MINA HAGEDORN  CV / CONTACT
PROJECTS:  MA PRIMARY SCHOOL EDUCATION / INTERACTIVE INSTALLATIONS / EXHIBITION DESIGN / MA CRD / INTERACTIVE ART



< OVERVIEW

INTERACTIVE ART / SELF-COMMISSIONED / 2000
VIDEO CONTROL / TECHNOLOGY FOR WAITING PEOPLE

with Fernando Fonseca / Concept developed during a workshop by Edler&Edler / We chose the meeting point after the baggage claim as a site to intervene with a closed circuit surveillance installation. The basic differentiation was made that people who are waiting to pick someone up have idle time on hand, whereas passengers arriving are preoccupied with getting their luggage, which allows for less involvement. Therefore the concept looks at having one way control only but still to be an open observation/monitoring system that allows seeing who is watching. [ image 1 ]

Each conveyer belt in the luggage area is linked via a monitoring station to the outside. The station allows people to remotely control a camera positioned in the centre of a conveyer belt to turn and zoom in on the passengers. The screen also displays the flight of the luggage belt. [ image 2 ]

Within the luggage claim area, displays next to each camera show who is controlling it from the outside. The monitoring stations inside move exactly as the person controlling it outside is moving them. Therefore the movement will be irregular and more 'human' than just constantly turning. [ image 3 ]

CRITICISM
During the public discussion at the end of the workshop the criticism was voiced that control should be possible from both sides in order to create a democratic situation. The argument was that seeing on the monitor who is watching, is not enough, as this is a too limited view of the outside.

To allow people from the inside to monitor the outside on a broader scale - without having to get actively involved (based on our assumption they will be too busy looking for their luggage) - a solution would be to add a second surveillance circuit. This consists of a monitor inside connected to a camera outside, which constantly scans the line of waiting people by moving up and down. Therefore persons waiting for their luggage could - with just a couple of glimpses once in a while - check on the waiting people outside.

The monitor would enact the same movement within the luggage claim area by moving along the ceiling in a central position. This would be a regular movement, thus clearly different from the human controlled cameras in the luggage belt areas and therefore revealing the automatic nature of its control.

Democratic monitoring does not necessarily mean absolute mirroring of control options but definitely implies a two-way system, where the identity of the watcher is disclosed as well.

CONCLUSION
This proposal touches on issues of surveillance, privacy and control. The way systems and behaviours of objects are designed, tell about - or try to disguise - their immanent power and control structures. This concept aims at making the control structures transparent via the visual feedback of the controller. The way the two proposed surveillance circuits behave different aims at giving clues about the nature of their control - one human, the other automatic - again offering a degree of transparency.




1. Waiting area connected to luggage area


2. Display with controls in waiting area




3. Display in luggage area