Question #1
I believe I brought up a topic about digital media versus traditional media and this question is also going to coincide with that discussion. Bishop makes a statement about how easy it is to "copy and paste" and going back to my statement, there's an integrity to the work. Yes it is easier to move images and digital programs have advanced quickly, but there's still work being put into that certain project. Working on the class animations, it's easy to say that working with unfamiliar programs is quite difficult. From personal experience, I had to learn these programs through hours of mistakes; the class blog; and thanks to the internet. I had put in a lot of time and effort to make my animation move and to get it to the point that I want it to, so does Bishop make a point by saying what I'm creating doesn't contain as much work and effort compared to those who used older programs?
Question #2
Bishop states, "My point is that mainstream contemporary art simultaneously disavows and depends on the digital revolution." Going back to the last discussion I also made a point saying that because digital media is so accessible and you can get any of the programs as long as you have the right equipment. Bishop sounds as if digital media is the only art form during that time. Do you think people now are just utilizing their resources? Or because all these programs are well known, people are just using them for the name?
No comments:
Post a Comment