Collaborative initiatives invite users to work together pursuing a common goal. The participants of this projects, create a network that allows them to communicate and establish a series of links or connections that characterize the morphology of this collaborative network.The objective of this research is to analyze the different networks that are generated in order to create hibrid visual projects through crowd-sourced techniques. This common goal will only be achieved if a large amount of users/contributors create a set of links, rules and protocols and base their thought in acting locally and thinking globally.
Each crowd-sourced project is characterized by a particular morphology to which we are going to approach, based on three reference levels. First, the scale of centralization determines who accepts, rejects or modifies the users’ contributions. This scale is directly related with the autonomy level that a participant reaches when producing their own contribution. Second, the level of agency determines the predefinition of the task that the user performs. This scale determines how strict are the rules imposed to the creator and therefore the user’s freedom to create his own contribution. The third element that will determine the nature and morphology of a collaborative networks is the level of synergy. This one, is connected with the interaction degree among users. So, the strength and typology and characteristics of the links that are created between different nodes of these networks.
In order to have an active experience on collaborative and crowd-sourced initiatives, several drawing-based experiments are developed with the XPUB community. The levels of agency, synergy, and centralization are going to be modified trying to understand which are the contributors behavior consequences when transforming the nature of their network. Moreover, the visual result, will reflect this morphology modifications, allowing us to experiment different association and links through which to create a collaborative visual element.
Crowd-sourced networks have been created for large and ambitious projects, especially in the last 10 years, when Internet communication is more than globalized. In this research, 7 web-based collaborative projects will be analyzed and mapped. The comparative analysis of these crowd-sourced mass projects allow us to have a comparative and global vision. Through projects such as The Exquisite Forest, Reddit Place or The Sheep Market, we will determine the network morphology created around it and how the graphic result shows a reflection of the structure and links between users behind it.
When the visual collaborative objective is reached, it can be understood as a graphic representation of the complex network that exists behind them. The users / contributors / creators that are part of it leave their visual imprint that will become part of the essence of that crowd-sourded creation. Furthermore, communities and sub-communities that have been created to encourage more prominent elements will also have a literal translation into the global visualization. Can we understand collaborative projects as an X-ray of the creators networks that are formed behind them?
Crowdsourcing is creating something that’s greater than the sum of its parts. This collaboration is been used to come up with new business ideas, solutions to social problems, funding new products , mapping environmental disasters, identifying potholes that need to be repaired and even getting someone to wait in line for your new iPhone. This system enlist a multitude of humans to help solve a wide variety of problems. The crowd-sourcing principle confirms that a collective creation can produce better (and cheaper) results than an individual. Whether crowdsourced art grows into a prevalent method of expression, or, as one critic worries, becomes a form of “digital serfdom,” when millions of individuals from around the world contribute to a work, the work can be as diverse as the individual contributors.
Collaboration and community building are not only driving forces in everyday life. They also have emerged as important topics and practices in contemporary art, as Grant Kester illustrates in his publications. Addressing communities and collaborative modes of production in different cultural and social contexts claims to be art. Crowdsourced art is about inclusiveness, turning formerly passive audiences into active creators and empowering people who aren’t normally part of the art world
The meta-narrative of globalization has brought into view many different manifestations and experiences that emphasise the “co.” How to deal with this diverse and complex phenomenon? This apparently inconsiderable prefix not only designates loopholes in canonical settings in art theory and practice, but also reveals a multitude of coexisting art notions and art practices. Collaboration and community building in the arts lead to all kinds of results, situated between physical structures, social networks, and ephemeral events. We can say that a crowdsourcing system enlists a crowd of users to explicitly collaborate to build a long-lasting artifact that is beneficial to the whole community.
Can collaboration over art reveal the inherent similarities between cultures and people? People all over the world are dealing with the same things, just in different ways.How to recruit and retain users? What contributions can users make? How to combine user contributions to solve the target problem? How to evaluate users and their contributions?
Collaborative art is not an entirely new concept but has become easier than ever with the advent of digital technologyCollaborative art emerged in the late 1950s and presented a radical paradigm shift from the artist as creator and fully separate from the audience, with the output of his creation to be displayed in museums and galleries, to a form of art more integrated into the public space and with participation from citizens in its creation.An offshoot of social practice, crowdsourced art has roots in the communal idealism of the late 1950s and ’60s, when Fluxus artists such as Allan Kaprow started staging Happenings and other interactive performances with the public. Fluxus member Yoko Ono was (and still is) a major progenitor of collaborating with the crowd. While those works were participatory, they weren’t exactly crowdsourced.
The visual arts in Western contexts seem to be an exceptional case even though medieval European artists worked in collectives such as the “Bauhütte” (masons‘ lodge) and guilds, without (claiming) any individual authorship.Creating a social sphere through art became pivotal in Joseph Beuys‘s concept and practice of “social sculpture” (soziale Plastik). Beuys‘s work is a popular source of building a community through art and of regaining social and political power for the arts.
Net art emerged in the 1990s when artists found that the internet was a useful tool to promote their art uninhibited by political, social or cultural constraints.Over the past decade, numerous such systems have appeared on the World-Wide Web. Prime examples include Wikipedia, Linux, Yahoo! Answers, Mechanical Turk-based systems, and much effort is being directed toward developing many more. Even the word crowdsource, coined by Jeff Howe in Wired magazine in 2006, has techy origins
This crowd-sourced creativity online is putting a new twist on traditional ideas of artistic ownership, online communication and art production. Computer-mediated collaboration has become an important issue due to several trends that change how we go about organizational and academic work. The increased use of computer media for daily communication leads to more online activity even with local colleagues. Communication via computer media is also complemented by multiple forms of data repository, including databases, digital libraries, and information stored and disseminated via the web.
Moreover, it might just be the quintessential art form for our hyper-engaged era of social media and smart app Our access to the Internet, knowledge-networks and each other is increasing at an astonishing rate. We’re connected through our cell phones, computers, cars & soon-to-be watches. We’re all at the same party and have reached a tipping point of online connectivity. In fact, 2.4 Billion People use the Internet everyday.( Hyperconnectivity)
Because crowdsourced art can require huge numbers of people, Internet artists have become some of its most prolific practitioners Both the algorithmic nature of the Internet and its potential to amass distant collaborators allow artists to execute very big ideas. Using Instagram and Twitter, Ono has collected photos of smiling faces from every continent except Antarctica for her ongoing #smilesfilm campaign. It’s good to remember that the internet can be used for collaborative projects beyond just Wikipedia or flash mobs.
In crowdsourced art, viewers are also often the makers: clearly the value for those actually involved in the making is increased through enhanced meaning attributed to the piece. In many works, audience is used as raw material, we need an audience to see and react to the given work, we need their reactions for the work to exist,” the Mattes said. “Duchamp once said, ‘It is the viewer who makes the work,’ and we took that very literally.We have seeked to analyze projects wherein audiences become artists by participating in the creation of a piece of art by making one or more creative contributions. The labor isn’t always free, but it costs a lot less than paying traditional employees. It’s not outsourcing; it’s crowdsourcing.
There are three distinct roles in crowdsourced digital art projects:
Project Initiator: The artist, group, or institution that creates the process and defines the product.
Participant: An individual that makes an intentional contribution to a crowdsourced digital art process.
Audience: An individual that observes a crowdsourced digital art process, or observes or engages with a project’s product.
Contributor: A participant that makes an intentional digital contribution to a crowdsourced digital art process as defined by the processes system or structure established by the project initiator. The most basic and foundational building block of crowd-sourced digital art projects.
Everyone who participates in a crowdsourced project should take this common roles:
Collective Responsibility: Internet participants share a responsibility towards the system as a whole.
Evolution and Consensus: Effective security relies on agile evolutionary steps based on the expertise of a broad set of stakeholders.
Think Globally, Act Locally: It is through voluntary bottom-up self-organization that the most impactful solutions are likely to reached.
When a collaborative visual project is created, it generates a complex network of users/creators/contributors who will become an active and fundamental part of it. All this complex interconnected world that is created has different morphologies depending on the specific characteristics of the network that is generated around it. In order to determine the qualities of this set of links it is important to attend to three fundamental aspects represented by the concepts of centralization, agency and synergy.
First the centralization scale determines who is going to select or modify the contributions or which filters are they going to overtake. We understand that a collaborative network is more centralized the more manipulation are allowed. Second, the agency level determines which are the rules imposed to the users, this concept is directly related to the freedom that a certain user has when making his contribution. A collaborative network acquires its highest point in the agency scale when stricter rules are imposed. Finally, we will analyze the interaction and communication between users. The networks generated when starting a collaborative project, can be tremendously extensive and the level of interaction among the users that compose it can be very diversed. This level of communication will determine the nature of the links that will be created and therefore the position of a certain collaborative network on the synergy scale.
LET’S DRAW A NETWORK
You can participate in this collective drawing experiment if you consider yourself a node of the Xpub Federated Network and you have at least one link or connection with some different node of the Federation.
QUICK, DRAW A NETWORK!
Contributions are selected by the project iniciator who collect and evaluate them.
QUICK, DRAW A NETWORK!
LET`S DRAW A NETWORK
(2mins) You have two minutes to draw your node / your server / yourself (use a black marker) in the paper that you chose.
Put all the pieces of paper together following the numbered mapping structure.
(10mins) You have 10 minutes to draw the links or connections that you have with the rest of the nodes/servers in your Network. The links can be drawn or described whatever you want so feel free to use any type of marker or color that you consider to express different levels of strength or character.
QUICK, DRAW A NETWORK
The contributors don’t have contact with the other contributors when they are drawing their concepts.
LET’S DRAW A NETWORK
The drawing-based experiments with the XPUB community allow us to have a physical approach to the different elements that compose a collaborative network. In the first of these experiments, Quick, draw a Network each contributor will draw 5 concepts related to internet and netwoks. This topic is well-known and has been studied by the group in recent months. Through these quick drawings we will analyze the intuitive visualization of the users.
Quick, draw a Network has a medium-high level of centralization since all contributions go through the curator, who selects, collects and composes all of them to be shown together. The level of agency is low because of the task definition is strictly provided (the format and style is pre-established). Finally, the level of synergy is low, despite being the users in the same space, the interaction between them was not allowed so they didn’t have knowledge about other contributions.
Observing the results of Quick, draw a Network, we see that despite the predefinition of style and task, the results have a wide ranging appearance. The largest point of parallelism is found in the densities that are represented in the drawings. A link, in a much simpler element than a community. A user is characterized by his individuality in all his drawings but his nature is diffuse. We can also observe that the broader is the concept, the more problems it supposes for the quick visual representation, creating confusion that even generates question marks among the participants. Collective experiments have an important richness because of its mass knowledge in which tendencies and repetitions can be study. This global vision allows us to have a peer to peer knowledge which represents a reflection of the community that has participated in a centain initiative.
You have an A4 piece of paper and a black marker. You have to develop a fast drawing trying to visualise the following concepts: LINK, USER, COMMUNITY, NETWORK and INTERNET
The second experiment, Let’s draw a Network had as its objective the visualization of the XPUB network. It has a lower level of centralization, since no contribution is evaluated or eliminated, but the group as a whole decides if the drawing that is being developed is appropriate. The level of agency is higher since the result is highly unexpected and, especially in the second part of the experiment, the set of users are the ones who establishes the rules. The level of synergy is the highest of the scale, since the interaction between the users is complete. Being in the same space and being allowed all forms of communication.
Therefore observing the results of Let’s draw a Network we see that the richness of the final piece is much higher when the users have a full interaction between them since the ideas are launched and taken and improved by others. In this way, without having an established style, a highly uniform result was obtained since the group ends up defining its own rules to have an easy and common reading.