3 ms·
Today's ease of access to a color gamut exceeding any pre-~1940 artist's wildest dreams, at high detail and on demand, is hard to overstate. I think people can
by morelisp 4y ago
Today's ease of access to a color gamut exceeding any pre-~1940 artist's wildest dreams, at high detail and on demand, is hard to overstate. I think people can still understand vaguely that something like vantablack or color-shift or things outside some gamut are "different" because they can't appear on a screen at all, but overall most people think "oh yes, I've seed red, I've seen blue, that's not art per se." But even though a screen is capable of reproduction of the basic frequencies of something like a "Rothko blue", actually seeing Rothko blue in real life - at that scale, with that texture, etc. - is a completely different experience. We think we can anticipate the experience by screen, but we are totally wrong. And the idea that something like cochineal's mere use to make "rich red" exist could be a artistic revolution is simply too foreign for us to sit with.