Tuesday April 19th

In Class

Reviewing Assignment 3

• • Reviewing Assignment 3 (Kevin, Jack, Iason)

  • Questions/ Challenges from Assignment 3

--Break--

Introduction to GCode as Design Space

• GCode and CAM as Design Space (slides)

• Basic GCode Generation in Grasshopper (link)

• Turtle-Art G-Code (link)

After Class

• Comment on at least two student assignments on Instructables

• Complete the reading.

• Post a slide with your reading reflections to the shared google slide deck by 6 PM Wed April 13th.

Reading

Laura Devendorf and Kimiko Ryokai. 2015. Being the Machine: Reconfiguring Agency and Control in Hybrid Fabrication. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2477–2486. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702547

AND

Ilan Moyer. 2016. Personal fabrication: from automated machines to augmented tools. XRDS 22, 3 (April 2016), 28–31. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2896905

Both Moyer and Devendorf present alternative visions for human/ CNC interactions where humans play an active role in the fabrication process, in contrast to the relatively passive role humans have when working with traditional CNC machines. Devendorf’s approach is speculative, whereas Moyer’s is driven by the practical considerations of individual or personal fabrication in contrast to industrial production. Discuss the qualities of both Moyer and Devendorf’s approaches (the ability to incorporate diverse materials, the reduction in accuracy, the requirement for manual human labor etc.) From your perspective, which of these qualities open new expressive potential for digital fabrication? Which seems undesirable? Why?