The Golden Paints Blog rang a bell with me this morning and I wanted to pass the thought along. Here is the last paragraph:
"I'’ve thought about this quality of being just too perfect and its analogy to visual art forms, particularly digitally generated art. I can appreciate the quality of the visuals produced by the computer. Often times depending upon the level of talent of the artist, they can truly be quite beautiful. Yet, I still can'’t get over the feeling that I am being cheated: That no one has yet blown any life into the work. They just simply put it up to their lips and pressed the button to start. I am so grateful for the artists who are continuing to push this media, to make it more than just a "“make-it-and-take-it" as called in the craft world. I realize this media is just at its infancy and has been made and remade already many times over. I am also aware of the artists who are capable of the tweaks and subtleties one expects of great art using this medium. However art is made, whether by pushing a button or a brush I am hopeful that it remains infused with humanity."
I've played around with digital art, learned just enough to wonder how I did that, but didn't stir enough interest to investigate further. There's no denying that's it's here to stay, but I can't imagine it replacing the creating of visual art as we know it... the hand crafted process that stirs the senses. I remember when synthesized music was first being discussed... the ability to create the sounds of different instruments, but how they often missed human nuances like the little shuffle of the fingers on the guitar strings which is more important to the music that one might think. I guess they've inserted that sound by now. Oh, well, maybe digital art will be refined to include the 'hand of the artist' as well.
The above images ares proof that, while not complete, our efforts to enhance the view of our lake is coming along, though a wall of green still covers the wider expanse of the lake. Unfortunately, a large part of that green is possessed by dogwood trees and it's a near sacrilege to fell a healthy dogwood in these parts (many are dying from disease and these show no signs.) At least we can now see all along the water's edge from our deck and soon we'll be able to view it all as leaves are shed. The second image looks back toward the house and shows the road we'll keep cleared, hopefully for golf cart transportation (the g-kids will love that!) and trailer hauling of a continuous supply of debris... that property promises lots of exercise, but that's not all bad.
2 comments:
I agree with you and the Golden blog about the artist's hand being such an integral part of the work. As you know, I've been working at opposing ends of that spectrum, both with textures on wood and with pixels on a screen. The only thing that makes the digital work satisfying for me is using the "brushes" in the most natural way possible. However, there is still the mediation of the machine.
This is an interesting topic, and I think there is a lot of difference in using the mechanical/digital means to reproduce what is done by a human body - as an end, and in using the new technology as a tool - as a means to a human mediated end.
I agree about synthesized music and 'wallpaper' muzak; but electronic music can be extraordinarily beautiful when the digital means are used as instruments. In contemporary jazz I have heard the most wondrous sounds created by combinations of traditional and electronic instruments, and still sounding different in the live concert from the recorded version on a cd.
I think that too often digital technology in particular is thought of as being a means of reproduction - hence the thought of the quality being 'too perfect'. Just as it is too limiting to think of photography as being an uninspiring lifeless version of painting, I think that digital developements are too often dismissed for what they are not rather than what they can be.
Your views are quite something, and will be fabulous with their fall colours.
Post a Comment