Light Tubes Install on Yellow Container

[missChief]

@elch @jonasjohansson and I have worked on prepping the LED tubes to install on the side of the yellow container permanently.

• 2m long tubes
• approx 20x
• centered on the container
• fixed with some custom designed steampunk brass 3d printed holders that we’ve painted black and tumbled for maximum badass-ery look.

One unforseen problem is that the GALLERY sign we put up a few months ago is in the way. Does anyone have an opinion on moving this, in addition to removing the plexi that is currently in the way of this install? If no one has opinions we will install later this week and use best judgement.

Cheerio! @Frihamnstorget

t_video5945302393519343450

[hugi]

Cool!

@missChief

fixed with some custom designed steampunk brass 3d printed holders that we’ve painted black and tumbled for maximum badass-ery look.

I looooove this btw!

@missChief

Does anyone have an opinion on moving this, in addition to removing the plexi that is currently in the way of this install?

Honestly, I’m not crazy about this. We have been building the story of the gallery as “The Yellow Container”. I think that’s a strong story, and I also really like the yellow patina. This proposal would make it look more circus, more burner, more maximalist. That’s not the vibe we have been going with for the gallery.

This plexi is there to cover posters advertising the exhibitions in the container. Of which there will be many in 2021!

Could we find another container wall for this? And perhaps have the yellow container lighting be a little more subtle?

I really hate to get in the way of creativity, it’s just that in this case, the creative vision of the gallery group is not aligning with the creative vision of this initiative. Can we find ways around that?

[hugi]

One alternative could be the wall of the kitchen container that’s facing the street? Since we are no longer planning to use the hatch on that side, seeing that the inner walls now cover it.

Or perhaps one of these two walls?

[missChief]

We have been building the story of the gallery as “The Yellow Container”. I think that’s a strong story

Absolutely! I don’t think there’s any intention of removing the gallery sign, just moving it to another spot on the container. It should very much be the “gallery container”

This proposal would make it look more circus, more burner, more maximalist. That’s not the vibe we have been going with for the gallery.

Not necessarily - the LEDs are programmable to whatever we like, and don’t have to be rainbow blink-tastic

This plexi is there to cover posters advertising the exhibitions in the container. Of which there will be many in 2021!

Of course! Again, not removing just moving perhaps to the front of the container

One alternative could be the wall of the kitchen container that’s facing the street?

Could work, but I think the tube install is partly to achieve lighting inside the square for when people are there, inside. One of the reasons for choosing that particular side of the yellow container is that it would be both visible from the street and for those inside.

For the second img - wasn’t there a planned mural by @Alex.Colard in the works?

[elch]

Kitchen container is out cause isolated and full with kitchen. I would put it on the red one

[hugi]

@MariaEuler, @cecilia_ulfsdotter - what do you guys think?

[MariaEuler]

I think it might be better if we can find another place fo rthe led tubes. the red container facing the square coud be good. I thought Alex was painting the caffe container?

For the yellow container, I think chances are people could also plan for nonpermanet outside fixtures with the exhibition and after the meeting with Deborah it seems more and more atractive to play witht he whole container and concept of it for experinetial exhibition concepts.

With a permanent artipice attached to the Gallery that will aumatically become part of the context of the exhibition going on at the time, even if it can be programmed to get adjusted.

[hampus]

I agree with @hugi and others about placing it in another container altogether.

One idea that hasn’t been suggested yet is to place it on the top container (red one, unless that was also what @elch meant rather than the orange one) facing either the street the street or the square. The challenge there if of course mounting on so high in a safe way without a skylift. The inside would be easier of course given the roof of the yellow container.

An interesting combo with this (if technically feasible as it relies on the sturdiness of the 3D printed mounts etc.) would be to use the tubes as a background complemented by the new Frihamnstorget sign in front of them. That way the programming of the tubes can complement the programming of the lights on the sign itself. It could also just look weird, but it’s an idea.

In general this would give the square a big upgrade in visibility given that the top container is so visible also over surrounding rooftops.

When it comes to easier places where to mount it my vote would go towards the already suggested orange container (level 2) facing either inside or outside OR the Amandus side of Beckmans (but then the current painting there will limit what programming looks good and not). Preferable with a uniformly coloured container and replace the Amandus painting with something else.

I have an idea there with the “Cafe Wall Illusion” tiled which fits nicely conceptually with the adjacent cafe and @Alex.Colard suggested eye painting there.

[jonasjohansson]

First, love the mounts! Great job @missChief

I can understand the argument of leaving the Gallery container untouched. When this idea began, there was very little work done on the Gallery, and the original intention was to bring light into the “entrance” (as it was known back then).

But, it’s not an entrance anymore. And the container has a life of its own.

My suggestion is to place it where it is left visually undisturbed, and free to be all that it wants to be. Annie has given it a lot of love, and the visual effect of all those tubes will be quite stunning, with regards/in relation to the space.

Thoughts:

It could go 360 around the red container, or be on one side, or two sides. The downside is that we can’t see the lovely mounts that were made.

If we can’t see the mounts clearly, then I think the positive compromise is that the formation of the tubes is presented in such a way that they clearly become the beacon of FT.

[hampus]

+1 Jonas! I’d also like to give @missChief and @elch massive kudos for the super nice mounts, setting an example for other installation projects at the square to draw inspiration from!

Just for the sake of clarity can we establish that we’re all talking about the same thing when saying “red container”? Given that the (IMO) orange and red containers are close enough in color for confusion.
To me when I say “red container” I mean the most red container, as in the top one (with the soil and the trees).

Are we all in agreement there or has anyone here referred to the second level container as the red container?

[missChief]

I’m not going to lie guys this is incredibly frustrating. We (@jonasjohansson @elch and I) have been working on these LED install (primarily the holders) since the middle of August. We have discussed this across many different forms of media (forum, chat, in person) and I even presented this at the townhall meeting in mid October (with no feeback/suggestions of location change etc.). Every single one of these discussions resulted in how these tubes were designed specifically for the gallery container. An extra effort was made make them look super naijs because these were supposed to eye-level and permanently part of the gallery.

This includes:

• custom STL design of these holders rather than simple rubber endcaps
• investing in brass 3D print filament which is quite $$
• a huge amount of time spent printing (since Oct), troubleshooting the printers, and removing the support
• designing and building a tumbler so that these could be polished for full “effect”

I have been responsive in putting in extra effort to get these finalized ASAP given the square’s lighting push here. In response to @NinaLindberg’s call (fbook chat) for more lights in time for the secret experience yesterday, @elch actually tried to install the tubes on Monday but postponed due to the mess/noise it would make. This forum post was started was to discuss adjusting the gallery sign, not to discuss the location of the tubes.

I am fully sympathetic to wanting to maintain the “look” of the gallery container. (The critique of LED tubes aesthetic not matching does seem a bit hypocritical given that the GALLERY sign also uses rainbow WS2811s but that’s not particularly important.) I don’t personally care where the tubes go - this isn’t an ego-thing or something. I was told that the orange container bridge over the yellow made a dark spot of the square that sorely needed light. I suggested installing Jonas’ old project, that was encouraged, and the three of us made it happen. Simple.

My frustration is that this location concern has never been previously mentioned - In the many discussions we’ve had about this over four months, if i had ever gotten a hint that there were considerations installing higher up (orange/red containers) or less prominently, I would have happily slapped some rubber endcaps on the tubes and been done with it. The extra effort on my behalf was specifically made in response to direct feedback that we should take this opportunity to give the gallery container this extra love and attention.

This is a sore spot as I am experiencing a similar pattern with the dome column design. A project is started -> others are consulted and a concept is discussed -> design is finalized and “signed off” -> a radically inclusive forum discussion starts which ultimately negates all the work done to that point. I value my time, and have no interest in spending where it is not of use. This pattern is discouraging and personally makes me hesitant to invest my time when the work will eventually be discarded.

[jonasjohansson]

Agreed! Apologies if I didn’t “defend” the initial proposal enough.

Suggestions moving forward?

Annie’s work is somewhat of a permanent installation, could we continue with the idea as planned and adjust the Gallery container? Perhaps a compromise trumps the current state of the Gallery, and the original intention. I could see a solution including the Gallery, the “most red” container and more.

It’s not too much work to re-align the “sign”. Having the GALLERY text above the tubes could be quite slick as well. And “so what” if branding material has already been made, photos etc. The space is in constant flux, right?

[MariaEuler]

I am sorry to hear of your frustration @missChief.

As always there is a problem with everyone knowing everything thats beeing planned. We for example also put work parallell in the gallery development and somehow it must have slipped during the townhall that the same place was worked on differently. In fact I was unaware that this permanent installation was planned.

The concern is not with “existing marketing material” but rather that a permanent installation will shape the character and always be seen in context with whatever is inside. That does of course not rule it out. The whole space is quite the “context” and thriving for a white cube id not what we do.

That we have a discussion now however is fair i think. No one here can keep track of all the planned projects, so they get faced when they are near complition as we then become aware of what rlse they might touch.

We said what we would think and alternatives where suggested. That does not mean that alternatives need to be what are choosen.

We could not know how sight specific your design and development has been you do not know the conversations an planning we had about the gallery and use of the space. So we have to have a conversation and after learning about maybe it just has to go ahead as planned and maybe there could have been a not seen alternative that would have made everyone happy.

[hampus]

I hear you Annie Locke and for my part I apologize for jumping directly into “solutions and suggestions mode” instead of acknowledging all the hard work you’ve all put in, and how frustrating this must be for you. I do get it.

This project is one of the oldest installation projects of the square, I remember it being discussed for a really long time now, popping up on the forum every now and then when there had been some update to the progress. It’s without a doubt a big communications doodoo that has happened here.

There are also underlying problems of unclarity in the whole decision-making process for the square that contributes to this, which @hugi will post about shortly.

@missChief

This is a sore spot as I am experiencing a similar pattern with the dome column design . A project is started -> others are consulted and a concept is discussed -> design is finalized and “signed off” -> a radically inclusive forum discussion starts which ultimately negates all the work done to that point. I value my time, and have no interest in spending where it is not of use. This pattern is discouraging and personally makes me hesitant to invest my time when the work will eventually be discarded.

When it comes to the dome project I can only concur. As it was my original idea I felt a lot of engagement for it initially but that was then progressively watered down with everyone (outside of the crew of doers) chiming in left and right. I also bear responsibility for that process taking place in that I didn’t state my own boundaries and desires in relationship to it and in that sense allowed it to happen. I was also pressed for time and couldn’t take as active a part in the design process as I wanted to (a common theme in my projects given the roles I usually play).

[missChief]

I’m confused:

@MariaEuler

I was unaware that this permanent installation was planned.

Isn’t this from the meeting notes you took at the townhall @MariaEuler?

@MariaEuler

We are now printing those holders for LED tubes. For lighting up the square (Steam pun style) one of the sides of the gallery container will be illuminated.

Is this new info to you guys @hugi and @cecilia_ulfsdotter as well? (not sure the extent of who is developing the gallery, tag in case I’m missing someone)

@hampus

There are also underlying problems of unclarity in the whole decision-making process for the square that contributes to this, which @hugi will post about shortly.

This would be great and an important discussion to have.

[MariaEuler]

@missChief, yes it was talked about in the meeting. That was a very dense meeting. The permanent character i was not aware off, but mainly its what i ment with not having the band width to fully engage with and understand all the wip projects, which is why we always have a discussion in the end.

However again i want to stress that that does not mean to shut anything down. Just wanted to ask if there is another way. If not, fine.

But we can’t avoid late game conversations i am affraid.

[cecilia_ulfsdotter]

Sorry I totally missed this, need to check the forum more often, but saw the results on thursday evening, looked great!

I agree that I could potentially go on another wall but as long as the gallery sign is not moved I am happy, I don’t think it should be moved. My vote is for it to be on the middle storey red container, facing the square, so that you can see it from afar, but still have it impact the square while in the square. But maybe there is a reason it didn’t go on that wall that I’ve missed.

[missChief]

Newest updates: adjusting layout to be 20 tubes over the three containers, and no need to move the Gallery sign. Bottom row installed last week and next two rows on the way.

@jonasjohansson to replace the arduino MEGA with a wifi/app controller so light patterns can be changed by anyone given any particular event’s needs. Goal to add the gallery sign to this as well to sync

[hugi]

@missChief

image1460×1521 278 KB

Super cool!

[DianaMO]

Wow! Excited to see the resultado!