Machine for Taking Time, David Rokeby

 

David Rokeby, Machine for Taking Time, Installation, 2001, Gairloch Gallery, Oakville. Photo © 2007, Oakville Galleries.

 

Machine for Taking Time is an installation by Canadian artist David Rokeby. In May 2007, Richard Gagnier and Ariane Noël de Tilly of the DOCAM’s Case Studies in Conservation and Preservation Committee conducted an interview with the artist. The work, commissioned by Oakville Galleries for its exhibition Earthly Delights / Deep Gardening, curated by Su Ditta, was created between 2001 and 2004 and subsequently acquired by the gallery.

 

On March 28, 2001, Rokeby installed a surveillance camera in the Gairloch Gardens Gallery of Oakville Galleries. Each day, the camera captured still images on a continuous sweeping path around the garden, with 1079 fixed positions. The camera maintained each of these positions for four seconds, and the entire predetermined path lasted just over one hour. The surveillance camera was connected to a computer, and each image was integrated into a database. The images were then projected on a screen in the Gairloch Gardens Gallery. The screen itself was suspended from the ceiling in front of a window overlooking the garden, which allowed visitors to see that the projected images were actually taken in the gardens surrounding the building.

 

The Max/MSP [1] software application and softVNS 2 [2] objects were programmed to create a “synthesis” of these images, with the software doing four kinds of wandering. “It sometimes moves along the path using images from a single day. Or it might dissolve sequentially from day to day as it progresses along the path. Alternatively it might dissolve from date to date randomly. Occasionally it will stop its movement along the path and show all the images taken from that position in rapid succession.” [3] These four possibilities were produced at random, which meant that the montage of images was never repeated and was continuously projected in real time during the presentation of the work.

 

This artist was of particular interest to the DOCAM project because he still owns many of his major works. As such, he is directly concerned about their technological longevity and about the authenticity and originality of their incarnations.

 

First problem: preservation of the operational functions of the computer program

Machine for Taking Time was created using the software program Max/MSP from Cycling ’74 and softVNS 2, which is a software application that Rokeby used as a complement to Max/MSP to create objects. softVNS 2 is stable and has extensive tracking functions (real time motion capture, colour tracking, head tracking, etc.). It also offers video capabilities at a resolution of 640 x 480 pixels, and it is compatible with Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X interfaces. Rokeby has commercialized this program but continues to create new objects with it that are not always offered on the market, as was the case with the objects created specifically for Machine for Taking Time in Oakville.

 

‘v.gairlochbuffers’ and ‘v.gairlochclient’ are versions of softVNS objects ‘v.buffers’ and ‘vbuffertap.’ They share similar functions, with the exception that v.gairlochbuffers and v.gairlochclient store additional information related to the tracking function in the file associated with each image. Once the image is tracked, additional information is added to its corresponding file, which the computer can then access. The program will move the image according to this orientation prior to the program starting in order to assure a continuous, smooth flow with the landscape sequence. In 2007, Francine Périnet, then director of Oakville Galleries, explained that the software had been enhanced and that the changes reflected the artist’s ongoing work on the installation. It also took into account the number of images added to the database as well as new programming possibilities. [4]

 

The operations performed by the software are part and parcel of the work’s creation and presentation, which explains the need to preserve the program’s operational functions. Ideally, the artist would like the program to remain operational for as long as possible through successive migrations.

 

Ethical problems

Authenticity and integrity

During the interview conducted by Richard Gagnier and Ariane Noël de Tilly [5], Rokeby mentioned a number of elements that contribute to the authenticity of the work and that must be preserved in Machine for Taking Time. For future exhibitions, the work must always be presented in front of a window, as was done with the original installation in Oakville. Secondly, the projection size must be kept proportional to a window; it would be inappropriate to project the work on a surface that is too large. Also important is to preserve the operational and movement mechanisms of the image sequence in the work. This involves maintaining the speed of movement of the images at a pace slow enough to allow viewers to clearly discern the details and transitions, constructing a fusion of images, and presenting the images in the four modes defined by the artist. All of these possibilities are produced randomly to ensure there is no repetition in the presentation of projected images.

 

To preserve a record of the work’s sequencing and the mechanisms favoured by the artist, Rokeby suggested creating a permanent version of his work on a DVD (two hours in length). This would guarantee the longevity of the work in the event the system becomes obsolete or can no longer be kept operational. Video documentation could thus be created by recording the video output directly from the computer. And while this version would not provide a sense of the work’s presentation over a lengthy period of time, it would offer a comparable experience for the person viewing it for the first time. The integrity of the work would therefore be maintained through this compromise. Finally, the artist does not feel that the equipment used is essential to the authenticity of the work. It would therefore be possible to replace defective or obsolete equipment with more recent technology adapted to the work, provided it would also allow its operating mode to be maintained.

 

Problems specific to this case

Emulation

The artist is very aware of the fragility of the processes and of the problems associated with conserving the work, but he feels that these problems should not define the creative approach taken. He is, however, committed to trying to find ways of preventing such problems in the future. During the retrospective of his work held in Liverpool in 2007, Rokeby was relieved that almost all of the works exhibited functioned flawlessly through emulation. There was therefore no need for him to adapt or reconstruct any of his historically positioned devices.

 

There are, however, instances where emulation does not work. Because the artist is interested in using new equipment over the long term but does not wish to relinquish ownership of his most essential tools, he plans to continue to develop softVNS 2. Other products exist, such as Jitter, for example, which works in Max/MSP, is capable of video processing, and offers most but not all of the features of Rokeby’s own software. In many cases, a work could be emulated in Jitter instead of in softVNS 2 and differ only in speed on a faster computer, which is acceptable to the artist. Other processes created by the artist would be more difficult to emulate.

 

Reconstruction

Rokeby has created a special version of softVNS 2, which is designed like a library, allowing the user to work with other applications. With this version, particularly in the least complicated cases, it is possible to define operations specific to the work. Libraries such as these also allow the user to build an application to recreate the work without using Max/MSP, should it become unavailable. Machine for Taking Time was designed such that it can be described as a set of equations.

 

Rokeby prefers, over the longer term and to the extent possible, to retain ownership of the code that allows his works to function, so as to enable him to reconstruct the works in the future, should an occasion present itself or should restorers wish to do so. The artist is uncomfortable with the idea of selling a work to someone with expectations for long-term longevity if the work is based on a software application that has rights attached to it or is produced by a company that might one day disappear.

 

Thinking from a conservation perspective has helped the artist make informed and proactive decisions. For example, each of the objects created, and in particular those in the works sold, is accompanied by a schematic description. The program could also be written in a universal language (pure C code), enabling it to be read in any version of the machine’s algorithm and greatly facilitating a reconstruction effort.

 

---

[1] Max is a visual programming language for music and multimedia developed and maintained by San Francisco-based software company Cycling '74. It has been primarily used by composers, performers, software designers, researchers and artists for creating interactive software. MSP is an"add-on" package for Max allowing for the manipulation of digital audio signals in real-time and allowing users to create their own synthesizers and effects processors.

"Max (software)", Wikipedia, available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_(software), accessed 11 November, 2009.

[2] softVNS 2 is a set of external objects for MAX/MSP that allows you to process video in real-time.

"softVNS 2", Mac, available from http://homepage.mac.com/davidrokeby/softVNS.html, accessed 21 October, 2009.

[3] Description taken from the David Rokeby site, available from http://homepage.mac.com/davidrokeby/machine.html, accessed 11 November, 2009.

[4] E-mail sent by Francine Périnet on March 19, 2007.

[5] Richard Gagnier and Ariane Noël de Tilly, "Interview with David Rokeby", 2009, available from https://www.fondation-langlois.org/html/e/page.php?NumPage=2162.

 

< Prev		Next >