SCANSCAPE

Scanscape of Ferdinand Hodler's landscape.

ON THE RIGHTS OF THE MOLOTOV MAN

The argument is interesting because it will never end. This is a recurring argument because this situation and others like it are not black and white. I understand both the painter's side and the photographer's side of the disagreement.

As a photographer, photographs are your artwork and you wouldn't want someone to alter and use it without your permission. But, is it really the photographer's art if they are just documenting a moment in time?

On the other side it is the painters job to take and image and create something new with it and if a photograph is just a documentation of the moment shouldn't they be allowed to paint from photographs? Or should you give credit and rights to the photographer?

In my opinion the painter should only have to give credit to the source of the photograph of reference. I think that it was the responsibility of the painter however, to learn the context and history of the image she was painting. Because if she new the context she would have seen how it conflicted with her theme and changed the meaning of the painting.

ELECTRONIC VENUS FLY TRAP

TED TALK: VIK MUNIZ

http://www.ted.com/talks/vik_muniz_makes_art_with_wire_sugar.html

This video of Vik Muniz was most interesting. It's really funny that his whole art career started out from getting shot. You've got to have a really good personality to make getting shot into a good opportunity. And Vik Muniz does, which is also very apparent in his work. All of his pieces are fuzed with energy and humor.

All of his work involves temporary media: string, chocolate, trash, clouds. Its really interesting that all that remains of the original work is a photograph which technically isn't even part of the work. It make me wonder how does Muniz really want us to see the art? Would he rather us see is in real life as the event is happening or from a removed photograph, does this make the photographic aspect art in itself?

I like the idea of art being temporary art though. You can look at it and move on. The artwork will move on. You appreciate it in that moment. I know that if I were an artist and spent so much time constructing an image for fibers of string I would not want to be temporary. I would want it to stay forever remind me of all the hard work I put into it.

On another note I think that the art addresses themes that are well thought out and interesting. Also humor is a big part of his work. And I love that aspect about it. Clouds made out of clouds, how witty!

DIGITAL DESIGNERS REDISCOVER THEIR HANDS

The article, Digital Designers Rediscover Their Hands, talks about how designers are now tinkering and building with their hands so that they can better understand the aspect of designing. Personally, I think this is a great idea. Being able to use a computer to design is complex but being able to design it by hand should be structured into the process because if they cannot build it by hand, then in reality how will they knows it works correctly? After they build it I think that the designer would be able to make better corrections/alteration to improve upon it, which you could not see on a simulated computer screen but physically in real life. Actually building the design will help you understand how the materials work together and how it actually moves and functions.