3 ms·

When I think of art that combines tech and art - this is the kind of thing that comes to mind, I really like it. Some of the things you see attempting to combi

by avh02 6y ago

When I think of art that combines tech and art - this is the kind of thing that comes to mind, I really like it. Some of the things you see attempting to combine technology and art is a serious con [0]. Don't get me wrong, the space mentioned in that link is famous (and notoriously difficult to get in to on a regular day). Some of the recordings were quite well tuned, but they basically set up a multispeaker system and played some noises on loop. People were meditating to the relaxing highway noises being played in a former power plant. It gets to some people's heads i guess. The event description would make you think it was a drug experience. [0] - http://singuhr.de/en/projects-2014/2020-2/eleven-songs/ http://singuhr.de/en/projects-2014/2020-2/eleven-songs/

driesdep 6y ago
Thanks! For me it's super important that people can understand my art super easy. Art doesn't need to be difficult.
mxxx 6y ago
And Rothko just put paint on canvas. I’m not sure that technical complexity is the best benchmark with which to measure an art project, regardless of whether it’s an “art x tech” project.
- specialist 6y ago
  Great point. Ouch. FWIW, I did a complete 180 wrt Rothko. Once I bothered to learn why others thought Rothko's works are important, I'm embarrassed by my prior dismissal.
- avh02 6y ago
  yeah, i guess so. Look, I can appreciate art, when the intention and meaning is legitimate - that is up to the audience to judge for themselves. When it's random crap being monetized as art (very pretentiously), I can't get behind it.
  - adwi 6y ago
    Lots of angles to attack "art" but monetization isn't one that applies here. This is extremely hard work to sell, time-consuming to create, and doesn't scale in any way that's compatible with an industry unpinned almost entirely by scarcity. Think about how much this would cost to prototype and build, and how much time the artist put into conceptualizing and creating it. Then think about the tiny subset of people who would want to (and had space to) live with pieces like this—no matter how cool they are. Even if a piece like this sold for $50k (which would put this artist in > 95th percentile of earners), take $25k off the top for the gallery, subtract out cost of materials and take into account maximum annual output and, factoring in value of his time, we're talking modest middle class money. Nevermind the endless schmoozing and strategic friendships and events and studio visits it takes to drum up any gallery/institutional/collector relationships... Kudos to the artist, keep fighting the good fight!
    - avh02 6y ago
      This thread wasn't about the article's piece of art, more about the example provided by me as being a gimmick disguised as art. As stated in the root comment, I like the piece the link is about as it's far more authentic. (Obviously this is all opinion) The example I happened to provide though definitely scales. The line was a 3 hour wait and the entrance was not free (granted - covid capacity and all that).
jcrawfordor 6y ago
If there's anything to be annoyed by here it's probably the writing in many art publications... much like the back label on a bottle of wine, the art industry has developed a writing convention for descriptions and artists statements that can get a bit nauseating at times. It's a matter of style and presumably doesn't stand out to people in the arts who read these all the time.

by avh02 6y ago

driesdep 6y ago

Thanks! For me it's super important that people can understand my art super easy. Art doesn't need to be difficult.

mxxx 6y ago

And Rothko just put paint on canvas. I’m not sure that technical complexity is the best benchmark with which to measure an art project, regardless of whether it’s an “art x tech” project.

specialist 6y ago
Great point. Ouch. FWIW, I did a complete 180 wrt Rothko. Once I bothered to learn why others thought Rothko's works are important, I'm embarrassed by my prior dismissal.
avh02 6y ago
yeah, i guess so. Look, I can appreciate art, when the intention and meaning is legitimate - that is up to the audience to judge for themselves. When it's random crap being monetized as art (very pretentiously), I can't get behind it.
- adwi 6y ago
  Lots of angles to attack "art" but monetization isn't one that applies here. This is extremely hard work to sell, time-consuming to create, and doesn't scale in any way that's compatible with an industry unpinned almost entirely by scarcity. Think about how much this would cost to prototype and build, and how much time the artist put into conceptualizing and creating it. Then think about the tiny subset of people who would want to (and had space to) live with pieces like this—no matter how cool they are. Even if a piece like this sold for $50k (which would put this artist in > 95th percentile of earners), take $25k off the top for the gallery, subtract out cost of materials and take into account maximum annual output and, factoring in value of his time, we're talking modest middle class money. Nevermind the endless schmoozing and strategic friendships and events and studio visits it takes to drum up any gallery/institutional/collector relationships... Kudos to the artist, keep fighting the good fight!
  - avh02 6y ago
    This thread wasn't about the article's piece of art, more about the example provided by me as being a gimmick disguised as art. As stated in the root comment, I like the piece the link is about as it's far more authentic. (Obviously this is all opinion) The example I happened to provide though definitely scales. The line was a 3 hour wait and the entrance was not free (granted - covid capacity and all that).

jcrawfordor 6y ago

If there's anything to be annoyed by here it's probably the writing in many art publications... much like the back label on a bottle of wine, the art industry has developed a writing convention for descriptions and artists statements that can get a bit nauseating at times. It's a matter of style and presumably doesn't stand out to people in the arts who read these all the time.