pipe” is scrolled on the bottom of painting, pointing out that the painting is not a pipe, but a painting of a pipe. It is a representation of the real item, just as a Polaroid photo of an object is a representation of that object itself.
Maybe what Baudrillard is trying to say is not necessarily that we are the representations of ourselves, but that the representations are influencing who we are. We are bombarded with representations of objects, people, and places everyday through many different media. New screens and representations are being developed faster than ever. With humanity’s easy access to computers and television, mankind is over-saturated with the amount of images we see everyday, to a point that we are now completely desensitized. The fact that we are so desensitized means that what is now unconsciously influencing us is what we see in these representations. Do we really see the world around us? Or is it all digitally re-mastered?
I personally do not believe that we as people are the representations of ourselves. Representations are simply images. They are not what they represent. In today’s world, I believe that we are our physical selves. But images are powerful things and we can be influenced by what we see in the ever-growing digital realm. For instance, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold (the Columbine High School shooters) were influenced by the violent video games they played. They internalized what they saw. We are capable of internalizing the images that we are exposed to, but I think that most of the population has the social filter to differentiate images from reality.