Comments on: Four categories of art http://artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html a multi-disciplinary dialog Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:29:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Karl Ziper http://artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3201 Karl Ziper Tue, 02 Jan 2007 09:43:20 +0000 http://www.artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3201 The comments above about "living with one's art" and seeing what "holds up" resonate with me. I love to look at my own work over long periods of time. Some of the works are too much part of the past for me to change. Others are ongoing, works I am striving to complete. This is one of the reasons that I decided against becoming a "painting a day" painter, as fascinating as that idea is. I want my work, as well as my ability, to develop over time-scales longer than a single day. The comments above about “living with one’s art” and seeing what “holds up” resonate with me. I love to look at my own work over long periods of time. Some of the works are too much part of the past for me to change. Others are ongoing, works I am striving to complete. This is one of the reasons that I decided against becoming a “painting a day” painter, as fascinating as that idea is. I want my work, as well as my ability, to develop over time-scales longer than a single day.

]]> By: Birgit Zipser http://artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3095 Birgit Zipser Fri, 29 Dec 2006 11:48:21 +0000 http://www.artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3095 June, In early December on this site, Walter Bartman recommended that I read Hockney’s book "Secret Knowledge". So far, I have only read a New Yorker article on this subject and have spent my free time reading books that helped me with basic blogging skills. Now it is time to read more by Hockney. You solved riddle for me. I looked up on the Google whether ‘out of my depth’ really meant what I was trying to say. But I still did not understand that it referred to drowning. Using your recent expression, I will spend more “time in the water”. June,

In early December on this site, Walter Bartman recommended that I read Hockney’s book “Secret Knowledge”. So far, I have only read a New Yorker article on this subject and have spent my free time reading books that helped me with basic blogging skills. Now it is time to read more by Hockney.

You solved riddle for me. I looked up on the Google whether ‘out of my depth’ really meant what I was trying to say. But I still did not understand that it referred to drowning. Using your recent expression, I will spend more “time in the water”.

]]> By: birgit http://artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3093 birgit Fri, 29 Dec 2006 11:11:36 +0000 http://www.artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3093 Steve, Perhaps we are thinking about the same issue, namely how to compress the 3-D world into a 2-D image. With respect to the picture of my sister sitting on the dune, a local friend emailed me that my photo indeed does not convey the steepness of the dune. Steve,

Perhaps we are thinking about the same issue, namely how to compress the 3-D world into a 2-D image. With respect to the picture of my sister sitting on the dune, a local friend emailed me that my photo indeed does not convey the steepness of the dune.

]]> By: June http://artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3089 June Fri, 29 Dec 2006 04:20:57 +0000 http://www.artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3089 Birgit, you aren't in over your head until you drown! And you sound like you are still breathing freely! To explain my own response a bit further, I wouldn't touch images of nature for years because ole Ma nature does it so well. So I had to find a way to deal with that question. As for photography and the question of vision -- are you aware of David Hockney's theories? The best place I've found to meander about them is "Hockney on Art: Conversations with Paul Joyce." This, more than anything I've ever read before or since, changed my whole idea about what and how we see. Among other things, Hockney points out that we never see a still image -- our saccades (eye movments) fill in images so we think we might have stopped time for an instant. But we don't. I highly recommend the book to anyone who is thinking about photography and painting and seeing and perspective. Hockney is the guy who upset everyone with his theories about the use of the <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/archive/content/articles/011126fr_archive02?011126fr_archive02" rel="nofollow"> camera obscura</a> in the Renaissance. Birgit, you aren’t in over your head until you drown! And you sound like you are still breathing freely! To explain my own response a bit further, I wouldn’t touch images of nature for years because ole Ma nature does it so well. So I had to find a way to deal with that question.

As for photography and the question of vision — are you aware of David Hockney’s theories? The best place I’ve found to meander about them is “Hockney on Art: Conversations with Paul Joyce.” This, more than anything I’ve ever read before or since, changed my whole idea about what and how we see. Among other things, Hockney points out that we never see a still image — our saccades (eye movments) fill in images so we think we might have stopped time for an instant. But we don’t.

I highly recommend the book to anyone who is thinking about photography and painting and seeing and perspective.

Hockney is the guy who upset everyone with his theories about the use of the camera obscura in the Renaissance.

]]> By: Steve http://artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3084 Steve Fri, 29 Dec 2006 00:09:01 +0000 http://www.artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3084 Birgit, There actually are cameras with two lenses made to create stereo pairs of pictures, which of course must be viewed with some type of viewer. Ironically, there were much more popular long ago. I think I get a sense of your fascination for this when I remember using high power binocular microscopes to examine all sorts of things, for example sea urchin shells, which have a very intricate architecture. I could look at these for hours. In my case, if I think about dimensionality at all, I am usually more interested in the 2D-ness of a photograph than in the 3D-ness of its subject. Birgit,
There actually are cameras with two lenses made to create stereo pairs of pictures, which of course must be viewed with some type of viewer. Ironically, there were much more popular long ago.

I think I get a sense of your fascination for this when I remember using high power binocular microscopes to examine all sorts of things, for example sea urchin shells, which have a very intricate architecture. I could look at these for hours.

In my case, if I think about dimensionality at all, I am usually more interested in the 2D-ness of a photograph than in the 3D-ness of its subject.

]]> By: birgit http://artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3083 birgit Thu, 28 Dec 2006 23:39:16 +0000 http://www.artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3083 Steve, I am happy for any response from you, critical or not. Someone needs to invent cameras with two lenses. Steve, I am happy for any response from you, critical or not.

Someone needs to invent cameras with two lenses.

]]> By: Steve http://artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3081 Steve Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:57:05 +0000 http://www.artandperception.com/2006/12/four-categories-of-art.html#comment-3081 I didn't mean to imply that there aren't some fascinating questions to explore here, relating art to nature, spirituality, etc. Or to halt discussion of them. Of course, we will open Pandora's box (Fate); I'm just leery of ripping the top off suddenly. Some great post topics to be carved out here... Even the topic of a camera lens vs. the vision of a one-eyed person could lead deeply into mind... I was very interested to learn about the prevalence of natural vs. "art" objects as objects around the house to delight the eye. I have many myself, though for some reason I didn't think of that when I wrote the post. Often I've incorporated them into something else, like tree branches supporting a bookshelf, or the rock base for a lamp. I didn’t mean to imply that there aren’t some fascinating questions to explore here, relating art to nature, spirituality, etc. Or to halt discussion of them. Of course, we will open Pandora’s box (Fate); I’m just leery of ripping the top off suddenly. Some great post topics to be carved out here… Even the topic of a camera lens vs. the vision of a one-eyed person could lead deeply into mind…

I was very interested to learn about the prevalence of natural vs. “art” objects as objects around the house to delight the eye. I have many myself, though for some reason I didn’t think of that when I wrote the post. Often I’ve incorporated them into something else, like tree branches supporting a bookshelf, or the rock base for a lamp.

]]>