End Note.

Now the printings done. It's not really the end as there is so much more to be explored beyond these simple experiments. These outcomes are a disparate shift from some of my early ideas. The real key to getting things done appears to have been to follow one element of an idea. I envisaged that my end show would be a display of screens taking a live streams from the university cctv infrastructure constructed in the fashion of quantum time, using some undecided interface that would allow you to navigate time. What I in fact will (or possibly not) be displaying is two static images of some urban space.
Quantum Time - Static TimeLapse (2006 - TV Test Image)

Scan TV (Temporal distortion implicit in method)

A common theme throughout any idea has been the use of software to generate the image at some stage. From Quantum Time; a small command line app to the use of Photomerge. A major factor to changing the route taken was the realization of the amount of up front learning that would be required to become proficient in Processing and implement even a non-live, static version of Quantum Time that used a pre prepared image/data set. Given the time constraints, software became the product of what i could learn and manipulate enough to achieve a given goal. In all honesty i should have pushed myself to write a least some code as this would have offered me far more insight and allowed me the kind of control and manipulation i crave.
I have some rather strong views on the educational aspect of these endeavors. There is no education. Higher Education is a misnomer, most of the time is spent in a self explorative state. At first this sounds valuable, through self exploration you will learn. This view is harmonious with the vision of artist hero, and no doubt some theories of learning. The problems lies with the framework you explore within. I remember way back when i was looking at uni's. A big debate back then was 'House Style' the idea that the institution was a production line for its own ideology. I found this rather offensive and focussed on places that offered freedom and exploration.... little was i to realize that a strong vision or process is in-fact a massive asset. What creates a quality institution is its commitment to a conceptual vision, imparting that to it's student to explore or resist. This seems far more valuable that floating around in a tired, banal postmodern irony. The true irony being that my institutions lack of vision is what i have resisted. What is required is progressive program that embraces the risk and uncertainty surrounding modern communication, combined with a strong focus on the vocational requirements of working in a world made of data. No tall order compared to burying your head in the sand and becoming another degree vending machine.
Movement over the duration of the scan. It's a bit of a tired technique and easily created in software from a video stream.

Where Next. More to come on that soon.....

Final.

These are the final images bar some editing to correct colour and contrast etc.... Not sure which to print yet.

Problems. Part Two

This first image was to signal the beginning of my home run with the creation of the final project images. Instead all that appeared was an image saturated with infrared. Even with the infrared filter in place the bellows appeared to be leaking and reducing the image to a red, contrast-less mess. No matter what i placed over the bellows i could not shift the infrared. Too add to this the power supply in the car cut out even though it states its good for 600w. There was no way i was drawing that much current running a laptop and the scanning back. I went home. Trying to recreate the infrared in controlled conditions appeared to be impossible. Even with a few lights against the bellows and a flash. From this i could only conclude that the colours shift was a mix of sunlight and the power supply. Im aware that scanning backs are very sensitive to their power source. But scouring the forums i could find little information of these issues.This image from today is a near success. As this project has moved along and become less about some interactive digital output from the camera, i have become more concerned with making images that will print well. This image suffered from no infrared problems but was cut short by the power supply failing again. It needs some balancing work to adjust from a rather large variation between the two exposures. Not really sure what it's of. I'll let people do the reading. Im just trying to do the making.

Milo Action

If only my uni would give me access to the snazzy new student attracting tech. Obviously my use for the Milo motion control arm was so abstract as to fall on deaf ears. But had i gained that access i would have been producing something very similar to this from Carnegie Mellon. My version was to be geared towards the production of a super wide field of view image with infinite depth of field with the potential to be rendered into a 3d environment for inspection/interaction. I wouldn't normally mention such things but it irritates me as Im so close to something that is out of reach to all but a precious few. Outside of the common understanding of what these machines are designed for there are thousands of exciting possibilities, only limited by the red tape that surrounds such fun toys. Calling it a toy is enough to reject you from a legitimate conversation about how you might want to use it. At least we can live safe in the knowledge that innovative uses will win over the banal as soon as it is junked or stolen.

Techno.

The technological transitions that fascinate me are one side of the process. Peoples use of images is what is going to define them beyond the current paradigm of Photography.
Computational Photography i suppose can be said to be a branch of photography that is primarily research based. Its more the science of image creation. Most of the research has obvious commercial applications and can be placed in the context of photographic progression, like increses in quality and automation. But the field also offers an insight beyond the commercial, and insight into the changes at the core of the medium.
In terms of creating images with extended depth of Field their are several notable methods that mostly rely on encoding additional data into the image for post processing. These manifest themselves as a mixture of hardware modification and software.There is a passing similarity to Dolby and the methods employed to transpose the audio signal into the optimum frequency range of a given tape or RIAA tone curves that perform a similar task on vinyl.
Accept these modern methods of encoding create additional data that can be used to manipulate the image. This video is a reasonably comprehensive overview of the key methods involved.

This work from Stanford using a large array of cameras is just amazing. Im particularly impressed by the Synthetic Aperture video near the end.
EDIT: As per request. A link to a hi-res version of this video

Gefeller

Andreas Gefeller - another veteran of Bernd and Hilla Becher teaching at the Düsseldorf Art Academy. Who's distinctive pedagogy and conceptual vision of a comparative taxonomy of utilitarian structures has become a standard in art photography. Gefeller's images are overt composites that upon closer inspection reveal that they are pure digital manipulations with obvious joins and blends.
In this sense I find them much like the use of blocky, and poor resolution fonts within in graphic design acting as obvious motifs for 'digital'. This shorthand screams at you to question the age-old question of reality and representation within photography. But it does more than this; it forces observation of built environments. In fact they remind me of Intelligence Photographs, revealing paths and human interactions on an environment from a odd and totally unnatural perspective. Of course their are many visual parallels within contemporary photography, im thinking Hockney's 'Joiners' and Gursky's vast, super detail composites. Im not really sure where to place his work in relation to mine. Im jealous of his education, why am I not under the thumb of someone with a vision. Even if their vision were not mine at least I would have something to work against. Instead Im at the soft end of a triple expansion engine, its hard to place your self in opposition or sympathy actively. Or at least I find it to be. I don't really need to place his work, i just need to keep exploring without solid guidance. The obvious fear being following desire will lead to nothing.

'Desire is always for the past, for the lost infantile completeness. Desire is always about our sense of lack'

Problems. Part One

The scanning back has presented a set of problems that I thoroughly underestimated and to add to this my conceptual resolve is under significant strain also. I'll start with the technical issues first. All my testing has lead to one thing becoming very obvious. With the increased effective sensor size their has been a dramatic loss of depth of field. This is something I really over looked even though I have experienced it. This .pdf outlines the concepts and mathematics involved clearly. So even with fewer exposures required to cover the image circle of the lens there is an increase in the number of images required to create a fully focused image-by-image stacking. The common adage of stopping the lens down to clasp back some depth is incredibly mis leading. Whiles this methodology works to an extent it also at some point gives way to lens diffraction that’s begins to soften the entire image. And in the case of my 210mm lens even at a reasonable aperture of f32, focused at 10ft I only have 6" of depth in focus. At 20ft the depth of field rises to around 2ft. The implications for image stacking are hideous. To cover an image like the Basement is going to take at least 5 scans and that’s pushing it. I have attempted to increase the perception of depth of field via some delicate sharpening but for any perceptual gain it is soon lost in the layer stacking process that just blurs the poor transition from to out. This test below show all the new problems. Made using 4 layers per camera movement at around f16 with each scan taking about 8 minutes. The transitions between each layer that are out of focus and have no data thats in focus come out blurred just like with the dslr. Another issue that has occurred now, is that at the extremes of the camera movement there is some serious lens distortion. I was aware of this with the dslr composites but as the BetterLight back can be moved beyond the image circle the effect becomes incredibly obvious. The use of the dslr had limited the sensor ever getting to these distorted areas. This brings me to the field of view. Now that the 90mm lens is in commission I have been testing out what it can do. Having a wider field of view (100 deg) compared to the 210mm (72 deg) means it benefits from a compressing effect allowing for a potentially greater perceptual depth of field. This comes at the cost of some distortion and a positively miniature projected image circle of 216mm. The smaller imaging circle turns into fast light loss and crazy distortion. So it’s not really a solution for large composites....
But their is hope. Having tested my lenses solidly for the last few days I have been able to calculate the highest aperture that I can use before the diffraction cannot be mitigated with sharpening. The rather mundane result below has depth of field from as far as the hilltops to the boot of the silver car in the foreground. All these issues with depth of field are very landscape people type issues. Of course the methods im using to create these images are dated and by no means innovative. The real development and exciting stuff is being researched and explored in labs. Methods for gaining more depth of field are a popular area for Computation Photography. Two of the most accessible methods are Coded Aperture and Lightfield. Both require a change in the hardware of a camera to work but all use software to resolve their final output.

Scanning Joys

Today the scanning back arrived. Not without trouble though as Customs insisted on delaying the delivery for an inspection and then charging a small fortune in tax. But once in my hands the back was amazing. Today was mainly spent getting accustomed to the Viewfinder software that controls the camera. It's not the most intuitive, but once understood it is actually very sensible. Probably my favourite feature has to be the focus assist. You place a small card patch in the image that has a pattern on it, then select this patch in the preview scan. The program shifts the scanner head to those pixel locations and offers a live output. This is displayed as a r,g,b scope that has a sharp peak when in focus, not dissimilar to contrast focusing used by cheap point and shoot cameras. This will translate into perfectly repeatable focus points that will entirely remove focus errors and patchy focused images. The test image below is the first time I have been able to use my 90mm lens as previously the Dslr sensor could not get close enough to the plane of focus. It has a wider field of view than the 210mm and is considerably softer but now usable. The image was created from six scans with a healthy overlap. It's not focus stacked and it is not using all the image circle available but it is a spot on proof of concept..As I’m now ready to begin shooting the final images, I have to confront myself about what and where I’m going to image. I’m tempted to re-shoot the basement image and possibly the carpark but I’m still avoiding the issue.

Genealogy. Maybe.

Looking back at all the experiments I can easily trace most of my technical choices. Although I can never firmly pin why it is that I make these images. I have strived to avoid the question. If you look at it and something goes on for you, great. But for me more than anything it is just getting it done. These current multi-focal composites are a departure from this method of approaching my work. They are the following of a series of ideas surrounding photography to a conclusion within their own logic.

For me photographic images have fundamentally changed. We are all familiar with the transition to digital. Instead of a chemical process, photographic images are encoded samples taken from a sensor. Whiles there has been this fundamental shift in the mediums underlying working, by and large the use and conceptual development has continued in the paradigm of traditional photography. Welcoming digital for the technical enhancement it has brought but treating it much the same, with the core focus being on the 'image' as subject matter, a human computational outcome. It is hard to ignore this intuitive, taught method of interacting with images. 
It is so hard to explain the shift in feeling towards images in this sense. It is like sitting back and looking at the world pass by and realizing that most things are the sum function of a rule being abided by. Adherence to a rule enforces the rule. Thinking of an image as data, takes the image into a purely abstract space. But this is the habitat of the modern image. The real innovations in photography happen outside 'photography'. The software development, the opening of new domains of interaction. The treatment of an image as product of a given data-set in an ever growing dataverse. Projects like Joachim Sauter & Dirk Lüsebrink’s ‘Invisible Shapes of Things Past’ expose these potentials. But there are millions of examples from Scene Completion to Automated Facial Recognition. All leveraging computation over the data to create something that is more than a photographic image. At the moment the use of images in this manor is treated as a little novel but these data hybrids are only going to grow and further penetrate peoples use of the image.

Computation.

All of the images Im making rely heavily on post capture processing to turn them into what i want. These computational overheads add significantly to the time it takes to create an image but represent more than anything what Im trying to achieve. The current workflow runs something like this;

1. Convert the camera .raws into small .jpgs using the generic settings within Adobe Camera Raw.
2. Organize the images into their row, then layer. The row is all the images from one set of full movements in one axis. The layer is how many images to create on whole image in focus
3. Feed the layers into one of a few image stacking programs. This part can take some time. As each image can need a fair bit of optimization. save this output.
4. Feed these outputs into either Photoshop Photo-merge or Autopano Pro. If the images/data are decent then photoshop can stitch out a test image in a few hours but any major gaps or serious mall alignments lead to a massive increase in compute time.

Autopano offers the fastest most controllable output but responds really badly to images sets with missing images by warping the entire image. But when all the data is there, it produces great outputs. Photomerge is stupidly slow but seems to be able to ignore missing images. Mostly the missing images are a result of my lack luster capture process - this should/will improve greatly with the use of a scanning back. I also tried Realviz Stitcher,I used this extensively for early panoramic experiments where it performs brilliantly but when faced with images that cover a large planar field of view it fails. I’m not really sure why but in the face of autopano i gave up trying to optimize it.
This is the last test I intend to do with a DSLR as the capture unit. It highlights nearly every problem! The lack of any uniformity reveals the fact that it was created with small images over a long period of time. In this case when I started it was a rainy day and by the time I had finished it was sunny. This has been less pronounced in previous images as they have been shot in environments with mainly continuous lighting. Although most of this could be edited out, I feel that that is outside of this project. Most of the image is 'in focus' but there are chunks and gaps. These relate to the repeatability issue and are exacerbated by small movements in the camera (of all the things the floor bowed under the weight of the camera). The dark square effect is caused by the minimal amount of image available to overlap. This test also revealed an entirely new problem that only really occurs with stacked images. This problem arises from an optical effect. By 'shifting' the back standard of the 4x5 camera I move the sensor over the lens projection. At the extreme end of a movement there is more image being projected but the sensor cannot move anymore. In these situations I 'shift' the front standard to move the image over the sensor. In the case of early composites this has never manifested itself as a problem as the image has been at a single focal plane. But with the images being stacked, these slight changes become parallax errors that make it impossible to overlay multiple focused images accurately. This phenomena was greatly enhanced by the fact that what I was focusing on was very close. It might well be possible to get away with it in an image if the plane of focus is shallower. This will reduce the total number of images used to make a composite, unless I can find a way to extend the rear movement. I should have really known about this before it happened as it was a major problem in my early panoramics. That said, I really like this failure image. It embodies a lot of what im trying to say.
The software I have settled on to perform the image stacking is Helicon Focus. Although i have tested a few, this program offers a good range of possibilities in manipulating the image. Also it supports a batch render function (only under Windows, unfortunately). This use of the software really stretches the algorithms used to blend the layers of different focal planes, mainly as its all optimized for macro work. Obviously if all this testing works, i go back to the .raw's and give them a full workover and repeat the process with greater attention to the details.

One small step for me, One giant leap for my credit card

I can with some degree of certainty say that i have got a BetterLight 4000E in the pipeline. Its the lowest model scanning back from BetterLight and the version im getting shipped in is SCSI based. I cant wait. I had hoped to find something a bit more local, like a Phase One PowerPhase but they are nie on impossible to find. As with all things in hi-end imaging, its all dealers and pros. Its very hard to crack in and have a play. Unless your shooting some skinny model for a catalogue. Despite putting out requests to UK dealers only one had the decency to respond. The BetterLight back tops out at about 18 Mega pixels but the quality of those pixels will be awesome. With the colour data being derived from a single scan line in its own r,g and b colour. No Bayer interpolation is necessary to generate the colour image combined with the Dac working in 16bits. I can look forward to some very clean images. Of course my main need is to have a large effective sensor and the 4000E's scan area is a whopping 72mm x 96mm. Honestly i feel a bit uncomfortable with this back as all the images and all the discussion on forums surrounding then are geared towards either art reproduction or landscape. I really don't see myself in either. As usual i'll just ignore and carry on.

Image Stacking Composites - Tests

This is the first full scale test. Using rise, fall and shift as before to capture the greatest area possible of the lenses image circle. Combined with racking the focus to generate enough images to describe the entire field of view as 'in focus'. This test image is riddled with errors. Most of these errors are surmountable but require an further increase in tolerances of the current imaging process. Currently the source images for each composite are captured via a Canon 350d attached to a 4x5 studio camera with large range movements. Because of the area of the 350d sensor is so small a great number of individual exposures are required.
The sensor is effectively in the back of a box, the shutter-box. Because of this not all of the image circle (approx 301mm at f22 from 210mm lens) can be captured. Also due to the angle of the mirror for the viewfinder only a very small area of the total image circle can be seen and focused. This never effected the early images, as i used an angle finder to amplify the viewfinder and acquire focus. This point of focus would then be same across the entire set of images made via the movements. By introducing the need to change the focus to acquire enough information to make a all in-focus composite, many of these early limitations become major problems. The issue with not being able to use the viewfinder outside of a small image area makes it incredibly hard to find all the required focus points for the image stacking. I have found a few ways to circumvent this but non of them is as satisfactory as being able to use the viewfinder. As the camera is mounted about 80mm from the 4x5 insert its not possible to use the ground glass focus screen. The next major hurdle is repeatability.
With each whole image being constructed from upwards of 300 source images the margin for error is high. Each image must overlap approximately 25%. This leaves room to wriggle. But as soon as focus stacking is introduced the number of images skyrockets to anything upward of 650. Additionally the overlap needs to be even greater to offset the change in focal length caused by shifting the focus. This focal shift manifests itself in the focus stacked images having a soft edge often reducing the overlap below 15% and intern increases alignment errors. All of these errors can be seen in the test.
A live-view camera would allow for more accurate on the fly focusing but the best solution would be to use a medium format digital back. These have an adaptor that would allow the use of a magnify-able ground glass screen and also benefit from a large image sensor that would reduce the amount of total shot required.
Upon reflection i have decieded the best way to improve the image and get it nearer to my vision will be the use of a scanning back. This will increase the effective sensor size to 100mm x 80mm approx. As a scanning back will require being tethered to a laptop, instant review of the images will remove most of the aforementioned errors. An with potentially less than 30 images required, high tolerance repeatability will be easy.

Of course all of these errors and ideas pertain to a single vision of the images i want to create. Their are many other routes and experiments to be explored. Im particularly keen to explore some form of automation of the process. It not inconceivable to develop a system that manipulates the camera movements via stepper motors. I also have yet to try using any of the movements that manipulate the perspective and plane of focus of a recorded image. But all in good time.

Focus

Two experiments of the current direction im working. Their is much to be said about these bits and the ideas they pertain to. I will add these thoughts soon. Additions. The image of the street excites me because in my mind it's a kind of anti-photography photo. For me it's only the outcome of process to generate an image with unlimited depth of field. As such it has imaging errors as a result of process variables. Their are methods that no doubt will become mainstream technology that achieve this via more advance means and also generate images that are visually faultless. Specifically I'm thinking of Stanford's research into LightField cameras. Yet more perfect vernacular photography to come with the continuing democratization of imaging technology. In this sense the image is a bit academic, its primary reason for existence to stimulate some form of debate about images now. The awkward dichotomy being i have no interest in engaging with this discourse beyond what i create.

Not sure about the video. It makes visible the changes between the focus points. I would really want the whole image to be interactive, although I'm not sure how. The possibility to navigate the process. More to be added

One of the few images i have made lately. Using software to combine images shot at different focus points leading to images that are sharp at every-point. This was a small test made of 3 groups of 4 focus layer images, stitched together. Mainly a proof of concept for a super large scale creation. As soon as i get my Canon angle finder and Sinar wide bellow to alleviate the standards drifting under pressure of the normal bellows. Sometime soon i really want to up a video of me making one of these images with a small interview.

Printing. Capturing. Part One

These past few months have become a re-inquiry into photography for me. In school, when I started making photographs seriously, my primary impetus had grown from listening to the adults in my life lament about the magical time that was their youth. With this in mind I set about imaging everything and everyone I knew in the hope of solidifying some of this apparently fleeting time. Now years later with my archive of images and video I have mixed feelings as to my use of photography. The archive represents a highly unique and personal time but for a long time left me unsure of what good photography was.
My images were not littered with sexy girls and awesome parties like Wolgang Tillmans or Vice Magazine. The images also did little for me except put me in a nostalgic void. By the time my disbelief in photography had fully manifested I was stuck inside the academic machine, learning the peculiar position of photography within art and culture. Now images had to be made with a level of referentiality and to some extent be placable within an understood dialogue surrounding the medium. This was fine until it began to impede things getting done. Why could I not make a 4ft square image of a girl’s anus?

Well I could if I created an accompanying context that fitted the image into a discourse that could be understood by the educational institution I was in. So here I am many years later doing a similar thing. Working out where what I create fits. I find this process to be slow and cumbersome. It almost instantly decays the energy that comes with the desire to make something, unless you are making things that comfortably can be positioned into the explicit framework that your educators enforce. Its hard enough to objectify your own work let alone fighting the reverence that your educators have for there own predilections and knowledge. So I’m at the point where I only offer a cursory nod to their requirements.

Joachim Schmid:

I have liked this guy's works since i first saw some of his 'Photogenetic Drafts' series. These where composites of cut negatives from one studio in germany that he had combined top make a full but distorted portrait image. Other works like his 'Statics' have a conceptual link and are surprisingly similar in their visual outcome to my own work; The Statics where created from images left over from a project that aimed to recycle photographs; from what i have gathered the left over images where thematically organized, this can be seen in their titles and then shredded and then mounted horizontally.
Statics (lingerie catalogue 2), 2000, 40 x 50 cm

In an interview for Flasher, Schmid talks about his methodologies for image making but near the end he says something fascinating; 'many of my colleagues think digital-age is the end of photography' and he thinks it's the beginning. The problem here is that he is an artist, who's output is mostly constructed from vernacular photography; he does not shoot these images! I have felt for a long time that photography was at some kind of end or transition. It has taken me years to get a feel for what i think is occurring. Schmid then talks about how he has the time to look at images online, its his profession. I think a key element that Im feeling is that images in the digital domain are breaking away from the paradigm of photography over it chemically manufactured history. Reading this back it seems blindly obvious but then it also seems natural to be looking at other peoples lives via flickr. Again another blog post where Im left lost; i suppose i keep thinking that so many things that fit into an art-historical discourse occur without any artistic intervention. As an additional note Im loosing faith in my own idea; Im looking at what can be done with the ever growing petabytes of images, what can this data do but as he say's "even a complete idiot can take a fascinating photograph" so can a complete idiot create something with all this visual data. - I would like to add that i think this is a terrible post, it only serves to show how confused it get.

Software:

Gently honing in on what my essay will be discussing: software and imaging. Hoping to go further than just exploring the amazing array of things that can be done with images via computers but to look at the very nature of an image in the digital domain. From it's creation from light into its encoding in binary. Obviously a rather broad area of inquiry that i need to refine, pronto. The first five minutes of this video from Sun's Bryan Cantrill offers an insight into something i have never really resolved:

Although a bit old hat in the online world of digital imaging, Content Aware Image Resizing is a fascinating look at where public level interaction with images is heading (my use of 'level' and 'layer' really need to be defined outside of my mind, so as to make sense to others);

"The basic idea is that if you want to stretch out an image, it will keep the key elements of the photo in sensible places while filling in less important areas. The same goes for shrinking an image - it will eliminate the less important features of an image and leave the main subject areas intact and in the same relative location as they previously appeared in the image."

Any truth that people may have seeked from images is now well buried. Much like the shift to mp3 and the mass loss of quality in comparison to other mediums; many people i have observed accept low bit-rate poorly encoded music with it's shrill treble and muffled bass. The real jokers are the people who listen to music from their phones!! Can they really accept that as progress. There is a point where the mediums entropy begins to effect the enjoyment of the music (message). Here i am creeping into Marshal McLuhan territory, so i suppose i could be looking at the amount of effort required to derive a meaning and how the medium is changing the fundamental content of the information. In this sense images will become a further simulacra.

Composites/Contradictions

The most visual thing i have made thus far. At other end of the scale from the Static Time-lapses this image is created by moving the camera on planar plane over time, when composited together it makes an image with a high amount of spatial information but very little temporal (although this could be increased by spacing the shots further apart in time).

I am of the feeling these images/experiments externalize a confusion that is pervasive throughout the culture i am familiar with. An awkward polarization, im often of the opinion that i just have to do what i do without much thought. In a Death of the Author kind of way. This suits me as often im following desires and intuition rather than the institutionally more desirable didactic de-constructible linear workbook mode of getting where needs to be got. But reading Imomus last night triggered the introspection of ones own methodologies. All of these thoughts are in relation to the university (educational?) complex i am doing so well to avoid latterly. Having spent the best part of the last decade on one side of this system i can say that i feel written. Not to the point that im just a node of this system but in a the way i have to challenge myself to think otherwise.
Where does this leave me and my artifacts. I make them but don't want to justify them. They make me, what i create defines aspects of my understanding. So it would seem on a personal level they are self explorative and on a public level they orphans, open to interactions and interpretations free from me. And just think all i ever wanted to do was take pictures but i have ended scripting representations of an abstraction

David Bohm Implication:

As a quick addition i thought i should add some information about David Bohm, he wrote a very successful book 'Wholeness & the Implicate Order' that posits that all existence is an unbroken whole, many ideas he forwards in the book are very compelling and visible in the world we experience. I read this book about five years ago and it has had a lasting effect on how i try an understand the world and allot of my actions in it. With that in mind I am re-reading it and getting excited all over again. Here is a little taster from Bohm;

Conceptual Demands:

After what can only be described as an extended holiday im feeling like im back on track. Feeling obviously being very different from actually doing. For a long period i have been mauling over where i draw inspiration and im still not sure but it's clear that science is at the front of many of my thoughts more than art or even design.

This video is constructed in the same way as the still images but each square plays a portion of time. Combined the video represents about 13Hrs. The time depth of each square limits the overal resolution within the logic of how these images are made and work this highlights a dilema; a high spacial resolution reavealing a clean image or high temopality reavealing changes. I have alot of idea's to add to this concept that are grown out of a tentative understanding of a test used in quantum theory, although this is by no means the driving force.