About 20 years ago, digital art was a minority art form. Weil (2002) commended that, “only a few artists used digital technology in their practice twenty years ago and that was caused by the expensive price and hard technical expertise of digital device and technology.” In comparison to the 2010s, digital art is a uprising category of art that has a great opportunity to be exhibited in a number of well known galleries, art museums, exhibitions and art fairs, for example, the exhibitions of digital art “Digital Revolution” at Barbican centre in 2014 and “Electronic Superhighway (2016 – 1966)” at Whitechapel gallery in 2016, the art pieces involved with virtual reality technology “Rising” by Marina Abramović and “Into Yourself, fall” by Anish Kapoor in Art Basel in Hong Kong in 2018 and (2 more example).From the examples above, making digital art is a common practice for artists, in additions, it has been generally accepted and appreciated by audiences and curators as a general use of digital device like making phone call and sending email via our handy smart phone. Digital technology may be a fashionable or regular material and media for artist along with the developing digital technology and a great population of using digital technology.
This dissertation will focus on the discussion of the aesthetic found on the device that commonly involves with digital art, screen. It is a general component of many digital devices like smartphone, television and smart watch, however, it is a critically essential part of device which acts as a part or a whole piece of interface device for artist and audience, so they can explore the possibly aesthetic experience in different stage of artwork, from the begin of creating to the end of exhibiting.
Meanwhile, digital art comes along with the reflections of how modern people connect to the virtual environment, object and relationship with people, as we are building an immaterial world within the reality.
It reveals an interface between audience and artist with digital art, and the intimacy of us with digital technology and its phenomenon. A unique form of digital aesthetic is found.
Artists, of course, follow the stream of technological development and people shifted focus to digital realm, expend their imagination and creation to the digital realm.
The relationship of us with digit is closer via the screen.
Screen almost surrounds us in daily, from a handy smart phone to an enormous LED displays in Piccadilly Circus. Receiving information directly or passively from the screens can be said as a necessary daily behaviour to people in the 21st century.
Technically, digital screen purely functions as a between us and digital realm, it shows the encoded information from the processors, for examples, CPU and GPU, which process and translate the digit to readable information.
The digital interface for artist and audience
For a certain kinds of digital artwork, screen is a necessary tool from the beginning of creation to the end of presentation. Digital painting is a easy begin to explains the screen takes a role of interface as a general and intimate relationship with screen which as the means of monitoring in creating process and displaying an original or delicate digital artwork, moreover, screen itself may be an inseparable part of the artwork.
David Hockney solo exhibition, “David Hockney: Fleurs Fraiches” at the Foundation Pierre Bergé—Yves Saint Laurent in 2010 showed a collection of drawings of flowers and plants by Hockney and the animations of the drawing process were presented on the devices iPads, which is the device that Hockney practiced with. Using an iPad to create a painting requests the touch on screen with finger or specific pan. From the choosing of color, brush type and other settings of digital brush on the panel of painting software to the swiping the virtual brush on touch screen, finally, the painting is completed. Touch screen is an example of digital interface. For other digital painting, the creating process and interface may applies with the digital creativity on desktop, except the finger is replaced by the compatible digital devices as drawing pad, keyboard and mouse. It is a an interaction between artist with digital device via screen or torch screen propose an alternative mechanism from physical painting. Hockney does not need the physical tools as brush, oil paints and medium for digital painting because all of it are replaced by and shown on the menu and panel in the drawing software. In other to choice the right tool and color and create a stroke, Hockney performs it with his finger. The gestures as swifts, touches, pressing, clicks are the only ways for artist to inform the device the image in their mind or the view they see.
Whatever the screens on iPad or for desktop, the interface of screen is a digital canvas for artist, but the process of imaging is a reaction of the physical gestures, order and the digital respondence. Once the screen receives the gestures of human finger, it translates the physical torches as the commands to the device. A stroke and texture of digital painting can be created from the digital painting software. Digital artist as Hockney can have an infinite combination of brush style and color for his digital painting. Painting software provides a panel of brush where the size, hardness and roundness of brush can be customised, and the brightness and saturation of color are adjustable on the color wheel which is probably able to imitate the specific stroke and texture of oil color and watercolor. Finally, a color outline, a surface, depth, shadows and many visual details of painting are created on screen with gentle finger swiping, repaid pointing and other hand gestures.
Therefore, Hockney seems did not directly paint the flower on the iPad. The mechanism of digital painting and physical painting seem completely different. For the physical painting, artist takes the control of the brush and paint directly and autonomously. Compare with digital painting, there are something in between the artist and the painting, Gavin (2017) described that, “the screen exists in a zone between the human and the machine as device but we do not see the processes as its working is invisible.” Therefore, the gestures that artist made can be said as the orders, the touch screen or other input devices receive the orders, and then transform it to the device to process, finally, the device presented the outcome on the screen. The duration of this process take instantly as illusional as directly paint on the screen. The screen as a one-side mirror hides the processes of creation of digital painting that the painting is directly emerged by the device.
In Hockney’s solo exhibition, his paintings are presented on iPads and projected on the wall by projector. He did not print his painting on paper. Besides, he mentioned that he sent his paintings to his friends via email once he finished a painting, so his friend viewed the paintings on their personal device screen and they may unconsciously own a copy of the painting that store in the device. The actions that Hockney processed may break the place of viewing his painting, because his painting is stored digitally and perceived on the screen. It reveals a feature of digital painting as Paul mentioned that (2002), the employment of digital technologies as a medium implies that the work is produced, stored and presented in digital format and makes use of the inherent probabilities of the medium. The matter of digital painting is digit, which can be transmitted to other devices and be translated to the text or visualised as the graphic on screen. The difference of the paintings by Hockney on the screen is eliminated wherever it is viewed at home or in gallery. Digit breaks the physical limitations so audience can see the digital painting on his smartphone anywhere and anytime, therefore, visiting the gallery is not the only option for audience. Screen, in certain level, is an alternative way of visual experience in digital for audience which art seems not need to have a material form.
However, for certain digital artworks, specific screen become the only device of presenting. A project 15 folds, founded by Margot Bowman, Jolyon Varley and Sean Frank, invited artists to create an animated GIF (abbreviated Graphics Interchange Format) image with a selected theme, and then present it on the social media, Instagram, in additions, the GIF images on Instagram are reposted on Facebook and other social networks.
15 folds, then, was invited to present its collection of GIF images in several galleries. The first method of presenting the GIF images was that to show it on a television screen mounted on white walls, which is a LCD screen. But the members of 15 folds eschewed the original method of presenting in the later exhibitions, because the television screen is not the nature habitat of GIF images. According to the report, a member of 15 folds say, “If it becomes a DVD, it isn’t really a GIF.” The television screen is not the suitable device for GIF image because it cannot directly output the GIF format file. If the animated GIF image has to show on the television screen, it must be converted to a video format, which also changes the nature of GIF image.
The team of 15 folds eventually found a way to fulfil the ideal appearance of GIF with two digital technologies, quick response code, as commonly known as QR code, and augmented reality. They suggested audiences to use the provided tablets or smartphones, which the required software was built in, to scan the QR codes on the walls of gallery. When audiences scan the QR code on the wall, the device then shows the related GIF image floating on device screen, which the features of GIF image is completely and directly exposed to audience on the mobile device screen rather than the replacement format of GIF image.
The link between the GIF image and audience is obviously established by the QR code, screen and device. The QR code on the wall is meaningless for audience because it is designed to be a conveniently recognisable and readable information for digital device. In other words, the QR codes in the exhibition as the invitational signs that asking audiences to scan the code and view the GIF image on the screen of the device on their hand. If the audience do not have a requested device with screen, the GIF image will not be viewed.
Moreover, the team of 15 fold expanded the visual experience with augmented reality. The environment around the QR code including any obstacle in between of the audience and the QR code would be shown on the screen with the animated GIF image, which created a digital scene as magical illusion that mixing the digital object and reality into a scene and shows it on the screen only. It is a unique living personal experience because it is on the audience’s hand and what they would see depend on the environment in gallery while other audience moving around.
The role of screen in the art practices of 15 folds and Hockney firstly proves that the screen is an essential digital device for creating and presenting in digital art, which including digital animation, post-production of video and image and digital photography. The professional skills and methods of material-based creations can be replaced by a series of creative softwares, for example, Adobe creative series, and digital devices. Secondly, as the material and way of creation is digitalised, the digital artworks are the absolute digital object as it is built upon the digit. It allows the digital painting breaks the physical limitation in order to be viewed by many people in many screens at the same time. The way of seeing digital painting or image is via screen unless the digital artworks are materialised. Screen becomes a necessary interface and display for artist and audience as a connection for the realm of digit and material.
The online interactive and intimacy experience of digital art in screen
Screen, in one hand, is a simple device of output of image, however, it is a component of interacting device with computer. The nature of computer suggested that the digital artwork presenting on the screen should not be static, solitary and unresponsive as material painting but interactive to audience via screen.
A digital artwork can be a software, a website or a computer game which are the mediums of digital art that make the immediate digital respondences on screen.
Through the screen, artists Joan Heemskerk and Dirk Paesmans see the internet as a medium of digital art and created an internet-based artwork JODI.org. The website is composed with a number of pages and there are full of moving images with high contrast color and unidentifiable texts and numbers. The website equips the basic functions of website but it looks like a labyrinth as there is no clear sign of direction or menu. Audience could get stuck on a page because they could find any obvious button there. It may not even have an exit or destination. Chayka described the website “is created to be confusing, to make viewers think twice about what they expect from the internet.”
Visiting this website becomes a journey of finding the hidden buttons on a crowd and chaotic information on each page by moving the mouse. This journey is similar to the practice of looking for the information online by clicking and moving the by the internet users when they are browsing on the internet. It revives the desire of information of audience, however, our respondence to this man-made confusing website is purely tricked by the riddle-like visual elements on screen. The website gives a statement about our desires on the internet, a powerful and convenient digital tool on screen, however, our desire may not be fulfilled on this website where the information is meaningless to audience.
Heemskerk and Paesmans successfully present an alternative experience of online surfing, where the experience is an interaction of digital art of internet on screen.
The respondence of digital artwork is digitalised and our relationship of art and audience is digitalised. A new experience of art happened on screen with internet.
An experience of online surfing to an aesthetic and interactive experience through screen to this website, which does not have an ending of journey.
Brenna Murphy primarily works with the computer softwares to create and product artwork in reality. However, she presents her digital artworks in two ways. The first, she materialises the digital artwork of digitally-fabricated sculptural elements, textiles and prints in gallery and secondly upload the digital artwork on her website. Rather to view her artworks in gallery, browsing her artworks on her personal website may have a deep understanding of her intention of art making. Murphy explained that ”I made art that is meant to be viewed on the internet by people privately browsing from their own device. I think this is an intimate and powerful way of transmitting and experiencing media.” The first impression of her website are fully composed with the still and moving digital images and synthesis noise. There are far more objects and details of a piece of artwork could be viewed on her website than the gallery, including, her digital artworks, the videos of her performances and the photographs of the physical artworks. Viewing Murphy’s artworks on Internet via screen is an intimate interaction rather than the materialised artwork in gallery which cannot be found on the materialised artworks in gallery. At least, the experiences of both ways are identical.
The digital artworks on her website remain its nature and originality, audience do not only view an image of the digital artwork but include the details, moving images and sounds of the artwork together when audience clicks into it. These elements and effects which compose her digital artworks may not be able to present in gallery because of the limitation of physical reality. It becomes an exclusive experience on screen.
In the period of November 2017 to January 2018, The Wrong presented The Wrong biennale which is the third edition of a massive digital art event online and offline. It creates an open digital environment where temporarily gathered a massive selections of digital artworks and embraced digital artists, curators to participant in the biennale. It is a biennale celebrating digital art as a part of digital culture, holding part of the event in some physical locations, on the other hands, the major part of Wrong biennale took place online that encourage audiences to have an experience of the digital artworks online via their screen, in additions, no ticket is need and the time of visiting is not limited. The biennale had more than 100 online pavilions which exhibiting digital artworks by about 1400 artists from around the world.
Is an online digital art biennale as the art biennales in reality like Venice art biennale? Jochen Volz described that, “the role of biennial as an independent foundation, to be a platform that actively promotes diversity, freedom and experimentation, while exercising critical thought and producing an alternative reality.” The Wrong biennale totally complies with this description.
Firstly, David Guilló, the founder of the Wrong biennale, welcomed the artists and curators to join the biennale without too much requirements, he said that “If you believe your art or your curating talent must be part of The Wrong, then for us, it’s a must.” The result is thousand of digital artworks of digital illustrations, performance videos, GIF images, animations and other formats composed more than 100 pavilions on the internet. The style, theme and number of pavilions were open to artist and curator to identify of the common belief and thought of a group of artwork, therefore, rather artist find a suitable pavilions to join or create a pavilion with his topic, both are negotiable and possible. All the participant needs is to proposal the artworks and idea of curating through the discussion in the Wrong’s Facebook group. There are many possible groups of artist with combinations of digital artworks could be happen on a pavilion. The common belief and idea of creations may be a reason of gathering them in a pavilion. In comparison to the traditional biennales that the way of curating is ruled by the organisers and it is generally according to the genre and the wide theme of artwork or the nationality of artist, the Wrong biennale transfer a part of control to the participants.
The art biennales in reality are important cultural event that consists with many aspects of the local society. McAuliffe said that, “the fusion of national, commercial and cultural promotion continues to haunt the contemporary biennale.” Art biennale is an significant attraction for visitors to come to the cities, but its influence is included the economic and culture of the host city, therefore audience journey in an art biennales is also a journey of experiencing of the local culture of humanity and commerce. On the other hand, the Wrong biennale is located in the pure digital online environment, it does not have the influences to the city as the art biennale in reality because the biennale focused on the promotion of the diversity of internet cultures involved with the advantages of internet and screen. Meanwhile, the experience of the Wrong biennale is limited on the screen and internet. Audience can access to the digital art biennale anytime and anywhere, in additions, the time of visiting is not limited. Therefore, the unrelated aspects that found on the biennale in reality will be ignored. The requirement and cost of the facilities needs for the digital art biennale are relatively lower for artist and audience, for instances, to rent a venues for displaying the physical artwork, in comparison to, to host a website for digital artwork. Organisers and the participants of digital art biennale would have a higher autonomy and lower restrictions from the authority of city and sponsor.
In conclusion, the Wrong biennale is an anti-authority, anti-regionalism and anti-elitism but user friendly art biennale in contrast to the art biennale in reality. It reflects that the combination of internet and screen is able to provide a space that features on the greater liberty, diversity and capacity for digital artworks.
The accessibility to digital art on internet is digitally and friendly to audience.
The scale, opening hours, number of works, number of counties representative and gallery of the biennale in reality is limited by the physical circumstance. different categories of digital art completely rely on screen which allows audience to experience a unique visual information from the realm of digit.
It is a new form of art biennale that focus on digital art in the way of presenting the digital artwork online and be viewed on screen.
The new generation of digital illusion
Facebook and Youtube were founded on 2004, they soon grow up to be an enormous online society which contains billion of users worldwide. More social media were founded after the success of Facebook and Youtube, for example, Twitter and Instagram. The rise of social media provide a number of multi-media platforms for social media users to share different types of content, for example, photo, video and the feeling at an event on the internet. Fogel said that “Social media channels provide a unique opportunity to connect with others of similar interests, and clearly, people are utilising this capacity to advantage.” Social media focus on the culture of sharing and commenting. It encourages the users to share their original digital contents on the social media and continually spread the content to any potentially linked personnel, who is interested to this content, though the re-sharing. Viewers can give the comment below the content that activates a way of communication between the creators of the content and the viewers.
Molly Soda, a digital performance artist, shares her performance video on multi-society media, especially on Youtube. Most of her videos on Youtube are recorded in her bedroom and the topics of her performance are very typical and that many YouTubes are still practicing, for example, singing, dancing, makeup tutorial and vlog. This is her way to build a connection to audience from her private living to public in the online social platforms. Her videos may not be seen difference to other videos on Youtube neither be constantly considered as the artworks.
However, in her solo exhibitions “From my bedroom to yours” and “Me and my Gurls” at Annka Kultys Gallery, London. the different kinds of screens on walls and tables play the same videos from her YouTube channel, in additions, the setup and the decoration of the exhibition “From my bedroom to yours” imitate a teenage girl bedroom that is a symbol of private and intimate space to female. The screen seems to isolate the performance of Molly Soda from the viewers rather in Youtube or gallery and the direct response were missing in the stage of Youtube.The only communication is in the comment section that the voices from audiences can be heard by Molly Soda.
Her performance videos are lowbrow, but Howe, who commented the exhibition of “Me and my Gurls” that, ”Although some may perceive her work as shallow or superficial, if you take the time to look deeper, …, you will find an intricately complex and engaged artistic practise, powerfully addressing structures of identity, especially female identity.” The artistic value of the performance videos by Soda are hidden under the first appearance and idea of typical contents of video on Youtube, where contains a huge amount of videos for entertaining, educating and other purposes.
Our screen may not be able to completely delivery the intention of the artwork in social media, but a designed and specify location as gallery can guide audience to discover the passion to and idea of social media that expressed by Soda.
Another female artist, Amalia Ulaman made an experiment about the popularity of attractive female images on social media. She launched a project “Excellences and Perfections” in 2014 that she tried to increase the followers on her Instagram account with a designed image of her. She firstly posted a photo of her after the breast augmentation, after that, more selfies of her in a sexy dress and luxury life style were posted on her Instagram. She successfully gained more than one hundred thousand followers on her Instagram based on the designed photos with ulterior motive. At the end, she declared that this is a project and her journey was showed in the exhibition Digital superhighway at Whitechapel gallery.
Unlike to Molly Soda, who performs a real of her in private life, the experiment performed by Amalia Ulaman is build upon a fake image that was inspired by the trendy subject on social media. Her experiment identifies that a way to get attention on social media is a performance of pleasing audience, and the authenticity of photos and even the identity of user are lack of certainty and trusty.
The two female artists display a desire of being viewed that may be a culture of online social media. But they are different,
The buttons of Like and Share as an strategical tool that engage audiences to promote the digital content to more people.
Using private personal life as the material and have an interaction event with audience
The huge amount of work, obese to the internet social media. The communication of the artist and audience is connected
Screen as a significant hardware that pushes the art to the new generation of new media, the new model of screen keep coming in society and become a new device for artists to pursue the extreme experience in art.
he common impression of screen is a single black flat device as computer monitor and smartphone, which allows audience to perceive a two dimensional image. The new fashionable technology allow audience to experience a reality-like journey by vision, that is virtual reality. It is a handset with two separate internal screens which create two identity image in each screen which then generate a three dimensional effect.
Many artist apply with this technology in their artwork.
In the case of Hockney, he can customise a suitable brush by pressing the button of the painting software panel, and then create a line with his bare finger with a gentle pressure and speedy swipe. The skills and methods of physical materials do not apply in digital.
Gavin (2017) The screen is no longer a place just fro content but a space that invites you in. The screen invites artist to paint and create the artworks belong to digital realm, and seduces audience to view the diverse artworks through the screen
we can see digital technology has not only permeated our living style but our culture and art.
we can see digital technology is not only the tool and method for producing artwork, but a way of experience art.
Digital art cannot be said as a new art genre but it keeps breaking the limitation of our imagination and perception following with the development of digital technology.
Screen is a frame of digital art
2019-1-29-1548732573