Holographic Imagery and Cultural Interpretations

Peppers_Ghost-1

A hologram is a photographic capture of a light field using a laser and when lit properly will create a three-dimensional image. The first holograph was invented in 1962 by Yuri Denisyuk in the Soviet Union and by Emmett Leith and Juris Upatnieks at the University of Michigan. Often confused as a hologram, the Pepper’s Ghost trick is 2D projection reflected through glass. Even though it is not a hologram, I would categorize it as holographic imagery because the intended purpose is to recreate (or imitate) a projected 3D object to be interacted with. It is no surprise Pepper’s Ghost caught on in theatres since the stage is the original platform for manifesting fantasy. Unlike story-telling, theatre adds physical vehicles to guide the imagination and as stage tricks became more sophisticated, the more real the illusions became. What is special about live theatre is that it is taking place in real time and is grounded in that “truth” even if the story is fantasy unlike movies and television which are records of past happenings. “Movie magic” is accepted as common place or easy with film editing but a live performance is respected to be much more difficult. Cultural applications of holographic imagery are made for first hand

Hologram figure of virtual British group Gorillaz appears on stage during their performance at the MTV Europe Music Awards 2005 in Lisbon

interaction. For example, famous singers are resurrected from the dead to perform on stage and politicians can perform live rallies at multiple locations all over a country at once. The famous example is Tupac at Coachella where a life-like animation of the deceased rapper sang and danced with the real Snoop Dog using the Pepper’s Ghost trick. Other musicians and actors have been “raised from the dead” and some bands only perform live as projections like the Gorillaz.  Holograms and projection tricks are meant to be seen in person and do not photograph well. They are always experienced live.

The latest development of hologram technology is sense of touch. Japanese researchers from University of Tokyo’s Department of Complexity Science and Engineering (DCSE) have invented the Haptoclone. The Haptoclone can make a hologram of an object, like a ball, and when that holographic ball is tapped, the real ball resting a foot away will roll off its platform. The sensation is very light and feels like a slight brush because the ultrasound waves responsible for the sense of touch must be used at a low power or else the radiation levels will become dangerous. So technically a virtual handshake, or a hug would cost you your life.

 

Starting from the popularity of the pepper ghost trick, the illusionary phenomena has been used to “resurrect the dead”. The transparent quality makes sense to use the mirage-like images for spirits but even now there is a company in South Florida that manufactures Pepper’s Ghost trick set ups to make a “hologram eulogies” so people can attend their own funerals (Link http://aimholographics.com/ ). What is it about these optical illusions that are used to fantasize about death and the afterlife? Is it that they appear to exist between reality and imagination? Or does it feel like a doppelganger has been created that will live on once you die?

220px-The_Invention_of_Morel_1940_Dust_JacketThe Invention of Morel by Adolfo Casares is a science fiction novel from the 1940s about a device that makes a holographic recording of an entire island for a one week span. When the main character is cast away on the island he is the first to witness the holographic video and believing that it was displaying real people, falls in love with one of the recorded women. The catch of the holographic invention is once you are recorded, you will only exist in the recording and will no longer exist in the real world. The goal of immortality was achieved by the inventor but the immortality is only realized through the perception of others watching the recording. I love seeing echoes of the age-old fears of mirrors, photographs, and even paintings having the ability to steal people’s souls by capturing a person’s likeness. Casares layers more metaphor and depth to his story but the sentiment is still there. The superstitious attitude has now turned to intentional obsession because now we want our “souls to be stolen” by images. There are so many fantasies of “immortality” from Black Mirror’s uploading consciousness to the cloud to Futurist inventions of cryonics and Bina 48.

Stream

Sympathy of Things

Reading Response 1 p. 31-41

9781474243889

In the reading Lars Spuybroek argues “Craft and Code” are really one in the same and describes code as something that “speaks the language matter speaks”. Using the example of someone writing the same letter over and over, each letter will never be identical just like code can make infinite variations of the same action. Mechanical machines are guilty of creating perfect copies where digital machines can express the nuances and interlacing structures done by craft work. The way this works is through continuous systems and using Lars’s steps/check list of Redundancy, Changefulness, Rigidity, Naturalism, Savageness, and sometimes Grotesqueness(p. 39-40).

What stood out to me was the proclamation that “as all craft moves towards design, all labor must move towards robotics”(p.39) In order for craft to survive in the protection of design, digital manipulation must replace labor from the artist to the machine, but not in the way industrial manufacturing has altered the labor of products. The “products” must be varied, like technologically induced evolution in the mutation of genes. I can grasp how digital machines can replace drafts of gothic cathedrals but it is something originally done by craftspeople and now copied by machine. We are still stuck trying to emulate hand work. It seems like digital machines are really the only hope to maintain a sensitivity to craft since human labor must eventually be replaced by machines. I do agree with Lars but it is still unsettling. Yet the idea of “technological abstinence” is even more damaging. Progress cannot be slowed, it is something you want to stay ahead of.

Question: is Spuybroek trying to sell digital machines to crafters or a warning to try to preserve craft?

 

 

 

 

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started