Week 5 Readings:
Miranda, A 2013, ‘The new world of net art’, ARTnews 12 June1013 http://www.artnews.com/2013/06/12/the-new-world-of-net-art/ An introduction to the current practice of ‘net art’
“Our cultural landscape is now rife with references to digital visualizations, such as pixelization or the plastic colors and stiff lines of digital rendering. And the boundary between the “virtual” and the “real” is often blurred. Last year at South by Southwest, artist, writer, and technologist James Bridle dubbed the phenomenon the New Aesthetic, a term that has since gone viral.”
“The vastness of the online world is such that some artists have taken to building new tools for viewing it, as is the case with Simon and Swartz’s image-search engine. Projects of this nature have included Mark Napier’s Shredder 1.0—a piece that reconfigures, or “shreds,” the text on any given website—and dump.fm, a fast-moving image chat room designed by art-technologist Ryder Ripps. For his 2010 work riverthe.net, video artist Ryan Trecartin, along with several collaborators, created a site that endlessly streams ten-second videos uploaded by users. It’s a frenetic peek into the Web’s oddest corners, a way of decontextualizing and reframing Internet imagery.”
Prada JM 2009, ‘Wed 2.0 as a new context for artistic practices’, Fibreculture issue.14, November 1 http://fourteen.fibreculturejournal.org/fcj-098-web-2-0-as-a-new-context-for-artistic-practices/ A discussion of the possibilities of the internet as a medium
“Filtering and ‘tagging’
Participation and synergy in real time is what this new stage in the Web should ideally offer; that is, broadening potentials for acquiring knowledge. No one knows everything but everyone, jointly, can know everything. An extremely important step forward in collectivized, mutualised knowledge. It is the arrival of a stage of broadened ‘co-intelligence”, of the reciprocal production of knowledge among infinite persons, of a multitudinous cooperative development and of the increasingly open possession of knowledge, all channelled through inclusive systems, and not designed to prevent anyone from the possibility of contributing. Undoubtedly, the potential illuminators of ‘general intellect’ are none other than teleology of the commons on linguistic interchange and cooperation.”
“Artistic practices in the reconfiguration of communicative interactions
The fact that the most recent artistic proposals on the networks are so ironic and critical instead of optimistic is because Web 2.0 has been presented to us corporatively as an idyllic field of happiness, joy, friendship, sharing, and communication, all increasing endlessly. With networks today defined through these principles, there is an assumption of a blanket neutral ideology. The most critical of these art works and actions oppose the acceptance of that assumption, and will do so repeatedly. The subjects of those art works and actions coincide with specific ways the Web 2.0 works. Interpreting them demands an interpretive, critical and political reflection of the ways the Web works as well as the mediation mechanisms and socialization control predisposed by the Web.”
Presentation of Inside Out Assignment
Lightness and Darkness, Darkness and Light, without each other there would not be color or tone, as they meet the world appears, and then we as humans use all different types of apparatuses to capture the magic that we perceive in front of our eyes. The eye then looks for “punctum”, as Barther explains “In this habitually unary space, occasionally (but alas all too rarely) a “detail” attracts me. I feel that its mere presence changes my reading that I am looking at a new photograph, marked in my eyes with higher value. This “detail” is the punctum. It is not possible to posit a rule of connection between the stadium and the punctum (when it happens to be there). It is a matter of a co-presence that is all one can say.” (Barther, 1981).
As in HDR images the “punctum” what one tries to achieve, but light and darkness play a bigger role of exposing the detail and translating the 3D space into a 2D image. As Flusser puts it the ‘imagination’, “Images are significant surfaces. Images signify – mainly – something ‘out there’ in space and time that they have to make comprehensible to us as abstractions (as reductions of the four dimensions of space and time to the two surface dimensions). This specific ability to abstract surfaces out of space and time and to project them back into space and time is what is known as ‘imagination’.” (Flusser, 2000, p. 8).
The Inside Out project brought all this questions in mind are we converting the space from 3D to 2D or is the detail that is going to awaken the ‘imagination’. As I personally found on undertaking this project is that both perceptions of an conversion of reality into an imagination is that all the aspects of “punctum” are very important in expressing the point of converting the 3D space into a 2D image. As Rice also explains as the most photographs of interior spaces “Acting more like windows, they encourage us to see interiors as static spaces, existing sometime in the past, or as the pristine result of an up-to-the-minute makeover.” (Rice, 2004, p. 41)
Flusser mentions the idea, “Any ideas we may have of the scientific universe (signified by these texts) are unsound: If we do form ideas about scientific discourse, we have decoded it ‘wrongly’; anyone who tries to imagine anything, for example, using the equation of the theory of relativity, has not understood it. But as, in the end, all concepts signify ideas, the scientific, incomprehensible universe is an ’empty’ universe”. (Flusser, 2000, p. 13). As the idea is the driving force then the interpretation of any visual is unique as the ideas are unique for one individual. As the individuality is not ‘real’ in a sense that we are all the same then that interpretation or concept is maybe something that makes us as visual beings unique.
Barther, R., 1981. Extracts from Camera Lucida: reflections on photography. In: R. Howard, ed. Camera Lucida: reflections on photography. New York: Hill and Wang, pp. 34-45.
Flusser, V., 2000. Extracts from Towards a Philosophy of Photography. In: Towards a Philosophy of Photography. London: Reaktion Books, pp. 8-16.
Rice, C., 2004. Space and Image Inside Hill End. Architecture Australia, Issue July/Augus, pp. 40-41.