KineticCanvas:
Synergetic Effort Between Art and Technology
Roshan Lalintha Peiris1, Suranga Nanayakkara2, Vikum Wijesinghe3, Kouta Minamizawa4
1,4
Keio Media Design, Keio University
2,3Augmented Human Lab, Singapore University of Technology and Designroshan1,kouta4@kmd.keio.ac.jp, 2suranga@sutd.edu.sg, 3vikumsw@gmail.com

Figure 1. Kinetic Canvas Installation: (A) Exhibition setup showing the synergetic process between Art and Technology. (B)Final piece that showcase moving fish on the canvas (Only a single fish is visible at run time)
ABSTRACT

Kinetic Canvas is an attempt to synergise art andtechnology, where artists can animate paintings on theirdrawing canvas to represent a passage of time. We
collaborated with a professional artist who works on“nihonga” artwork (artwork that features traditionalJapanese techniques) to create a 5 feet by 3 feet art piece
for a public exhibition. This paper presents thedevelopment process of the artwork, challenges faced byboth the artist and the technologist and reflections on thesynergetic effort.
Author Keywords

paper display; peltier; thermochromic; interactive art
ACM Classification Keywords

H.5.2. Information Interfaces and Presentation: UserInterfaces
INTRODUCTION

In the recent times creative practices and newtechnologies have been blurring the boundaries between
different disciplines. For example, introduction of toolkits
such as LilyPad Arduino (Buechley et. al., 2008) have
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work forpersonal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are
not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that
copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights
for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be
honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, orrepublish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires priorspecific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from
Permissions@acm.org.
OzCHI '15 , December 07 - 10 2015, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Copyright © 2015 ACM 978-1-4503-3673-4/15/12... $15.00
http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2838739.2838794.

enabled artists to introduce new dimensions into theirmasterpieces. In addition, there is an increasing trend ofdeveloping toolkits such as Little Bits (Bdeir, 2009) toallow non-expert users such as artists, makers anddesigners to merge new technologies into their works.
Furthermore, research projects such as FreeD (Zoran et.
al., 2014) indicate attempts to merge creative practices
and technology.
Our previous work on PaperPixels presented thetechnologies that tried to simplify complex concepts
behind animating papers into a simple plug and play
toolkit (Peiris et. al., 2014). PaperPixels is a toolkit thatallows users to create subtle animations on papers. With
this toolkit, the users would be able to create animations
on paper by using a simplified three-step process: draw,attach, and animate. The toolkit uses paper,
thermochromic inks (inks that change colour based ontemperature) and peltier elements (solid state device foractive heating and cooling). A workshop conducted at theSingapore Mini Maker Faire indicated that participantsfrom ages 9 to 40 were able to grasp the concept and start
using the toolkit immediately.
With Kinetic Canvas, we have been working with aJapanese artist, Tomoyuki Kambe 1, who works on“nihonga” artwork (artwork that features traditionalJapanese techniques). His work is generally themed on`chance encounters' with fish, flowers, turtles, water
insects that depict a single resonant moment in time.

1575

http://goo.gl/SMUhOM

Figure 2. Experimenting the effects of the red color thermochromic inks mixed with inks used by the Artist

We had workshop sessions with the artist to exchange
and learn each others' ideas and techniques. We thenconducted
brainstorming/prototyping
sessions
toconceptualise the ways of adding time-dependent
dynamics (animations) to static moments that arerepresented in his paintings. Figure 2 represents aninstance of these sessions where we explore mixing his
regular paints and thermochromic inks and animated with
the PaperPixels toolkit (Peiris et. al., 2014).
The Kinetic Canvas is a 5 feet by 3 feet animated painting(Figure 1) which was initially exhibited at the `Making
Sense: Intersecting Lines of Investigation in Design andTechnology' exhibition 2 in Singapore. This exhibition
features works that were collaborative efforts between
new technologies and creative practices such as art anddesign.

In Kinetic Canvas (Figure 1B), the artist attempts tocapture the subtle movement of a fish in a pond. The
position of the fish at each point in time is painted
carefully as different frames by the artist. These frames
are animated to appear and disappear with the help of thePaperPixels toolkit that is attached behind the canvas.
Development Process

As a starting point, we conducted a few workshops withfew professional artists to understand their techniques.

The contributions of this paper are:

• A case study to explore the synergetic collaboration
between art and technology• Understanding of the advantages and disadvantages ofthe PaperPixels technology when collaborating withcreative professionals• Presenting an artwork where technology acts as acatalyst in the background
KINETIC CANVAS
Philosophy behind the artwork

The nature around us features an assortment of subtle
interactions between various organisms that sparkinteresting reactions. Whether it is ants crawling on a tree
or a mimosa plant folding its leaves when touched, these`animations in nature' have often become a static
impression of an artist on his canvas that represent asingle resonant moment in time. Kinetic Canvas is anattempt to release the static nature of these artistic
representations into a dynamic form. By adding atemporal component to the canvas, the artist can represent
several moments of these `animations in nature' as several
layers of animation frames on the canvas. That is, theartist can animate his paintings on the canvas itself torepresent a passage of time of these nature's animations.
This way, the interactions and reactions of the nature canbe re-lived and captured on an artistic medium that is thecanvas.

2Figure 3. Results from explorative workshops withprofessional artist: (A) Experimenting the effect of colourchange in the fish (B) Exploring the effects of different typesof ink binders on paper (C) An experimental art work
created that depicts few animateable `butterfly' frames

Figure 3 highlights some of the explorations of theseworkshops. Through these workshops, we identified few
key steps required for the implementation of the Kinetic
canvas. For ease of discussion, we identify thedevelopment process of Kinetic Canvas in two tracks (Artand Technology) and discuss the various steps involved.
Figure 4 denotes the two track development process.

goo.gl/0AlaV0576

••
Figure 4. The Art Track and the Technology Track of theKinetic Canvas Implementation Process
Art Track

This track signifies the artist's development process of theKinetic Canvas.

• The artist experiments with different kinds ofthermochromic inks and their capabilities. In the caseof Kinetic Canvas, the artist tried available types ofinks, their mixing capabilities, colors, etc. This wasimportant in planning out the composition of thepicture. In addition, here the maximum size of eachframe (the size of the fish in the Kinetic Canvas) wasdecided. This was important in selecting the peltier
sizes.
• In this step, the artist experimented on different typesof canvas for the art work. The types of paper would
have a significant effect on heat transfer characteristics
from the peltier elements resulting in changes to thesynchronization and speed of the animations.
• Working within the agreed specifications, in this step,
the artist paints on the canvas using thermochromic
inks for the animation frames (fish) and backgroundwith standard inks.

•Peltiers: In this step, after discussion with the artist,
the size of the peltier is determined. This would involve
determining the size of the animation frame. For mostof the fish depicted in Kinetic Canvas, two side by sidepeltiers (2.5cm each) were used with two PaperPixels
elements in synchronization (Figure 5B). Thissynchronization results in smooth animation of the fullfish frame.
PaperPixels: This step involved specifying andprogramming the PaperPixels elements to perform theanimation. The PaperPixels elements are the controllers
that raise or lower the temperatures of the peltierelements beyond the trigger temperatures of thethermochromic inks. Therefore, the thermochromic ink
selection step by the artist was important to specify thetriggering temperatures in the PaperPixels elements. Assuch, the modules were programmed with thetriggering temperatures and the animation sequence
using the animation software (Peiris et. al., 2014).
Attach: In this step, we attach the peltier elements andthe PaperPixels elements behind each animateable fish
frame of the art work. For this purpose, we custom built
a frame that could hold the underlying technology
components together (Figure 5A).

DISCUSSIONInteractions and Challenges

The steps in Figure 4 are simplified for the purpose ofdiscussion. However, there were plenty of continuous
discussions between the artist and the technologist in
between the steps. We list some key examples below.
Identifying the inks: In identifying the inks the artist andthe technologist had to work together to understand eachothers requirements. The limitation of colours, using
different mixers/binders for the inks were thoroughlyexperimented. In addition, we agreed to finalise on an ink
that turned from one colour to a transparent colour whenheated (without turning into another colour).
Number of frames: There were numerous discussions on
selecting the number of frames for the animation. To keep
the Kinetic Canvas operating for more that eight hours a
day and over the course of few weeks, we decided tosettle at twenty fish frames for the animation. While more
frames would have made the animation smoother, there
were concerns of operating long hours considering thatpeltiers are inherently power hungry devices.

Figure 5. The structure behind the artwork holding
PaperPixels components (A) The frame holding 20 actuator
pixels for the 20 fish frames (B) A single heatsink module(C) PaperPixels elements
Technology Track

This track signifies the technologist’s development
process to support the development of Kinetic Canvas.

Attachment of pixels: The attachment and painting
process also required continuous discussion between thetwo parties to avoid frames being drawn in areas where
the peltier and PaperPixels elements could not beattached. However, the drawing would still need to be up
to par with the artist's expectations.
Power requirement: The work required 20 PaperPixels
modules in total. This required proper power management
to ensure prolonged operation of the artwork as each
PaperPixels required approximately 10W of power. Thiswas one of the main challenges of the work.

577

FeedbackWe had the chance to meet and interview some of theattendees at the Making Sense exhibition. Following are
few key feedbacks from 6 selected attendees.
Hidden Technology: All the attendees were impressed by
the fact that the art was the highlight of the Kinetic
Canvas. They were impressed by the subtle animations
which was happening on the canvas itself that was notovershadowed by the driving technology.
Proportions: Three attendees mentioned that they would
prefer more frames as the final artwork seemed quite
empty. They felt that the animation scale was not enoughfor the size of the artwork.
Speed: Two attendees indicated that the speed of theanimation was too slow which could possibly seem as if
there was no animation on the canvas. There's possibilityof speeding up the animation but we believe thePaperPixels technology is meant to add subtle andambient dynamics to a static drawing.
Interactivity: Two attendees suggested that we add aninteractive component to the Kinetic Canvas. Follow up
discussions led to interesting scenario ideas such as fish
`swimming away' when there were people around.
Limitations of the current implementation

Our previous PaperPixels workshop with hobbyists at theSingapore Mini Maker Faire indicated that the toolkit waseasy to learn and use. However, the experience of Kinetic
Canvas can be characterised as a challenging andcompromising collaboration between the artist and thetechnologist. This can be attributed to the following
limitations.
Scale of artwork: The Kinetic Canvas is the largest formof artwork that was done with the PaperPixels toolkit.
Most of our previous works (including those at theMakerFaire workshop) featured approximately A3 sizeworks. This size could comfortably work within thespecifications of the toolkit. However, in scaling up,
Kinetic Canvas required careful coordination between theartist and the technologist to ensure a number of factors
such as the alignment of the peltiers with the fish on thecanvas, ensuring efficient contact between the peltier
modules and paper etc. Therefore, in future versions ofthe toolkit, we intend to look at improving the attachment
process. In addition, we are intending to look at rigid
frames that allow easy attachment of the pixel elements.
Heatsink modules: All peltiers were mounted on separate
heatsinks to ensure proper heat management over longer
periods of time. Therefore, we identified that thePaperPixels elements should be further modularised alongwith the heat sink modules to allow ease of use for large
scale projects.
As mentioned above, this synergistic collaboration
empowered us to understand the current limitations of thePaperPixels toolkit from a different perspective. We
intend to address these issues to develop a PaperPixels
toolkit version optimised for larger scale works.
CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

Kinetic canvas is an animated art work that features acollaborative exploration between art and technology.
With this case-study, we were able to explore thePaperPixels toolkit's advantages and limitations in thecontext of using in a large-scale art installation. We
discussed various challenges and opportunities identified
during interactions between technology developer andcreative professional. The final piece was presented as awork that intersects art and technology at the `Making
Sense exhibition' in Singapore, which was well receivedby the attendees.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Authors would like to extend their gratitude to artist
Albert Teh, who was the key artist in completing the finalpainting. After learning from the workshop, authors
collaborated with Albert Teh to complete theKineticCanvas.
This research was conducted as part of the JST-ACCEL"Embodied Media" project and the International Design
Center of the Singapore University of Technology andDesign

REFERENCES

Bdeir, A. Electronics As Material: LittleBits. In Proc. TEI2009. ACM Press (2009), 397–400.
Buechley, L., Eisenberg, M., Catchen, J., and Crockett. A.
The LilyPad Arduino: Using Computational Textiles toInvestigate Engagement, Aesthetics, and Diversity inComputer Science Education. In Proc. CHI 2008.
ACM Press (2008), 423–432.
Peiris, R. L., and Nanayakkara, S. PaperPixels: A Toolkit
to Create Paper-based Displays. In Proc. OzCHI ’2014.
ACM Press (2014), 498–504.
Zoran, A., Shilkrot, R., Nanayakkara, S. and Paradiso, J.
2014. The Hybrid Artisans: A Case Study in SmartTools. ACM Trans. Computer-Human Interaction. 21,3, Article 15 (2014), 29 pages.

578