Archive for June, 2015
jpeg version of a png I made on Computers Club Drawing Society a while back
Suggested feature for the "art and technology" websites:
A page where people can talk candidly about how stupid computers, phones, and social media are.
Failures, breakages, outages, poor design, scams, stories about people falling into manholes while reading phones, etc.
The tech sites all have such upbeat, utopian attitudes, and their partnerships with Silicon Valley rent-extractors are ominous.
You have your occasional "broken kindle" jokes but what's needed is a page of pure zine 80s style hatred.
I would contribute.
hat tip cheseball for burning laptop
So-called "art" GIFs were around in the late '90s -- I used to see them on Word.com. They were made mostly by graphic designers as opposed to self-identifying artistes. The above GIF came from there; the original was 102 x 128 pixels. I enlarged it to 400 x 400 using "nearest neighbor" resizing to preserve the sharp edges. Still, this is an incredibly small (19 kilobyte) GIF in terms of ecological impact, in case you are thinking about alternatives to binge-watching Mad Men. Not that you can look at this one for very long.
hat tips jules laplace, giorgio de chirico and scuola metafisica (google campus)
hat tip pfifferking
Michael Manning's work at the NADA art fair this year (reproductions cribbed from various online documentation). Note that the color doesn't have to "go" with the texture. Smart! These are handsome objects that don't take themselves too seriously, as with Manning's phone and tablet paintings that raised the ire of Art F City commenters because of their lethargic finger wiggling. Real men use their muscles!
The Hole gallery shows this artist, Matthew Stone. Haven't seen these in person but the concept doesn't appeal. Evidently they are based on photos of "phat" brushstrokes (as in, self-consciously flamboyantly lovely) that are then transposed into impossible environments where they cast fake shadows on pointless geometric objects. We've been here, in the '70s, with abstract illusionism, and it didn't go well.
Yes, that would have to be Van Gogh reproductions sold by his namesake museum. All this ingenious algorithmic mimickry of color and texture in the service of Puff-Paint™-like kitsch. Maybe they are amazing in person but again, it's the concept that's revolting. Is our understanding of Van Gogh's work enhanced by running it through the Star Trek replicator?
An installation shot of the "Forest Blob" animated GIF, shown with a projector, at the Honey Ramka opening last night.
Heuitae Yoon, who randomly came to the opening wearing that hat, was photographed by the stunned gallery.
Also, thanks to Diana Kingsley for this phone video documentation of the GIF: [1.3 MB .MOV file]
The crowd schmoozing makes an appropriate soundtrack.
Micah Ganske, Warhead (detail), 2014, PLA polymer and acrylic, 45" x 24" x 30", work from the "Control Panel" exhibition, opening tonight in Bushwick.
Just a reminder that I'll have work in the show. I'll be exhibiting a -- wait for it -- animated GIF. Hope to see you there.
Orit Gat has an essay on art criticism written from a parallel universe to the one blog readers inhabit.
In the Gat universe (simplifying the argument greatly) you have two main types of opinion-dispensers: print critics, who may or may not have special, professionalized wisdom and perception but who do, probably, deserve to be paid, and the great unwashed of tweeters and YouTube commenters out there typing first, thinking later, and likely not deserving to be paid. What's missing is the middle ground of nerdy amateurs writing in depth, mostly out of love, without being beholden to editorial guidance from for-profit gatekeepers. This nerd group flourished in the blogosphere (2000 - 2007) and still exists in force on the internet, with sites that are "visited," found via search, or aggregated in RSS readers. Gat doesn't mention them, in fact doesn't use the word "blog" once in her essay. Again, the simplified version of her argument is "you paid for criticism in the print era and you better be prepared to pay again in the app era, and we'll all be better for it." Am not sure why Rhizome keeps publishing these anti-democratic articles. Perhaps it's all the VC sponsorship.