hi Pall I don't know if I'm playing devil's advocate or standing for your point, but it comes to my mind the idea of a blueprint, which is not exclusive to code. Wouldn't a script for a movie, the lines of a play, be also forms of laying out a final shape? And these codes (text) are also self-standing pieces of art? I could go even further and think of the frames of a movie compared to the screened result in a session.
In case, the argument is very interesting. Bruno On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 7:13 PM Pall Thayer via NetBehaviour <netbehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote: > > As some on this list know, for many years, I've been pushing the notion that > programming code should be viewed as an artistic medium when it's used to > create art. The artist molds it into shape, as they would with a lump of > clay, until it takes its final form. When I've discussed these ideas, I've > always gotten a lot of pushback. People will say that programming code is a > tool, like a paintbrush, not the medium, like paint. I don't agree. This > notion has piqued my interest again in the wake of a rising trend where > artists are creating graphic images by only using HTML/CSS (e.g. > https://a.singlediv.com/ , https://diana-adrianne.com/purecss-francine/ ). > > The problem with computer programmed art, however, is that it requires a > computer. In my mind, there really hasn't been any justifiable reason to > display computer programmed art on anything other than a computer... unless > it adds something significant to the work. And this is something interesting > that has recently occurred to me. I came up with this really simply piece: > > http://pallthayer.dyndns.org/notApixel/ > > And have decided that this piece, although based entirely on computer > programming code, will work better when divorced from the computer and the > browser's interpretation of the code. On my 4k screen, it's practically > impossible to see the red pixel in the center. If I remove the work from the > environment that interprets the code, I'm free to determine the size of a > single pixel: > > http://pallthayer.dyndns.org/notApixel/notApixel.png > > And I could choose to produce that piece in any physical material I want. It > could be a block of wood glued to a panel of wood. What determines the size > of a pixel of wood? What determines the result of a hexadecimal color code > when it's been removed from the computer? If the code is to be interpreted in > wood, what does #f00 mean? > > My main point is that with the example shown above, the piece can be made to > work better at a conceptual level than it would if it were not removed from > the browser environment. > > I'd love to hear other people's ideas on this. I did just write this all off > the top of my head, so if I'm rambling and things don't make sense, just ask > and I'll do my best to clarify. > > Pall Thayer > > -- > ***************************** > Pall Thayer > artist > http://pallthayer.dyndns.org > ***************************** > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
