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