While sorting photos of a recent exhibition using iPhoto on an Apple Mac I explored the ‘book’ option in this free software. After selecting one of the many layout templates it was easy to populate the pages with images. The basic image editing tools in iPhoto also helped to improve the look of the pictures significantly. After tweaking the templates and adding the images and some text, I only needed to press the ‘buy’ button and through my Apple account the prove of my catalog was on its way to be printed. This is just another example of a web2 based production method.

iPhoto book interface

The price of about $25 (Australian) for each copy is good if one needs only a few copies instead of hundreds to make a traditional print-run viable. I also used a pdf export of this catalog to get 20 copies printed locally, the price was comparable but the quality of the ‘Apple’ print was superior. You can download (500KB) a low res pdf of this catalog.

I have now a lasting document that helps with promoting my work and a little giveaway for everyone who supported my work. In the process I also registered as a publisher and this booklet has an ISBN. This might sound like a lot of effort for a little 30 page publication, but this catalog documents my recent ‘highlights‘ exhibition, which in turn represented the outcome of an intensive period of research and work as part of my professional practice.

Based on web 2 technologies, a growing variety of production processes are becoming easily accessible for anyone.
An online interface makes highly specialized technologies available. Once you setup your account, payment and shipping options are selected you can start producing and in some cases have access to a network of like-minded users or potential customers.
Companies like Ponoko (laser cutting and engraving), RedEye (Rapid Prototyping) and blurb (bookmaking) can successfully contribute to a designer/maker practice. A competent level of computer skills are required to address these services to achieve the best outcome. For waterjet or laser cutting, which are essentially two dimensional processes, of flat or sheet materials the mastery of a vector-based graphics program like Adobe Illustrator is essential. To use the RedEye ‘factory of the future’ one needs to generate a .stl file of a virtual 3D object that had been modeled in a CAD program.
The underlying specialized technology, for a long time the domain of the manufacturing industry, is expensive and usually out of reach of a single craft practitioner. If acquired, such equipment would ‘tie’ the individual maker to this technology for a long time and introducing a high level of risk to their business. Not to mention high running cost and that these digitally based technologies become obsolete within a few years.

I have used several of these processes while designing and making the ‘desk light‘, it has a waterjet cut stainless steel plate, a lasercut lamp shade (Ponoko) and Rapid Prototyping parts. Using these technologies has led the design process to new solutions and made the making of this light relatively easy.

Some contemporary craft professionals refer to their practice as designer/maker. Eight different models (designer/maker niches) of this approach to practice had been defined by Noris Iaonnou. (1) I like to add an other variation here, with a raised level of information literacy and competency, identifying today’s designer/maker practice. A literacy that goes beyond using email and ordering materials online, it will include administration, development, presentation, promotion and (partly) production of projects.

Much of the Design Arts degree at the Australian National University, School of Art is based on matching changes in craft practice, education and digital technology with the expectation of this contemporary designer/maker model.

The core of any craft practice has to be the skills of the maker in his/her respective field, using traditional processes and materials. If these skills are paired with ‘digital’ competence both hold great potential to inform each other and merge into a contemporary designer/maker practice.

from www.cinnamonlee.com

Canberra based jeweler Cinnamon Lee can be seen as an example of this approach. She applies a series of technology based processes together with a high level of manual finishing to make unique rings only possible through the application of high-resolution rapid prototyping together with casting.

(1) Noris Iaonnou, ‘Old paradigms for new: designer-maker models and the dilemma of globalism versus regionalism’. pgs 23 -29
‘Designing Minds – Contemporary issues in craft, design and industry’ Symposium, University of South Australia, 2000

My first solo exhibition since 2001 called ‘Highlights’ opened in February 2009 at Craft ACT in Canberra and then in May at Metalab, in Sydney. Many thanks to Catrina Vignando, general manager Craft Australia and Grace Cochran who have opened those shows respectively. Highlights represents a change in my practice with the focus on light objects as well as highlighting how combining making processes (manual, digital and distributed) can address the designer/maker model as a contemporary approach to craft. See earlier post of the design/making of the light ‘Desk 30′.

The exhibitions were well received and successfully set up by Jason Hugonnet, curator and exhibition manager Craft ACT and Cesar Cueva, director of Metalab. Please find Jason Hugonnet’s exhibition review here.

Highlights at CraftACT, Canberra, Image by Creative Image Photography

Highlights at metalab, Sydney. Image 'Indesignlive.com'

Many of my posts share findings about two particular prints published in Albrecht Dürer’s 2nd edition of the Painters Manual 1538 (Unterweysung der Messung). In order to see these woodcuts in relation to their descriptive texts and their ‘context’ within the book, I had to travel to Melbourne, Nürnberg, Munich and Vienna.

I could have had a very good ‘preview’ of this book on the “Rare Book Room” site where a good quality, page by page, reproduction of the Manual is available.

On the intro page of this fantastic site it says: ‘The Rare Book Room site has been constructed as an educational site intended to allow the visitor to examine and read some of the great books of the world.’ And it is a pleasure to turn the pages of these special books.

You can see the two prints I have posted about in the rare bookroom here:

The Draughtsman of the Lute and A draughtsman drawing a reclining woman.

My blogs about the ‘Lute’ print are:
‘Did Albrecht Dürer get it wrong, a surprise discovery in one of his prints’
‘Ist Albrecht Dürer ein Fehler unterlaufen eine überraschende Entdeckung in seinem Holzschnittes der Zeichner der Laute’
‘Further to Albrecht Dürer woodcut The draughtsman of the Lute’

My blogs about the ‘Reclining woman’ are:
‘A page out of Dürer’s own copy of the Painters Manual’
‘Male or Female? One of Dürer’s prints in the context of gender, feminism and other theories.’
‘Dürer lost in translation? German Klartext and English translation of one page of Dürer’s handwritten manuscript of his 2nd edition of the painters manual’

The image below shows a word-by-word and line-by-line ‘translation’ of Dürer’s handwriting in clear text. In this text Dürer describes the use of his illustration of the ‘grid system’ as a drawing aid. Please find a discussion about this illustration here. Below the image is the English translation by Walter L. Strauss (The Painter’s Manual, 1977, pge 435). I matched the line sequence of the English translation with the one of Dürer’s manuscript to allow for an easier comparison of the two texts.

Translation of Dürer

(Ektachrome Signatur: 4 L.impr.c.n.mess. 119, http://www.bsb-muenchen.de)
Please find more details about this page in my earlier blog here.

Walter L. Strauss’ translation:

1. There is yet another method of copying an object and of
2. rendering it larger or smaller according to one’s wish, and
3. it is more practical than using a glass pane because it is
4. less restricted. In this method one uses a frame with a grid
5. of strong black thread. The spaces or quadrangles should
6. be about two fingers wide. For scanning,
7. one must prepare a pointer whose height should
8. be adjustable to be at eye level, which is
9. marked ‘o’. Then place the object to
10. be drawn a good distance away. Move it or bend
11. it as you like, and view it from
12. level ‘o’ to ascertain that it is in
13. the proper position, so as to please you. Then
14. place the grid or frame between the object and the pointer.
15. If you prefer to use fewer spaces of the grid,
16. move it closer to the object. Check how many spaces of the
17. grid will be utilized to accommodate the width and height
18. of the object and then draw a grid, large or small,
19. on which you wish to draw. Now begin to scan the object with your eye -point
20. o- placed above the pointer, and where it points on the grid in the frame, mark it
21. off on the grid on your sheet of paper. It will be good, and it will be
22. correct. But if you prefer to drill a small hole into your scanner,
23. it will serve the same purpose equally well. I have drawn
24. this method below.
notice on the margin (+ on a sheet of paper or a panel)

My thoughts about this text:
As I pointed out earlier here this text appeared in the second edition of Dürer’s painters manual together with a preliminary sketch for the woodcut ‘A draughtsman drawing a reclining woman’. This second and extended edition had 22 additional illustrations. It was commissioned in 1538 by his wife Agnes and printed by his friend Hieronymus Formschneyder ten years after his death.
Several ‘inconsistencies’ appear when comparing Dürer’s manuscript with the final printed version. Firstly he makes references to the ‘eye-point’ marked ‘o’ in lines 9 and 12. He shows this point in his sketch, however in the printed version the text still shows the ‘o’ but the illustration does not.
Secondly the ‘gender change’ in the illustration itself. Dürer drew a male model in front of the artist while the printed version shows a female model. This printed version has given rise to much discussion. Please see earlier blog about this print.

Sketch 1525?

Print 1538

This blog intents to question the basis of some the interpretations of the woodcut ‘Draughtsman drawing a reclining woman’ by Albrecht Dürer. Some texts discuss this work in the context of gender, feminism and post modernism. The following sentences are taken out of the texts I refer to, with links to the full text where they are quoted from, followed by my own thoughts to anticipate Duerer’s intentions.

Duerer's 'Draughtsman drawing a reclining woman'

Purdue University:
The result confirms our suspicion that vision exists in Dürer’s image as the scene of sexual possession. Dürer’s engraving presents us with a specular economy that sublimates touch into sight and dominance into art. And we, by implication, are present as a third party to these events….

Suny College at Oneonta:
The opposition between male culture and female nature is starkly drawn in this image; the two confront each other. The woman lies in a prone position; the pose is difficult to determine, but her hand is clearly poised in a masturbatory manner over the genital. In contrast to the curves and undulating lines of the female section, the male compartment is scattered with sharp, vertical forms; the draughtsman himself is up and is alert and absorbed. Woman offers herself to the controlling discipline of illusionistic art. With her bent legs closest to the screen, the image recalls not simply the life class but also the gynaeocological examination.

Even at Stanford University someone cannot help but to make a comment about this image:
A wooden frame covered with a grid of black threads, together with an eyepiece - represented here by a small obelisk - permitted an artist to replicate the scene before him onto a drawing surface ruled with a matching grid. We will repeat his demonstration in class. Nobody will be asked to undress.

Now my thoughts:
What leads me to question these readings is a handwritten text and preliminary sketch by Albrecht Dürer himself. I came across these sources while sighting an Ektachrome reproduction of one page in Dürer’s own copy of the 1st edition 1525 Painters Manual.
See earlier blog.

Dürer had planed further additions for the 2nd edition of his Manual. The sketch and descriptions were inserted as a loose leaf in a (his) copy of the 1st edition.
Now what is interesting is that this 2nd edition was printed 11 after his death in 1538 commissioned by his wife Agnes Dürer. As is obvious from his initially sketch he shows a man (artist) drawing another man and NOT a woman. See for yourself:

Duerer's preliminary sketch showing a man not a woman.

(This sketch is true to Dürer’s drawing and appears ‘mirrored’ in the printed version as a consequence of the printing process. Ektachrome Signatur: 4 L.impr.c.n.mess. 119 (http://www.bsb-muenchen.de) I purchased a digital reproduction of this Ektachrome and have permission to publish it as part of my research)

His intention was how to best illustrate this particular drawing system – subdividing the picture plane in squares as reference areas to be reproduced on a drawing surface with the same number of squares.

That he used a human figure as a ‘subject’ in this print might be the consequence of his intense study and documentation of the human proportions – also published as a book after his death. In other related illustrations he had used simple objects like a vase or more challenging to draw objects like a lute. In this image he uses the complexity of the human figure, especially when observed in such a way that it will show foreshortening; difficult to capture even for an experienced hand.

I have absolutely no problem in ‘taking a work of art’ apart to support one or another theory or point, but in this case I believe the authors of the texts above might have drawn different conclusions if they would have known about Dürer’s own view as shown in the sketch of this so well known and discussed print.

There are further ‘clues’ in the text that he had written on the same page. I will blog soon a transcript/translation in German and English from his handwriting.

In the hope to find evidence in support of my theory of the ‘misaligned perspective’ I visited several print-rooms in Europe in April this year. (see earlier blogs: ‘Blog 1 English version’ , ‘Blog 1 Deutsche Version’ , ‘Blog 2′). Using funds from the Carrick Award, I saw original versions of the wood cut of ‘Man drawing a lute’ at the Germanisches Nationalmuseum (Nürnberg, Germany) and at the Albertina (Vienna, Austria) as well as high quality ‘Ektachrome’ slide at the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek (München, Germany) this slide held the biggest surprise for me, but more about this slide later.

In Nürnberg I was able to see a copy of the print in question as a single leave (proof) and several (historic) books holding references to this print. In Vienna I got presented a rebound and cut at the margins copy of Dürer’s Manual which included also some of his drawings about medieval defense installations. As in Melbourne when I was able to compare the 1525 and 1538 editions of Dürer’s manual, it is always as special moment when an original Renaissance print is brought out of the vault and presented for close inspection.

However I could not find any further information about my theory at either location. The senior curator at the Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Dr. Rainer Schoch, made me aware that the Bayerische Staatsbiliothek in München holds a copy of Dürer’s own copy of the 1525 Manual with handwritten comments and additions, an advice which let to very exciting new insides about this Manual.

My visits to Nürnberg and Vienna were prearranged and I could see the original artworks, however the visit to München was spontaneous with only one morning to spend allowing not enough time to retrieve this book form the vaults and I could only see an ‘Ektachrome’ reproduction of the page with ‘Man drawing a lute’. As this Ektachrome shows the book opened, two pages are visible. On the right side is the print of ‘Lute’ but on the left an inserted loose leaf with a hand written text and sketch by Dürer himself. On this loose leaf he has described the use of an additional drawing system to achieve a perspective drawing. This system appears then in a significantly altered version in the 1538 edition of this Manual (this 2nd edition was published by his wife 11 years after his death). Here is a low resolution of digital reproduction of this slide. I will provide a translation of the text and some further thoughts on Dürer’s sketch in the near future.

One page out of Dürer

Ektachrome Signatur: 4 L.impr.c.n.mess. 119 (http://www.bsb-muenchen.de) (I purchased a digital reproduction of this Ektachrome and have permission to publish it as part of my research)

I like to thank B. Fellner for her assistance and her skillful navigation to make the findings in Munich possile.

Further to my last blog, Preparing for Highlights, 2.
Yesterday, my first Ponoko laser cut pieces arrived and it was worth waiting for. After peeling off the protective sheet, that still showed the impact of the laser’s heat, clean clear pieces popped out of the cut Perspex sheet. I had used the clear 2mm thick Perspex material out of Ponoko’s material catalogue.

Peeling off the protective layer

The edges are clean and appear almost polished and do not show, as I had expected, some ‘burn’ marks. As Ponoko suggests in their ‘starter kit’ the dimensioning of interlocking pieces might need a bit of fine-tuning, I found that while having a good fit the slots I had designed have been a bit too wide. This will be easily fixed in Illustrator, as I have in mind to get more of the same parts cut in different colours for further variations of this lamp.

close up of the lamp

These parts form the ‘head’ of the desk-lamp for which I had already made all other parts. The assembly was straight forward as everything, the rapid prototyped and laser cut parts fitted very well together. I used sandpaper to make the surface of the parts opaque as the clear was ‘too’ transparent. Now the LED’s make the whole head light up.

Prototype put together

Opaque surfaces

I am very pleased about the straight forward way Ponoko’s system enables me to include precision cut pieces as part of my designs, only the three week turn-around-time is somewhat testing.

I just put together the prototype of a desk-lamp. This object uses polished stainless steel, ABS plastic (rapid prototyped parts), an aluminum tube coated with carbon fiber, laser-cut Perspex and 3 warm white 3 watt LEDs.

Desk lamp computer rendering

For the first time I will use a net based producer for part of the making process. Most of the lamp’s head part – the laser cut Perspex – will be produced by Ponoko . A clever (company) setup that laser cuts and laser engraves materials based on ones own design. Ponoko’s well working website makes it easy to get started. From selecting the materials to producing the right file formats for cutting and/or engraving all is explained in easy to follow steps. I am eagerly awaiting the first shipment of the 2mm thin cross-sections for the ‘reflector’ part of the lamp’s head.

After modeling the lamp shade as a ‘solid model’ first in CAD (formZ) I then sliced it into the cross-sections, these sections were then imported into Adobe Illustrator and saved out in the right format for Ponoko’s processes.

Cross-sections for laser cutting

Before uploading the file to be laser cut, I printed and cutout the Illustrator outlines and put together a mock-up of the lamp shape to see if I like the design and to get an idea if the pieces fit together.

Computer simulated lamp head

I also rendered a simulated view of the final head-piece as well as the whole desk lamp. I hope the final ‘real’ object will closely resemble this simulation.

prototype of desk lamp with paper shade

Responding to a call to participate in the APM (Accredited Professional Member) exhibition by CraftACT with the title Interior Exterior I decided to make a light object. This show will open on Thursday 18 September at 6PM. Taking the dualism in the title as a starting point I used a warm light (1watt LED) representing the interior and a cold white LED as its counterpart. Both lights are directed towards each other and shinning onto a slightly curved transparent screen. See image of a few preliminary drawings for this object.

This screen is the membrane separating the inner from the outer. At this screen the different light qualities mix or fuse. Interestingly you can see the cold white on the ‘warm’ side of the screen and visa versa.

However when I started to model the components for a simulation on formZ (CAD) it became apparent that ‘all that stuff’ I needed to hold the elements in place was distracting form the pure, initial idea. What are now little cubes housing the LEDs were various (failed) designs going from bad to hideous. Even the cubes I have now are somewhat a compromise. Also the base-box which is capped by two alu plates and a white rapid prototyped frame feels like a necessary compromise to me. It contains the switch, driver and an additional LED (360 degree), which illuminates the base lightly.

First I wanted the top alu plate to be in mirror-polish but this particular alu piece I used had too many inclusions creating the occasional streak in the otherwise polished surface. To hide these streaks I used the new high tech Ink jet printer at the ANU School of Art , it can print on anything up to 40 mm thick with ink. The ink is then cured (backed on) with UV light. (One of our staff printed on a room door). The pattern I got printed onto the alu was derived from a piece of white sandpaper scanned in then the image was inverted and finally a ‘chrome’ filter in Photoshop applied. I usually avoid filters and effects at all cost but this pattern seemed to be able to run from the interior to the exterior section of the object without problems.

Now that this object is together and shines when switched on it has grown a little on me, but still it is an object that is neither a lamp nor a sculpture. Maybe, if I find the right (friendly) term for it it will settle into its place. Materials: Aluminium, ABS plastic, LEDs. Dimensions: 100 x 100 x 95 mm

Since yesterday I am on ArtFlock thanks to Sharon and Amy who got me there in the first place.
I will be interested in the responses I might get to my works in this art and craft related (web2) space. The first work I uploaded is the DP bowl, this piece is part of a body of work that uses mathematical formulas I manipulated as their source. Despite a lot of technologies involved in creating this object there is a significant amount of manual work necessary to get this work finished, both on the keyboard as well as on the workbench. Tomorrow, 5th September 2008, will be the opening of Digitaler Formenschatz at the Galerie Handwerk in Munich, Germany. This exhibition intents to show the impact of new technologies on and the response to these by makers and the crafts in general. I have six related works on display at this show.

This is the first of a series of blogs I intend to write about the development of light objects in the build up of my exhibition at Craft ACT (Canberra, Australia). For this exhibition I hope to have up to ten new designs developed. This show will open in early February 2009 under the title Highlights.

I just finished the first of these objects which takes advantage of new generations of high bright LED lights. The object shown here uses two 3 Watt warm white LEDs, waterjet cut stainless steel, rapid prototyped parts (in yellow) and carbon fiber tubes. Height 1035 mm.

The design is torch like with the intention to appear clear and slender. All elements are as thin as possible but strong as necessary. The tension of the bowed carbon tubes holds the lights in place while at the same time supply the electricity to the LEDs.

The main challenges with this piece was to source the right driver for the LEDs to achieve good brightness while maintaining a long lifespan. I used two Cree XR 3 Watt (Jaycar electronics no: ZD-0444) together with a driver (AA-0585) which automatically detects how many LEDs are there, 1-6 are possible on one of these drivers, this allows for a wide range of designs. The driver itself is connected to a 12 VDC 1 Amp power pack.

The electricity is picked up by the LEDs from the carbon-fiber tubes, the bowing of the a result of the ‘light fittings’ are wedged in place by pushing out the tubes. More then two could be fitted to this lamb (the driver would adjust automatically). The black round disk in the center of the yellow fitting in the image above is the LED’s heat-sink. Despite being very power efficient and producing ‘cool’ light these LEDs get hot on the back and need to have a heat sink to make sure they stay within their recommended working temperature 50 - 70 degree c. The shade is, for the moment, made from drafting paper.

The foot part holds the driver, switch and connections to the carbon tubes. I designed all yellow parts on a CAD program (form•Z) and then rapid prototyped on a Stratasys FDM machine in ABS plastic. I polished the stainless steel after it had been waterjet cut.

I got this 1.7MB PowerPoint file attached to an email showing a series of stunning images of the earth from space. I particularly enjoy the images showing the shadow line between day and night.

BlueBeauty 1.7 MB slide show might take a while to download.
The last slide motivates the viewer to ‘send’ this file out wide. I am not sure as to who owns the images, as only agencies like NASA or ESA could capture such images, so the intellectual property might be an issue with this PowerPoint file. If it is a NASA image then there seems not much of a problem here.

On the NASA site they state as for the guidelines to use their materials they state:
Using NASA Imagery and Linking to NASA Web Sites

Still Images, Audio Files and Video.
NASA still images, audio files and video generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages.

A friend from Germany has recently send me this extremely exciting link about the most interesting image visualization software I have seen for some time. Especially with the demonstrated possibility to harness the global collective visual data with many applications for education and entertainment.

The Photosynth technology preview is a taste of this new - and most exciting - way to view images on a computer. This software takes a large collection of photos of a place or an object, analyzes them for similarities, and then displays the photos in a reconstructed three-dimensional space, showing you how each one relates to the next.

Its architect, Blaise Aguera y Arcas, shows it off in this standing-ovation demo (you will need broadband).

Using photos of oft-snapped subjects (like Notre Dame) scraped from around the Web, Photosynth (based on Seadragon technology) creates breathtaking multidimensional spaces with zoom and navigation features that outstrip all expectation.

Seadragon promises speed of navigation is independent of the size or number of objects (images and large amounts of text) and its performance depends only on the ratio of bandwidth to pixels on the screen. This leads to smooth transitions and near perfect scaling for screens of any resolution (wall-sized displays to mobile devices).

Seadragon is an incubation project resulting from the acquisition of Seadragon Software in February by Microsoft.

You can access gigabytes of photos in seconds, view a scene from nearly any angle, find similar photos with a single click, and zoom in to make the smallest detail as big as your monitor.

Its aim is to change the way we use screens so that visual information can be smoothly browsed regardless of the amount of data involved or the bandwidth of the network.

Just imagine the possibilities of a convergence of Photosynth/Seadragon and flickr, google earth and second life like systems for education. I just hope this helpful and exciting technology will filter through to average customers and not suddenly disappear from the public eye.

While researching into the perspective relationship between the picture elements of this print (see earlier posts in English and in Deutsch) I noticed several ‘abnormalities’ in reproductions of this so well known work by Duerer. These abnormalities appear on paper representations and on digital images of this print. This post is to bring together these titbits.

In 2006 I was privileged to see originals of Dürer’s ‘The Painters Manual’, these splendid copies of this renaissance publications are held at the National Gallery of Victoria (NGV) in Melbourne, Australia. The ‘Man drawing a lute’ image is towards the back of these publication and is relatively small in size, 182 x 132 mm, rather like a postcard, the detail and the precisions of the lines however are impressive. The NGV, which very generously opened its archives for me, holds a large if not the largest collection of Albrecht Dürer’s graphic and print work outside Germany.

Now to the abnormalities in the reproductions:
1.) The vertical ‘rift’ in the upper middle of the print.
The following image shows in its upper part the print as in the original publications, while the image in the lower part shows it with the ‘rift’.

I found this distortion not present in the 1525 or the 1528 (NGV, Melbourne) publications but in many reproduction of images on the internet and in the following books, some declare to show ‘facsimile’ of Dürer’s print works.

Dürer today, pge 48
1970 and 1978 by Heinz Moos Verlag, Munich, ISBN 3-7879-0119-1
The Complete Woodcuts of Albrecht Dürer, illustration 338, Edited by Dr. Willi Kurth
1963, Dover Publication, New York, ISBN 0-486-21097-9
Albrecht Dürer, Les Gravures sur Bois
1978, Art et Culture, Paris, No d’impression: 5799

Initially I believed it to be a clue to help prove that Dürer (or the woodcutter) had made a mistake or change to the original print leading to the wrong relation of the perspective elements as discussed in earlier posts on this blog (see earlier posts in English and in Deutsch). But as I had to discover, while inspecting the almost 500 year old originals at the NGV, this distortion is not visible in the original editions. It seems to be an artefact from a later printing process of copies. The paper might have been ‘pinched’ at an early print run and subsequent copies and facsimiles have just helped reproducing this fault.

2.) The change in the quality of line.
Close inspection of the originals also showed a visible change in the quality of the line delineating the white space on the table below the open frame with the point drawing of the lute. This change is visible in all reproductions of this print. The weight or thickness changes at this location, some seem to run together with their neighboring line just as if they have been corrected or added later. And to support my theory (see earlier posts in English and in Deutsch), these ‘abnormal’ lines start where I suspect the frame should be placed in the composition of the print to make the perspective alignment of all elements right. Here is a crop of the highest resolution image I was able to find, which shows the changes in lines clearly.

I found this image on ArtStore.

3.) ‘Pirate’ copy of this print

On ArtStore there are several digital images of Dürer’s ‘Man drawing a Lute’ print, one of them looks like it had been printed from a re cut woodblock. It shows ‘1530’ as date, two years after Dürer’s death !– the original had 1525 as date - and a sanitised point-drawing of the lute. Duerer’s work, very popular during his life time achieved respectable retail prices leading to illicit copies.

Finally, I found a little reference about a handwritten note by Dürer on the back of the 1st edition in Nuernberg on the back of this print. I love to know what he wrote, as it might shed some light on some of my questions I have about the composition of this work. This remark appears on page 266 in the 3rd of three volumes, this book focuses exclusively on Dürer’s book illustrations. These wonderful books, edited by Rainer Schoch, Matthias Mende and Anna Scherbaum, are the most comprehensive publications about Duerer’s print (Druckgraphische) work. I hope one day to be able to read Dürer’s note and to find out more about this significant print.

If you have any further information about this print by Dürer or any comment about my views of his work please get in touch.

As I find it difficult to define the term ‘designer/maker’, the very core of our new Design Arts degree offer at the ANU, School of Art, I like to bring to this blog some of the short statements by my colleagues. These are taken from the de/sign/ed catalogue.

Approaching this term from different - in this case - individual points of view, will help forming a more complete definition. This third statement is by Nadege Desgenetez, lecturer Glass workshop ANU, School of Art.

 

I am drawn towards handsome objects that cleverly serve a purpose: After choosing an artistic path, I soon recognised that making was an essential part of my approach to creating objects. The making process nurtured my design principles.
Glass has been an incredible vehicle for my preoccupations with design. Looking to celebrate the intrinsic qualities of the material, I try to develop an aesthetic vocabulary around its technical language.

(My statement you can find as part of my first posting below)

 

Recently I came across the clip on youtube showing a novel gui (graphic user interface), the BumpTop 3D Desktop , as a way to help manage a user to sort icons of documents on their computer’s desktop. Of interest are the subtle references to our habits in keeping some sort of organizational structure in chaotic piles of paper.
At first glance this gui looks playful and I thought it would be great to have, especially with a pen based input like on a tablet computer. Then I noticed that the stacks of documents just look like poker chips being pushed about ( the ‘$$$ ringed’ hand, at sec 12 in the clip, might be a give away).

The interaction with computers the input side of things is still mostly base on the WIMP (Windows, Icon, Mouse, Pointer) system a rather archaic way of interfacing with computers, especially when it comes to graphics or 3d modeling work. There are however some devices like the Phantom Haptic Device by Sensable that enable the operator to touch, feel and manipulate virtual environments.

More about haptic .

The following chapter is from a presentation at the Challenging Craft conference in Aberdeen, Scotland 2004.

1.2 RESEARCH INTO INTEGRATION OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES WITH CRAFT

Any research to integrate new technologies within craft can only benefit through the direct involvement of craft practitioners. Their ‘hands-on’ approach will shape the practical outcomes required to make new technologies a tool for their practice.

The following TACITUS project is an example of looking at how a craft practitioner could better interact with a CAD system. The lack of dexterity while designing on a CAD system, typically using only a mouse and keyboard, was at the heart of the TACITUS project.

Ann Marie Shillito presented a paper about the TACITUS project at the PixelRaiders 2 [6] conference in April 2004 at the Sheffield Hallam University. A practicing artist herself, she shared her findings in regards to this project: ‘Our research has identified that a niche exists, in the germinal phase of designing, for exploiting the potential of a digital medium with haptic feedback. Such an interface would enable idea formulation and creative activities to be performed with the same intuitive & fluid transmodal interaction as sketching on paper and with as great a sense and degree of engagement as in modelmaking.’ The stated aims of this three-year collaborative research project include the exploitation of the advantages of being able to work, think and respond in a virtual environment [to stay] more ‘in touch’ with creative working practices and to discover the degrees of multi-sensory feedback required for artists and designers to work intuitively using their tacit knowledge and skills. TACITUS was based on the Reachin Technologies using the Phantom Haptic Device that enables users to touch, feel and manipulate virtual environments. The user’s dominant hand holds the finely engineered force feedback pen-like mechanism which has had its stylus tip accurately calibrated to the x,y,z co-ordinates of the virtual space.

When I had ‘first-hand’ experience with such a device at the Haptic Workbench at Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) in Australia, I was intrigued how convincingly ones mind can be fooled by a simulated hand–eye interaction. After distorting virtual material for a while I noticed, that the hardest surface sensation the Phantom device was able to simulate was that of a cricket ball. When the simulated tool silently clicked against the virtual surface, it produced the feel of hitting leather. Being a silversmith I found this feedback irritating and distracting. This kind of research is an example of looking at the ‘front-end’, the input-side, trying to overcome the limitations of mouse and keyboard while interacting/modelling on CAD system.

[6] Ann Marie Shillito, Tacitus Project, www.pixelraiders.org/
Accessed 7/7/04, 3:10 pm.

As I find it difficult to define the term ‘designer/maker’, the very core of our new Design Arts degree offer at the ANU, School of Art, I like to bring to this blog some of the short statements by my colleagues. These are taken from the de/sign/ed catalogue.

Approaching this term from different - in this case - individual points of view, will help forming a more complete definition. The second statement is by Roger Hutchinson, silversmith. Technical officer Gold and Silversmithing workshop ANU School of Art.

For me design is the process of overcoming problems in an effort to make an idea become a real, functioning object.

These problems arise when first sketching the idea and continue through the whole making process to the finished object. Although my original concept or idea doesn’t change, overcoming the problems and compromising to achieve an acceptable result often changes the form of the finished object from that shown in the first sketches. Researching while designing, often uncovers changes in technology that will alter the form of an object, how easy it is to make, how well it functions, etc.

How well I solve the problems determines how well the finished object functions and whether it is aesthetically pleasing. It is this process of overcoming or ‘designing out’ problems in an effort to create a new and exciting object that, I find, is the challenging and rewarding aspect of making.

(My statement you can find as part of my first posting below)

 

As I find it difficult to define the term ‘designer/maker’, the very core of our new degree (Design Arts) offer at the ANU, School of Art, I like to bring to this blog some of the short statements by my colleagues. These are taken from the de/sign/ed catalogue.

Approaching this term from different - in this case - individual points of view, will help forming a more complete definition. The first one of these statements is by Jannet DeBoos, head of ceramics.

My practice has always been centred on domestic ceramics, the processes by which it comes into being and the performative aspects of use by which it gets ‘remade’. I have since the mid 1980’s regularly exhibited work that presents these usually private acts publicly.

I have worked with other media (sound and video/film) to examine the nature of production, and with other materials (polystyrene and disposable plastics) to examine the way we use things. Since 1996 I have been involved in the examination of what is ‘lost’ (if anything) when domestic ceramics items are no longer handmade. (What if the importance of ‘handling’ is not in the making, but only in the use?).

In exploring these questions, I have become the ‘designer’ rather than the ‘maker’ in a collaboration with the Huaguang Company’s Bone China division (Zibo, PRC). This project is very ‘hands-on’ and I work closely with both the mould makers and factory workers as the pieces are produced, and adjusted. I have been particularly interested in the way that the change in material (porcelain to bone china) affects changes in the product, and how ‘design’ has created a resonance between the handmade and the factory ware.

(My statement you can find as part of my first posting below)

 

Link to English version
Visuelle Untersuchung des Holzschinttes ‘Der Zeichner der Laute’, bei Albrecht Dürer, 1525.

Was folgt ist ein direktes Ergebnis unterrichts gestützter Forschung.

Auf der Suche nach historischem Bezugsmaterial für unsere neue Design Basisklasse fiel mir der Holzschnitt ‘Der Zeichner der Laute’ von Albrecht Dürer auf. Ich konnte nicht voraussehen, dass dieser weltbekannte Druck mich in eine umfassende Internet- und Literaturforschung führen und mich am Ende den Meister der Nördlichen Renaissance noch mehr schätzen lernen würde. Die Entdeckung und Ergebnisse sind in den folgenden Zeilen und Abbildungen festgehalten.

Albrecht Dürer, der bedeutende Künstler wurde 1471 in Nürnberg - zu seiner Zeit ein Zentrum des Kunsthandwerkes - geboren. Er war gebildet und mit vielen seiner einflussreichen Zeitgenossen befreundet. Seine Reisen nach Italien, der Schweiz und in die Niederlande machten ihn damals zu einem Kosmopoliten. Während seiner zweiten Italienreise schrieb er 1506 an den Humanisten und Freund Willibald Pirckheimer, es würde ihm jemand mehr über ‘geheime Kunst der Perspektive’ zeigen. (a, Strauss 1977). Zweifellos waren es die Einsichten in diese Kunst, die ihn die perspektivischen Apparate entwickeln liessen, die er in seinen Büchern so überzeugend illustrierte.

Albrecht Dürer ist für seine Gravuren, Holzschnitte, Gemälde sowie für seine illustrierten Bücher, wie dasjenige über die ‘Underweysung der Messung Mit dem Zirckel un Richtscheyt’ bekannt. Der Holzdruck ‘Der Zeichner der Laute’ ist im vierten Band der ‘Unterweissungen’ unter dem Kapitel ‘Über die Theorie der Perspektive’ zu finden. Darin illustrierte Dürer wie man mittels seiner praktischen Vorrichtung eine detaillierte perspektivische Abbildung auf einer schwenkbaren Leinwand festhalten kann. In der ersten Auflage von 1525 zeigt Dürer zwei Vorrichtungen die es ermöglichen eine Perspektive korrekt abzubilden. Zur Neuauflage dieses Buches, -es erschien 1528 in Dürer’s Todesjahr-, hatte er drei weitere Apparaturen entwickelt. Sein Ruf als Künstler, sein Interesse an der Geometrie und seine Erfindungen lassen ihn ebenbürtig neben Raphael und Leonardo da Vinci erscheinen.

Ich verwende Albrecht Dürer’s Druck mit der Laute in meinem Unterricht, da er das Prinzip der Bildebene klar illustriert. Um die Abhängigkeit der Abbildungsgröße vom Abstand der Bildebene zum Betrachtungspunkt zu demonstrieren, habe ich eine ‘zeitgenössische’ Variante dieses dürerischen Systems entwickelt. Zwei Glasplatten werden in etwa einem Meter Abstand voneinander so aufgestellt, dass ein Objekt durch beide Glasplatten (Bildebenen) betrachtet werden kann. Ein Laserpointer, auf einem Stativ montiert, verkörpert den Betrachtungspunkt. Wenn aktiviert, leuchtet der Laserstrahl durch beide Glasplatten auf das Objekt und lässt gleichzeitig einen roten Punkt auf beiden Bildebenen sowie dem Objekt erscheinen. Die Studenten tasten dann das Objekt mit dem Laser Punkt für Punkt ab und markieren die dominierenden topologischen Merkmale auf den gläsernen Bildebenen. Beide Glasplatten zeigen, wie erwartet, eine gleiche Punktverteilung, jedoch in zwei verschiedenen Größen. Photokopien von beiden Bildebenen erlauben den Studenten dann perspektivisch korrekte Zeichnungen in zwei verschiedenen Größen anzufertigen.

Durch diese Erfahrung mit meinen Studenten, bekam ich eine gute Vorstellung von dem Zusammenhang des Abstandes Betrachtungspunkt/Bildebene und der Abbildungsgröße. Bei näherer Betrachtung des Dürer Druckes fiel mir auf, dass die Abbildung der Laute zu groß erscheint. Ich öffnete eine digitale Version dieses Bildes in der Bildbearbeitungs Software ‘Photoshop’ zur visuellen Untersuchung. Nachdem ich die Leinwand mit der Laute in Dürer’s Druck isoliert und perspektivisch korrekt manipuliert hatte, konnte ich eine Kopie davon in den offenen Rahmen projizieren. Die Verbindungslinie (Faden), die den Taststab an der Laute und den Betrachtungspunkt an der Wand verbindet, durchdringt die simulierte Leinwand in der korrespondierenden richtigen Position . Jedoch, wenn man einen anderen Punkt an der Laute wählt, wie z. B. den Berührungspunkt des Griffbrettes mit der Tischoberfläche, stellt sich heraus, dass der Projektionsstrahl zum Betrachtungspunkt die Leinwand nicht an der korrekten Stelle durchdringt.

Dürer’s Zeichnung der Laute ist überdimensioniert, zu groß. Verbindet man den Berührungspunkt des Griffbrettes mit dem korrespondierenden Punkt in der Leinwand, zeigt sich, dass dieser Projektionsstrahl weder zum Betrachtungspunkt zeigt, noch mit der ersterwähnten korrekten Linie konvergiert, also keinen gemeinsamen Betrachtungspunk hat.

Ich war überrascht, dass Dürer, ein Meister der Zentralperspektive – die Zweipunktperspektive war zu seiner Zeit noch nicht entwickelt – solch eine fehlerhafte Darstellung veröffentlichen würde. Ebenso verblüffte mich, dass eine Illustration von Prinzipien perspektivischer Darstellung ihre eigenen Regeln so eindeutig ignoriert. Es war weiterhin erstaunlich, dass ich keine Hinweise in der kunsthistorischen Literatur in Bezug auf diesen Fehler in dem so bekannten Holzschnitt finden konnte.

Was veranlasste Dürer diesen Fehler in seinem Buch abdrucken zu lassen? Platzierte er den Rahmen zu weit rechts, um der dominierenden Person - ich vermutete sie stelle den Meister dar – mehr Raum zu geben, während der Assistent, der den Schnittpunkt des Fadens im Rahmen festhält, sich mit eingeschränktem Raum abzufinden hatte? Es erschien plausible und Dürer’s Eitelkeit entsprechend, dass dem Meister mehr Raum zugeordnet werden musste. Jedoch sollte mich der Meister selbst eines Besseren belehren. In seinen Anweisungen zu diesem perspektivischen Zeichenapparat schreibt er: (sinngemäß) “Nun gehe wie folgt vor. Platziere eine Laute oder ein anderes Objekt nach eigenem Gutdünken vor den Rahmen, jedoch so, dass sich das Objekt während der Arbeit nicht bewegt. Lasse Deinen Assistenten den Taster hantieren….”. Dies stellt ohne Zweifel klar, dass die Figur rechts in der Abbildung den Meister darstellt und nicht den Assistenten wie ich fälschlicherweise angenommen hatte.

Die Abbildung der Laute ist als Punktzeichnung wahrheitsgemäss umrissen, jedoch zu gross für den Rahmen in der gezeigten Position. Es stellt sich die Frage:’ Wo müsste der Rahmen stehen, um die Punktzeichnung der Laute in der dargestellten Grösse erscheinen zu lassen? Wie das Laserexperiment mit den Studenten bestätigt, ist die Abbildung umso grösser je näher die Bildebene - der Rahmen mit der Leinwand – beim Objekt ist. In Dürer’s Holzschnitt müsste der Rahmen mehr nach links, also näher an die Laute rücken. Im weiteren fiel mir bei genauerer Betrachtung des Holzschnittes die eigenartige Stellung der linken Hand des Assistenten auf, dessen ausgestreckter Arm mehr auf der empfindlichen Vorrichtung mit der geöffneten Leinwand zu lasten schien, anstatt diese zu unterstützen. Mit Hilfe der Bildbearbeitungs Software verschob und verkleinerte ich den Rahmen bis er genau in die Hand des Assistenten passte. In dieser Position ist der Rahmen nur von der Seite zu sehen und stellt sich als senkrechte Leiste dar. Anschliessend markierte ich drei Referenzpunkte auf der Punktzeichnung der ausgeklappten Leinwand. Der erste Punkt, von Dürer selbst gewählt, markiert den Berührungspunkt des Taststabes mit der Laute, der zweite ist am Ende des Griffbrettes, und der dritte schliesslich zeigt die Stelle, wo der Hals des Instrumentes auf dem Tisch aufliegt. Im nächsten Schritt habe ich dann diese drei Punkte am Instrument selbst markiert und sie dann durch Linien mit dem Betrachtungspunkt an der Wand verbunden.

Nun veränderte ich die Position einer Leinwandkopie mit der Punktzeichung und den Referenzpunkten und verkleinerte diese perspektivisch korrekt bis sie der Rahmengrösse entsprach. Da die Leinwand zusammen mit dem Rahmen nun in die Mitte des Druckes zu stehen kommt, erscheinen sie - typisch für die Zentralperspektive - in der Seitenansicht. Dafür zeigt sich nun klar, dass alle Elemente, die Bezugspunkte am Instrument zusammen mit ihren Referenzpunkten auf der Leinwand im Betrachtungspunkt konvergieren.

Das lässt den Schluss zu, dass Dürer ursprünglich geplant hatte den Rahmen dem Assistenten in die Hand zu geben, um dadurch die grösstmögliche Abbildung der Laute zu erreichen. Diese Stellung des Rahmens reduzierte jedoch die Klarheit der Illustration, da der Rahmen nur als Leiste zu sehen ist, und die Leinwand samt den Referenzpunkten von der Durchdringung des Tasterfadens unsichtbar bleibt.

Meine Schlussfolgerung ist, dass Albrecht Dürer bewusst die geometrisch richtige Darstellung zu Gunsten einer besseren Illustration des Prinzips aufgab. Dürer spielt mit den Bildelementen und gibt unserem Wahrnehmungssinn in einer pseudo-realen Konstruktion den Eindruck einer wahrheitsgemässen Situation. Er hat diese Illustration so überzeugend in den Block geschnitten, dass es fast fünfhundert Jahre und die Entwicklung benutzerfreundlicher Bildbearbeitungs - Software bedurfte um diese Täuschung aufzuzeigen. Der Holzschnitt, der über Jahrhunderte so erfolgreich Prinzipien der Perspektive darstellte, hat für mich dadurch nur noch mehr an Wert gewonnen, da er eine Geschichte erzählt. Eine Geschichte über die Illustration von Prinzipien der Zentralperspektive und zugleich von den Grenzen dieses Abbildungssystems. Es war zu keiner Zeit meine Absicht diesen Meister der Renaissance zu kritisieren oder herabzusetzen, Dürer selbst steht mir hier zur Seite. Er schreibt in einem Entwurf eines Vorwortes zu einem geplanten Buch (c, Strauss, 1977):”Aber mit Gottes Hilfe möchte ich das Bisschen, das ich gelernt habe publizieren, selbst auf die Gefahr, dass man mich verspottet. Es soll mir aber nichts ausmachen.”

Strauss W. (1977). (a), The literary remains of Albrecht Dürer. Translation of and comments to The Painter’s Manual by Dürer A. (1525) Page 7. New York. Abaris Books.

Strauss W. (1977). (b), The literary remains of Albrecht Dürer. Translation of and comments to The Painter’s Manual by Dürer A. (1525) Page 391. New York. Abaris Books.

Strauss W. (1977). (c), The literary remains of Albrecht Dürer. Translation of and comments to The Painter’s Manual by Dürer A. (1525) Page 8. New York. Abaris Books.

These initial outcomes had been presented at Art and Authenticity at the Australian National University in November 2006, Canberra and at the ACUADS conference in September 2006, Melbourne.

Vielen Dank an Fritz Thurnheer für die geduldige Hilfe bei der Uebersetzung dieses Textes ins Deutsche.