Inspiration.

After a few brainstorming sessions with the rest of the team, it appeared pretty quickly that we were going to work with themes inspired by the breathtaking differences in scale found in nature. When looking at the curves of the architecture, the idea of flow came immediately to mind and we started looking into the idea of the sea and the crazy organisms that populate it. I did some research on deep sea organisms and found a couple of articles about the paleodictyon nodosum, its incredible habitat and supposedly faculties for bacteria farming. Without getting too much into details here, the similarities that we found between these organisms and Shigeru Ban’s architecture seemed to be too much of a coincidence not to be looked at.

Our storyboard gave me some pretty clear leads on how to build the the software upon. I had to come up with visual and technical solutions to make our ideas possible. Ideas like this concept of multiple individuals creating, on a higher scale, a big complex organism or this idea of “skin” being a structure constantly rearranging itself in reaction to different stimuli, and so forth… From that point it was kind of easy to see that I was going to play around with agents, particles and group behaviour. But since we’d all been experimenting a lot with these themes in the last decade I really wanted to try to push this further. I had to find a way to make it more interesting for me and not just to create an nth Craig Reynolds’s Steering behaviors implementation.

From storyboard to software.

Instead of hard-coding a particle system as I usually would, I decided that it was time to have a more modular approach to designing particle animation, and invested quite some time trying to find the right solution in terms of usability and creative possibilities. I might have been wrong but it was pretty clear to me at the time that in order to achieve this i would need a good user interface.

I quickly implemented a typical scene explorer, similar to the ones you find in most graphic softwares, and came up with some easy-to-use code to create new objects that could be added to a scene. Having the hierarchies that a scene graph can offer allowed me to design a number of objects and re-arrange at will how those objects could influence each other. I quickly decided to limit myself to a small number of object types per scene. Particle groups, particle behaviour and effectors felt like a good starting points to build what I wanted. It kind of summarized quite well those ideas of internal/external world and stimuli that we had in our storyboard.

Complexification.

When it comes to programming physical processes, I’ve always been fascinated by how combining different layers of complexity can be so powerful. Each layer bringing its new set of rules and surprises. Combining can sometimes result in something greater than the sum of their parts, and that is where interesting and unexpected things can happen.

Usually the first layer that I play with gives each particle different properties, sizes, masses or shapes. “Press play” and see what happens, what kind of interesting patterns or animations emerge when exploring with those different parameters. Sometimes it does really feel like putting your finger into a Petri dish just to see what might happen.

Another layer that I wanted to add was the ability to create separated group of particles and apply behaviours or constraints to a group rather than to every single individual. This layer may seem quite simple or obvious at first, but it allowed for some really nice things to happen, and helped a lot to create complex interactions between particles. Make a small group act like a flock of fish and another one more as a fluid and you already have some nice interactions.

That is where the design that I chose (keeping particle properties, behaviours and constraints as separated concepts) came really handy. Playing with particles and giving them different properties, sizes and shapes is always interesting, but the fun really starts when you can mix different groups of behaviours together.

Timeline animation.

Why bother with coded animation when you can do it with a timeline? This might seems trivial but the level of complexity increased quite drastically when I added a time dimension to those two layers.

I knew that injecting any animated data into a physical simulation can often lead to surprising results but still I was really amazed to see how changing those behaviours over time would create such unexpected reactions. Anyone who has played with Craig Reynolds’s Steering behaviors knows how a small set of rules can create such compelling animations, even if none of the rules parameters are animated. Well if you are that kind of person, then you can probably imagine how animating those parameters can create such surprisingly organic and complex animations. This system helped me to create the different reactions that we wanted for our living organism, like skin contraction and dilatation, structure’s construction, re-organisation and deconstruction, and other organic animations. This was already a big part of our idea of an organism reacting to external stimuli. Here are a couple of examples of that “ever-changing state” structure:

Node Graph and sound design.

There was quite a lot of ping-pong between our composer, Thomas Vaquié and myself. More than ever, the music that he wrote influenced our approach to visual production. More than just a highly collaborative way of working together , we wanted to give the music a real literal role in the piece, making it one of the actual inputs in our (eco)system, like the very stimuli I was talking about previously. The music became quickly the main antagonist in our story, attracting/repelling those organisms, controlling their every move. It also helped a lot to structure our narrative around the birth, life and death of this weird organism, and even led up to an interesting new aspect, that of the balance between two other worlds, light and darkness.

This is one of the reasons why we needed that strong symbiosis between music and visuals. The last few years I’ve been experimenting a lot with audio and particles systems as part of my ongoing collaboration with Murcof and I really wanted to try something new in terms of creation and experimentation possibilities. This is where a node graph came really handy, allowing me to visually route any part of the audio to any part of the visual/physical system. When you are used to re-design the code every time you want the music to influence a part of the animation, well, a user interface like this one is definitely a huge time saver and gives much more space for experimentation.

Stimuli and working with motion designers.

From the start, it was pretty clear that Yannick was going to focus on the more graphical and geometric parts of the piece, and that I would be taking care of the procedural and organic parts. Instead of giving a 4 week old software full of bugs to Yannick, I decided to put my efforts on building bridges between my software and the ones that Yannick would be using. In order to develop fully our story it was really important for us to make those two worlds meet, fight and live together, not only in terms of collaboration and compositing techniques but also conceptually.

I decided to look into computer vision to find simple ways to work with Yannick’s footage rather than the other way around. I built an OpenCV module that was taking care of analysing Yannick’s videos and extracting interesting data that I could use for my animations. This idea gave birth to a nice list of new effects, some of them would extract the polygons out of videos to create collisions, some other would use grayscale gradients to influence the strength of another effect, etc…

It ended up being a really powerful tool, allowing me to use those graphical animation to physically collide with particles, scaring them off or attracting them. And after a few tweaks to the computer vision engine the result was quite convincing. I could just click one button, import new videos, assign them to different effects and, voila, please meet interactive physical compositing!

This module was the last piece I added to the software. Because time is often the main constraint for that kind of project, especially when you are the lead and only developer, there’s always a moment when you have to stop building new toys and start playing with the one you already have!

Artistic direction by Simon Geilfus, Yannick Jacquet, Thomas Vaquié
Producer Nicolas Boritch
Visual content by Simon Geilfus, Yannick Jacquet, Romain Tardy
Music composed by Thomas Vaquié

Header photohraph by James Medcraft.

You can find more information and pictures about the project here.

The software that I built for this project was made possible thanks to the huge efforts and energy of Andrew Bell, the Barbarians and the amazing Cinder community. A big thanks to the whole team for creating such a powerful framework! Cinder rules!

I used Gwen GUI to build the user interface, Gwen is a small library written by Garry Newman, and it is definitely worth having a look at it! I started playing with this library several months before this project and had to hack it quite a lot to make the timeline and nodegraph widgets possible, but it is without any doubt a really nice piece of code!

Post written by Simon Geilfus

The piece I presented is a light and sound sculpture whose elements are suspended in mid-airspace, and fragmented in a space. This dynamic layout offers different points of view and perspective according to the position of the spectator.
The structure was in the center of the room, and filled a 13 m2 surface and a 3m height.

“White roads in the red matrix” is in continuation of my artistic commitment over the past few years, but this time with a more “structural” approach, as opposed to my work based on still or moving images, but again with the same focus of deconstruction. A selection of my deconstruction series can be found on my blog WYSI*not*YYG, while series based around the theme of time are visible on Deconstruction Time, Again

While doing some research around the deconstruction theme, I had to create fragments, which would always be rectangles, the main geometrical shape I’ve been obsessed with for years, the core material of the work. But this time I wanted to have an even more radical approach.

The outcome of this research is a spread of fragments in space, a floating matrix  animated in time by sound and light.

The installation is made of 14 elements of red semi-translucent Plexiglas and six  aluminium structure with embedded LEDs.

These elements can be lit up independently, and synchronized with a sound design  that brings the temporal dimension of the work. Thomas Vaquié worked on the sound design, and created two main sound ‘colors’ to reflect the each of the two materials’ singularity. The sound is then made of 44 different sounds, and the challenge was to create melodic and harmonious.combinations from these elements.

Part of the structure was projection mapped, and projectors were used to contrasts with the sharp lighting of LEDs, and the visuals were developped with VVVV. The software will allow future development of an interactive version of the piece.

Olivier Ratsi : design / Thomas Vaquié : sound design / Anthony Gouvrillon : software development / Julien Guinard : LED development

Thank you to Elektra team, Gilles Alvarez, Julien Taib, Cedric Huchet, Nicolas Rosette – Support by Arcadi, Théâtre de l’Agora and Stereolux. 

Inspiration is key to creative work.
Watching, digesting, and reinterpreting other artists work is a common thing in our internet age. We have instant access to an almost infinite library of work by other artists, researchers, developers, and it has become one of the most efficient learning tools, allowing anyone online to understand the different steps or parts of a creative process.

Of course nothing is ever completely new, and taking a route others have taken before helps to go further and push things forward.
Making variations, editing, adding, swapping, adapting an idea by changing elements and variables, mixing influences, -when enough time, effort and new inputs are put together- will often lead to new concepts and emerging ideas.

Fair use.
For a small independent project, the common “fair” behavior when a large part of a work clearly appears to be related to another, is to state as such. Explain its conception and credit and link to the original artwork.
Both the original creator and the “inspired” one can gain from this mutual respect, and many pieces can be seen as an “homage” to a previous work.

Commercial work.
When you enter the commercial world and when money is involved, the legal questions become a different story.
Copyright laws are applied on a stricter level, with a set of rules, ownership waivers, commercial licencing, royalties and lawyers. Most professionals understand that it has to be played “by the book”.

I am always amazed when a large commercial corporation is literally stealing someone’s work, and taking both credit and money for it, while being proud of enlarging their portfolio with an idea they ripped off.

The first time I came across such story is when MTV commissioned an agency to replicate 1024 architecture’s stage design. They went as far as rotoscoping 1024′s content frame-by-frame to recreate the same effects, and no credit was ever given.

More recently, when an agency got “inspired” by Chris O’Shea’s work “The hand from Above” (Liverpool, Sept 2009), many artists and creators spotted the resemblance and started a debate over ownership, almost turning the project page into a forum.

The list goes on and on and the topic is probably as old as the history of art itself, with notable examples like the lawsuit that opposed Albrecht Dürer over Raimondi plagiarising his prints the during the Renaissance.
While there might not be a definite solution to this “inspired by” / “ripped off from” topic, the debates and discussions around the subject seem to help define the boundaries, and to draw the line between the two.

A few weeks ago, I discovered a case dealing with similar issues, and I am still surprised that even after a few weeks, the story hasn’t been discussed much.

FORMS, an audiovisual installation by Memo Akten and Quayola.

Forms is an ongoing collaboration between visuals artists Memo Akten and Quayola, a series of studies on human motion, and its reverberations through space and time. It is inspired by the works of Eadweard Muybridge, Harold Edgerton, Étienne-Jules Marey as well as similarly inspired modernist cubist works such as Marcel Duchamp’s “Nude Descending a Staircase No.2″.  [...]

So the collaborative piece from Memo Akten and Quayola, is essentially a use of “fairly recent” technologies and strong aesthetics combined together around a theme, a narrative, that gives a sense to the piece. It was then presented at the National Media Museum as installation, and a short version is also visible online.

The Forms (process) video shows some of the secrets behind the work, gives us insight into the project, and makes it easier to break down the original idea into three layers:

Narratives: The idea being the piece was the capture and synthesis of movement, the chosen subject: motion of human body practicing various sports (swimming, acrobatic diving, gymnastics, athletics, etc..).

Technology: The main trick here is Tracking, a technique to extract spatial data from 2D video footage. In this case it seems to be a combination of automatic (image analysis) and manual rotoscoping.

Aesthetics: The data from the tracking is then reinterpreted and visualized through abstract geometrical shapes, three dimensional trails, and sparkling particles, to visualize dynamics and motion over time.

None of the elements above are totally new. We can find similar examples of narratives, technology and aesthetics in other works, but what’s unique is this very combination of specific elements and a strong artistic direction.

ENJOY THE MOMENT, a TV advert by Publicis.

This video appeared 5 months later, and was shown on TV 600 times in total.

It’s all there.
Exact same content, techniques, narratives, very same aesthetics. I first thought it could be the work of the same team, but I noticed there wasn’t a single mention of Memo Akten and Quayola.
In fact the only credits that would appear were those:

Agency & Concept : Publicis QMP
Creative Director: Ronan Nulty
Art Director: Dan O’Neill
Director: Shane Griffin
Produced by Piranha Bar

Edit: a reference to the original artists was added later, after some people started commenting about it, and can now also be found here.  The video was also taken down Shane Griffin’s website and vimeo account the day I contacted him.

After seeing a few tweets mentioning a possible abuse, I was intrigued enough to send a few emails to the above list of  supposed “Artistic and creative directors”, as a question was burning my lips:

- When you had the idea of remaking “Form”, did you ask the artists to work on this project ? What did they say ?

In fact they never tried to contact the artists. Not a call. Not an email.

I also contacted Publicis Ireland, Piranha Bar, Cadbury and their owner Kraft foods to arrange interviews, but none of them answered positively. I had a polite response from Publicis secretary and one from Dan O’Neill saying that Creative Director Ronan Nulty would get back to me, but I never heard back from him.
Edit: Just got a call from a Publicis spokesman, right after this, but this article was already signed off.

I then contacted the artists and within a few minutes, I received some responses:

From Memo Akten:
Personally, I’d like to stay out of this discussion. My only acknowledgement of this was lighthearted tweet:
“we all have our inspirations, I wonder what inspired this  http://t.co/LgEHzRKE“

From Quayola: 
The big question that I cannot explain to myself is “why didn’t they approached us if they wanted exactly the same ?”
Not even sure if we would have actually say yes, but it would have been polite. 

AN EVERLASTING DEBATE
While writing this article, I asked some advice around, and a well-known media artist sent some interesting thoughts:

What I’ve learned is that these ad agencies really don’t give a fuck.
The ONLY thing they care about is money, and until something actually threatens that, they don’t care.
Being called unoriginal douchebags in public? They already know that, and it pays handsomely, thank you.

It would be very naive indeed to expect the big companies to care about ownership or to express any scruple. They’ve deliberately chosen that way of approaching projects, and they’re probably working on their next “big idea” already.
It would be pointless to try changing it, as much it would be to expect living in a fair world.

That said, what really shocks me the most, is the “copy / paste / brand / sell” process, without trying to enhance the original idea, or bothering to contact the creator.
As a visual artist, and a creative content producer, I feel like this could happen to me, or to anyone in a similar field working as an independent artist. Even if I think copyrighting is no longer the way forward, in this case I would feel completely dispossessed of my idea, something personal in which I may have put a lot of time, effort, and expectations.

While writing this post,  I found it really interesting to see artists, creators and companies intensely debating around these ever changing concepts of ownership. My only point here would be that we’re being given new tools: blogs, social networks and new mediums, and this gives us a great opportunity to discuss these topics, express an opinion or show our support, and maybe somehow try to contribute to the definition of future models.

@publicisdublin steals visual artists’ work , and sells it to @CadburyUK.  
RT 

Online resources :
- Intellectual property, on Wikipedia.
- Copyright and Fair use (Wired).
- New Media Artworks: Prequels to Everyday Life (flong).
- Case study: Der Lauf Der Dinge vs. Honda (the guardian).
- Is copyright Dead on the Net ? (Wired).

Thanks to Kyle McDonald, Golan Levin, Yannick Jacquet, Romain Tardy and Nicolas Boritch for proofreading this article and for their useful feedback.

Last year, we were approached to create our first permanent installation for the new museum of architecture of Hala Stulecia, in Wroclaw, Poland. The piece – that we called O (Omicron), is actually the last part of the visit, and a way to create a link between the rich history of the building and the present times, by turning this massive concrete structure into a lively architecture.

When opened, Hala Stulecia was the largest reinforced concrete structure in the world. With a diameter of 65m it was home to the largest dome built since the Pantheon in Rome eighteen centuries earlier.
The Centennial Hall was listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2006.

It is reasonable to think that when Hala Stulecia was built in 1913 Max Berg’s ambition for his construction was to pass the test of time. What could have been his vision of the monument in the distant future? How did he imagine the olding of the materials? The evolution of the surrounding urbanism and populations?

The piece proposed for the Centennial Hall of Wroclaw is based around the notion of timelessness in architecture, and the idea of what future has meant throughout the 20th century.

Taking the 1910’s as a starting point (the dome was erected in 1913), historical and artistic references were used to reveal the architecture of the space, its timeless and, more surprisingly, very modern dimension.

A deliberately minimalist visual aesthetic allowed to highlight the very architecture of Hala Stulecia’s dome and re-affirm its place at the core of the piece. Minimalism also appeared to be the most appropriate means of conveying this idea of future at different periods of time (from 20’s/30’s anticipation film to more contemporary productions ). But the use of these references was not simply formal: the vision of futuristic totalitarian societies seemed to echo back real moments in the history of the building, warning us against the dangers of an idealized vision of the future.

Inspiration for the music composed by Thomas for this project was found in both orchestral work, echoing the colossal size of the architecture, and electronic textures, evoking the action of time. The score also tried and recreate a sense of evolution of the materials used for the dome structure, and their sonic aging.

By using references such as Fritz Lang’s Metropolis or the utopian projects of Archigram to confront the different visions of the future at different times, we were interested in trying to create a vision of a future with no precise time reference. A timeless future.

________________________________________________

DIRECTED by Romain Tardy & Thomas Vaquié
ARCHITECTURE by Max Berg (1913)
VISUALS by Romain Tardy, Guillaume Cottet
MUSIC composed by Thomas Vaquié
2D / 3D MAPPING by Joanie Lemercier, Romain Tardy
MANAGEMENT & PRODUCTION Nicolas Boritch
________________________________________________

Filmed by Jerome Monnot, Joanie Lemercier, Romain Tardy
Edited by Jerome Monnot
 

I was first invited in 2007, before AntiVJ existed, and since then we’ve been invited almost every year to show our more recent work, which really helped us to develop the label:

2007: – early version of my light sculptures series.
           – First time I saw 3Destruct live.
2008: New light sculpture with Romain Tardy, Olivier Ratsi and Yannick Jacquet.
2010: St Gervais, by Yannick Jacquet and Thomas Vaquié
2011: Cityscape, by Yannick Jacquet, Mandril and Thomas Vaquié.

This year I was invited to show my volcano piece (don’t ask me to pronounce its name). I haven’t had time yet to blog about it, and about the reverse mapping technique, but here’s a short documentary that explains the project.

It took me about 2 days to do the actual drawing (you could follow it almost realtime here).
I’m still not 100% happy with the visual result, and I’m looking for a residency to finally make some new parts and get the volcano obsession out of my mind, but I can feel I’m slowly getting there.

I wrote an article for CreativeApplications to explain the research and creative aspects behind the project.

             

“Mécaniques Discursives”
Being at the mapping was also an opportunity for me to see the new installation by Yannick Jacquet and Fred Penelle, it’s a project they develop outside of the label, and I was really looking forward to see it in person.
I will post more about it tomorrow.

Projecting onto the Parthénon.
On Sunday I did projection mapping workshop with teenagers, and we mapped a piece of the Parthenon, and used a new 3D scanning technique.
I’ll post more information about it in the next few days !

Our first permanent mapping.
I also did a presentation, and it was an opportunity to show the video of Omicron, our first permanent projection mapping piece on an incredible location, a 70m wide concrete dome built 100 years ago, and protected by Unesco. The piece was directed by Romain Tardy and Thomas Vaquié.
Keep an eye on the blog, the release is imminent.

In the meantime, here’s a preview of the 3Destruct project soundtrack. This version was composed during a residency at l’Usine Lu, in Nantes (FR),  inside an old factory warehouse. You can find the full length video report and more details in a blog post by Yannick Jacquet, who produced the visual content with the help of Jérémie Peeters.

“COMB”, Thomas Vaquie. This version is a stereo edit of the piece originally produced for a 7 channel system.

This extract is the second part of the piece which was articulated around 3 movements. I started the composition once the visual narrative and dynamics were developed by Yannick Jacquet and Jeremie Peeters. From there i decided to go for a frame based approach to composition and editing and synched every frame over a final video edit. Inspiration had to be found solely in the visual dynamics of those simple visual elements, vectors.

The physical structure of the installation is made of thin vertical stripes of material. This specific canvas created a strong direction for the general aesthetics of the piece. Also, a large part of the piece being based around the idea of streaks pattern, the use of “comb filters” to slice the space both sonically and visually became an obvious choice. And finally for the name of the track.

Streaks pattern, part of the piece aesthetics inspired by the physical structure of 3Destruct.

The 3Destruct video has just been nominated for the vimeo awards in the captured category, please show your support.  You can vote once a day until the 30th of April.
https://vimeo.com/awards/vote/captured

The installation will be touring more this year, keep an eye on the website.

Thomas.

This project began shortly after Imandril contacted me via facebook to tell me he like my work and would love to work with me in the future. After this first contact, I visited his website to see his work that I didn’t know before. I fell in admiration of his mastery of drawing, composing and his preciseness. I very appreciated his detailed cityscape so precise that you can zoom into almost indefinitely as a fractal. Though using different techniques of expression, I immediately saw that our works are both heavily influenced by architecture and I immediately imagined a possible collaboration.

We wanted to mix our artistic practices to achieve this project that blends 3D animation and drawing. To do this we used the technique of “2D mapping” or “reverse mapping”. (An article in this blog is planed in a near future to explain this technique). One of the pioneers of this technique is Joanie Lemercier he use it in several personal project like “Live Painting – Shackleton”. Before this project I had not really experienced this technique which I like very much. This collaboration was the perfect opportunity

The idea was to show the passing of a day in an imaginary city in fast-forward. We wanted to puts the spectator at the summit of a tower facing a huge “world city”. We wanted to mix various architectural influences to create a dystopian city strangely familiar but impossible to locate. Thomas Vaquié made the sound design to enforces this « disturbing strangeness »

Mandrill and I really like science fiction and anticipation tale. We were quite inspired by movies like Blade Runner, Amer Beton, The 5th Element or book as 1984 (George Orwel), Brave New World (Aldous Huxley) Fahrenheit 451 (Ray Bradbury), The Città Invisibili (Italo Calvino) and many more

The project was presented for the first time at the “Mapping Festival” of Geneva in May 2011.

Legoman (3D animation)
Mandril (drawing)
Thomas Vaquie (sound design)

Shot and edited by Jerome Monnot
(additional footage by Yannick Jacquet)

The 3Destruct project started in 2007, inspired in part by the wide-open yet claustrophobic space of an underground car park that the Biennale of Contemporary Art of Louvain-la-Neuve in Belgium had offered. Since then, the project has been presented in other festivals: Mapping Festival in Geneva (2007); Image Radio, Eindhoven (2007), 100% Montpellier (2008); most recently Yota Space in Saint Petersburg (2010).

An installation that occupies its host space in a particular and demanding manner, staging it requires finding the right venue. Since seeing the original Biennale presentation, the curator of the French festival Scopitone, Cedric Huchet, has been looking for that venue. 2011 saw the festival partner with the large former biscuit factory Le Lieu Unique, and in that space Cedric finally knew he had the perfect opportunity to host 3Destruct.

Allocated in an old workshop with industrial architecture typical of the late 19th century, we worked over a week to adapt the installation to this new space. As well as the expected issues of scale and placement, we had to update the whole projected sequence to eliminate all horizontal lines which we found just weren’t looking right especially in the more minimal sequences with the particular material used for this staging. Its a piece with real dynamic range and we had to keep that, and then we found the new constraint turned from challenging to a liberating new visual direction.

For those who might be interested by the technical aspect of the project, here are some schematics of the setup.

3Desctruct / Le Lieu Unique
4 volumes laid with mesh; 4x 1024 30fps Video streams;
6.1 surround sound.
Visuals: YANNICK JACQUET, JEREMIE PEETERS
Music: THOMAS VAQUIE

Many thanks to Cedric Huchet for inviting us, the Lieu Unique team for helping with the construction, and everyone involved in the project.

/Yannick


Official page: http://antivj.com/3Destruct_v2/

Related posts:
- 3DESTRUCT
- 3DESTRUCT IN RUSSIA WITH ONEDOTZERO

As I’ve been following the FLIM sessions for a while now, I was really happy to be invited to the november edition (the main musical act was Deadbeat – that made me even happier), and I imagined 2 structures with a simple design that could be hanged both over the stage and the VJ booth. The 2 structures were mapped with the great Millumin software (be sure to check it out at http://millumin.com/) and the visuals played live with modul8 (routed through Millumin via Syphon). The idea was to stick to the minimal aesthetic of FLIM, with only white lines creating patterns on the structure, with bits of 3D graphics from time to time. Similar visuals were projected on a curved wall and on a small stucture made with semi-transparent screens.

View from Millumin’s interface with grid warping enabled.

Many thanks to Kristoffer Karlsson for inviting me, Johan Holm for helping with the construction, and all the people involved in the project.

For more info: FLIM Stockholm / Facebook & www.romaintardy.com

/ Romain