DIGITAL ART + NEW MEDIA
new names for some old ways of thinking
Alan Dunn @ "Creative Solutions" National Conference on art, regeneration and housing, Reebok Stadium, Bolton 12-13.06.2001
The workshop will look at digital art & new media in the context of regeneration, exploring the relationship between traditional solutions and those made possible by or suggested by new technology. Today is about an introduction to ‘digital art’ and the roles it can play in regeneration and the varying ways in which it can be used to generate innovative artworks and thoughts.
Before using the digital equipment and engaging in some practical tasks, I will introduce some of my own work. I will take the phrase ‘digital art’ apart to see what it can mean and where it can lead to. In doing so we will see that the word ‘art’ is equally as important as the word ‘digital’.
For me there are two types of digital art – that which is inspired by or utilises new technology towards other ends and that which is in itself new technology.
The first type begins with an idea or a message to be conveyed. New media is then chosen as the best way to progress or process that idea. From there, an artwork evolves through a computer into something else (a print, projection, recording or even a painting or sculpture). New media is a new muse for the artist and public. The strengths of new-media-inspired works are that they often incorporate a wider range of creative acts, beyond the tip of the forefinger. They can also be messy or smelly (which is occasionally good for stimulating senses).
It can also take any form or shape or size desired whereas screen-based digital art has limitations. For example, if you wanted to produce a series of full-length portraits of people, then the horizontal computer screen can be frustrating. The existence of such a type of artwork has a social historical background in that if you wish to employ an experienced artist (eg with ten years of community art behind them) then it is likely that that person studied at Art School pre-computer-age and has since around 1990-91 added new media skills onto a broader portfolio of skills and techniques.
This is very different to working with someone who has studied in the mid-to-late nineties, perhaps on an exclusive IT course where life drawing, community art or colour theory have taken a back seat.
The second type – that which is in itself new technology – should also begin with an idea or reason but thereafter remains within the digital realms. This area covers artworks such as web-sites, animations or CD-Roms. Tomorrow you will hear about SuperChannel which is a good example of this way of working. This type of artwork has advantages in terms of portability (it often exists only as a ‘file’) and it can be viewed simultaneously by larger audiences from around the world.
The particular strengths are that it is new and thus challenging many long-held social assumptions about commerce (can you commission an artwork that doesn’t exist when the machine is unplugged?), authorship (gone are the days when an artist signs a work to signify that it is finished) and also quantity (a massive amount of work can go into and onto a 5" wide CD – as much as a frescoed ceiling or gable-end mural). As well as some of the practical disadvantages mentioned above, the real problems are in a sense what we are here to discuss, namely the myths of digital art (it’s too technical, it’s for young people, it’s too elitist).
The very basics today are a digital camera and a PC. These are primarily what I would call ‘button tools’ as we activate them by pressing finger-sized buttons in certain sequences. Like writers, we can convey unlimited universal thoughts through these buttons. However, the majority of new media work (unless you move into the realms of programming) is restricted by whoever writes the programmes we use. Thus, it is crucial to operate button tools in conjunction with thinking, discussing, consulting, researching, challenging and questioning.
Using this basic equipment, and what we ourselves bring to the table, we will look at three public situations. At first glance it resembles a brief for a piece of public art, but it need not be. These three photographs can be catalysts for a whole range of social suggestions.
Each of these three locations have problems and hence potential. All are heavily used by the public but in a sense taken for granted. There is no real sense of ownership or debate around each building/site/institution, yet within them hold scope for radical economic, educational, social or architectural changes. There are no right answers for these locations; listed below are three processes which may help us begin to debate the situations and challenge the status quo.
1960’s car park, grey corrugated metal cladding on exterior, community of motorists and pedestrians crossing to and from main shopping centre, a lack of identity, traffic moves from left to right as seen in photograph, busy road, façade is 30ft high, funding from European Economic Develoment Fund, total budget of around 70,000 with brief to reinvigorate an aging eyesore.
In heart of SRB area, Raffles housing estate, photo taken from playground side – other side faces main Raffles Avenue, high pedestrian traffic of all ages and visible from major bus route on Newtown avenue, problems of vandalism, school wants to present better image to public and involve the pupils. Artist’s fees from within SRB budget and materials budget fairly low (300-500).
As you exit the coach station you are faced with a four foot high wall. Over this wall is a view down into a ‘hole’. At the far end is an old 1896 rail tunnel which had been painted with a ‘Nottingham Insurance’ advert (with image of a steam train), the green area is full of discarded needles and thrown rubbish, there is no public access to this green area, the site is due for redevelopment. There is no contingency for an artwork and hence no budget other than personal or raised funds.
Changing colours, collaging images and texts. With screen-based digital art, the eye is the first door to the brain. A computer can allow hundreds of visual changes which stimulate an equal number of new thoughts. It is like doodling but with more options. What if this was red? (can colours affect people’s moods and outlooks?) Or upside down (how radical can we be with architectural or social or project designs? Where does most activity take place within a given situation?) Or stretched (what are the priorities and problems? How much space do people need?). What if we add this to the image? Or subtract that?
Sometimes a solution is right in front of our nose. Within any PC there are a wide range of verbs, commands and actions that we are subconsciously absorbing. They are not that dissimilar to what we carry out in real life: open, new window, close, copy, refresh, search, history, undo, redo, look up reference, cut, save, normal, template, help, send, language, sort, customise, break etc etc.
We may decide to propose something that is technically not possible yet. The realms of new media are full of playing God, dreaming, creating safe global villages and united utopian worlds.
We will now look at the second type of digital art – that which remains pixilated – and develop a basic web-site page to convey the issues that have arisen. This page will be published on my web-site and as such is ‘the real thing’. It will be available for others to view.
Do we require an introductory text?
Do you want your e-mail addresses included?
Do you want your names listed?
How best can a web-page represent the morning?
How best can a web-page develop or add to the morning’s progress?
Which audience are we writing for?
Are we writing as individuals, two groups or one group?
Can a web-page contain disagreements or unresolved issues?