Tag Archives: interface

Coisa Vista [operações aditivas] na ECO, Recife

Operações aditivas é um projeto que busca a criação de uma série de situações de processamento de áudio e vídeo em tempo real tendendo à produção de resultados imprevistos e/ou caóticos. É uma instalação cujo ponto principal de atenção reside na reprodução de uma base sonora em um processo contínuo de inclusão do ruído sonoro captado no entorno do ambiente onde ela é ouvida.

Coisa Vista está sendo apresentada pela primeira vez na exposição ECO, em Recife, com curadoria de Maria Duda Belem e Lucia Padilha.

O processamento do áudio de Operações Aditivas implica na interferência visual (por recurso de aceleração da velocidade inicial) em um vídeo que reproduz os textos:

“Não compreendo o que vi.

E nem mesmo sei se vi,

já que meus olhos

terminaram não se diferenciando

da coisa vista.”

Clarice Lispector (Paixao Segundo GH)


“O essencial é saber ver

Saber ver sem estar a pensar,

Saber ver quando se vê

E nem pensar quando se vê

Nem ver quando se pensa.”

Alberto Caeiro (F. Pessoa)


Conceito e direção: Lucas Bambozzi

Desenvolvimento tecnológico: Equipe Amarela (Matheus Knelsen, Lina Lopes, Paloma Oliveira, Caio Bonvenuto).

Assistencia e desenho sonoro: Caio Bonvenuto

Mobile Crash em Lima, Peru

Uma nova edição da instalação Mobile Crash foi inaugurada em Lima, dia 25 de fevereiro.

A instalação faz parte da mostra Geografías Celulares, que fica em cartaz até 13 de junho de 2010 no Centro Fundación Telefonica.

Esta é uma versão mais compacta em comparação com a edição apresentada em Buenos Aires entre outubro e dezembro de 2009, que permitia uma interação entre várias pessoas ao mesmo tempo. Esta versao mais ampla, em função de um teto mais alto para o posicionamento da câmera, deve ser a edição a ser apresentada no Brasil nos próximos meses.

A instalação introduz uma interface inovadora como forma de interação entre o público e as imagens, projetadas nas 4 paredes do espaco da obra. Ao se proximar ou apontar para alguma das telas o sistema responde com uma sequencia audiovisual que é reproduzida na tela correspondente. O público pode misturar as sequencias de forma intuitiva e direta.

O projeto trata de conceitos ligados à obsolescencia dos novos meios e comenta formas como linguagens às vezes desaparecem com as mídias.

Mobile Crash conta com desenvolvimento tecnológico de Ricardo Palmieri (Pure Data), tracking system elaborado por Roger S. (Open Frameworks) e produção/assistência de Paloma Oliveira.


ver página sobre o projeto:

Mobile Crash


Site Centro Fundación Telefonica, Lima, Peru


Blog Arturo Goga



outras matérias e artigos:




ampla cobertura nos jornais da capital Peruana

About SPIO [interview to Jose-Carlos Mariategui]

4 questions

Jose-Carlos Mariategui (Peru)

curator of Emergentes at Laboral, Gijon, Spain (2007)

1. Jose-Carlos Mariategui: Do you think your work is in some way connected

to scientific/technological research?   I see your research much more connected to

contexts, in that sense not just to Brazil, but sometimes to global

problematics.  Also something interesting from you is that it can be

impossible to define your pieces as series, all your pieces are different,

which means you are always looking for new things.  How do you start

working, from a more theoretical process?

Lucas Bambozzi: You are right, my work deals with contexts. More than usual it also deals with site and social-specific conditions, which as I see, also point to how one could perceive the particularity of the context around, meaning its social, political and technological environment. In this sense the scientific/technological approach is not the driven motor but it plays a big role in shaping the context. Sure, it also does influence the research  behind the work. It would be risky to affirm that such research is the core of the work, but if we consider the research as a way to establish links between the social reality and the communicational/technological systems, I tend to agree with that. My background are more communication than art, the art I do is permeated with communication.

My pieces are not too different. More than often I use different media to point to the same point (problems or conflicts generated by the introduction of technologies in or society). So it is also not true that I am always looking for new things. I would rather say that I keep looking for the same things (let’s say: the media, mediating tools and communication systems). The problem or the fascinating thing, is that ‘these things’ are changing constantly. For me, to produce a work is not a theoretical strategy, but an observation process.

2. J-CM: I believe you analyze quite a bit the users of the system in the spaces

it is being presented.  In that sense do you ‘tweak’ the installation after

watching the publics’ interaction?  Did you take into consideration the

publics’ interaction with your work to develop new ideas or works?  Did you

sometimes have found that your work is understood by people in a completely

different way?  Do you think that in that context the space of the

museum/galley is the best place to try out and present your projects, or you

think there might be better situated in other types of spaces?

L: I think that some kind of work, specially those involving interactions, are never really finished by the time of its first presentation. This is different from all those assumptions that the public will shape the work as a participant (the co-authorship ideas). I would rather “learn” with the work when I meets the public and its related participations of how to improve it, by expanding or narrowing down its concepts. More in technical sense, my works always demand some tweaking care and I think this is related to the fact that we never have the ideal conditions (time + resources + technologies) for preparing it 100% before the due time to be presented. Among us Brazilians, this is usually considered a sort of syndrome, a typical Brazilian condition. But it does happen in other contexts as well, as some ‘new media’ works do demand some kind of research that can not be conducted without proper support. In my case, even when the work is not being commissioned by the exhibition I took some exhibition’s opportunities as a way to further develop not only some ideas, but also some knowledge on hardware and software.

The museum/gallery space is not really the best place/environment to create, develop and test the work, but surely it can be the best place to tweak and fix the work, as in my case, it will be at the venue that the work will finally gain its ‘living’ condition, relating itself to the existing forces and specific conditions found in the space. However, more than often I have been trying to consider the public spaces as the place for such encounter.

So there are two things, sometimes being mixed up: the space itself, and the conditions proposed by the exhibitors – which would include available spaces. The first thing is more a conceptual issue and the latter is more related to production, financing issues.

In order to better deal with both, I am currently investing some money and time on a sort of atelier in São Paulo. I hope it will make it possible to work by my own, to build things independently from any invitation, without all that known pressure implied by an exhibition time-frame. With little exceptions, producers can help better when they are working for your work, not for the exhibition.

3. J-CM: As for New possibilities, do you think the project has some industrial/

commercial uses and possibilities.  Do you think you can apply some of your

works to more commercial or extended interfaces or ‘products’?

L: Talking specifically about the Spio project, it happened that it was related to an inverted situation. When it was produced and shown for the first time (2004), I wanted to point it directly to the growth of controlling devices and pervasive technologies such as the CCTV cameras, the introduction of RFID tags in ordinary products and the spread of automated and generative systems. It was a way of proposing the discussion of the physical presence of surveillance devices embedded in daily life. However I used a device (Roomba, the robotic vacuum cleaner) that was already absorbed by the industry and commerce. iRobot, the company behind Roomba, was developed like this, with a trajectory rooted in MIT labs and soon gaining a big market in the USA, not only in domestic appliances but also in more ‘sophisticated’ applications that would lead to some controversy, such as military use.

Spio was also inspired by the Fluxus’ and Nam June Paik’s use of irony and humour so as to highlight the contradictions of their time. We notice in Nam June Paik’s works the simulation of high-end techniques with excessive visual effects treatment, with references to science’s utopias such as robots and impossible gears, as well as the use of toys, furniture, domestic appliances or strange engines. Spio refers to some of these approaches,

Funny enough, the Roomba vacuum cleaner has evolved a lot in the last three years. It gained an operating system and a serial port, which allows different ways of programming with C++, Mobile Processing, MacOSX or Linux, via Arduino or Wiring. So it has been recently used as a platform for hacking purposes, driving attention from researchers, artists and potential hackers, from mechatronics, engineering and art fields. There is a book released this year called Hacking Roomba: ExtremeTech (by Tod E. Kurt) that teaches step-by-step many hacking possibilities.

Spio is not listed in the book as a hacking project there, but it could be, as it was really a sort of pioneer project dealing with Roomba (most projects are from 2006/2007). The version being presented at Laboral will feature many possibilities that was not easy to implement in 2004, but will now be possible (the tracking cameras will trigger some responses on the robot itself), improving and sharpening up the original concepts. It is now working under Ubuntu, with Pure Data and it has been very reliable.

Back to your question: No, Spio could not be really applied to commercial field (ate least as a product), as it is exactly the opposite: to bring a product to a different purpose.

As a system that is at the same time a sort of ‘found object’ and a surveillant/surveilled device, it produces confusion and misapprehension. It interfaces ‘nothing with nothing’ and this void may produce strangeness about a device whose functions, tasks or parameters one does not know for sure. It can be seen less as a finished object and more as a hub of linking possibilities.

4. J-CM: You have been quite involved for a long time with elements around

locative media and mobile apparatus. Spio is definitively one of them.

What do you think of the possibilities of locative media, is it that the

media becomes much more context aware or context dependent?  Why it

interests so much to you?

L: Your question implies a sort of conflict: to be more ‘context aware’ is to become more ‘context dependent’? I do not think about it this way, as I think I do both. My two feature films for example, deal with the context (anachronistic situations lead by substitutions in the way people work, the instability of life in the borders) as a result of an approximation, as a consequence to be immersed on a chosen/desired/given environment I do believe that this way we can better understand the context, and by doing so we can improve our lives, by means of real communication.

So, what does it means to become context-dependent? Is it something to avoid?

What I am particularly interested in locative media is that these systems are to be considered naturally immersed in the public environment, and for this reason it is expected that they would help to effectively improve the experience of public life, re-shaping social reality, at least with less mixophobia (a concept proposed by Bauman, as opposed to mixophilia – we already talked about that, remember?). Mobile apparatuses are spread in Brazil in such a big figure: more than 110 millions of registered mobile phones in use. And I am truly interested on the networking capabilities of this phenomenon. Mobile media can be used stupidly, but not only. Instead of just connecting private bubbles (in a one-to-one connectivity), it can potentially empower networking in an effective way, puncturing sealed private environments, broadening relationship to a richer experience. I do expect to see and produce more works dealing with these ideas, as the context it relates to, has been a challenge for us living in mega-cities like São Paulo, where the public spaces has been decreasing so drastically. Spio is still a model for a protected environment, but I am working on a couple of projects in which I want to see these edges widened.

(october 2007)

Los mapas del futuro, desde Argentina

Dias passados a Giselle Beiguelman pescou a seguinte matéria no lanacion.com - Noticias actualizadas las 24hs:

“Crear, producir y trabajar con herramientas actuales implica enfrentarse a paradigmas también actuales”, escribió el año pasado Lucas Bambozzi en Vídeo en Latinoamérica. Una historia crítica (Brumaria). El mismo Bambozzi que muestra la instalación Mobile Crash en la exposición Geografías celulares, en el Espacio Fundación Telefónica. Cuatro enormes pantallas que se activan con la presencia de los visitantes muestran cómo, en forma rítmica, mecánica e intermitente, un martillo destruye modelos obsoletos de teléfonos celulares; una mano “barre” los restos del destrozo y todo vuelve a empezar. La instalación juega con la interactividad (el espectador “decide” cuál de las pantallas emite primero) y alude al vértigo de la actualización tecnológica que deja en el camino carcasas de equipos a los cuales, como los de Mobile Crash, sólo les resta esperar la destrucción. En el caso de esta obra, la destrucción no llega de la mano de una tecnología preweb sino premoderna. ¿Qué más ancestral que un simple martillo? Máster en Filosofía por la Universidad de Plymouth (i-DAT/ Planetary Collegium) de Inglaterra, profesor de posgrado en San Pablo, documentalista, curador y artista multimediático, Bambozzi sintetiza teoría y práctica de un modo muy similar al de los otros artistas de Geografías celulares. Curada por Marcus Bastos, la muestra incluye obras de artistas nacidos o radicados en Brasil, país que ha recorrido un interesante camino en la experimentación con el video, las imágenes digitales y sus múltiples cruces expresivos.”

achei bem elogioso… a matéria na íntegra está aqui:


X MORADIAS: Presenças Insustentáveis

Fui convidado para o evento X Moradias, onde apresento um projeto que acontece por 5 dias num apartamento situado no centro da cidade (rua General Jardim 373 ap 12, quase esquina com Amaral Gurgel). A idéia reflete experiências anteriores, entre ambientes privados e espaço público, mas dessa vez sem envolver projeções, formas de representação ou tecnologias mais complexas.

x moradias_small

Meu projeto em X Moradias é um desdobramento de questões esboçadas em um trabalho anterior, ainda não finalizado, chamado Presenças Insustentáveis — apresentado como uma espécie de protótipo na exposição 14×32 no 3º, no Sesc Paulista no final de 2007. Ali foi montado um pequeno apartamento cenográfico, em cujas paredes eram anexadas projeções de apartamentos vazios ou habitados por presenças imaginadas.

Nesse projeto que acontece no X Moradias, o apartamento é real, não há projeções e as presenças podem ser sentidas in-loco, envolvendo elementos reais. A assistência, manutenção, cuidados e operação é feita pela Paloma Oliveira.

localização do apartamento transformado

localização do apartamento transformado

Imagens e vídeos aqui em breve. O projeto vai até sábado, dia 27 de junho e a experiência dos percursos entre os vários apartamentos e residências é algo difícil de descrever, imperdível diria.

x moradias2


Paloma Oliveira, minha fiel escudeira que tocou boa parte do projeto e registrou quase todos os que passaram pelo apartamento enviou um texto. Segue:

Presenças Insustentáveis: kitinet

[relato de Paloma Oliveira]

O ciclo aparece constantemente no pensamento: o ciclo selvagem do gato que corre atrás da galinha lambendo os lábios gatunos, da galinha que roda em círculos e não sabe para onde ir, do ser humano que caça os gatos e os cachorros, o inquilino que foge do proprietário, que suga o inquilino por vezes uma situação que beira o cruel. Que lado tomar? O da constância? O dos instintos comuns? Por que não gatos em gaiolas se pássaros que tem asas são comumente presos ha tantos anos? Por que não aprisionar os gatos? Por que aprisionar um ser? Por que a galinha é idiota? Por que ela merece virar galinhada no final? Quais os parâmetros que definem isso? E tem também os ciclos dos visitantes que mostram como podemos ser tão diferente uns dos outros e no fundo, pouco importa o que se apresenta, tudo depende do que há dentro de cada um.
Mas podemos tirar o contexto de seu local de origem e só de fazer essa inversão conseguimos dar um piripaque no cérebro que faz com que vejamos, pensemos diferente.
Hoje chove. As pessoas estão naturalmente mais fechadas e assustadas. Talvez não se assustem tão fácil quanto em um dia com sol onde stão abertas e o desconhecido realmente não fazia parte do que se esperava para o dia. Mas a idéia é assustar? Ou é revirar o dia a dia? Talvez nem nós saibamos, seja uma construção.
Toques e conversas me fazem pensar mais a fundo sobre o trabalho. Penso em quanto as pessoas se chocam com os gatos dentro de gaiolas. Em como o desconhecido e retirar um dos sentidos: o da visão nos desorienta. Como somos pobres de sentidos, mas um novo publico se forma afã, pedindo para que o outro lhe proporcione isso. E me parece que o papel da arte, pelo menos atualmente, tem sido um pouco esse: o de retirar da anestesia. Se em algum outro momento os artistas o faziam para sacudir o povo, hoje o povo o pede para desafogar do que é imposto pelos já sabidos excessos (de mídia, de informações, de produtos, de idéias… tudo fragmentado e fora e qualquer lugar).

Paloma Oliveira [ao longo dos dias, durante o projeto]


3rd Inclusiva-net meeting: NET.ART (SECOND EPOCH). The Evolution of Artistic Creation in the Net-system

place: Centro Cultural de España en Buenos Aires

inclusiva:net: live streaming

The third meeting of the Inclusiva-net plattform, takes place on March 2 through 6, 2009, at the Centro Cultural de España (Cultural Centre of Spain) in Buenos Aires (Paraná 1159). It comprises a set of seminars, a series of communications chosen from a public call for proposals, and debate sessions, aiming to develop an analysis of the current situation of artistic practices on the Web from various theoretical and critical perspectives.

The encounter is directed by Juan Martin Prada. With the participation of  Josephine BosmaSteve DietzGustavo RomanoBrian Mackern, Arcángel Constantini, Lucas BambozziDaniel García Andújar, Franz Thalmair (cont3xt.net)Marisa Olson, Michael Mandiberg, Guadalupe Aguiar MasuelliLila PagolaCurt Cloninger and Patricia Gouveia.

> See selected papers
> Seminar Program
> Sign up for the discussion group

March 2 through 6, 2009

Venue: Centro Cultural de España en Buenos Aires [Paraná 1159, Buenos Aires]

Organized by Medialab-Prado and the Centro Cultural de España (Cultural Centre of Spain) in Buenos Aires.

Statement (the organizers)

This third meeting of the Inclusiva-net platform aims to develop an analysis of the current situation of artistic practices on the web from various theoretical and critical perspectives. It will comprise a set of seminars, a series of communications chosen from a public call for proposals, and debate sessions. Throughout the meeting, many topics will be addressed including questions such as: Can we speak of a second epoch in net.art? What do the new art forms based on on/off-line hybridization contribute? What critical reflection do new manifestations of digital creations in networks offer us? What are the new relations between creation and dissention?

Themes for the meeting

  • The evolution of artistic creation on the Internet, seen from the perspectives of Art History and Criticism, Aesthetics, Anthropology and Communication Theory.
  • Net.art in the Latin American context.
  • Net.art: criticism and curatorship. Recent initiatives and fundamental paths in the development of curatorship.
  • New orientations related to institutions that manage the world of art and online artistic practices. The phenomenon of their disappearance from biennales and major international contemporary art exhibits.
  • Beyond the Internet. From “net.art” to the new hybrid forms of “networked art”. From the computer screen to new portable networked devices.
  • Developments in software art on Web 2.0.
  • Artistic approaches related to the semantic web.
  • “Amateur” audiovisual creativity in social networks.
  • Blog-art. Artistic thought in experimental appropriation of blogs.
  • Artistic proposals and metaverses. 3D social networks as new spaces for artistic intervention.
  • The social and critical dimension of artistic practices on the Web. New developments in the relationship between art and online activism.
  • The creative dimension of new social organizational behaviour through networks: from “flash mobs” to politicized “swarming”.