(well, i try another reply strategy in order to allow this post to go through the list, let's test...)
In reply to Curt Cloninger : http://www.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/20100316/014853.html Yes, that's for me a very important point to address. In several works (1) i use the IP address of the spectator to compose the picture, so the picture is unique according to this spectator. The picture takes place only where the spectator is looking at it. From this point of view (reception, uniqueness of the picture), it seems that it has more to do with painting than with photography or algorithmic generative art. This is conceptually ok if i don't save generated pictures and show them to others. It's a another possibility, but it changes the relation between the spectator and the picture, and as a consequence, the nature of the picture. 'Networked painting' is a way to explore this relational/interaction space between users/spectators and pictures. (1) examples: http://www.yannleguennec.com/works/laval-bridge/ http://www.yannleguennec.com/works/found-shape-on-the-ground/square/01/ best, yann _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
