The purpose of this project is to explore society’s perception of what is real and what is simulated. We live in an age where digital replicas are every bit as lifelike and realistic as their physical counterparts. Simulators exist to train pilots and astronauts, CGI in films has given us the power to create digital creatures and even humans, and advances in computer hardware allow for video games to become increasingly realistic.  Photographs can no longer be trusted as proof of an event with the overabundance of digital cameras, scanners, and a little Photoshop knowledge. All in all, it is sometimes very difficult to perceive what is genuine and what is digital with the blending of the lines between
     This project relies on the contasting/comparing of two entities: 1) a physical gallery with real objects and 2) a virtual world experienced through projected imagery and 3d glasses. The physical space consists of the interior of the (art)n gallery as well as various sensor stations placed throughout the space. These sensor stations will be composed of a variety of sensor technologies (infrared, sonic, touch, sound, etc.) and will allow participants to feed input into the VR environment.  The virtual world is an ultra-realistic replica of the interior of the gallery. Lighting and shadows will be set up identically to the configuration on the night of the show and will be baked into the textures. The VR environment will fluctuate between two modes based on input from the sensor stations.  The first mode is merely the photorealistic replica, identical to the gallery. Participants can explore the entire gallery in this mode, examining it in relation to real space around them.  The second mode is a distorted, alternate version of the same gallery space. This mode will focus on using input from the sensor stations to impart changes upon the virtual gallery. Changes will range from effects as minimal as altering the lighting (color and intensity) to an extreme state where the virtual gallery is heavily distorted geometrically. Other examples of responses to sensor stations might include: rearranging the space by relocating objects and doors, altering the scale of the space, or perhaps modifying the space so that it it becomes a mirrored image of the gallery or has its axis flipped so the user must “climb” the floor vertically.

Questions/Problems/Issues/Things to be addressed
The project becomes site-specific. Modifying the project to be shown effectively in another location becomes a major issue.
What role will sound have within the project?
All sensor stations should have a consistent aesthetic.  This aesthetic must somehow tie back into the project conceptually.