Of Julian Palacz and Visual Hacking
Palacz’s aesthetics are always decent and elegant. His works are withdrawn and moreover somewhat sullen; one could almost assume that they are ashamed of the beauty of their existence, whereby they are only part of their origins. Even worse, they reveal themselves as a recycled product of only a part of a product, but have nothing to do with environmental protection. Palacz’s visualised precision mirrors the irony of their concepts, he does this quite automatically, if not fully automated.
Flows inspire Palacz. Almost always quiet ones, but definitely not just a flow of data, and never easy or trendy ones. It can also be flows of behaviour. How do people use a striking area to light matches with on a picture plane that he has pre-prepared?
How does a painter strike a match over Palacz’s model before he lights a cigarette or his oven. And what is achieved by these strikes? Maybe it is the attraction of the coincidental that Palacz knows how to provide. He doesn’t influence its course, but rather allows himself to be curious about the results of the coincidence he has predetermined. Palacz's test assemblies could also have been constructed from a technical viewpoint, which is the reason behind their legitimacy, as well as the strength of his work.
Flows caused by flow-lessness, whether due to lack of nicotine, or the lack of warmth should be experienced. With a matter of course Palacz misuses the flows that are imposed on us, and it is precisely those that we have to submit to. They occur without us even looking, you don’t even see them. You have no choice and he definitely doesn’t either. Continuously dictated flows should be used or ignored, and changed whether they are from mouse-gesticulations, generated by mouse loggers, (that means that every movement that the mouse dictates is recorded, similarly to the key loggers for the keyboard) or the output of surveillance cameras that passers-by walk past are then converted into walked-lines, as well as crossings at regulated zebra stripes. Whether he can or not, Palacz’s efforts are probably dependent on them.
Moreover, they are separate from the confrontation with the intelligence of a surprising moment. And more importantly the topic is only implied; eventually maybe its creator will find enjoyment in the data leading to a data caricature.
I cannot understand how Palacz managed to access Google Maps raw data, i.e. how he managed with C++ and other programming languages to create chaos only in order to present its results. Probably exciting but not really important. The Google Maps generated results move you, and Julian Palacz’s arrangements moved these movements. In so far Julian and Googles joint work confirms Google’s known good working conditions: well done.
Palacz’s algorithms not only include a sound synthesis, they also hypnotise as prime-number videos or are occupied with the results of text questionnaires in a new way. Palacz also uncovers data banks. Bank statements also seem very welcome; after all they can be printed out. He is probably the first person who has automated his online-banking transfers in order to transport values. The software that governs his transfers has been programmed so that the numbers on the printout convert into images from a distance and are usually organised mosaic-like from a several printouts.
No matter whether Julian Palacz organises the chaos of his bank statements into graphics or he develops the order of his search questions till they become absurd. His procedures function in both directions, and can also be comprehend as projecting our data existence. Not only in us, but also in others, there is a cynical aftertaste. Maybe he is trying to tell us what we are surrounded by, and who we are allowing to use our content. Maybe we are also guilty of creating Palacz’s invention? If so then I am even happier.
Published in nevertheless — www.nevertheless.at