Junpeng Liang + Weixi Kuang
Microbial Pigment Biopolymers
Bio-based polymer composite; fixed microbial pigment
MW : Can you tell us a little bit about who you are and what you do?
WK + JL :
We are Weixi Kuang ( WK ) and Junpeng Liang ( JL ), a London-based artist duo. Our current practice sits at the intersection of bio-art, material engineering, computational design, digital fabrication, and speculative/critical design.
We build research-driven workflows where living pigmentation, diffusion, and time become visual languages - translated into sculptural forms and design narratives that invite viewers to sense processes that are usually invisible.
MW : How did the two of you meet, and when did you both decide to work together?
WK + JL : We met during an international collaborative design workshop organized through our undergraduate program. At the time, we were both drawn to bio-art, material-driven making, and speculative/critical approaches to technology.
We began creating work together in 2022, and the collaboration has since developed into a shared practice that moves between experimentation and storytelling- building systems and materials that carry both method and meaning.
MW :
Can you tell us a little bit more about your research-driven material processes?
JL : We treat research as a way of composing material experiences, not as a purely technical exercise. The project begins with a design question: how can an invisible biological process become something a viewer can read-through color, texture, and time?
From there, we work iteratively, moving between design, making,and observation. We generate a small family of surface variations, test them under consistent conditions, and document how color appears, migrates, and settles over days rather than minutes.
The “research” is the rhythm of this loop: designing conditions, watching what the material returns, and refining the next iteration so the work becomes both intentional and alive.
WK : For me, the process is also a narrative method. We’re not aiming to “control” biology into a fixed image; we’re staging an encounter where color can emerge as evidence of living time.
The material tests create a language - gradients, boundaries, residues- that viewers can sense without specialist knowledge. In that sense, research becomes a form of storytelling: it turns cultivation, care, and uncertainty into a readable surface.
installation unit (single module), full view
installation unit, detail view
MW : Collaboration seems embedded both between the two of you and microbial systems. How does decision-making shift when biological agents participate in making?
WK : When biological agents participate, decision-making becomes less about imposing an image and more about setting a scene. We don’t treat microbes as a material that obediently follows a plan; we approach them as collaborators whose behavior carries its own rhythms.
Our role is to define conditions - a threshold of moisture, a duration of exposure, a surface that can receive - and then allow the work to unfold. That shift is also conceptual: it asks what it means to author with something you cannot fully command, and how care, restraint, and uncertainty become part of the artwork’s meaning.
JL : On my side, the practical decisions are always made with the final experience in mind:
How will a viewer read this?
Instead of “choosing” a color outcome, we tune the factors that shape how color becomes visible over time - whether it forms a broad gradient, a sharper trace, or a lingering deposit. What matters is the translation: these choices become a visual vocabulary that carries narrative.
A slow migration can read as drift or weathering; a boundary can read as a threshold; residue can read as memory.
The technical work is only there to make that vocabulary consistent enough to be legible, so the concept can arrive through the surface rather than through explanation.
installation unit, detail view
MW : How has working with feedback systems or microbial communities reshaped how you understand collaboration between yourselves as a duo?
JL : Working with microbial communities keeps us in a state of openness. Biology doesn’t behave like a stable material - color can intensify, drift, stall, or disappear - so we’ve learned not to treat outcomes as something to be “secured,” but as something to be met.
We follow our own method to stay coherent, yet we actively invite the unknown: the most interesting moments often arrive when the microbes respond in ways we didn’t anticipate. There’s a slight sense of risk in that - an edge of unpredictability that we don’t try to eliminate. Instead, we treat it as part of the collaboration, because it’s where new visual languages and new questions emerge.
WK : That openness reshapes how we work together. Rather than forcing agreement too early, we hold space for ambiguity and let the material guide the conversation.
In practice, Junpeng often pushes for legibility - how the system can be read- while I push for meaning- what the work is saying and what it ethically implies. The microbial agent becomes a third collaborator that prevents the work
from becoming purely conceptual or purely technical.
It keeps authorship distributed: between our roles, the material, and the living dynamics that exceed our control.
installation unit, detail view
group view (ceramic sculptures)
MW : Algorithmic modeling often seeks optimization. Are there moments where inefficiency or slowness becomes conceptually interesting and important within a growth-based system?
JL : Absolutely - within growth-based systems, slowness isn’t a drawback, it’s the medium.
Diffusion needs time to reveal structure: boundaries soften, gradients accumulate, residues settle, and color can intensify, drift, or fade. If I “optimized” too hard toward a single clean outcome, I would erase the very phenomena the work is trying to make visible. So I use computation less as an optimizer and more as a way to hold a field of controlled variation - different surface conditions and parameters that let me compare how time performs on matter.
Conceptually, that slowness matters because it resists the industrial fantasy of instant, permanent results. It reframes “finish” as something conditional: a surface that is always becoming rather than completed. The viewer doesn’t encounter color as a fixed coating, but as a time-based event - an index of duration, care, and environment.
In that sense, inefficiency becomes productive:
it is where new visual language appears, and where the work’s meaning is carried by change itself.
installation unit, detail view