1 TechArt: Journal of Arts and Imaging Science, Vol. 2, No.

2, May 2015

Case Study on Four Interactive Self-portraits: Technology

for Empathy
Hyunil Kim and Hyung-Gi Kim*
Chung-Ang University / Seoul, Korea
*Corresponding Author (unzi@cau.ac.kr)

Abstract: Self-portraiture has historically been used by artists as representation of themselves. First used in the
17th century, the term “self-portrait” expresses the idea of the self being presented. Beginning in the 19th
century, self-portraiture was produced in the forms of painting, drawing, etching, and sculpture of the face,
among others. The advent of new media expands self-portraiture as an exploration of the self and of the artist’s
facets. Indeed, the digital age brings new concepts and ideas to the expression of self. In the age of high tech,
interactive technology prompts physical participation and intense engagement with works of art. Interactive self-
portraiture has emerged as a compound of representation, performance, and technology of the artist’s own
identity, producing expressions of the self and empathy..

Keywords: Interactive Self-portraiture, Empathy, Post-humanism

Received Feb. 02, 2015; revised manuscript received Apr. 22, 2015; accepted for publication May. 27, 2015; published
online May. 28, 2015. DOI: 10.15323/techart.2015.05.2.2.1/ ISSN: 2288-9248.

1. Introduction
The advancement of technologies has brought new
media to the discussion of self-portraits. Self-portraits as
“selfies” have become more familiar to the public as
image-making technologies have become more accessible.
The Hockney-Falco thesis discusses the concept of
realistic and accurate depiction through the development of
optical apparatus technology. Earlier self-portraits were
made with the aid of camera obscura devices, mirrors, and
photography. At present, there are artworks that portray
idiosyncrasies, character, behavior, and other aspects of
the autobiographer beyond physical likeness. Visual artists
utilize hi-tech apparatuses and digital technology to create
images of themselves, adding interactive elements to their
work to express their individuality and bring spectators
closer into their world to the extent of empathy. The
following four works involve interactive technology and
convey a desire to reach out to others and feel understood.
The interactive element itself reflects certain aspects of the
artist, from which participants and spectators gain
expanded insight into the artist. The works are analyzed in
terms of visual and technical aspects: the visual
autobiographical elements in Section 2, and the
participatory functions for assessing their self-expressive
and empathetic qualities in Section 3. The study
acknowledges that empathy can encompass a wide range
of emotional states, including experiencing emotions that
are in accord with another person’s emotions, caring for
other people and having the desire to support them, and
discerning what another person is thinking or feeling [1].
The four aforementioned self-portraits exhibit one or more
emotional states of empathy.
2. Self-portraiture
A self-portrait may have various definitions; in general,
it is a portrait produced by an artist of themselves [2]. In
the traditional sense, self-portraits are a visual
representation of the face or head and shoulders. This
stereotypical image of the self-portrait arose in the
Renaissance period; art historians and researchers specify
this period as when the self-portrait was conceived as
autonomous. According to Woods-Marsden, the
autonomous self-portrait is a representation that depicts the
artist as central figure, as opposed to being the owner of a
face of one of the characters in a historical illustration [3].
Mirrors and other optical devices have assisted artists in
painting, drawing, etching, and sculpting their likeness.
Soon, they sensed the need to perform their image as
artists, by posing with tools-of-the-trade and carefully
selecting related backgrounds [4]. Fast-forward to the 20th
century, self-portraiture and autobiography become
connected. Avgitidou claimed that “self-portraiture in the
context of autobiography is a self-exploration as much as it
is a self-representation… Artists adopted this idea and
went on to produce self-portraits that explored, acted out
or performed the self [5].” This genre of self-portraits,
which Avgitidou coined “self-portrait as autobiography,”
is used in visibility politics to explore stereotyped social
and cultural identities [6]. Identity is fluid within personal,
cultural, and societal boundaries, and relative to one
another. Self-portraiture began from a face to represent
facets. Artists reflect this notion in various methodologies
and manners, which will be the focus in this section in
terms of the four works.
H. Kim et al.: Case Study on Four Interactive Self-portraits: Technology for Empathy
Fig. 1. Baek, RMP-Panorama
A. Baek, RMP-Panorama (2014)
Korean media artist JungKi Baek has presented a piece
utilizing VR photography in his work Ridable Multimedia
Player-Panorama (2014). Baek is an artist working with
themes of alternative media. He revamped a bicycle; the
seat has no cushioning, and the traditional rubber tires are
replaced with wooden ones. The work under review is his
documentation of a performance in which an
uncomfortable ride from Seoul to Daebu Island is recorded
on six GoPro cameras; the six separate footage sources are
stitched together. The photography includes digital noise,
nauseating shaking, blurry focus, and the noisy rattling
sound of the wooden tires rolling along different surfaces.
Baek used technology to simulate his ride on a
“multimedia player” for spectators. The image also acts as
a self-portrait. Spectators can observe the artist’s
immediate reactions to his alternate medium, the traffic
situation, and pavement, and even see him figure in an
accident. His reactions reveal his character, and spectators
virtually experience the physical hardship of his journey.
Although the artist looked toward his destination,
spectators in the gallery could choose their point of view
with a mouse set up in the gallery. They could navigate the
photographed space and get a sense of the location. The
experience can be termed “hyper-real,” as the actual ride
would have only allowed the view of the direction the rider
was looking at, at any specific time.
B. Cadet, Proposition (2013)
French artist France Cadet’s piece, Proposition (2013),
is an illustration of a cyborg in the artist’s own image with
a blue butterfly that flutters its wings when the cyborg’s
forearm is touched. Cadet is a digital and robotics artist,
whose work questions diverse aspects in debates of science
and contemporary anxieties on biotechnology. Her work
explores the imagined sensuality of biomechanical beings
with a tactile sense. The image is an embodiment of her
own self as a robot. The face resembles the artist, whereas
2
the body is that of a cyborg. The smooth sensation of the
encapsulated digital print reflects the suggested glossy feel
of the feminine robotic figure’s skin. A touch sensor
activates the artificial muscle for the butterfly’s wings to
move. Participants enter Cadet’s fantastic world of “the
naturally artificial,” which is where “living and artificial,
erotic and robotics, interior and exterior, real and unreal…
intermingle [7],” by activating the piece through stroking
an image on the forearm.
Fig. 2. Hawkinson, Emoter
C. Hawkinson, Emoter (2000)
Tim Hawkinson’s Emoter (2000) is a photograph with
cutouts of his facial features connected to motors that
make them move. The movement is not in sync, and
creates skewed facial expressions of various emotions, not
all of which can be named. The face is tethered to sensors
pointed toward a black-and-white TV set, and movement
becomes activated by the movement on the screen.
According to interviews done with the artist [8],
Hawkinson is shy when discussing his own work. One can
draw parallels between his sheepishness and the sensors
directed toward a TV screen in the corner and not toward
spectators. He is known for his low-tech aesthetics formed
into offbeat self-portraits. He utilizes ordinary objects and
puts them together in elaborate and extraordinary manners
to create his works. Emoter is about inventiveness and
process [9], and he is interested in the mechanics of
various objects. Hawkinson has said that Emoter had not
started with a face; it was intended to be about generating a
random pattern [10]. The handmade aesthetics of the piece
mirrors the artist’s idiosyncrasies as the indirectness of his
interactive technology..
D. Stelarc, Prosthetic Head (2002)
Stelarc’s Prosthetic Head (2002) is a 3D-rendered
animated avatar head in the likeness of the artist that is
projected largely in a darkened gallery space. The Cyprus-
born Australia-based performance artist equipped it with
an ultra-sound sensor to detect the presence of users and
then initiate a conversation with those who approach. It is
a talking head; it lip-syncs in real time, has the capability
to synthesize speech, and has a digital voice. The head can
change its facial expressions, thereby reflecting the artist’s
3 TechArt: Journal of Arts and Imaging Science, Vol. 2, No. 2, May 2015
behavior. It tilts and turns, and can change its eye gaze. A
keyboard is placed in front of the bigger-than-life-size
projection for users to type questions, which the head can
answer. The head is programmed with autobiographical
information and philosophy of the artist. The head’s
answers mirror Stelarc’s personality. It is embedded with
algorithms that enable it to generate novel poetry and
singing on demand. Stelarc’s piece questions issues of the
body and human consciousness as it has an immaterial
virtual body and fact-based intelligence. His work is based
on his concept that the human body is obsolete; “a physical
body has been exposed as inadequate, empty and
involuntary” [11]. This particular piece demonstrates and
questions this concept. Artist/writer Julie Joy Clarke
described, “The Prosthetic Head and its facial expressions
highlight the fact that the human face is a feature of our
body that we use sub-consciously to convey meaning,”
claiming that pathos is absent in it [12]. Nonetheless, it is a
piece that thoroughly shows multiple aspects of the artist,
in a post-human and human way, and builds an empathetic
relationship with its viewer.
Fig. 3. Stelarc, 3D Model of Prosthetic Head
3. Interactive Technology
A. Baek, RMP-Panorama
The technology involved is designed to provide a sense
of presence in another environment. Interactive VR
panoramic photography conveys presence and provides a
sense of location and space [13]. Baek’s desire to create
“alternative media” is documented in this technology with
all the side effects of the actual alternative, which is the
modified bicycle. The friction with the pavement is seen
and heard, and in many directions. Spectators can search
for reactions of onlookers, which the actual cycler may
have missed and is only available upon review. One would
also have to maneuver the mouse in the proper direction so
as not to miss the onlooker or onlookers. This technology
in this specific case not only offers the sense of spatial and
temporal proximity but also empathetic immediacy, with
the advantage of multiple perspectives.
Baek’s work offers a sense of presence, immediacy, and
empathy. The inherent distortion of flattening the 360-
degree panoramic image makes the artist look comical
owing to the exaggerated head and facial expressions. The
touch of humor from the distortion and the unorthodox
medium experiment appeal to spectators, and all emotional
states of empathy can be expected. The interactivity of the
technology offers participatory spectators control of
multiple views, which strongly suggests feeling in accord.
Fig. 4. Cadet, Proposition
B. Cadet, Proposition
In Cadet’s self-portrait, a “caress” opens up the artist’s
personal world of the body, mind, emotions, sensuality,
and machine. The interaction functions in the manner the
artist wants to evoke in the spectator–with intimacy. The
spectator may feel traces of warmth left behind by another,
and such a fleeting feeling connects the spectator to her
and her work.
The intimacy of the interaction in Proposition through
its physicality and fantastic qualities propose feeling in
accord with another person’s emotions. The artist’s love
for robotic beings and the imagined futuristic world they
may inhabit are latent in the work and then extended to
spectators.
C. Hawkinson, Emoter
Hawkinson’s Emoter mirrors the expressions and
emotions of gallery visitors. The interactive sensor is
installed indirectly; it receives input from a TV screen,
which activates the motorized cutouts to tilt and skew to
create recognizable and fictional facial expressions. The
indirect installation of the sensor can be interpreted as the
artist being private and/or shy. Judging from interviews
with the artist, he can be humble and reticent [4], [14].
Viewers may never meet the artist in person, but they can
H. Kim et al.: Case Study on Four Interactive Self-portraits: Technology for Empathy 4

observe a moving image of a surrogate or a fictionalized
proxy that performs his character. This approach elicits
empathy, as many claim a little shyness.
D. Sterlac, Prosthetic Head
The Prosthetic Head employs advanced computer
technology, 3D modeling and animation, audio speech
synthesizing, and text-to-speech systems to emulate the
artist. It is an enhanced and modified Alice chat-bot that
acts as a surrogate of Sterlac. Embodied conversational
agents (ECAs) are tools for communicative behavior and
are employed to achieve communicative likeness with real-
time recognition and response. The ECA software is based
on Richard Wallace’s Alicebot software. Alice is an
acronym for Artificial Linguistic Internet Computer Entity
and utilizes Artificial Intelligence Markup Language
(AIML), which is a form of artificial intelligence that can
form responses to users’ questions. The artist is planning
to develop the project by installing a vision system, which
will enable the Head to detect the color of the user’s
clothing and be able to analyze the user’s behavior. Hence,
the additional information obtained will allow the
conversation between the Head and the user to be more
convincing. In this case, the Head would become more
interactive; it would respond to the user in a dynamic and
engaging manner. This addition may allow the Prosthetic
Head to convince its empathetic qualities to future users.
E. Comparison of the interactive technology in the
four artworks in terms of self-portraiture
the artist presents the spectator with a choice to view
different angles of the scenery, his performance, and
himself. Cadet’s Proposition welcomes spectators into a
fantastical illusive moment through the stroking and
fluttering. The avoidance of direct interaction with the
spectator seen in the reaction of fictional emotive
expressions in Hawkinson’s randomly moving photograph-
sculpture is a tell-tale sign of the artist’s personality.
Stelarc’s avatar is an embodiment of its technology with
the purpose of reflecting the artist’s mentality and intellect.
4. Conclusion
Self-portraiture is in a new age of expression, in which
the expression is a fusion of technology and art. Through
the case study of the four works by visual artists and
performers, the representation of the self is demonstrated
to be both visual and experiential. The indirect interaction
in Emoter and direct contact in Proposition show not only
the face but also facets of their respective artist. The works
of Baek and Stelarc connect with participants in different
high-tech manners, yet both performance and performing
works display the artists’ identity in their own ways. All
four works use face and interfaces to construct the artists’
biographies in an interactive method, which attracts
viewers to participate, relate, and empathize. Florence
stated that “a measure of technolization of how humans as
artists construct themselves has been inevitable” [15].
Interactive technology is a crucial part of self-expression
and identity; the interactive self-portrait is a composite of
face and user interface, used by participants and the creator
to express oneself to the extent of empathy.

Table 1. Comparison Table References

Interactive Personal
Artwork technology in Activator quality [1] G. H. M. Pihnenborg, J. M. Spikman, B. F. Jeronimus
artwork revealed
and A. Aleman, “Insight in schizophrenia:
RMP,
VR Spectator /
Behavioral Associations with empathy,” European Archives of
Photography Participant
Baek Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 263, pp. 299-
Proposition, Spectator / 307, 2013.
Touch sensor Fictional
Cadet Participant
[2] “Self-portrait,” Oxforddictionaries.com, Oxford
Emoter, Spectator / Fictional, University Press, n.d. Web. Accessed January 28,
Light sensor
Hawkinson Participant behavioral 2015.
Prosthetic IR sensor, [3] J. Woods-Marsden, Renaissance Self-Portraiture:
Spectator / Behavioral,
Head, ECA
Stelarc software
Participant intellectual The Visual Construction of Identity and the Social
Status of the Artist, Yale University Press, New
Haven and London, 1998.
Table 1 presents the results of analyses on the personal
qualities revealed through the interactive technologies [4] R. Shusterman, C. Pontbriand, and O. Assilen, “Self-
implemented by the four chosen artworks. The works’ Styling after the ‘End of Art’: An interview with
visual representation of the self are enriched by interactive Richard Shusterman,” Parachute, 105, pp. 57-63,
technologies that affirm personal traits, which are 2002.
behavioral and intellectual, and in certain cases, fictional. [5] A. Avgitidou, “Performances of the Self,” Digital
Ultimately, all of the interactive technologies employed Creativity, 14(3), pp. 131-138, 2003.
disclose behavioral aspects of the artists’ personality,
reflecting the artist’s decision-making process. The [6] A. Avgitidou [5]
interactive technology used in the four media artworks
expose different aspects of the respective artist. In RMP,
5 TechArt: Journal of Arts and Imaging Science, Vol. 2, No. 2, May 2015

[7] F. Cadet, “France Cadet,” Variation, October 2014.

Web. Accessed December 18, 2014.
http://variationparis.com/portfolio/diaporama2014/
[8] J. Zellen, “Electronic Wizardry,” Afterimage, 33(2),
September-October 2005.
[9] S. Freudenheim, “A mop that talks and other creative
liberties,” The New York Times, February 15, 2005.
Web.
[10] ART21, “Tim Hawkinson: ‘Drip’ and ‘Emoter’,”
Art21, Inc., 2003. Web. Accessed on January 30,
2015. http://www.art21.org/texts/tim-
hawkinson/interview-tim-hawkinson-drip-and-emoter
[11] Stelarc. “Prosthetic Head,” Stelarc, Accessed on
December 19, 2014. http://stelarc.org/?catID=20239
[12] J. Clarke, “Stelarc’s Prosthetic Head,” cTheory: An
international peer-reviewed journal of theory,
technology and culture, 1000 Days of Theory, (eds.)
Arthur and Marilouise Kroker, October 10, 2005.
Accessed on January 25, 2015.
http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=491
[13] A. Hoeben and P. J. Stappers. “Taking clues from the
world outside: Navigating interactive panoramas,”
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 10(2-3), pp.
122-127, April 2006.
[14] “Creating Art with Moving Parts.” All Things
Considered, NPR, Washington, D.C., August 16,
2005. Radio.
[15] P. Florence, “Cybiog and sexed digitalia,” Digital
Creativity, 14(3), pp. 144-151, 2003.

Biographies
Hyunil Kim was born in Hamilton, Ontario,
Canada. He received his MFA in Studio Arts from
Hunter College at the City College of New York in
2007. Currently, he is pursuing his Ph.D. in Art and
Technology at the Graduate School of Advanced
Imaging Science, Multimedia and Film, Chung-
Ang University, Seoul, Korea. He also teaches
photography at various colleges. His research
interests include photography, video, experimental
film theory, critical race theory, and media art.

Hyung-gi Kim was born in Korea in 1960. He

lived in Paris for 15 years. Currently, he is a
professor of Art and Technology at the Graduate
School of Advanced Imaging Science, Multimedia
and Film, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea.
He received his D.N.S.A.P. of Multimedia Art
from l’Ecole Nationale Supériure des Beaux-Arts
de Paris in 1991. He received his D.E.A. of
Multimedia and Media from Conservatoire
National des Arts et Métiers in 2001 and his Ph.D. in Media Art from the
Graduate School of Soongsil University in 2009. He launched 11 solo
media art exhibitions and participated in many group exhibitions. He was
Chief Director of the Incheon International Digital Art Festival in 2009
and Director of SBS Tomorrow Festival in 2010. His research interests
are 3D display systems, projection mapping, media façades, kinetic art,
interactive media art, and media performance.