The Misplaced Academic

Here stand the accused.

This die holds special meaning to me, it was the first thing I bought when I first moved to Auckland. I didn’t have much of anything else to my name except what I had in my bag but when I got here I found an interesting store and as I stood there dumbfounded by the models and board games and toys this die caught my eye and I instantly fell in love. I didn’t have money to buy dinner after that.

It encapsulates me as a creative; like the die I too function based on logic, live by random chance, and like the colour red.

The interrogation begins by observing the die.

I don’t own a weighing scale… That’s okay, I have math.

Starting off I wanted to take down the physical characteristics of my object. I unfortunately didn’t have the equipment to do this directly. Rather than seeing this as a hindrance, I saw it as an opportunity to flex my math muscles and put my science to the test.

I was able to take the weight of my dice by accounting for what it’s made of, which in this case is PVC resin, and finding what the relative specific gravity of the material is. I then converted that value into its density in kg/cu.m. Measuring the volume of the dice was relatively simple without using a physical ruler, I just used an online ruler that accounted for the resolution of my monitor. Using both of these values and a little bit of unit conversion, I was able to derive the mass of my dice.

How many sides does a die have? Let’s ask the die.

This was pretty simple, my dice can’t talk back in any means but if you ask it the right questions it is still able to answer.

Using the right pieces for the puzzle:

I wanted to build my object back up with what the data that I was able to collect, I thought it only appropriate to make dice…

Using dice.

This side presented to you in numbers:

I figured out that to recreate my die based on it’s weight I needed 364 dice, I didn’t have 364 dice though so I built my 4 sided die one side at a time. Doing the math that comes up to about a 7x7 square for each side.

The evidence has been tampered with:

As with any interrogation, sometimes the facts are obscured. Mimicking this phenomena would have been pretty simple but I’m a programmer as such I used code to mess with the object, specifically....

Pixel Sorting

This one was fairly straight forward, at least from a programmer’s perspective. Didn’t do much to write my own code, the open source community provides.

http://datamoshing.com/2016/06/16/how-to-glitch-images-using-pixel-sorting/

Hex Editing

This one was not so complex, but incredibly tedious. I had to count how many bits I was replacing so as not to change the overall integrity of the file. I wrote a parsing script in the hopes to make the process a little bit easier on myself, unfortunately that did not work as planned so I ended up manually scrubbing through the hex code.

http://www.artician.com/forum/Glitch-Art-and-Databending-Primer-Part-I-Hex-Editing-and-You-t3799.html

The WordPad effect

This was incredibly easy, just get the right compression type open with Microsoft WordPad and then save. Simple.

http://blog.animalswithinanimals.com/2005/07/wordpad-effect.html

Hex Editing + WordPad effect

Feeling confident that I was able to tackle the first two processes, I challenged myself to utilize both. Same difficulties as hex editing with a little more precision.

http://blog.animalswithinanimals.com/2010/10/advanced-wordpad-editing-explained.html

Equals.

Lo and behold the final outcome. It was surprising to me how close the dimensions of my interrogated dice was to the original considering the rough and ready method I used to measure all of its characteristics. It is fitting however that it ended up the way it did. It isn’t always possible to see the truth of something, often we have to work with the evidence we collect and shape our understanding based on the evidence alone. We don’t always have a clear picture of what is, but we can get close to it bit by bit if we use the right methods.

Why I did what I did:

How did we get here?

Step 1. Be completely apathetic to the task at hand. Not every single project is going to be something that appeals to your personal tastes.

Step 2. Come up with something passable, be told repeatedly that your ideas are not good enough. It takes skill to take all that in stride.

Step 3. Get told how to do things, don’t be arrogant. Take every word with a grain of salt but still take it all in. You don’t know how much of it is usable so don’t take it personally if it isn’t the same as your process.

Step 4. Try what they told you to do.

Step 5. Fail miserably with shifting how your creative process works.

Step 6. Try again.

Step 7. Fail again.

Still I am unfamiliar with this medium of correspondence, but little by little I am able to grasp the process. I have penned all findings and procedures in writing, but paper leaves one wanting, it is a fragile medium and I require something with permanence. Here then I transcribe all that has been written in pursuit of that permanence.

3rd March 2016

After being given the summary of what we have to accomplish, what would be our first task, the room split into groups. I found myself with a small number of peers to discuss ideas of how to go about in accomplishing the task at hand. We arrived at several conclusions by end of day: we had three ideas worthy of pursuit, we needed to further split the group to tackle all the ideas presented, and we could become X-Men. The last conclusion was disheartening.

4th March 2016

I meet with <name redacted>, we work through the afternoon to collate and concretize the idea that we had, with the group, developed the day before. I have not before had a partner in accomplishing a project. The extra body made it possible to make short work of the tasks that we set out for ourselves; research into the feasibility of the concept fell upon my hands, and the presentability and aesthetic of the proposal upon hers. The work is done within hours, the project looking promising.

6th March 2016