From: utzoo!decvax!duke!mcnc!cdr
Newsgroups: net.graphics
Title: computer art and aesthetics
Article-I.D.: mcnc.1506
Posted: Thu Feb  3 14:18:04 1983
Received: Sun Feb  6 09:02:47 1983

Ah... everyone wants to be a critic.  I suggest we leave the
question "what is art?" alone.  If the people producing it want
to call it art, we should accept as art.  At this point it is
better to ask the question - what is good computer art?

Fortunately, I don't have the answer to that. (If I did I wouldn't
tell - people would immediately label me a damned snottish twit
and quit inviting me to parties.) However, to kick things off I
offer the following:

The simple production of a realistic picture has no value as art.

The fact that someone was clever enough to figure out all the light
sources, textures, shadows, reflections, bounce light, etc. does not
mean that the picture produced by him has great artistic merit.

Take the Fractal Planet Rise by Voss as an example.  My reaction
as a computer scientist is very positive.  It is impressive that
fractal geometry models nature so well and that Voss has been able
to construct such a clever demonstration.  But as an art critic (strictly
amateur) my first reaction was not so good.  The subject matter has
been treated extensively (years of sci-fi book covers, a beautiful
photo via NASA, and endless wall posters).  So what has Voss done
here that I should get excited about as art?  Has he brought a new
understanding to the subject or does he give us something new to
think or feel about it?  Where is the creativity? I don't think it
is very good art.

If you had a poster of it what would you say when you showed it to
someone?  Would you talk about the fact that a computer did it (with
lots of human help, of course) and all the nifty mathematics and
keen computer programs and hardware involved?  Would you say (with a
smirk, of course) that some guy at IBM did it?  Would you talk about
resolution and anti-aliasing and all that?  Would you have anything at
all to say about it as a piece of visual art?  Would you talk about
it the same way you talk about a Picasso, or Monet or Pollock?  If not,
why not?  We shouldn't abandon several thousand years of visual
literacy just because someone has invented a new box of crayons.

Ok - so there is my two bits worth.  I would be particularly
interested in hearing from some of the artists themselves.

		Durward Rogers
		decvax!mcnc!cdr