Pollack, Barbara (2010). The Hybrid Media of Matthew Kluber and John
Simon, Jr. In the catalog for Hybrid Media: John F. Simon, Jr. and
Matthew Kluber. Grinnell, IA: Grinnell College.
I'd like to know more about Simon's process. Does he start with a very specific idea and then figure out how to implement it, or does he let the realities of programming affect his vision as he works? I guess another way of asking it is, is he using technology as a tool to implement his vision, or as a source of inspiration?
The catalog made it seem like John Simon Jr. had a lot of knowledge about computers and programing. Did he have this knowledge before he got into art (i.e. was he a comp sci major) or did his interest in the art cause him to pursue the knowledge of programming?
On page 5, it says, "His (Kluber) resulting patterns range from bold and simple to intricate and subtle, all by his nuanced use of color and line." How does Kluber decide what is "bold" or "simple"? How does one use color and line to create these attitudes within his paintings?
If Kluber first covers the aluminum panels with vinyl strips, then paints on fluorescent pigments and finally projects video over the surface, does it really mean anything that the canvas is metal and not any other material? Does this hinder the “sense that we are looking at something imagined and made by machines”?
For Kluber, is digital art more about adapting existing technologies, such as the tool used by sign makers (4), or is it more about creating new technologies, such as the programs developed with Alex Dyba (5)?
Abstract art pieces that are made up of found material or resemble something that people experience in their everyday life are the hardest to analyze and appreciate because the mind makes connections between materials’ contexts. Matthew Kluber says that the video imagery that he uses should be analyzed based on their "formal qualities" because that is what "matters, not their context." How can one separate the social associations from the process and materials, when art history classes ask the reader or audience the reason behind the artist’s usage of shape, color, size, medium, etc. and how they relate to other aspects?
In the text, all of Mr. Kluber's pieces look strikingly similar once the projections are taken off, so I was wondering if he ever made anything really different from that, say with really wide lines in it, or are all his pieces made that way?
What formal qualities were you looking for when choosing a video for your video projection and where did you start?
"The film is modified in the code so that it compresses and multiplies itself in a looped cycle" (pg 5) does this mean that the video is made to "fit" the art work and looped over and over? I'm confused because "compressed" sounds like the format is changed.. and what exactly does "multiplying" a video mean? are
there any video filters added?
There seems to be some sort of play between lines that are purposely put very very close to each other. This sort of creates an illusion of a third color. Is this the purpose behind the lines being so close? or is it something deeper?
It notes that these artists have had their works displayed in museums, leading me to believe that much of their digital compositions are still-art. To what degree has digital art of this nature been applied to other forms of entertainment (performance theater, for example, could make elaborate and dynamic sets using this technology)?
It seems like most artworks being made in the contemporary scene are 'hybrid' in some sense - they are sculptural drawings, animated installations, decorative collage, performance painting, and what have you. Is 'hybrid media' a term specifically applying to technology-centric work? Or does it just mean some combination of media, as the term implies?
Kluber and Simon appear to be doing groundbreaking work by combining traditional art with the digital. There seems to be an endless amount of possiblities of combining the digital to other forms of traditional art. How realistic is that the digital be combined with other traditional art forms and are there currently any other combinations being produced? [+, although it would benefit from examples of other potential or difficult combinations]
How might Petroski's thesis apply to technology as an artmaking device (or not)? That is, what role does failure play in creating or using technology for artmaking?
Barbara Pollack says that when people look at the internet, they don't look at the aesthetics, but only at the information. Have any of these artists have been able to change that using their works and make people more interested on the digital art? [+]
How would you respond to the argument that using something artificial, like a computer, cheapens the art in some way?
Is the work of artists who incorporate technology into their work or who produce their work through modern technology looked down upon by the art world because it is generated less traditionally?
(Q for the artists.) How is your art influenced by the technology available to create it? Is there a technology which would be handy in the creation of more art that could be developed?
Barbara Pollack, in her introduction to the two artists, says their arts "serve the purpose of expanding our understanding of digital art." How do they achieve this? Just because they are "dyanamic yet meditative" and because they "reflect the boundless imaginations of their creators"?
How important is dynamism in digital art? (i.e. moving projections).
The essay said that we care more about content than we care about
form in electronics. I think it's pretty clear that they're at least
close-- if not balanced. How does this hypothesis hold up against new
products like the iPad whose content can be found in a lot cheaper
electronics?
In the case of the Hybrid Media exhibition we witness the intersection of technology and art, where art rather than simply produced is instead programmed. How do works like these blur the line between humans and their machines? Is the artwork itself the actual product of the artist or of the program he creates? [+]
My question is actually about the first sentence of the reading. I am not sure what the author means when she says "Abstraction is a difficult subject to resolve with technology because most of us appreciate the digital for its content,not its form" (p.3). What does abstraction mean in this context with reference to content and form. Is she saying abstraction is part of the art or that technological form is inherently more abstract than the content?
The artwork presented today is supposed to be a "hyrids, combining painting and programming, the traditional with the unexpected, the every-day with the sublime". However the art work, except those with projectors, does not give away to the viewer the programming or computer aspect of the art. Is the message of technology as part of the artwork necessary or does this devalue the art as a hybrid when it is not clear that the art is technologically driven? (Very subjective question but I think, the general idea, an absence of "technology" through the art itself should be interesting topic of conversation)
Simon and Kluber use computers as inspiration for art. What other ways in the history of art has technological innovation influenced art forms? For example, did the printing press lead to the creation of a genre of art made from typefaces (I don't know if this is even possible, I'm just trying to come up with a plausible example)?
Throughout the article Pollack uses phrases like "dictatorial software", "formulaic palette", and "relying of the iconography of ready made software",when referring to programs such a Photoshop, however many of these programs allow the user to set the precise color of individual pixels, how is this "dictatorial"?
You wouldn't really want to make a whole image a pixel at a time, and
you are limited in what you can do. (It is, for example, difficult or
impossible to make a dynamic brush on your own in Photoshop. Students
who have taken CSC 151 have seen how easy it is in 151.)
Is this the first digital art show Grinnell has put on?
No. Kluber has done shows before. There was also a spectacular
multimedia show in the Flanagan a few years ago. (I've forgotten
whether there was a particular occasion for it.)
;
