Tuesday, January 24, 2017

New vs. Traditional Media



Throughout the ages, many aspects of art media has remained the same.  However, over time, technology and cultural changes have expanded what art media means.  New art media, in general, is not an entirely new field but based upon traditional foundations.  According to Wikipedia, New Media Art often involves interaction between artist and observer or between observers and the artwork, which responds to them. Yet, as several theorists and curators have noted such forms of interaction, social exchange, participation, and transformation do not distinguish new media art but rather serve as a common ground that has parallels in other strands of contemporary art practice.
New Media art is often referenced with old media in mind.  New media art can be an alteration or expansion of the traditional form, as such, there are many parallels between the two forms.  New media art, much like traditional, still requires artistic skill with color, texture, shape, and perspective in mind.  As an example, the process of making 3D prints is not dissimilar to making sculptures, the tools are just different.  An individual making 3D prints still has to create a plan and have the final form in mind, and know the limitations of the media in which they are using.  This is further supported by the Brown University Wiki titled New Media Art  by Mark Tribe.  Tribe discusses the similar techniques required in traditional oil based paintings and comic book art.
With the many inclusive features of new vs. traditional media comes many exclusive features as well.  Some may argue that traditional media is more fluid and free to interpretation.  Tribe remarks in general, new media art is fundamentally different “focusing on ideas than on objects”.  Critics also argue that traditional media, such as hand painted artwork, is more original and one of a kind.  The argument, in this case, points out that digital art can be replicated exactly the same with no evidence of the original.  Not to say this hasn’t been done in the past with traditional media though.  Before the printing press, copies could be made by engagements on rubber, essential making stamps out of them.  Rembrandt, Pablo Picasso, Vincent Van Gogh, and Andy Warhol, all have used this technique in the past to create their works.
            So far, I have discussed computer generated art and 3d printing to represent some commonalities between the two genres. However, there are numerous other examples that one could draw from to compare.  There is some difficulty that arises when defining ‘new media’ as the definition continues to change.  For example, the etched replicated works of some the great artists that I previously mentioned were at one point considered new media, we now look back and think of this style as traditional media.  Our definition now includes, “digital art, computer graphics, computer animation, virtual art, Internet art, interactive art, video games, computer robotics, 3D printing, cyborg art and art as biotechnology” (New Media Art, Wikipedia, Jan. 12, 2017).   With this ever expanding definition, I believe that we will continue to see new media become traditional media, and traditional media remain the foundation for the new media.

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

Icons as Fact, Fiction, and Metaphor Reflection




Since wet/darkroom photography has been around since the beginning of filmmaking there is a certain familiarity with the process.  Along with familiarity often comes trust.  I would argue that more people implicitly trust wet/darkroom photography than the digital processes because the process required to create wet/darkroom photography leaves less room for altering.  In today’s society, we are constantly in the presence of digital photography.  Digital photography by many is seen as more advanced and technological.  With technology however, comes uncertainty.  The magazines, billboards, and website advertisements around us are almost all unquestionably altered in some way.  I believe this digital altering in advertisement and marketing gives the perception that any digital photography cannot be trusted.        

Although at first one might believe these assumptions to be true, they are not necessarily accurate in all cases.  In the essay, “Icons as Fact, Fiction and Metaphor”, Phillip Gefter uses many historical photos to illustrate that wet/darkroom photography can be deceptive in many different ways.  One such example includes “Home of a Rebel Sharpshooter, Gettysburg, 1863,” by Gardner.  Gerfter points out that wet/darkroom photography such as this piece can be “staged” to give the appearance of authenticity.  I would argue that both types of media (film or digital) are susceptible to this kind of deception.  It may be easier to alter the original photo in a digital format however it is not impossible to do so in darkroom photography either.  I believe in general people will be more trusting of older technology until something newer arrives.  So even though there is little basis of fact in proving deception occurs more readily in digital form, people will continue to believe this until they are more comfortable with it. 

The actual differences between digital photography and wet/darkroom photography are similar to the differences between an analog watch and a digital watch.  With an analog watch you can observe a mechanism changing from one state to another, much like processing digital film.  With a digital watch the numbers on the dial can change dramatically from one state to another with no indication of how it happened, this is similar to digital photography, and editing.  With a click of a button someone can change a subject’s skin tone, or turn a sunset into a sunrise.  In general editing digital photography is easier, and it takes less effort to manipulate a piece than the analog equivalent.  Therefore, I believe there is a grain of truth in arguing the validity of many digital works.  Basically, the effort required to manipulate digital works can be done with skill and keystrokes, the effort required to manipulate darkroom photography can require actor’s props, and arguably more time.

The debate over the perceived authenticity of darkroom or digital photography is really a debate of old versus new.  There was an equal amount of deception and editing with film as there is with digital media, it was only executed differently.  The trust that photographers get from the public is, and always has been directly linked to their credibility, which is all the more disappointing when they turn out to be hoaxes.