So I had posted this twice, and of course. No such luck with publishing, so I'm sorry that this is so late.
The main idea of my topical investigation is going to be centered around technology and art. With new emerging technologies that allow us to completely create digital fabrications of our art work and then if we decide to take them into the physical, we can, it is hard for us as a society to see the need for physical art such as painting, sketching, sculpting, or metal work. New technologies allow us to simply render an image from a 3-D scanned model, so why I ask you, is it necessary to spend countless hours trying to sculpt a human being, when a 3-D printer can always come out more accurate than a sculptor ever could?
The exploration of using technology to further our advances in art and not completely dub them obsolete is where my project is going to be focused around. I want to use images, 3-D models, and other Art and English outlets to create a Digital Prototype of an iPad application that will link English, Art and Digital Technology in a way that is educational and exciting for the new generation of users. This eventually could be also used as a website for those without smart phone access and could be implemented as a learning tool for middle school and high school students.
Let me know what you guys think and if there are any further suggestions that you might have to build on the gap between art and technology! Thank you!
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Monday, February 28, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Presentation vs. Representation
According to Webster Dictionary the definition of presentation is as follows:
: something presented: asa : a symbol or image that represents somethingb : something offered or given : giftc : something set forth for the attention of the mindd : a descriptive or persuasive account (as by a salesman of a product)e : a presenting symptom or group of symptoms <clinicalpresentation of appendicitis>
According to Webster Dictionary the definition of representation is as follows:
: something presented: asa : a symbol or image that represents somethingb : something offered or given : giftc : something set forth for the attention of the mindd : a descriptive or persuasive account (as by a salesman of a product)e : a presenting symptom or group of symptoms <clinicalpresentation of appendicitis>
According to Webster Dictionary the definition of representation is as follows:
: one that represents: asa : an artistic likeness or imageb (1) : a statement or account made to influence opinion or action (2) : an incidental or collateral statement of fact on the faith of which a contract is entered intoc : a dramatic production or performanced (1) : a usually formal statement made against something or to effect a change (2) : a usually formal protest
These definitions give us a brief outline of what presenting and representing something is about, however the difference between the two still seem pretty vague. When it comes to art, media, or anything that could be considered a visualization there's a few things that distinguish between the two.
When presenting the world with something you have created, or even something that you haven't, there are so many things that go into that decision. If I've made a piece of political art, do I print it out and present it to the world as a poster... do I put it on my Facebook page and leave it in a digital medium? The way that we present things to the world completely changes how we perceive it. If we decide that we're going to print them out and cover the walls of the student center with them, it sends a completely different message than if we were to keep it in digital format and post it all over our Facebook page. The presentation changes our reaction as an audience to that specific piece or work.
So what is the different when it comes to representation? Representation to me is the reasoning behind why you decided to present your piece in such a way. If I'm trying to represent the parallel between Vietnam war propaganda by placing my image on a picket sign, I'm representing the parallel between the war we are currently fighting and a war that was notorious for negative feedback from the community. I am also representing something about myself by presenting my images in this way: I represent a sense of peace that I want to keep, I represent freedom of speech and my right to protest. On the other hand if I were to post an event on Twitter and have that image be the forefront of every message sent to my followers, the way I'm representing myself is that I'm collaborating with technology and that I'm a modern user of media, not someone who is trying to get back to the basics. The way in which we present our pieces to the world comes directly from how we wish that piece to be represented in the community.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Philip O'Reilly
Philip’s main areas of research are Textiles, Textiles Technology, Digital Print, Dye Sublimation Technology, Substrates, Materials and Colour Applications.
'Material Colour' exhibition by Philip O'Reilly in the Upfront Gallery, September-October 2000.
Painting showing the visual theme for the work done during the AA2A project using imagery derived from Tamil Text or alphabets.
My aim during the AA2A scheme is to make a large felt wallhanging for a specific venue. The painting 'Kum-Kum Kolam 4' shows the visual theme for the work. It uses imagery derived from Tamil text and alphabets. I am not interested in merely copying the painting but to use it as a catalyst for the wallhanging idea. I have made a large life-size drawing for the new work.
The 'Automatex' needleloom he needs for his work is 'high-end' technology and if the Bolton machine were not available the nearest facility to rent would be in Southern Norway.
Automatex Inc. is an engineering company specialized in designing and building machines for automation of conversion processes. Automatex has considerable experience in the automation of processes for sewing, ultrasonic bonding, heat sealing, folding, hot melt gluing and other techniques used for converting of textiles, plastics, paper and other materials.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Digital Designs- 1970's
silkscreen
Imperialist Aggression
1st in a series of 3
1st in a series of 3
color lithograph
is a method for printing using a stone (lithographic limestone) or a metal plate with a completely smooth surface
HORROR VACUI- fear of empty spaces, perhaps represented by white spaces, also known as cenophobia) is the filling of the entire surface of an artwork with detail.
Advertising Art--United States--20th C. A.D
Photography--Exhibitions/Contests--20th C. A.D
mixed media collage
Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong
Silkscreen
Two piece poster. Advertisement for a karate club.
Offset
Offset printing is a commonly used printing technique where the inked image is transferred (or "offset") from a plate to a rubber blanket, then to the printing surface.
In 1967 Aicher ws commissioned to coordinate the visual image of the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich.
Printed lower right: Foto: Herbert Graaf, EPU 07.71.50 Printed in Germany by Franzis Druck, München
Gift of the designer
Printed lower right: Foto: Herbert Graaf, EPU 07.71.50 Printed in Germany by Franzis Druck, München
Gift of the designer
Lithograph
is a method for printing using a stone (lithographic limestone) or a metal plate with a completely smooth surface
"Arsène Lupin contra Arsène Lupin" was a film directed by Edouard Molinaro. It was first released in 1962. Cast includes: Jean-Claude Brialy, Jean Pierre Cassel, Françoise Dorléac, and Geneviéve Grad.
Signed in plate upper right: M. ZBIKOWSKI
Gift of the designer
Signed in plate upper right: M. ZBIKOWSKI
Gift of the designer
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Monday, January 24, 2011
Photography- Just 'Point and Shoot'?
Photography is something that was debated for a long time of whether or not it should be considered as a major art form. We're simply taking 'real life' and processing it through film, so how could it be considered an art? The question continued throughout the progression of photography and then through motion picture and we had to ask ourselves, if the digital fabrication of real life was something that we could consider art. For example with painting- something that has been considered an art for hundreds of years- we can paint something that exists in real life, but it will always be OUR perception of that image in real life. A painting of an apple, no matter how realistic, is our interpretation of that apple, our own image of an apple projected through paint, water, and canvas. We can never get the exact look of that apple because throughout the course of the painting, shadows change, apple's rot and the painters eyes and perspective shift. You can create a painting of an apple that doesn't even come close to resembling an apple, but was inspired by one and therefore we take the painting as a representation of that apple.
So how does this relate to photography? The main argument for photography not being an art was that it simply produced an image of one moment in time, a single snap shot with no room for creativity or inspiration. However, when photography started to be used to unveil the horrors of poverty on the streets of the cities or to capture the beauty of a sunset, people started to realize that photography, even though it is 'real life' can be shown in a way that evokes emotion and create controversy around those who are being photographed and those who are doing the photography. We can't fake a photo because it's taken at one instance in time, however we can stage a photo, which is something that shows we can have creative control over the outcome of a photograph.
This comes to our discussion of what photography is and can anybody be a photographer? If a photographer is described as someone who takes pictures, then yes, of course everyone can be a photographer- assuming that you have the means to push a button. But how has digital technology effected our view of what is 'good' and 'effective' photography? Anyone who can get their hands on a good camera can point and shoot and eventually a photograph will come out that is beautiful, inspiring, even breath-taking, but if it took you 300 pictures to get to that point, should you be considered a great photographer? The idea of using new technology to take pictures as art- not for scientific reasons, not for discovery, but for simply the inspiration of art- in my opinion takes away from the raw talent that it takes to get the angle and the lighting and the time of day just right so that the image is just how you want it. The same theory applies to our projects that we're working on right now. When taking a photograph, without the use of digital technology, there is a design process you must come up with. Where do you want the light, will it be natural or artificial? Will there be shadows if your subject is at a certain angle? What are you trying to get out of this photograph? When you are presented with a limitation, just like we talked about in class today, whether it's a time limit or a limit in the amount of frames you can take, limitations force us to think before we act. In photography and in Digital design, when we have limitations we think about what we want our outcome to be before we start designing.
So I guess the question I'm trying to get at is... in some cases does technology allow us to be lazy? Has technology gotten to the point where creativeness doesn't matter because we can so easily create something that would normally be considered a creative task? What are the repercussions of technology when it comes to something that used to be considered an art? Are we becoming less creative or are we simply putting our creative energies in technological art and design?
So how does this relate to photography? The main argument for photography not being an art was that it simply produced an image of one moment in time, a single snap shot with no room for creativity or inspiration. However, when photography started to be used to unveil the horrors of poverty on the streets of the cities or to capture the beauty of a sunset, people started to realize that photography, even though it is 'real life' can be shown in a way that evokes emotion and create controversy around those who are being photographed and those who are doing the photography. We can't fake a photo because it's taken at one instance in time, however we can stage a photo, which is something that shows we can have creative control over the outcome of a photograph.
This comes to our discussion of what photography is and can anybody be a photographer? If a photographer is described as someone who takes pictures, then yes, of course everyone can be a photographer- assuming that you have the means to push a button. But how has digital technology effected our view of what is 'good' and 'effective' photography? Anyone who can get their hands on a good camera can point and shoot and eventually a photograph will come out that is beautiful, inspiring, even breath-taking, but if it took you 300 pictures to get to that point, should you be considered a great photographer? The idea of using new technology to take pictures as art- not for scientific reasons, not for discovery, but for simply the inspiration of art- in my opinion takes away from the raw talent that it takes to get the angle and the lighting and the time of day just right so that the image is just how you want it. The same theory applies to our projects that we're working on right now. When taking a photograph, without the use of digital technology, there is a design process you must come up with. Where do you want the light, will it be natural or artificial? Will there be shadows if your subject is at a certain angle? What are you trying to get out of this photograph? When you are presented with a limitation, just like we talked about in class today, whether it's a time limit or a limit in the amount of frames you can take, limitations force us to think before we act. In photography and in Digital design, when we have limitations we think about what we want our outcome to be before we start designing.
So I guess the question I'm trying to get at is... in some cases does technology allow us to be lazy? Has technology gotten to the point where creativeness doesn't matter because we can so easily create something that would normally be considered a creative task? What are the repercussions of technology when it comes to something that used to be considered an art? Are we becoming less creative or are we simply putting our creative energies in technological art and design?
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Blog for 1-19
Using the Wordle application is something that I've always used to create unique word poems and visual designs, but to use it for an advertisement is something that is completely new to me. Text design is something that I've been working on the entire time that I've been in the English Department, but most people only look at things that have been made digitally. Digital design is the new frontier for advertisements and for visual designs and as we saw there are ways to make something that is supposed to be completely non-creative (such as Excel) to design something that is visually appealing, but this is something that has been around for years. While studying the progression of media and our use of media through time, there are so many different ways to use technology to create something that other people would've never thought to be art or to be creative in any way. For example, in 1967 Steve McCaffery started using a typewriter (which was a very common technology) to create panels of artwork that no one would've thought possible with just the use of a common typewriter. He started a movement towards taking technologies that we use all the time to create works of art or to make us change our perception of what technology is actually capable of doing. Here is a picture of his entire second panel that he made between the years of 1970 and 1975 and then a close up of one of the sections.
To create a picture or a completely separate image from just the use of text is something that people tend to shy away from. It's so easy to add a picture or a graphic image to an advertisement to convey the meaning of your advertisement. As a graphic designer we take classes that teach us the difference that we can make to help convey our images and texts in the way that we want them to. For example if the text is red and the background is white, the message comes across as urgent. Something we must read right now, but if the text color is changed to say blue or green, the message comes across completely differently. We are trained to think in a very singular way, red means stop, blue is calming, yellow is happy, but by using digital media and placing contradicting ideas together we can start to expand what media can do and how media interacts with us as consumers. We limit ourselves by thinking that certain media's can only be used for one specific purpose, but when we start to push those boundaries and push those limitations we can see the true potential of what each individual media can do.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Daily Blog for 1/12/11 by 010010110110000101101001011101000110110001111001011011100010000001000001011011100110111000100000010100100110111101110111011100110110010101111001
Digital media is something that not only is a part of our every day lives, but it's something that has incredible possibilities. From medical discoveries to helping conserve the environment, there are new technologies that are being invented and prototyped everyday, but there is one part of digital media that I'm particularly interested in. As an English major and Interactive Media Design minor, I've been spending the past 4 years attempting to combine the use of modern technologies and classic English poetry and short fiction to change the way that the next generation views English. In the realm of poetry in particular there are many stipulations that come along with poetry and to many, poetry is ancient and out of touch with the modern world. However, with using digital media and new technologies there are endless possibilities for the world of poetry to grow and expand. Using interactive interfaces and interactive media we can make poetry a personal and modern experience that can be enjoyed by people in a more technologically advanced world. Here is an example: Interactive Poetry
Post by: کیتلین آنن روسے
Post by: کیتلین آنن روسے
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
























