patina in digital objects

Today there are many objects – digital in particular – with a short product cycle that are manufactured with little or no concern of positive ageing. It creates a gap between the increasing digitalization of services and patina as an immanent part of most physical objects surrounding us. To bridge this gap we have to investigate the potential of incorporating patina in digital technologies. This issue will be discussed in the following by considering the main characteristics of the digital material.

The focus will be on how we experience the digital, more than on perception of the medium. Thereby we are questioning the conception of transparency. Transparency is a term – often used within interaction design – describing how new technologies give immediate and unproblematic access to new actions with the purpose of optimizing the fit between people and technologies. Here it is not transparency that makes a product superlative but the ability to provide aesthetic experiences and poetic dimensions through the digital object it self.

Whereas most products are made of natures own material, digital objects main substance is superficially constructed by humans. The material is constructed in such a way that it has to inhabit physical forms in order to exist. It dematerializes literally into binary codes and dematerializes metaphorically in response to miniaturization and integration in new and existing products. For that reason it does not have any qualities and makes no sense in itself. Only when given an input combined with an analogue output, it somehow creates its own meaning. Consequently, when we perceive the digital material we only see what is mediated by physical materials and analogue outputs – the digital by itself happens to be indiscernible. The medium becomes our optical illusion of what occurs in the digital world. It translates the quite abstract landscape of binary codes and makes it possible for us to perceive what our sense cannot directly detect. Thus, what we see is a representation of the digital world.
Everything ages over time, it just differs in tempo. What we experience is a change in appearance. This change (in appearance) is either due to a change in the physical and functional appearance or to the perceptual appearance. Digital material only ages in our perceptual appearance. Long term changes in the relation between the object and outer demands and expectations to their actuality make us experience a relative change in ageing although the object in it self does not age.

Unless you modify the binary structure it does not show any signs of use. A digital object can exist for decades without getting worn out and still consist of the exact same binary combinations. The mathematical fundamentals behind the material offer what we can call an on/off quality; either a digital code works or it does not. There is nothing in between – no process in which the content of the material progressively alters. It will remain the same until some system error occurs and changes the structure of the material itself. What makes a digital object old is the actuality of the underlying engine and functions. We can conclude that the digital material changes our ways of living but it is by itself unchangeable.

These perspectives describe a gap between the worlds of digital material and spatial, analogue inhabitation. It becomes even more evident when we talk about creating digital patina. Since the digital material is not ageing, we have to design a simulated patina. By modifying the combination of binary codes we can transform the inner structure and not only the representation of the digital material. Although we change the structure of the digital material, it will still be an imitation instead of an immanent quality. Hence, digital patina is about “patinizing” the digital material. Still it opposes the perfect and questions the sterility in the digital world.