Welcome to Etherbox!
This pad text is synchronized as you type, so that everyone viewing this page sees the same text. Add __NOPUBLISH__ to prevent this pad from being archived.
this is the pad for the "Do not share photographs or recordings on proprietary social networks unless explicit consent."
Guidelines in progress, temporary stable version (untill january 2020)
Collecting questions bugs remarks improvements .... :
Some bug in the Orientations:
All images on constant gallery are FAL
anyone can do anything with a picture, as long as you credit the maker of the image.
Question: is this the right/useful license for Constant images?
The orientations are also a wishlist... we don't want people to share pictures on FB etc. But FAL explicitly gives you the right to do that.
The contradiction is noted and even perhaps 'on purpose'
'Do not share' ... it is also somehow contradictory with the practice to work promiscuously with materials / maximalist traditions within Constant constellations.
documentation through visual materials
'signalling to potential recorders'
vs. 'making pictures'
to be visually active
temporality of consent. It happens before or after.
Pictures where taken, after it became clear we needed to signal consent. So there was a different
how to not erase saying 'no'
having devices in the space to mask
How to do visuality in surveillance time
Do we think about metadata in the files?
There is a difference when you work with local groups, other than working with groups in networks. Non-fluffy boundaries.
Changing habits. Indymedia not (very) active anymore in Brussels.
However it has a long history in argentina and alike (and perhaps still active there!):
Indymedia proposes to blur faces. It is also a visual clue that a person is suspicous.
Feminicide in Argentina -- blurring faces of violators, not victims.
Who gets blurred? What does it mean to be blurred? These decisions are often gendered.
'the author of the crime'
violent media treatment
how to combine visual pleasure ...
Adding a Creative Commons non-commercial license is not the solution?
Sometimes "crediting the author" is not the solution or not the intended effect.
Who is the author? there may be a collective authorship, and who is the author in the end: the photographer? the post-processor? the collective that appears/intervenes the picture?
what are the reasons people do not want to be on/in a picture?
Martin: has already assumed the idea that our data is around. By exposing data I am allowed to use the services.
Andreas: It can have an effect later on: data dat seems useless now (at school, in a demonstration), can be valuable later (when you finally become famous, or get a public position, or vulnerable otherwise)
To not feed the individual/hero cultus.
contexts that are sensitive.
Picture = exposure
To be pictured
but pictures can also be political support, declare your affiliation
escalation, in social situations
e.g., showing support to the Delices Afgans a domicile project; showing support to Lula Livre
Gathering remarks for the Constant Orientations for collaboration
discrimination based on technologies:
what i sthe problem with the structures (fb, pomme,) and how t-o or not relate this to the use of apps, un.st-a(ble)gram
concern about excif mlettaat laocation,
By making this explicit we allow ourselves to reflect on those moments of pictures making.
At the same time, this may break the flow of the activity itself, or put some people under social pressure (being/not being) in the picture; or go against the documentation of a particularactivity which may be desired/useful for other purposes (e.g., the funding of a research project of one of the participants).
what abpout the importance of the moment:
being able to decide in the moment
there can be social pressure, slippage can go really fast
should you make a policy fro everyone in the space ?
A: showing tthat you are supporting collectivity, maybe a license should specify the purpose of collectivity
I would be happy with al icense that anonymises but allows for declaring sioidarity.
metadate is maybe sensitive, face can also be an issue or buildings in background, but body in gourp in space is necessary to show.
License / Individual protocol with variations which can be specified:
Yes [ ] No [ ] - Okay with EXIF data
Yes [ ] No [ ] - Okay with showing my face
Yes [ ] No [ ] - Okay with showing my presence (to strengthen collectivity, be solidaric)
Yes [ ] No [ ] - Okay with sharing on commercial platforms
Yes [ ] No [ ] - Taking pictures on devices which filter / process / enhance them automatically (phones with AI chips and image processing pipelines)
Use an online upload tool (like an image minifier) which automatically (in batch) removes Metadata and faces of all pictures (puts funny politicans on them instead)
not waste energy on proprietary tools
often in public situations, lectures, presence in documentation acce
is part of the work, Asks for open content license to be put on the documentation.
against the dominant regime of visibilty of the platforms
proof that is important
we can do other types of practices. it is not true that you need to be on these commercial networks.
emphasizing the NOT means you stop doing things
we should not give up on pictures.
M: maybe iot helps to emphasize the positive:
what we want to do, what do we want that happens with the people that are in the pictures;
maybe we should retrain how to do pictures and images,
maybe our picture-making is in another era, and we should update picture practices
sometimes you need to say no
-- e.g., the post natyam collective Manifesto:
Yes to saying no: It is
Yes to pictures, because it is important that bodies appear in the context, but also yes to the idea that commercial platforms are not (the best) or the only way to distirbute them.
Yes! we can be artists without Instagram :-)
... affirm independent platforms ... ?
images is politics
actors and moments.
changing your mind
I want this to be anonymous, but my body/presence can be there.
Easy is maybe not the best starting point: gymnastics is also not easy
Imagine image gymnastic
3 days / 3 exercises
Define a Pipeline: first pre-process all the pictures as the default thing, then ... (to be defined)
Pipeline with consent form
produce new images / filter / recombine
what to learn form the visual history in terms of image politics
'looking good' because of social media pressure
maybe we can do a day with 'beautiful' images
only take pictures with
* very old devices
/super low resolution/blurry images/...
image risk assesment
one day no faces
make a pipe through the