Rachel Greene’s Internet Art shows how artists have employ online technologies (websites in general) to create new forms of art, and to move into fields normally beyond what one would deem the “artistic realm.”
I think what is really interesting about the advent of the Internet is that the Internet Art feels quite different than artwork that has been created in the past because it has the opportunity to be created and experienced by so many people. Many people that are not “artists,” including me, have used the Internet and technology to create and explore art. The Internet has made many people that would have never considered themselves an a artist or a creator. The Internet has also provided lots of opportunity to view others artwork, to become influenced by others and to continually expand the domain of knowledge that goes into creating art. Technology in general has also allowed art to take on many new forms, whether its interactive, video, audio, even collaborative in real-time (reddit’s pixel art – the place).
Rand Response, “Computers, Pencils, and Brushes”
I don’t agree with Rand’s response (that of which opposes Graham’s) that the computer is a tool and cannot be used to create true art (or that it forms a barrier) between the artist and what the artist wants to achieve. I believe that the computer is nothing more than a very advanced pencil or brush. Rand is correct in that with the advent of the computer, it is “easier” to create ideas, concepts, blueprints, design, but it is nothing more than that. Behind the computer still requires someone who has the experience to create beautiful work (art) that others will appreciate. The computer is a way to push art forward, into new boundaries, connecting the physical and digital worlds. I don’t think art is so strictly defined as Rand believes it to be.
Response to Graham’s “Hackers and Painters”
I found Paul Graham’s article and interesting read. He believes that hackers are similar to painters and considers hackers to be “makers” rather than pure scientists. He does not believe the terms “computer science” is the appropriate term, rather he considers hackers to be somewhat between an architect and an engineer. He writes that the end goal for all art (creative art in general) is to “make things for a human audience” furthermore, “to engage [that] audience.” Graham writes that “nearly all the greatest paintings are paintings of people, for example, because people are what people are interested in.” I both agree and disagree with his statements. I believe that although “hacking or creating software” mainly uses the computer as a medium for the creation and design, a lot of the software created has a deeply rooted mathematical and scientific basis behind it. I don’t believe painters and artists approach the creation of their art similar to those doing software engineering. That is not to say that software engineering cannot be interpreted as an art form but I don’t believe it is correct to consider engineers not as scientists.
Title: Be Your Own Make-Up Artist
Group member: Serena Uy
Initially, we had many different ideas that were circulating around Serena’s vision about beauty and makeup. However, it was difficult for us to compress those visions into manageable project idea that could be presented in class.
In on the recitation, Prof. Tim helped us to guide our vision into a manageable area connected to Make Up. We have decided to make a makeup simulator with various different colours of lips and eyeshadows. The buttons on the right of the page navigate the displayed colours on the face of the model that is presented on the left.
We have divided the work so that I took responsibility of the visuals, photoshop and makeup colours that are seen on the website and Serena have done the majority of the coding for the website. When she had a problem with losing I’ve tried to help her. In addition to visuals, I’ve also added 7 buttons of lips and eyeshadows and worked on the positioning them so that they fit exactly in the place where they should be located.
The result is that when a user clicks on the button on the left the corresponding coloured element is displayed on the model’s face.
We have split the work on visuals and coding nonetheless I’ve supported Serena’s in coding what with the help of the learning assistant’s and professor allows us to complete the project in the required time.
My reflection on the project is that we usually we think big and then do not accomplish the vision that we have set for ourselves. This time was the opposite we have decided to approach the moderate and fairly simple project and accomplished it. I believe that in fact, we could have set the bar for ourselves a bit higher what even in a case of failure could stimulate our development with regard to web design.
After reading the article from Walter Benjamin, I kept wondering what it is in art that moves me. Now I would use the word put forward by Benjamin – aura, to describe the mysterious and unique quality of art which can make itself resonate with human hearts. Aura is something we can’t really see with our eyes or touch with our hands, it’s intangible. But art needs something tangible to carry this intangible magic, so we have paintings, sculptures which we can observe and touch. However, with the development of technology, new arts such as photography and film are beyond the discussion of tangible and intangible. The films as tangibles aren’t really the art itself. That has a significant influence on the notion of art.
Art and technology don’t seem to be influencing each other very much if we don’t look deep into them. They actually have a very intimate relationship! The doubt in the reproduction of art results from the development of technology. Also as already mentioned above, photography and films are new arts which were invented a hundred year ago. In the definition of technology it stands for innovation and development, so it is constantly changing. Art forms such as photography and films whose existence is based on technology, make the connection between art and technology more noticeable. And from then we should be aware that not only is technology changing every second, because of the strong connection of technology and art, so is art.
In my opinion, the change in the notion or definition of art shouldn’t be regarded as pessimistic. It doesn’t mean art is fading. On the contrary, it means many more brand new possibilities for art, which is very exciting! For example, usually the new Internet art won’t be considered as a threat for the traditional art, it is an exciting and promising experiment. Art has many forms and is fluid, if we consider art merely as a specific aspect of it, that would be very unfair. I think every lover of art should embrace the changes happening in art and have an open and flexible attitude towards the future of art.
Walter Benjamin argues that art is evolved because of technology. Art is a form that loses its “originality” when its duplicated, but the plus side to duplication is the ability to reach the mass audience. Mechanical reproduction has no history or story to it, therefore it isn’t unique. In his perspective, reproductions no longer give the created object value; the value now shifts to the way the mass audience experiences the object. This is why he brought up the example of the elk drawn on the walls of a cave. There was once a meaning for showing the drawing to other men during the Stone Age, but “today’s value would seem to demand that the work of art remain hidden”. There is a greater importance placed on the who — as in who can access the art, not the what, as in what’s the meaning behind the work of art. I believe that art can come in different forms, and art is created for different reasons.
Another point I picked up on his piece was about the performing arts. I do agree that as a performer on stage, the actor can adjust and tailor his/her performance for the audience. But with the advancements of technology, aren’t we still doing something similar with movies? Although filmed footage is carefully selected by the producer, the audience is still free to interpret the scenes. Likewise, one can argue that actors on stage perform for their audience, but the people who attend the show are a specific niche. This isn’t any different for moviegoers — movies are produced with a specific type of audience in mind.
In my opinion, internet is a modern platform for artists to create work of art. Technology is one of the tools that artists could use to make art rather than seeing technology as art. From image to video to audio, all types of media could be used to present art in a modern interactive way to engage with the audiences or users. Internet is a platform to present art while connecting the work of art all together various forms at the same time.
The various new forms to present art, which only exist thanks to the internet, only had made it more interesting for the audiences. It makes the audiences more engaged with the art, or more interactive with the art and the artists. The platform somehow combines what we see, hear and feel into one package so that the audiences would be more empathetic with the work of art. However, the internet art is only based and developed on the original art. In other words, there is no such art that is 100% internet. An image that is presented on a computer screen could also be presented in a museum. But the internet also allows more people to see the image so that it shows the importance to use internet as a platform to present art.
Hackers and painters are a great pair of example of science and art. However, as it was described in the article, hackers and painters are the opposite hence the similar. Painters are are story-tellers though their paintings. Hackers are story-tellers through their codes. It is correct that hackers have to bare the challenge from math while painters don’t, which makes hackers seems more like on the side of science rather than art. However, hackers are artists at the same time from the perspective that they have to design the codes themselves for it to present whatever they want to show to the audiences. The hackers, in a sense, are the painters that can code. They combine the work of artists and scientists so that the work of art is presented well through programming.
As it was said in the article that hackers are rather makers than sciences, so do the painters because they all learn by doing it. The sciences don’t learn by doing science, they apply the science to their work. The hackers and painters are similar in that way that they are all creating new things. However, I think that the hackers are a perfect combination of the artists and sciences, rather than that painters are more like artists.
In the article “computers, pencils and brushes”, the author brought up the issue that modern design education depends too much on technology which makes design lost the beauty of origin and creativity. Technology shall be a tool as pencils or brushes instead of the platform for designers.
From what I say see in modern design, it does have the issue of the lack of “origin” or rather there is barely some design that could bring the same excitement as in the old days. However, I love modern work of art that combines technology, as a modern design tool, with the old tools such as handwriting and drawing. As the modern society is too dependent on technology, the old platforms or tools should still be used in a creative way for design, hence the art is created in a modern way and improved with the new tools, instead of being in the circle of lack of creativity.
In the article The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Walter Benjamin brought up the concern that the modes of art are lack of the sense of origin because of them are reproduction of items that existed before. Using the example of photographs, the photos are basically the copy of a view however a painting can be a creature of the painter.
It reminds me of video games which some of them basically copied real life games into a computer screen. However, in the age of mechanical reproduction of art, technology allows people have more opportunity to explore when they cannot in real life. Video games allow you to play different games with a computer and a controller, without setting up the scenes or finding the fields. Besides the technology that made reproduction of work easier applying to people’s daily life, technology use in modern work of art has also made it more interactive for audiences. For example, movie productions put thousands of images together to make it a consistent story which in the old times images or paintings are the only way to tell a story visually.
The modern work of art is built based on the current conditions that we have alongside with the technology which allows artists to explore and present their work of art in the best way.