Shared publicly  - 
 
The Great Google+ Art Experiment

Several weeks ago, I asked any "adventurous artists" to contact me about a Google+ experiment (original post: http://goo.gl/fQ4H4). As you can imagine, my inbox rather quickly filled with responses...sometimes with hilarious subject lines ("Adventurous Artist looking for long walks on the beach" comes to mind). I had 30+ artists volunteering before 30 minutes had passed, and because this really was an experiment, I just made a Circle, threw the first 30 in, and started explaining what my idea was:

"The gist of my experiment is that I want to get a bunch of awesome artists together who are interested in G+ and furthering the spirit of content-sharing and creativity on this platform ... I want to demonstrate that it's possible for people who have never heard of each other to come here and use Google's tools to make something awesome."

That was it. I had no grand plan, no scheme beyond that. I just wanted to know what would happen if 30 strangers who liked to make art got together to...make some art. Would Google's collaboration tools help or hinder? Would anything happen at all? I had no idea.

The video attached to this post is the result of many hours of hard work from artists around the world. The theme everyone chose was Circles -- rather fitting. Everything you see in the video is 100% original. Writers contributed their poetry, painters took pictures of their canvases, musicians composed and produced...and every collaborative effort was made through Google+ or Google products.

So, was the experiment a success? I asked the artists who participated to tell me how they felt Google+ worked for them in terms of making art collaboratively. Here are some of the responses:

“The G+ platform was used to the limits of its design, and other Google products nicely filled in on tasks where Plus came up short. Art can definitely be showcased here; art can even be made here.” +John Phillips

“Google+, from everything I've heard or experienced, is wonderful for artists. It gives an easily accessible gallery of photos that are open to immediate discussion, and most importantly, they are convenient. You see a picture in the flash of your rapidly cascading stream, and its impression is immediate. One can be bothered to look at it and appreciate it.” +Pete Davis

“We might have been able to do this on Facebook, but only if we'd met each-other some other way.” +Drew Nicholson

We found weaknesses too:

“While we can all use hangouts and do a +Daria Musk live show or some kind of turntable.fm-style audio showcase, it's still cumbersome to post music here. The simplest solution would probably be an embedded music player, like the Soundcloud and Bandcamp functionality in Facebook posts.” +Pete Davis

“My only beef throughout the project...was the lack of a ‘group’ page/function. We REALLY needed to be able to consolidate communications to one place. Yes, there's the ‘notify all’ option if one wants to post something to the group, but it's really easy to forget to do it.” +Cayenne Linke

The conclusion -- at least for me -- is that Google products really make collaboration possible. But let’s remember our part in making tools better. Pushing limits, experimenting, playing with the platforms actively makes our feedback more useful. And we get things we need when we know how to ask for them. Just look at how Google has responded to user feedback on G+ so far.

I think the experiment was a success. Is the video a masterpiece? Not really. It’s a series of small masterpieces pieced together to prove a point: Google+ is a new place to do things you never thought you would. Like make an art project with a group of strangers on the Internet. These artists have just created their own unique network of fellow artists who can help them become more refined artists. That’s not something you can do very easily anywhere else, at least not as far as I’m aware.

Thank you to everyone who participated, but a very special thank you indeed to +Drew Nicholson, who managed this project with more grace and enthusiasm than I could have possibly hoped for.

And thanks to all of you who make Google+ an amazing community to play in. Without you, it’d just be a Facebook clone with a bigger character limit.



--

Music Composed and Arranged by +Pete Davis
Assistant to the Composer: +John Phillips
Assistant to the Director: +Kay Partain
Logo Design by +Scott Pederson and +Kay Partain
Directed by +Drew Nicholson

Contributors:
+Bruce Aldridge
+Nathanael Card
+Brian Carroll
+Matt Davis
+Branden Johnson
+Matt Lichtenwalner
+Cayenne Linke
+Dan Magyar
+Ankeet P
+Stephen Reitz
+Amy Rothstein
+Graham Tiplady
+Ben Walker
+Aaron Wood
107
104
John Phillips's profile photoChristina Trapolino's profile photoBryan Jones's profile photoKay Partain's profile photo
89 comments
 
Wow. Very nice indeed. I really like the quotes following, "the best way to intimidate an artist is to be blank."
 
Thanks for the opportunity to work on this project. :)
 
Fantastic.. Thank you all for sharing.
 
[obligatory comment that serves as a bookmark for later reading]
 
I have had such a wonderful time assisting +Drew Nicholson with this project, and I absolutely love how this turned out!
 
Gives me chills, absolutely beautiful video, music, artwork, text/narration, everything.

It's been a true pleasure to experience this with all of you, thank you again the opportunity to participate in such a pioneering event!

This is only the beginning!
 
I had a blast working on this. Couldn't have thrown randomly with a better bunch of folks.
 
I may have been the organizer, but it wouldn't have been anything without the amazing art. We hope to have that art up in static pictures soon so everyone can see how amazing that art really was.
 
As you said, maybe not a masterpiece, but it's a lovely initial end product of a visualization for collaborative efforts. Kudos to you +Christina Trapolino and everyone who participated. This will definitely encourage other collaborative Sekrits...into tangents I'm sure we can't possibly anticipate. Being Sekretive ain't all bad!
 
Thanks again for organizing this- it was a lot of fun to contribute to, even in my limited capacity. Can't wait to see what's next!
 
I absolutely love that. Its so artistic. Bravo to your entire team!
 
For whatever reason, youtube will not let me watch. Just keeps 'downloading' and 'downloading' and even after it's done, I press play, and it starts 'downloading' all over again.

//finally let me watch it. I liked best the round'about with the railroad lights, but enjoyed the production as a whole.

+Christina Trapolino, nice work!!
 
That is a fantastic video, not only for the actual content and creativity involved, but because of the premise behind the work, how it was executed, the statement it makes, and what it took to bring it all together. Nice!
 
Thanks for bringing us together, +Christina Trapolino ! And +Nathanael Card Did a brilliant job of clicking together all of the disparate images and free-floating words -- that was a LOT of random stuff to fit into a cohesive/coherent video. applause
 
I'll second the kudos for +Nathanael Card. I may have been the director, but he had to actually put it all together, and we never actually worked in the same room or anything. He did and excellent job.
 
amazing stuff - sad not to have been able to contribute in the end, but it was a honour to see this coming together.
 
Could you please describe the workflow, and what hardware and software tools you used? Thanks.
 
I keep watching the video, and my favorite part has got to be the close up of the phrase "I WAS HERE". +Nathanael Card did something to that slide to make it look like the words were moving or something. It's a perfect summation of art to me.
 
And what traditional art media and tools were used?
 
+David: I'll leave it up to the artists to tell you what tools they used -- +Cayenne Linke's was quite different from +Aaron Wood's, for example, and I'll let +Nathanael Card talk about the editing, and +Pete Davis and +John Phillips talk about the music.

From the organizational end of things, we used a very limited toolset:

a) G+ itself, with a custom group containing all the members of the project
b) A Google email list, which we barely used at all
c) Google Docs to brainstorm ideas, list people into groups, etc
d) A Google Website to collate the images
e) Google + Hangouts -- we had a few, but didn't really use these.
f) Google Chat for me to talk to Nate for brainstorming the intro and editing purposes, and to Christina when I needed her input.

That's it. I was asked to be the Director on July 20th, and I set an aggressive schedule; the artists had about 10 days to turn in their round one art, inspired by the concept of "Circles". People either shared albums with me in G+ or (rarely) emailed me their content, which I then shared with the group via albums in G+.

After round one was complete, the artists had three days to look at the round one art to become inspired for round two; If you split the video up into "Intro", Round 1, Round 2, Credits, all of the art from the third quarter of the film was inspired by art from the second quarter of the film.

Round two was six days, but the artists ended up getting a three day extension because I happened to be travelling home from New York to Chicago at the time.

All of the art was turned in about a week ago, maybe a little bit less. Nate finished the editing and Pete finished the music, and we put it together, and there you are.

I think I might have used Notepad to compose a few posts, simply because at some point my stream reached critical mass, and it was too difficult to try to compose within the incoming stream.

Are there specific questions you have that I've left unanswered?
 
Thanks for your superfast response. I look forward to reading the contributors' stories. Your pioneering workflow is inspiring.

We used to call these futuristic tools Groupware 20 years ago.
 
+Drew Nicholson, without us, you're nothing! lol WE MADE YOU.

Also, +David Newman, I used a little bit of magic and come luck to come up with my pieces. When that didn't work, I just blindly drew on my inner creativity and a liberal dose of digital design programs to help me out. :)
 
Aaron, blindly drawing can result in the best art. 
 
+Griffin C. Anderson the team was very excited about doing something new. We did have about 50% attrition from the original set of volunteers. G+ doesn't make it very easy to single out posts from the stream, and the lack of a public circle to put everyone in was REALLY a problem. To this day, I know there are people on the team who aren't in all of the circles of everyone else. It required that I share almost everything at least once.

Next time, I'ma get something IN the presentation, too.
 
+Griffin C. Anderson well, you nailed it; that's pretty much what we did. I probably could have used the Google Groups email list to better effect, too.
 
What worked -- that will be interesting to hear. What didn't work will also be interesting.

What video editing software was used?
 
Great initiative and great result ! Congrats everyone.
 
Love the artwork, love the visuals, love the poetry in motion.
 
+Drew Nicholson was truly a MASTER cat herder -- his "corporate" approach to project management worked really well. Getting a bunch of busy people, and artists, no less can be a nightmare; I've watched countless projects never get off the ground or completely fizzle out due to lack of identifiable management/leadership.

Drew did an amazing job -- but I can't emphasize enough how much easier life would have been for all of us if there had been a function akin to group pages in Facebook -- a means of consolidating all of our posts -- questions, discussions, and information -- in one 'go to' spot. I had to create separate folders in my email for notifications regarding the group -- things I would definitely need to reference again, things I probably didn't need, but didn't want to delete, things that weren't specifically informational, but"nice to have," etc. Even with that, I'd have to hunt and peck around my mailbox folders to find things I was looking for.
 
+David Newman, I used iMovie. Illustrations (galaxy, moon, house, face) were created on a dry-erase board, filmed on a Flip and neg'ed.

Next time around I'll be playing with Adobe After Effects, and may have access to a Canon T2i/HDR.
 
Dry erase board as an animation medium. Very cool.
 
In answer to your question, +David Newman , I was one of two of us who used traditional "paint and canvas." Honestly, I was concerned with how flat and dead the photography of it would look in comparison to the shiny clean lines of digital imagery, but I think they came out okay; rather than trying to blend everything in, it really is more of a compilation of free-standing images. I was worried that there was no place for old school painting in the sleek digital realm. I'm also the World's Worst Photographer, so thought the crappy images of my paintings would ruin the "slideshow" of other images.

Regarding specific media -- I do acrylic and enamel on canvas, with mixed media/sculptural elements, using plaster, and polymer and air-dry clays, found objects. And voodoo. Lots of voodoo. If interested, here's an album with the full pics and some detail pics of my round 1 and Round 2 contributions: SSAGSubmissionRoundsIAndII | 107473732057289412630

'Twas good fun -- I really enjoyed the aspect of our Round II submission needing to be inspired by something someone else submitted for Round I.
 
+Cayenne Linke The group pages that you speak of is probably being incorporated into Google+ (my personal opinion). Google bought a company and folded its operations into Google+. This company used groups instead of circles. I expect to see groups in additional to circles very soon. ---- http://www.frid.ge
 
+Monty Montz -- Nice! Definitely a welcome addition. I'm involved with another project right now, and the leader of it refused to move it to G+ because it was truly a functional requirement to have a group page for it. So, she mentioned it on G+, but only to say "I won't answer any questions about it here. If you want to participate, find us on Facebook."
 
+David Newman While my contribution was strictly digital art in its final form, I did start with a draft using simple pencil and a sketch pad. This evolved into creating a vector image of the symbolic "+" sylized with the colored circles loosely following the google.com multicolored logo, and ultimately representing the idea of the circles each being their own individual entities while also overlapping to create a venn-diagram-like collective whole. Software used: Illustrator CS4/Photoshop CS5.
 
Graham, it seems like your team's workflow could spark its own documentary video.

Like Fitzcarraldo did.
 
+David Newman -- I've only seen about 20 films in my life, and Fitzcarraldo is not among them -- I had to Google it -- it looks quite delightful. "Fitzcarraldo is a 1982 film written and directed by Werner Herzog and starring Klaus Kinski as the title character. It portrays would-be rubber baron Brian Sweeney Fitzgerald, an Irishman known as Fitzcarraldo in Peru, who has to pull a steamship over a steep hill in order to access a rich rubber territory. The film is derived from the real-life story of Peruvian rubber baron Carlos Fitzcarrald."

If you're a Herzog fan, you might enjoy the series of children's book readings done by a faux Herzog, with deliciously dark "adjustments" to the storylines. Here's "Curious George" (please don't feel like you have to watch if you're not interested -- and/or you may have already seen them): Werner Herzog Reads Curious George

Sadly, I always thought these were REALLY read by Herzog -- but apparently not, from what I just read --though youtube rumor claims he knows about them, and is amused by them.

Perhaps our team's workflow could be presented in a Seussian format, and narrated by the faux Herzog! Perfection!
 
+David Newman The music workflow was pretty interesting as well. +Pete Davis was appointed composer and wrote and recorded the piece in the video (I still don't know what software or equipment he used - Pete?), and posted it to us to talk about. There were a lot of parts that were rendered by VST robot instruments, and I volunteered to play some of those parts live. So I recorded some instruments, accordion, bass and percussion, on my primitive home setup, just with Pete's track in my ear to play to, and I processed and mixed those tracks in Adobe Soundbooth to sound similar in frequency and tone to the robot tracks, and passed them back to Pete. What you actually hear on the final product are my live parts blended with the robot tracks, each taking and giving to the other.

As far as art, I tried different things: the poem in the video starting at "The finest way to intimidate an artist is to be blank" is mine, rendered as text over a very oddly-shaped photoshopped image with quasicircular swirls made from light-painting experiments in my camera. Nate and Drew did a great job cutting the piece to distill its essence into the video, while working around the strange formatting and length (and I too really like that effect at the end - what was that?). The drawn image after that is mine also, I drew what started in my head as a mandala in my sketchbook very quickly and with no plan one morning, then scanned it and put in some textures and gradients in photoshop to give extra dimension. And there's a purple image later in the video, a circle with a dark plus over it, that was vector art just to see if I could.

Everybody was doing all kinds of different things. Drew worked miracles in terms of keeping everybody together and on task without ever being harsh or demanding, and Nate did a masterful job putting it all together.
 
Sounds like google Wave would have remedied this situation. :) “My only beef throughout the project...was the lack of a ‘group’ page/function. We REALLY needed to be able to consolidate communications to one place. Yes, there's the ‘notify all’ option if one wants to post something to the group, but it's really easy to forget to do it.” +Cayenne Linke
 
Wow very nice to all involved.. somehow I missed the original post asking for folks to be involved.. but hopefully at some point in the future I can be involved with something this cool :) +Christina Trapolino Way to drive really neat content.. you totally rock!
 
Very well done... <lifts a pint> Wait, I need a Pint-glass circle... <gets his profile circling edit on>
 
That's incredible! Great job to all!
 
I re-watched this... I have to make the observation: the video starts out very dark. There is the rain and the dark color scheme of the images for about the first 1:05 and when the music kicks in there is seemingly a "transition space" for 10-15 seconds where the viewer is "eased into the light". Accompanied with the uplifting music it's such a natural and sincere transition.

+Christina Trapolino on a different post I mentioned an experiment, to see if we can transcend ourselves. You said answering that question is your purpose here. Transcendence implies enlightenment... I'm wondering, that 1:05, the ensuing 10-15 seconds, and what comes after ... is that a parallel to the time before Google+, the transition to it, and then what is to follow? Art is what the individual makes of it, so regardless of what the intent was, you pulled it of really well.

I'm sharing on Facebook (muahahaha!), I want to see how it is received
 
Very nice video well done 
 
Thank you for your honest critique +Daniel Davis Feedback is a key factor in refining, growing, perfecting. Now that we've established the proof of concept I'm definitely looking forward to whatever comes next.
 
As the director, I'm going to take a lot of the heat that +Daniel Davis is pushing. I alone was responsible for the schedule, and I now believe that I rushed it out the door because I was so excited about it, which meant that my editor and my music director didn't really have time to work together to make it all mesh better than it did.

As far as the art goes, well, we all agreed on the theme of circles, and that's what we did; drab is in the eye of the beholder. I'll leave it up to the artists themselves to defend their art or accept the criticism.

This first video was to see if we could do it at all. We proved that. So, it's up from here.

We're still flyin'.
 
We came up with the concept on July 20th, and I set a 30 day deadline for two rounds of submissions and publishing. We missed that deadline by three days.

I didn't mean to suggest you weren't being fair, I think you were. But we also involved over 15 people, which made things MORE difficult rather than less, in addition, we only had one editor, who was overworked.
 
We made a conscious decision to include every submission we got on this one. Remember, when +Christina Trapolino called for volunteers, we got thirty people, and she cut off the pipe. I think that much of the art itself is amazing. I'm just saying, we got a random selection of 30 people to work with, half of them dropped out, and we went with what we had after that. Were I attempting to curate an art exhibit, I wouldn't have chosen to do it this way; this project was supposed to show that G+ could, in fact, give us the tools we needed to collaborate on something without ever meeting each-other face to face.
 
Well, aside from never having met each other otherwise, G+ was the tool we used for all of our communication as a group. We brainstormed together on G+. We did hangouts on G+. We displayed the pictures and drafts of the video on G+. I feel that it lends itself to collaboration better than anything else, if only because the comments are visible in realtime.

Again, the point of the project was to do something awesome (which is in the eye of the beholder) and prove that we could use this social tool to do it in. G+ isn't an art creation tool like Photoshop, but it was an art enabling tool.

I encourage you to be involved in the next video we do. We're discussing it now, I can add you to the circle.
 
+Griffin C. Anderson, +Drew Nicholson, +Daniel Davis -- I'm so glad I finally got to read this exchange closely.

For what it's worth, I think it's important to remember that this was an experiment to see how well G+ lent itself to collaboration. "Proof of concept" is a good way to put it, but even that's more defined than the intention with which this was undertaken.

Think of it more like an art adventure in a new territory on the Internet.

The question of whether this could have been done on another network is a fair one. I think Facebook might even make a project like this easier in some ways. But the Facebook public community is not exactly like the G+ public community. Same for LinkedIn or Twitter. This wasn't just about whether Google has provided us with adequate tools, it was a question of whether the Google+ community was going to approach a project like this in a different way than other social networking communities might.

Maybe it's impressive that these people came together and created some art on a social network and maybe it's boring and uninteresting. In either case, this video is the answer to the question that the experiment asked, which was "What happens when you get 30 G+ users together to make art?" The question was not, "how do we make the most kickass video ever?" It's arguable that we should have asked that second question, but it simply wasn't the driving force. We were just playing, experimenting together, making things and testing the usefulness of the environment.

These artists were strangers before they all signed up for an art experiment on Google+. They now belong to each other's networks in a way they wouldn't have. Now you have all seen some of their work (which I do think is quite good), and who knows? Maybe one of these people will get to make more art for someone -- for money instead of as an experiment. Maybe not. No harm either way.

Here on Google+, I believe we understand that we have a unique opportunity to make a more relevant network based on genuine interests. The content shared in that network becomes a sort of currency that is just a little different than what I've personally seen on other social networks. Big and little members are in every community, as I've said before. Anything is possible.
 
+Daniel Davis , what does that last question accomplish (or many of yours, really)? Just the fact that this happened on G+ should answer your question.
Now, while I do encourage and love constructive criticism I feel that your comments come off [edit] shallow. (I speak for myself) I'm sure this is not how you intend them to come off, but you appear (to me) to fail to see the point of this project. It helps to view the subject for what it is, not what "you wish it were" or "how you'd do it differently"...
Your crit is welcome, but please leave your ego out of it. You are obviously an intelligent and artistic individual; please put these qualities to use more. +Pete Davis and +John Phillips very successfully collaborated on music, there's no reason why three artists couldn't work together. So, if you'd "love to contribute in some manner," do it; but please don't use other artists as your pedestals for pontification.

Thank you for your thoughts, Daniel.
 
I'm just going to toss in my .02 here about a couple of things I learned from this project. And nothing I'm going to say holds any real bearing on the project itself -- I love +Christina Trapolino 's comment "this video is the answer to the question that the experiment asked, which was 'What happens when you get 30 G+ users together to make art?' The question was not, 'how do we make the most kickass video ever?'" I'm willing to take that as the bottom line critique of the whole thing.

My take-away thoughts from this project are geared toward future projects.

I think there IS a place for curation in these things. The "come one, come all" attitude this was approached with was perfect for the scope of the experiment. In the future, it makes sense to make sure the quality of art submitted meets the end goal of the project. And especially as future projects, having bounced off this one, will likely have more refined/defined goals, it only makes sense to sort of "jury in" the type of art that will help meet those goals. I say this with the full knowledge that my work would be juried out - but that's the name of the game in artistic endeavors; free-for-all shows are unheard of. Each gallery/show/project culls submissions by whatever best meets their need(s). It may be that future endeavors are less "nice," and have to turn people away; but anyone who's been making art for any length of time thinks nothing of this...it's just another day in aestheticsville.

My other thought, which I alluded to in a previous comment, is that I'm not sure there's a place for traditional art in the digital realm. I'm not saying "poor me, the old school painter" -- I think this might apply to all static images, though I do think digital art has a little better shot at not looking out of place, due to the clean lines and vibrancy of color.

In either case, though, with our world geared toward flashy and zippy movement, static images are necessarily going to break the flow, and assault the sense of movement when presented in a video format.

I don't know what the answer to that might be -- if there is one. Aside from doing an exquisite corpse type of thing, where some sort of time lapse can be done around the changes in the images, or a morphing project, a la Women In Art , I don't know how one would give static images the "oomph" they need in order to "compete" in a video format. Even in those two scenarios, where people are basically capturing images from a variety of locations, with a variety of equipment (and skill using that equipment [said The World's Worst Photographer]), there will be breaks in visual cohesiveness.
 
Yes, I have said repeatedly and will continue to say that what makes Google+ different has very little to do with Google.

Honestly? I think Google did intend to make a Facebook toppler. I mean, that's just my own speculation and it's not like I know one way or another.

But G+ and Facebook are not the same thing, and Google unwittingly unlocked a whole world of rich interaction here. Now it's the community's job to maintain it.
 
Thanks for your thoughts, +Daniel Davis. I think I understand most of what you're saying. I don't agree that this is a horrible representation of an idea, but it could certainly be better or more thought-through. Again...it was just an experiment. I feel like your questions are important, but they aren't being asked in a way that seems very helpful, or perhaps I'm just not able to see it that way because you punctuate each of your points with a reference to how terrible the video is in your eyes. It's not that I'm taking that personally (I didn't make any of this art) -- it's that your dismissive attitude about the video is just really distracting.

In any case, thanks for participating in the discussion.
 
I just watched this for the first time. Beauty. Perfect Beauty. I got chills, it made me feel, that's art baby.
 
Oh and just as a side note, (after taking almost an hour to read all of these comments, wowzas!) I too believe G+ is "different". Perhaps the video means more to people who are already stoked about circles and G+ , and those who aren't don't see the beauty within a piece like this.
Example: If someone put together a montage of Led Zeppelin's greatest moments, most Led Zeppelin fans would be stoked about it. They wouldn't notice the white space between frames, or if the music flowed with the video - they would simply be happy with the art and compilation of something they love. On the other hand, if the same compilation was shown to a group of people who didn't know who Led Zeppelin was, the reactions may be mixed - a mesh of "Meh, whatever" and "Wow, these guys rock!" would ensue.
As a G+ lover myself, I was able to sit back and just enjoy being immersed in more of what I loved - perhaps that makes a big difference. Just a thought...
 
+Pete Davis - Yes, I think it means something. Not necessarily about G+ (that’s nearly impossible to argue one way or the other), but about social networking itself. I think it means that people are willing to use these sorts of platforms (it happened on this one, but consider the larger implication) to do more than what they've mostly done on social platforms before (which is post about their minutiae to their real-life friends on Facebook or retweet celebrity fart jokes on Twitter or even comment thoughtfully on an NPR.org article).

+Daria Musk, +Michael Mozart, +Louis Gray, +Cam Meadows, +Mike Elgan, +Craig Kanalley, this “Google+ Art Project” team … totally from different worlds, but all have used G+ in engaging, innovative ways. Everyone here who talks about the community and content being king (a la +Robert Scoble) knows that there is something interesting about G+, something that makes people want to use it creatively.

It’s not some tiny niche group who wants to see an evolution in social networking online.

We’d be kidding ourselves if we tried to say Google+ is the greatest social network of all time or that Google has nailed it and gotten everything right and struck gold. It’s still a trial.
But people are ready for something new, and that’s what I think the video is suggesting: possibility for us to do something different, something that means something.

I think +Jeff Jarvis' ideas about public personas are linked to this. There is arguably a change occurring in the way people think about social media and themselves. Is that because of G+? Probably not. G+ may have shown up at the right time and nothing more, who knows?

+Tom Anderson's use of the platform is what inspired me in my use of the platform. It also inspired a lot of other people to think about social media’s future. Sometimes it just takes being shown that something is possible. Maybe this experiment will do that for someone.

G+ may just be the watering hole for people who want “social media progress,” but that’s still something unique, I think, to answer your question about "what's different here?"

The fact that 30 artists replied to a G+ post during early adoption isn’t that remarkable. It may not even be remarkable that they made a video slideshow of their work, or that any work was done at all. What’s remarkable is that 100 people shared it because they thought it was an interesting idea, and I’ve never seen a video this amateur get anywhere near the same level of engagement as quickly. Could it be that people on G+ like ideas more than other networks? I don’t think this experiment answers that question. But maybe it brings it up for consideration.

I’m not going to say the video is a great video. It’s not. Some of the art in it is great, the music’s great, but the video isn’t a masterpiece. It’s a cool idea, though, to imagine what people could do with Google+ other than update publicly about this morning’s latte. And that is the point of the experiment.
 
Thanks for the mention +Christina Trapolino! I too have been inspired by +Tom Anderson and his enthusiasm for G+ and using the platform creatively has definitely fueled my own. Your enthusiasm too to be honest! And all the Googlers. It's very contagious.
 
awwwwwww i wish i was here :( i felt so left out :(
 
Well-done, Christina and team. It's beautiful. You're showing the world what creative collaboration is really about.
Add a comment...