A. List Of Artists:
Kevin Appel:
Picture 1
Picture 2
David Thrope:
Picture 1
Picture 2
Silke Schatz:
Picture 1
Picture 2
Paul Noble:
Picture 1
Picture 2
Julie Mehretu:
Picture 1
Picture 2
Mark Lombardi:
Picture 1
Picture 2
Tim Biskup:
Picture 1
Picture 2
Glenn Barr:
Picture 1
Picture 2
Jeff Soto:
Picture 1
Picture 2
Mars-1:
Picture 1
Picture 2
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
8/28 HW
A.Response To Interview:
What defines a piece as net.art presently? We have so many sites out there that support artists that want to show their works around the world but we don't necessarily classify them as net.art artists. Maybe it is a term no one knows about or no one wants to be categorized in per say.
B. Review of EMOTICONS: SMILE:
When I look at this piece of work it reminds of the posters of famous musicians made out of small album covers and pictures taken through their lifetime. The piece Emoticons:Smile is ironic because we're basically seeing a bunch of smiling emoticons in different hex color codes forming Da Vinci's famous painting. I was able to get to the piece through Rhizome which is a news site dedicated to showcasing net.art. Link to picture: http://www.artknowledge.net/trashconnection/emoticons/smile.html
C1. (Questions)
Question 1.
Since digital media entered the field of art has the perception of art changed?
Question 2.
A relevant section of digital art represents Internet based art. The Internet hardly existed, but artists conquered already this new field for their artistic activities. Can the work of these early artists be compared with those who work with advanced technologies nowadays? What changed until these days? What might be the perspectives for future developments?
Question 3.
The term "netart" is widely used for anything posted on the net; there are dozens of definitions that mostly are even contradictory. How do you define "netart" or if you like the description "Internet based art" better? Do you think "netart" is art, at all, if yes, what are the criteria? Are there any aesthetic criteria for an Internet based artwork?
Question 4.
Dealing with this new, and interactive type of art demands an active viewer or user, and needs the audience much more and in different ways than any other art discipline before. How do you think would be good ways to stimulate the user to dive into this new world of art? What do you think represents an appropriate environment to present net based art to an audience, is it the context of the lonesome user sitting in front of his personal computer, is it any public context, or is it rather the context of art in general or media art in particular, or anything else.? If you would be in the position to create an environment for presenting this type of art in physical space, how would you do it?
Question 5.
As Internet based art, as well as other art forms using new technologies are (globally seen) still not widely accepted, yet, as serious art forms, what do you think could be an appropriate solution to change this situation?
C2. (Answers)
Question 1:
The perception of art has changed since the arrival of digital mediums. What really pushes the idea is the fact that you can imitate almost anything surrounding us and translate it electronically. This could be seen as an easy way out of getting the full hands on experience.
Question 2:
Internet art is still very recent in creation and the foundation that the veterans of the genre made are still seen in the newer pieces. The only difference is that since the advancements in technology we're able to mask that foundation to give it a little originality. In the near future I can picture artists recreating pieces of art that we will be able to interact with on a daily basis. Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcmtDAVM-3A
Question 3:
I wouldn't even know where to begin to define the term net.art. Personally the whole genre is too broad to cover because like the question asks..anything and everything on the Internet can have the term attached to it. What I could classify as net.art are some pieces that i've seen that have incorporated science/programming those are the most interesting pieces to me. Example:www.mattgilbert.net/article/40/rollo-mutation-pool
Question 4:
The best way to showcase net.art is to use some of the new advancements in PC/MAC viewing. Like later this year Microsoft is suppose to release a beta of their new touch screen projection system for their operating systems. Why not have something like that for galleries where a viewer can walk into their own little cubicles and access the featured art exhibit. Skys the limit.
Question 5:
That is a hard question to answer. I wouldn't even know where to start to help net.art become a more recognized art form.
What defines a piece as net.art presently? We have so many sites out there that support artists that want to show their works around the world but we don't necessarily classify them as net.art artists. Maybe it is a term no one knows about or no one wants to be categorized in per say.
B. Review of EMOTICONS: SMILE:
When I look at this piece of work it reminds of the posters of famous musicians made out of small album covers and pictures taken through their lifetime. The piece Emoticons:Smile is ironic because we're basically seeing a bunch of smiling emoticons in different hex color codes forming Da Vinci's famous painting. I was able to get to the piece through Rhizome which is a news site dedicated to showcasing net.art. Link to picture: http://www.artknowledge.net/trashconnection/emoticons/smile.html
C1. (Questions)
Question 1.
Since digital media entered the field of art has the perception of art changed?
Question 2.
A relevant section of digital art represents Internet based art. The Internet hardly existed, but artists conquered already this new field for their artistic activities. Can the work of these early artists be compared with those who work with advanced technologies nowadays? What changed until these days? What might be the perspectives for future developments?
Question 3.
The term "netart" is widely used for anything posted on the net; there are dozens of definitions that mostly are even contradictory. How do you define "netart" or if you like the description "Internet based art" better? Do you think "netart" is art, at all, if yes, what are the criteria? Are there any aesthetic criteria for an Internet based artwork?
Question 4.
Dealing with this new, and interactive type of art demands an active viewer or user, and needs the audience much more and in different ways than any other art discipline before. How do you think would be good ways to stimulate the user to dive into this new world of art? What do you think represents an appropriate environment to present net based art to an audience, is it the context of the lonesome user sitting in front of his personal computer, is it any public context, or is it rather the context of art in general or media art in particular, or anything else.? If you would be in the position to create an environment for presenting this type of art in physical space, how would you do it?
Question 5.
As Internet based art, as well as other art forms using new technologies are (globally seen) still not widely accepted, yet, as serious art forms, what do you think could be an appropriate solution to change this situation?
C2. (Answers)
Question 1:
The perception of art has changed since the arrival of digital mediums. What really pushes the idea is the fact that you can imitate almost anything surrounding us and translate it electronically. This could be seen as an easy way out of getting the full hands on experience.
Question 2:
Internet art is still very recent in creation and the foundation that the veterans of the genre made are still seen in the newer pieces. The only difference is that since the advancements in technology we're able to mask that foundation to give it a little originality. In the near future I can picture artists recreating pieces of art that we will be able to interact with on a daily basis. Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcmtDAVM-3A
Question 3:
I wouldn't even know where to begin to define the term net.art. Personally the whole genre is too broad to cover because like the question asks..anything and everything on the Internet can have the term attached to it. What I could classify as net.art are some pieces that i've seen that have incorporated science/programming those are the most interesting pieces to me. Example:www.mattgilbert.net/article/40/rollo-mutation-pool
Question 4:
The best way to showcase net.art is to use some of the new advancements in PC/MAC viewing. Like later this year Microsoft is suppose to release a beta of their new touch screen projection system for their operating systems. Why not have something like that for galleries where a viewer can walk into their own little cubicles and access the featured art exhibit. Skys the limit.
Question 5:
That is a hard question to answer. I wouldn't even know where to start to help net.art become a more recognized art form.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
