transcript

Can you please introduce yourself, your full name, pronouns, and what you do?

I’m Lewis, he/him, and I'm a student here at the School of Art, doing Fine Art.

Nice. Do you define yourself as a fine artist?

Erm, just an artist.

Just an artist? Yeah, fair enough. What does your work involve? Like, what are you interested in?

So I'm really interested in technology, time-based media, sort of programming - at the moment, I'm trying to work on a volumetric camera that I can program and take this data and change it. I'm also into live coding visuals, so that's sort of my performance at the moment. Yeah. I collaborate with a couple of artists I know. A guitarist and a drummer, but we’re sort of expanding that project a little bit. And that's about the main things I do at the moment.

If you had to describe that to an alien that has no idea what any of those things are, haha, are you able to do that?

Yeah, I make pretty images projected on the wall and they react to the audio, that the computer’s hearing.

Do you feel like digital art or digital media is - obviously it's kind of a product of these technological advancements - do you feel like it's being impacted by any kind of recent changes?

Yeah, definitely. I think we're always advancing technology. I think the open-source movement has been really cool. It’s put a lot of power in people’s hands and obviously with AI and stuff, people using Chat-GPT- chat-bots and image generators, has really changed what people could do. Yeah. I've found that - I'm a beginner coder, but if I know what I want to do, then I could talk to a chat-bot and yeah, I can get that code back. It’s sort of, just out of my ability, but I'm able to realise it.

You mentioned open source, do you feel like that's something that’s important to you?

Yeah, definitely, because I think it's motivated me to sort of learn more, and also share what I've learned as well, and share tools that maybe could be monetised, but it should be free to use.

In your experience, how is artificial intelligence specifically, interacting with the sort of areas that you're that you're in?

Within the arts, I think there's been a lot of fuss about image generators, yeah. And a lot of fear as well that it's taking jobs, or things can get done just through an AI, which I think is a valid concern to maybe photographers, and some artists as well. Yeah, but I think in terms of real impact, yeah, I'd say that photographers think they are going to be properly replaced by people who can use AI. However, the skills are transferable, if you could describe a really good photograph to down to the focal length, and if you have an image in your mind that you can realise with the camera, then you can probably tell an AI to generate that image for you: as a photograph. So yeah, I think there is valid concern.

Do you think a lot of that fear is rooted in a lack of autonomy or ownership, or intellectual property over their work?

Yeah, I don't think work is directly being stolen, because I think that these- I talked about these sorts of laws that make research online really accessible, finding files and finding photography or images. So, these laws that have made it really easy for researchers to use all these images, have also sort of paved the way for these image generators. So I think a lot of people are concerned that their art is within these models, and it's somehow being stolen, but I think I think it's just a drop in the ocean of what really is in these models, yeah.

I think it comes in two parts, its fear that your work is being used without consent, compensation or accreditation-

Yeah.

And a fear that maybe this thing could do it more efficiently than an artist. And then the next conversation is obviously, well what happens to our jobs, what happens to our income?

And I think that is making up a huge part of the fear, and overwhelm, and anxiousness around it.

But I think a lot of people are also frightened, perhaps due to the kind of media they’ve consumed growing up, about the potentially dystopian future of developed artificial intelligence software. And what that could mean in the long term, rather than the short term fear of losing jobs, or not being able to adapt, or not being able to transfer certain skills. Which is a completely valid problem, like you said, it is an issue. And in a way, we're kind of lucky that we can see that and talk about that.

But I had a conversation a couple of weeks ago, about the potential of losing a sense of creativity as a species, losing a sense of motivation, ecause we have something that can automate what we have previously defined as creative process. How do you feel like that- It's a very broad question and I'm asking you to hypothesise a little bit - but in the future, do you see it as a scary negative thing?

Erm, No. No. I feel like, personally my progression using technology, I will only be able to control it better, that's my optimistic outlook on things. And as an artist, yeah I've experimented with using AI so far, but it's not something that I completely like A) rely on, or B) am constantly enamored by. You know, I'm not using it all the time. So no. I don't think I'm going to lose my creativity. I don't really- I've seen people's opinions online about the fear that they feel, and I just can't empathise really, I just don't really get.

Yeah, I understand that. Do you think- coming along with that conversation is - how are we now defining what art is?

Well, in art school, you know we're - art constantly, it’s like the universe, its constantly expanding and like you know, I've been to exhibitions where you just don't recognize the art as art. You literally don't see it.

So I think within the digital media thing, I think people within the art world, are coming along now. There's definitely kind of a ‘digital art camp’, where there’s Internet art and digital painting, and whatever, and then there is the more traditional art world. These worlds have sort of butted heads, especially during early Internet art and Internet art groups invited to these places, these openings, like the Whitney opening and selling the tickets online. And I think now, we are beginning to understand that, you know, digital media, whatever form it takes, whether it's these AI generators, they can all be part of the process of making art. I think especially during my time here, I've realized that people are actually more accepting than I thought. So yeah, I think these ideas are sort of similar.

I think it's a conversation that will never end, about “what is art? What even is it?”

And actually there's been plenty of artworks that have just been prompted to make artwork, way before- not before computers, but during this era of like the 60s. Computers sort of becoming artmaking tools, and these art prompts that were just like ‘go do this’, and that's all you're telling the computer to do now. It's just you're using a really experimental form of intelligence. The thing that we should understand is that it is really not perfect at all yet, and we're essentially like experimenting with a computer that can- it's ‘computer vision’ hacked backwards, so instead of the computer being able to identify things using a camera, it's sort of running that algorithm backwards and seeing what it thinks these things are. And that is always a reflection of us as well. That technology is always a reflection of us, as well as these data models. And actually by sort of engaging with these data types, and seeing what you can prompt from it, you can actually get a really good idea of what the data is. So I've used chat bots as like a litmus test for what is on the Internet. So if I'm trying to find some like weird, if there's some hard information to find that will involve me going through like 10 pages of the search, I'll just ask the chat bot and if it doesn't have that information, I can be pretty confident that it's not there. But then you can also like use that idea of the litmus test on the images on certain models and stuff, you know? And yeah, when you - to lower the tone a bit - like when you might type in ‘refugee’, if you see overwhelmingly black faces, then clearly that represents a social bias. And that's something that I've looked at and they all come up with things that are quite stereotypical in in the Western mind.

I’ve had a lot of conversations with different people, who see it as an ‘other’; this ideas of artificial intelligence being ‘something’, or being someone. Which firstly feels a little bit misinformed, but secondly, I think it's fueled by a lot of news articles or the kind of information that we're getting about it. This idea that we're threatened by something that can only ever be a reflection of humanity.

Yeah.

But you're very much right in what you're saying, it has a lot of, you know, ethical biases and social leanings. And that is a huge problem, and will continue to be a huge problem, for probably a long time, maybe forever.

You spoke very, very briefly about Internet art. I wanted to touch on- Internet art, I feel like my experience of it, or my research on it, it feels very… transgressive, in a way.

Yeah.

And I think a lot of people who are in a more traditional art scene, like you were saying, perhaps might have a certain perception of it. What's your experience with that, kind of being in that world?

Yeah, my research of Internet art, I kind of split the ideas of, like, early Internet Netscape art. And I didn't really experience that in my lifetime, really, because it was it sort of a bit before my time. But I've always sort of admired the hacking culture of, you know, trying to find new ways of looking at these files and data and stuff. But I just, I really like the community online. You can share ideas about artmaking with people, a niche community that is spread across a network, that it's always accessible. So, yeah, I really like that.

Is it something that draws you to it, that kind of collaboration, and that collectivism?

Yeah.

Is that something that you see- I don't want to draw too many parallels between Internet art and artificial intelligence because they are not the same thing. But I do think there are conversations to be had there.

Well, yeah. You say- that reminds me that it's sort of the collective artists versus the myth of the individual genius. I think when you sort of engage with technology, you have to accept that whatever you are building, is built on everybody else. And to draw parallels to AI, when you're using these things, you're building on a history of photography. Like, quite literally, there's images from a hundred years, two hundred years, in this model. And when you prompt these things, you're using all of it. So yeah. You have to accept the fact that you're not making something original. Whether you make it with AI, whether you make a program, even like photography or whatever. Sure, you kind of come closer to the “aura” of the artwork when you’re making analog photography, or you're doing a painting. But, that that aura - this this sort of aura is kind of lost until we start talking about NFTs again when that aura sort of rears its head again.

It it's so complex, I think it's almost kind of freeing, from our “common artist’s” perspective to understand that originality is a myth, and you can be authentic without being original. And I think that, like you were saying, does bring up a huge conversation with artificial intelligence, this idea that it it's building on so much data and this idea that creativity is innately linked to that “aura”, or to that originality. When, in my experience anyway, that's just not true.

Yeah.

And this machine can conduct creative process, but are we valuing that as art, based on whether it has that aura or not? But, like you were saying, that applies to so many- to every piece of art ever made, whatever that be, or every process. It's not that black and white, it's not easy to define. It feels I think in the Internet art, and related subcultures, that it is very punk, like that idea of collectivism I think is innately linked as well.

Yeah.

And it leads me to ask about using artificial intelligence, or just similar technology, or similar software, as a collaborative tool. Again, back to kind of open-source software. The idea that collaboration and collectivism is what can lead the upcoming technological advancements. Do you think that is important and do you think it is realistic?

Yeah, I think it's important and realistic.

That’s nice!

I think like going back to the open source, these ideas, if a small group of people want to do it and they have the skills, or at least the means to learn how to do it, or the time to experiment and learn how to do it, then I think it will get done. I don't think it costs money all the time, although a little bit of some donations by people who might not have the means to give their skills, maybe they have a little bit of money to make sure that they have what these people, this team, hypothetically, have what they need, to get done. But I'm just thinking about platforms I use. So with my live coding, I use a platform called ‘Hydra’, which is by somebody called Olivia Jack, who developed this JavaScript-based platform, and it's just in development. It's released - not perfect because it's free, but it's at a really good level. However, it's limited only by what people can do with it. So they can add on extensions to it, and this is all done just through the use of coding, all the tools are there. And all they need to do is code an extension, put it onto a site like GitHub, and then they can pull that off Internet and use it on this on this app, its already there. Yeah, that's it. So that didn't cost anyone any money, it cost people time, but it was just the motivation. Someone had made something that they could make additions to, and then these people could become the people that make another platform from the skills they've got from helping with the project. So I think, yeah, it just builds up from there.

I’ve had a lot of conversations with different people, who see it as an ‘other’; this ideas of artificial intelligence being ‘something’, or being someone. Which firstly feels a little bit misinformed, but secondly, I think it's fueled by a lot of news articles or the kind of information that we're getting about it. This idea that we're threatened by something that can only ever be a reflection of humanity.

Yeah.

But you're very much right in what you're saying, it has a lot of, you know, ethical biases and social leanings. And that is a huge problem, and will continue to be a huge problem, for probably a long time, maybe forever.

You spoke very, very briefly about Internet art. I wanted to touch on- Internet art, I feel like my experience of it, or my research on it, it feels very… transgressive, in a way.

Yeah.

And I think a lot of people who are in a more traditional art scene, like you were saying, perhaps might have a certain perception of it. What's your experience with that, kind of being in that world?

Yeah, my research of Internet art, I kind of split the ideas of, like, early Internet Netscape art. And I didn't really experience that in my lifetime, really, because it was it sort of a bit before my time. But I've always sort of admired the hacking culture of, you know, trying to find new ways of looking at these files and data and stuff. But I just, I really like the community online. You can share ideas about artmaking with people, a niche community that is spread across a network, that it's always accessible. So, yeah, I really like that.

Is it something that draws you to it, that kind of collaboration, and that collectivism?

Yeah.

Is that something that you see- I don't want to draw too many parallels between Internet art and artificial intelligence because they are not the same thing. But I do think there are conversations to be had there.

Well, yeah. You say- that reminds me that it's sort of the collective artists versus the myth of the individual genius. I think when you sort of engage with technology, you have to accept that whatever you are building, is built on everybody else. And to draw parallels to AI, when you're using these things, you're building on a history of photography. Like, quite literally, there's images from a hundred years, two hundred years, in this model. And when you prompt these things, you're using all of it. So yeah. You have to accept the fact that you're not making something original. Whether you make it with AI, whether you make a program, even like photography or whatever. Sure, you kind of come closer to the “aura” of the artwork when you’re making analog photography, or you're doing a painting. But, that that aura - this this sort of aura is kind of lost until we start talking about NFTs again when that aura sort of rears its head again.

It it's so complex, I think it's almost kind of freeing, from our “common artist’s” perspective to understand that originality is a myth, and you can be authentic without being original. And I think that, like you were saying, does bring up a huge conversation with artificial intelligence, this idea that it it's building on so much data and this idea that creativity is innately linked to that “aura”, or to that originality. When, in my experience anyway, that's just not true.

Yeah.

And this machine can conduct creative process, but are we valuing that as art, based on whether it has that aura or not? But, like you were saying, that applies to so many- to every piece of art ever made, whatever that be, or every process. It's not that black and white, it's not easy to define. It feels I think in the Internet art, and related subcultures, that it is very punk, like that idea of collectivism I think is innately linked as well.

Yeah.

And it leads me to ask about using artificial intelligence, or just similar technology, or similar software, as a collaborative tool. Again, back to kind of open-source software. The idea that collaboration and collectivism is what can lead the upcoming technological advancements. Do you think that is important and do you think it is realistic?

Yeah, I think it's important and realistic.

That’s nice!

I think like going back to the open source, these ideas, if a small group of people want to do it and they have the skills, or at least the means to learn how to do it, or the time to experiment and learn how to do it, then I think it will get done. I don't think it costs money all the time, although a little bit of some donations by people who might not have the means to give their skills, maybe they have a little bit of money to make sure that they have what these people, this team, hypothetically, have what they need, to get done. But I'm just thinking about platforms I use. So with my live coding, I use a platform called ‘Hydra’, which is by somebody called Olivia Jack, who developed this JavaScript-based platform, and it's just in development. It's released - not perfect because it's free, but it's at a really good level. However, it's limited only by what people can do with it. So they can add on extensions to it, and this is all done just through the use of coding, all the tools are there. And all they need to do is code an extension, put it onto a site like GitHub, and then they can pull that off Internet and use it on this on this app, its already there. Yeah, that's it. So that didn't cost anyone any money, it cost people time, but it was just the motivation. Someone had made something that they could make additions to, and then these people could become the people that make another platform from the skills they've got from helping with the project. So I think, yeah, it just builds up from there.

I think artists specifically, or other industry professionals feel like they have a lack of power and autonomy in the conversations in the development of it. So a lot of people are very much in the dark about what this development can mean, and hear a lot of misinformation about it.

I think the thing that excites me is it could break down, sort of, systems. Like if somebody has- say there's a 30-year-old person who's been learning to code, they've become a developer, and then they're fired at the advent of this new technology, then that's not great for an economy, is it? Like if like the middle-class skilled workers are sort of losing their jobs to machinery, it's sort of pushing a sort of tension, you know, that's been happening for a long time with capitalism. Where people are just like, well, if I can't make money and there's people making an obscene amount of money right now, and we're all struggling, then surely there's got to be a push for change. And this capitalist mode, isn't working anymore. Which is scary but exciting at the same time, I think. But my concern is, is the same concern before AI, that the world doesn't have equal access to the Internet, and therefore they don't have equal access to knowledge, skills, power, through this. And that's really sad. It’s not really on, basically. And I think there should be some sort of like consensus globally, that we should be having the world up-to-date and accessing new technology. Not even new tech, just the Internet! Just the Internet. Without a company coming along and monopolizing that access like Meta are doing, all over the place, because they're not responsible, and it's not fair. And the access is too limited to basic messaging services, and they're reaping all this data. So, the concern for me is this fear of AI that creatives ,and artists and whoever, like, middle class professionals have in this country; is like, well, you got to understand that, you know, you've come to where you're at, through the use of the Internet, and other people in the world haven't had that privilege. And now you're getting angry about it. Well, there's been people that haven't had access to- and you have access to this AI thing! So you can use it, you know, so, just use it! Just use it and think about the ways that other people- you know, it's a privilege for you to use it, and not so much for other people, nd try and do something about that. Think of a way of saying, well, maybe these should be our concerns.

Yeah, I think as well as that, you touched on it, it's a continuation of a problem that has existed for a long time, and a problem that has existed for lots of other people, on lots of other platforms. The concerns that people have about AI are the concerns that other people, and other groups of people, have held for a very long time. And have been shouting about for a very long time to very little response, or like you say, a response of monopolization of a platform.

“OK, well, we'll provide you a service. We will provide you a suite of messaging, e-mail, Internet access - ‘link(!)’ - and we will give that to you for free. And you will use our free basics, but we will take your data, we will get to see everything you do, and we'll use that data for our own means. But hey, you get all this (!), and you know, we'll show you it in the terms and conditions that no-one’s going to read”.

Yeah “we’re a transparent company” (!)

Yeah, but it feels as if we can't really escape these, there's been sort of pushes to escape these monopolies, like Instagram, but it seems like actually we can’t, in the world we’re living in. There's no real push to get off these platforms, and just find an alternative way of communicating to each other.

Yeah, yeah, that's true. And if that was to happen, do you think that would be through legislation, or…?

[shaking head]

No?

Historically, like, legislators have been throwing fines at big companies like Meta, and it bounces off basically because they see it as a cost of doing business. So no, it's not going to happen through legislation. It's going to happen by people actually saying, well, do you really agree with this? Just because everybody uses these platforms to share images and communicate, should we? Or should we go through the effort of finding out alternative means of communicating? Because we're just funding monopoly, and they know what we're doing all the time, and who knows what this information is used for? We know that they don't really act ethically. So it's collective action that will power change really.

Yes, I agree.

Or bigger fines.

Yeah. Yeah, I agree. I don't want to make it sound like artificial intelligence is this incredible solution to a problem that's been here for most of our existence. Because it’s not, and that’s unfair to say that it could be, and just disrespectful, I think. But as a tool, do you think – I think we touched on it earlier – do you think that it could have an effect on dismantling these kinds of systems?

Yeah, I do think so. Like the way, I mean, I think that am basically bypassing, you know, learning more about coding, or hiring somebody to help me, by using these tools. And I don't mean to like try and be the exception to the rule, but I think if you have a creative idea that you think that you could realize through coding, through, say, you have an algorithm in your head like do a maths problem and you want to use a chat-bot to try and realize it, I think you should. I think yeah, it's definitely the most disruptive tool we've, kind of, come across. Yeah. I think it puts more power into the into the hands of the individual, for sure. And I think there's a phrase that I want to use… A rising tide lifts all boats. It's that idea that - I mean this says it’s about the economy – but the way I'm thinking about it, is if we all have more access to these tools, then we all benefit. That's my sort of optimistic idea really.

Do you think that conversations that happen between artists, at the moment around intellectual property, or AI exhibiting social biases and leanings -not that they're not important, they are very important conversations to be having - do you feel like some of those are potentially trivial in comparison to conversations that could be happening around dismantling larger economic systems, or political and social systems?

Yeah, I think, I think- Erm, yeah, I don't know. It's quite a dangerous conversation to have, isn’t it? So, it's probably not the sort of thing that happens in front of the camera. I don't know, I haven't really heard these conversations. But something springs to mind that like mentioning NFT’s, I saw a little blog post by Steve Shapiro and it was his take on NFTS. And the one thing that he found really interesting was the fact that- coming back to this aura of the unique art object, this aura is now completely separated from the accessibility of the art object, or whatever it is. Because, you know, just because you sell an NFT, doesn't mean that the fact that it's infinitely reproducible, it doesn't mean it's like devalued by that. So he was saying that, for example, if you're an author and you want to sell books, but you also want as many people to read it as possible. So how do you go about that? Well, at the moment, before NFT's, you would have to sell a physical copy of a book, and also try to stop people from copying that book and sharing it online. However, if you're an author that wants to release NFT books, then maybe you give away that book for free. There's a digital file, anyone that wants to read it could read it. But you also sell NFTs of that book, so that you have a little reader base that already knows you, or they want a bit of clout, or they're a collector of some sort, and they see value in this thing that is sort of unique. But also, that definition of unique is now like sort of broken and it doesn’t really work. So, I think, yeah, I think that that is something that's really changed about the way that we value art, and value digital stuff now.

You're saying it can change, not change, but it can appeal to a creator, what a creator values – whether they value that sharing of their work, in comparison to how much they value monetary gain. Not that either it's necessarily negative. Yeah, that’s interesting.

How are you using artificial intelligence? Sorry, to bring it back to, kind of, the practical-

So one thing is, I did a work placement recently, and I was just a technician basically putting paintings up on the wall. And we have to do this little algorithm where you get the eye level, you measure half the painting, you measure up the wall to the eye level, and then you mark it and measure down, and then you mark it, and then you put the painting up. And trying to talk out, especially when you're working with another person, to try and work things out, or use your mind, or just use the calculator when you haven’t got your hands free. I figured that there was an algorithm you could do, where you get the eye level and you take away half the painting, and then you just want to put the painting at the bottom of that, like flat to the bottom. So I went home and I thought, well, the algorithm is like: eye level, minus half the height of painting, and then that gives you a mark to put it on. But I didn't really know how to code it, but I thought to myself well, what you could make it a website, just have that little script as something that you can put data in, and it’ll come back to you, with one click, rather than doing the same calculation over and over again. So, I used Chat-GPT to give me the HTML code, at first it gave me some Python code.

You sound disappointed haha.

Yeah, well yeah, this is it, it is a bit disappointing sometimes because if you have literally no idea what you're doing, actually you probably won't get as far as you want with it. But if you have a better idea of what you want to do, then you can use it to just realize that idea really quickly and get it to type it out for you.

Yes.

So that's what I did. I made this little online calculator, and it's just a basic project. I think you need to go through – one of my main takeaways, is that you need to go through these iterations of having a conversation with it because it will try and quickly come back with an answer for you. But using a Python code meant I had to make some sort of app which would’ve got like really complicated, but if I didn't have that idea in my head of like, I'd have to make a website to do this, because it would be easy to access for everyone, then it wouldn't have given me that. So I had to come back to it and be like ‘well wouldn't it be easier to just use the website?’ Yeah, you sort of have to goad it in the right direction. It will give you quite basic answers sometimes.

So yeah, I've also used AI to generate point clouds. So this has been one more sort of iteration of generating images, I've used an AI to generate images, but then there's another program that works on top of this system to create 3D objects with AI. And I always think the reason why I'm fascinated by it, like a lot of other people, is just how it is so mysterious. Like a lot of people don't really know how it's really cognizing these images. So it can come back with really abstract results.

Before that, I recently did an installation where I sort of created a fake archive, in response to a local exhibition at the Ikon called ‘Horror in the Modernist Block’. And I had the idea of at first of creating like fake architecture visualization mockups that you tend to see on like the hoarding of building sites, where it's lots of people walking, chatting, enjoying a coffee, everyone’s having a nice time. And that sort of developed into- I just messed around on AI for ages, trying to get images to make photo montage out of, but it sort of developed into this one prompt which was like council tenants outside their block, and it became this sort of like, fake photography of groups of people outside their council blocks. And I find that AI is very good at making sort of patterns of like tiled images. So the way that council buildings look: there's windows, doors, and balconies, and everything is quite modular and square. It's quite good at doing that. And then it can become kind of trippy when you start to look at it. See that these seams and these edges are sort of like a bit warped. But the quality of the images was really good to be honest. Even though I was using quite a basic process, in reality, they were quite low-res images. But what I then did was I printed a series of like 60 images that I'd taken from this thing, I put them onto transparency film, just like an acetate transparency, and scaled down, and then projected using overhead projectors. The quality of images looked quite realistic and I think reflecting on it, I probably should have given people a bit more information about what I was doing. I kind of wanted to let people sort of like discover it for themselves that these images weren't quite right. The inspiration for that project, I'm living in an ex-council flat and these modernist blocks, so it's just taking inspiration these council flats and the lives that go on in there.

I also sort of like developed little ‘glitch process’ when I was experimenting with AI. Like first thing, when I just first discovered it. I was using like Google Colab documents. It seems like the only place you could really get to it a little while ago. There was no like Stability Diffusion playground and stuff, but it's a bit more malleable and you can see the process that it's going through, see the script.

Haha, if it works.

If it works, yeah, haha. But just changing- I came up with a little series of- I was looking for like creepy images on the Internet, like creepypasta images, cursed images. And then I was taking these images through the process of using the image as a prompt but going through one iteration of this GAN network. And it would just glitch it slightly, so, it came out even a bit more f****d up than it was. So yeah, it's just about like- I liked using that because you weren't just giving it a prompt, you could like actually control a little- the settings a little bit, and make it sort of unique, and have that creative idea yourself.

Yeah. Nice.

Yeah. That’s sort of my AI experience.

Brill, do you want to promote anything? Any of the work that you're doing? It doesn't have to be related to the project, any platforms, any places and events?

No, just keep an eye out. If you see me, say hello.

Yeah, I'm sort of doing VJing at the moment. I'm going to be, sort of, developing my project with my friends Luke and Ryan, and we're sort of promoting this preliminary project right now, where we're just creating like an audio-visual experience, sort of like a band but more of an art group, collective-

An experience.

Exactly, yeah. So just keep an eye out for that please, that would be cool. Yeah, I've got a lot of sort of rubbish documentation online that's a bit rough around the edges. But in the next few weeks, I think we're going to get something together that's a bit more like of a nice-looking quality, polish it up. So, yeah, I've just started promoting stuff, like other people’s events on there [Instagram], so I'm lrowen_97. Yeah.

Awesome. Cool. That's it.