Time is in my mind the hardest dimension to work threw art, although I greatly enjoy it. It’s questionable to me if it’s always a good thing, some commercials and TV shows are stuck in the same format forever and time is imposed upon the artist.
More so artists that create art that requires the viewers time may turn off people with short attention spans? In scriptwriting most scenes are planned to last 30 words, but their is no basic strategy to actual motion in art. Maybe we should work on developing this with studies, lol.
I really like interactive art like the Phonetic Faces but this one in particular drove a weird thought in me, at what point does that become art? It seems that just because it drives threw a gallery of pictures that it’s art, but looking up pictures of faces on Google would almost encompass the same thing. Is it then the interactivity that makes it art or does this just fall in line with a digital gallery?
The scanner on the other hand seems artistic in it’s creation, and I really enjoy that even after the original impression is composed it is re-edited and printed in various formats, it really shows that digital art can grow into various physical dimensions. My only problem with this is doesn’t the re-editing take away from the original purpose? If we are supposed to see these digitally compressed pictures then changing that seems to lessen the impact.