Chapter 4.
Overall conclusion
This chapter brings together information and analyses gleaned from the literature reviews and case studies, and applies them to the new methodology and matrix in development in this thesis. Conclusions drawn from the case studies (3.4) are applied to and compared with the conclusions drawn from the literature studies (2.8). The outcome of both of these conclusions provides the material for the last iteration of electronic art research and development (aRt&D) methods, and the last details for the aRt&D Matrix. The overall conclusion provides an overview of the most significant outcomes from the theoretical and practical investigation.
(fig. 35. aRt&D Matrix final overview)
This overall conclusion provides a final vision of the stereotypes, expectations and motivations in interdisciplinary collaboration among electronic artists, technicians and (mainly computer) scientists. (4.1.) These concluding stereotypes are based on the literature studies in chapter 2, and these are compared and informed by the case studies in chapter 3.
This overall conclusion continues with the summary of the aRt&D methods. In 4.2.1., 4.2.2., 4.2.3. I provide an overview of the three main categories of electronic art research and development methods, including their subcategories. The literature studies (2.2.1., 2.2.2. Wilson, Century, Weibel) provide the basis for the proposed aRt&D methods. These were completed via field research and a range of case studies from chapter 3, and these final iterations of the aRt&D Methods are presented in 4.2.1., 4.2.2., 4.2.3.. In the descriptions of each aRt&D method, the theoretical and/or practical background, aims and applications are highlighted to inform the reader about their relevance for each application domain. Each aRt&D method’s description ends with the key information about its suitable collaboration model and most frequently observed application domain(s).
In this overall conclusion, the last iteration of the aRt&D Matrix will be presented (4.3.). The last iteration gives an overview of the relationship between objectives and methods. It lists the characteristics of each aRt&D method and the links with the observed group dynamics or team composition. The crucial advantages or disadvantages are also included according to their relevance for the collaboration process. The aRt&D Matrix also suggests the best matches with comparable or complementary methods from other disciplines. Finally, the advantages and disadvantages of each method are brought forward. In 4.3. I connect the analysed models for collaboration with certain types of artworks and Information Technology research themes. In 4.3.1., the supporting tools and instruments for processpatching, as suggested in chapter 2 and used for the case studies in chapter 3, are discussed as one of the additional outcomes of this study. The aRt&D Triangle (4.3.1.), the diagrammatic instrument for analysing the team constellation, serves as a basis for the collaboration model. The conclusion ends with a set of recommendations for future work (4.4.) and recommendations for professional artists, educators, future collaborators and policymakers to improve artistic practice in interdisciplinary collaboration (4.4.1.).
