PORTFOLIO (3)
Re: considering abstraction in digital art?
@Andre:
What exactly do you mean with trancendental?
There are quite a few definitions of that
term on the market.
@Curt
>I've been fascinated by the idea that there is really no distinction -- >it's just a question of scale. (matthew ritchie)
??????? this makes no sense to me. What do you think
how he meant that?
How do you apply that for example if you do
the abstraction from "chair" (meaning the actual thing*)
to "chair" (meaning the abstraction as a "thing which
can be used for sitting")??
(*like chair as in a chinese restaurant for eating hot and
sour soup :-))
@Geert
>You will never be
>able to walk around it, look at it from the back. It simply does no
>exist in our dimension.
This is definitely true for our nowadays internet.
However I think this will probably change if you look at the
already now available 3D technology.
I posted this link already on rhizome, but may be you missed it,
its an example of what#s on the way:
http://www.aist.go.jp/aist_e/latest_research/2006/20060210/20060210.html
and well finally -"one" can already now walk around an object as an avatar in virtual 3D space (e.g. on the internet).
What exactly do you mean with trancendental?
There are quite a few definitions of that
term on the market.
@Curt
>I've been fascinated by the idea that there is really no distinction -- >it's just a question of scale. (matthew ritchie)
??????? this makes no sense to me. What do you think
how he meant that?
How do you apply that for example if you do
the abstraction from "chair" (meaning the actual thing*)
to "chair" (meaning the abstraction as a "thing which
can be used for sitting")??
(*like chair as in a chinese restaurant for eating hot and
sour soup :-))
@Geert
>You will never be
>able to walk around it, look at it from the back. It simply does no
>exist in our dimension.
This is definitely true for our nowadays internet.
However I think this will probably change if you look at the
already now available 3D technology.
I posted this link already on rhizome, but may be you missed it,
its an example of what#s on the way:
http://www.aist.go.jp/aist_e/latest_research/2006/20060210/20060210.html
and well finally -"one" can already now walk around an object as an avatar in virtual 3D space (e.g. on the internet).
Re: Re: Re: martin kippenberger has left the building
Hello Regina,
I wish you all the best for your health!
i like your work, keep doing!
i hope things will sort out.
nad
I wish you all the best for your health!
i like your work, keep doing!
i hope things will sort out.
nad
Re: sometimes people give me things they made
Curt,
are you sure that reading Paul Klee's first Bauhaus teaching notebook
and eating sweet and sour soup at a time is a good idea?
nad
are you sure that reading Paul Klee's first Bauhaus teaching notebook
and eating sweet and sour soup at a time is a good idea?
nad
Re: Re: I have a suggestion for Rhizome...
Hi Sal & all
Yes I was also thinking often that
a more "democratic" curating
system would be good for Rhizome, like e.g. with tagging
or voting. I am glad you bring this up.
Its good to have official curators but
yes i could imagine that some interesting
stuff is "slipping through the system".
Everybody has another focus. Tagging
may allow to shift something into
general focus. But I have no idea
how "democratic" a tagging system would be
in reality - i.e.
this depends also on the frequency
of "tagging visits" of rhizome members etc.
Who has the time to browse daily?
But if one sets this up then it would also be
interesting to have
the discussion about a work linked directly
to the work itself. This would enable people
to learn and to make themselves understandable.
However I have no idea how fair or good this works
and its a lot of work to set this up.....
nad
Yes I was also thinking often that
a more "democratic" curating
system would be good for Rhizome, like e.g. with tagging
or voting. I am glad you bring this up.
Its good to have official curators but
yes i could imagine that some interesting
stuff is "slipping through the system".
Everybody has another focus. Tagging
may allow to shift something into
general focus. But I have no idea
how "democratic" a tagging system would be
in reality - i.e.
this depends also on the frequency
of "tagging visits" of rhizome members etc.
Who has the time to browse daily?
But if one sets this up then it would also be
interesting to have
the discussion about a work linked directly
to the work itself. This would enable people
to learn and to make themselves understandable.
However I have no idea how fair or good this works
and its a lot of work to set this up.....
nad
Re: Re: Workshop RFID & Internet of Things
Hi Rob & all
you are right it may happen that art is
complicit in the propagation of RFID and the workshop
texts sounds also too euphorical for my taste -but anyhow
it is better to propagate knowledge about
RFIDs somehow, than keep it among the circles.
Lets hope that most artwork rather display
the "critical" or "nightmarish" regard of RFID and
that people start think themselves.
Everytime the cashier in my local supermarkets
ask me about wether i have a customer
card I keep telling them about RFID, surveillance and
how it will change their work and they still look
at me as if i am a little mad.
nad
you are right it may happen that art is
complicit in the propagation of RFID and the workshop
texts sounds also too euphorical for my taste -but anyhow
it is better to propagate knowledge about
RFIDs somehow, than keep it among the circles.
Lets hope that most artwork rather display
the "critical" or "nightmarish" regard of RFID and
that people start think themselves.
Everytime the cashier in my local supermarkets
ask me about wether i have a customer
card I keep telling them about RFID, surveillance and
how it will change their work and they still look
at me as if i am a little mad.
nad