Rhea C. Agpaoa
Professor P.
Whittenberger
ART 245
28 April 2013
The Interaction of Environment in Digital Media
“Artists very often look towards nature as a source of inspiration.”
-Lillian Schwartz, The
Artist and the Computer (1976)
The development of art continues to grow
as technology continues to become more advanced. Before photography became popular, artist
would paint in order to capture landscapes and portraits of people; which
developed into different categories and subdivisions. As photography became a new medium, film was
also starting to become a medium in itself as well. The development of the computer enhanced both
photography and film, and eventually brought digital media to a whole new
level. Even though art was taking a
whole new turn, nature is still a popular subject among artist. During the 1970s, artist Lillian Schwartz used
digital media to the best of her ability.
She used computers as a form of painting, rather than using them as a
mapping device like the engineers during that time. Later on, digital media grew to be extremely
well known in film and photography. But
artist like Leo Villareal used computers to work with light, with the help of
algorithms, in order to coordinate how the light would be presented. Schwartz and Villareal have a unique way of
approaching digital media, but they also come up with different ways to use
nature in their own work.
Lillian Schwartz taught herself how
to use film technology and later explored what computer technology had to
offer. Schwartz uses materials that she
has available during that time; her sculpture pieces consist of found objects
with the use of LED technology and she created several graphics and films with
the help of computers. Schwartz’s films
are very colorful and simple in design, but by pairing certain sounds with the
images she’s able to create a whole new feel to the colorful imagery. In her documentary, “The Artist and the
Computer,” Schwartz made a comparison that working with a computer should be
viewed similarly to the way impressionist Georges Seurat’s work consisted of
dots. If a person looks closely at
Seurat’s paintings, they are able to see each individual color that is used,
but as they move farther away their perception would change so the dots start
to merge. Schwartz continues with, “If
you think of the screen as an array of dots, it’s the way you program the dots that
you will create an image.” When working
with computers she uses an input device tool called a light pen, which was
created solely for computer graphics.
Schwartz also comments that when working with computers, a person needs
to have the same intuition, imagination, and emotion as they would with a
painting.
In Schwartz’s film,
ALAE, she takes footage of seagulls that
she recorded, digitizes, and scans the film onto a computer. Schwartz then uses a program to turn the
imagery into a divisionism style. The
first few seconds of
ALAE has an
extremely eerie vibe, mostly due to the music she has paired with the
imagery. In the film the birds appear to
be roosting and flying away from the area of water. Schwartz does not provide an artist statement
for this film, but going off of what she says in, “The Artist and the
Computer,” with the use of color she also adds in a “flicker” effect giving off
a creepy feel but at the same time these effects are able to create deep
feelings in a person. When watching the
film, a person is still able to make out the shapes and the actions of the
seagulls regardless of how distorted or colorful they turn into. Throughout the film, I had an extremely hard
time watching it because of the music and even with the sound on mute, I could
not get rid of that eerie sound in my head.
Because she makes this piece using nature and creating it into an image
from what it is naturally, Schwartz’s film was very effective in creating these
“deep feelings”.
However Leo Villareal uses computer
technology in order to program LED lights with algorithms. In one of his interviews, Villareal mentions
he first started to make LED light sculptures in 1997 where he installed his
first sculpture on top of his RV at Burning Man. He continues in his interview by saying, “I
don’t know what they’re (light sculptures) going to be when I’m making them. I have a general sense, but then my goal is
to create the conditions of what’s going to happen.” Villareal’s sculptures live up to the
standards of his statement; depending on the sculpture, the lights appear to
dance around and move in random patterns.
In the same interview Villareal says, “You can create very potent work
of art with a small amount of information.”
Even though his sculptures appear to be limited to the spaces they are
contained in, his sculptures hold that feeling of infinity because of their
constant motion and complex patterns.
In his most recent installation “The
Bay Lights,” Villareal creates a program to have the environment of the San
Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge to reflect the lights that will be portrayed on
the bridge. The public installation is
created by using over 25,000 lights over a span of 1.8 miles. Each light on the bridge is meant to
represent each pixel on Villareal’s program that he used for the installation. In Villareal’s interview with The New York
Times he says,
“My inspiration comes
from the motion around the bridge, the kinetic activity of boats, water,
clouds, traffic.” The installation is
supposed to help the city bring up their tourism and to bring more attention to
the Bay Bridge. The lights are not
supposed to reflect a certain image, but the forms the lights create are free
for interpretation. Since the lights
appear free flowing, they have a calming and romantic aura to them.
Schwartz
and Villareal both used computer programming in order to portray their images. Villareal’s installation and Schwart’s film
both contained ambiguous forms and used the concept of light and negative
space. Even though both of their art
pieces were made during different times, they had the same ideas of how each
spot or pixel on the screen, or in Villareal’s case each light seen on the
bridge, of Georges Seurat’s impressionist style. Schwartz and Villareal interpreted nature in
their pieces to look more surreal. Both
styles were also using organic shapes and turning them into geometric
forms. They both also accomplished
wanting to bring out deep emotions to their audiences. Schwartz and Villareal both used light tools
in order to execute their pieces and made careful considerations on how they
were going to present them as well. I
also noticed that both Schwartz and Villareal also had their pieces in a marine
setting.
However,
the most significant differences in their art pieces was Schwartz’s use of
color in her film. Villareal did not
consider using color because he wanted the bridge to represent twinkling
stars. Schwartz’s film also contained
sound, but Villareal’s could also be considered using sound with the natural
environment of the bridge. Villareal’s
installation had softer and rounded shapes, yet Schwartz’s film consisted of
angled shapes. Even if they both used
the concept of nature, Schwartz and Villareal’s pieces were different in
aura. Schwartz’s film looked as if it
was going to be exciting and full of life with the use of colorful and fast
moving imagery, but instead had the feeling of being in a haunted house with
clowns. Villareal’s installation seemed
like it would make the public feel more nostalgic and mellow, but because his
piece was constantly in motion it had a surprise element of what would be
presented through the lights. Villareal
says he does not have a certain idea of what the lights would do while Schwartz
has a definite idea of what is going to be portrayed in her work. Their ideals of how their work should be
created are also very different. Villareal
seems to have a more spontaneous approach on how his work turns out, but he
knows exactly what the end product might turn out to be. While Schwartz puts in detail to how her work
is created, but expects the computer to put in little faults to her
pieces.
I
have tried to contact both artist to understand the approach of their work and
I did not receive any reply back from either.
I understand both artists used the concept of nature as their basis of
inspiration, but they showed that in two completely different ways. I would also liked to have understood more
about what type of feelings and the content of Schwartz’s film. They both used computer based programs in
order to interpret nature in very opposite ways, again I would have liked to
know more of Schwartz’s interpretation but for now I am just going to have to
assume. I would love to experience both
pieces in person, especially since the Bay Bridge is of a large scale. I have not experienced one of Schwartz’s exhibits;
so she must present her work in an interesting manner. Nature in art is not a new concept and as long
as technology continues to advance, art will follow suit.
Works Cited
Farrell, Sean P., dir. Bridge of Light. Vimeo,
2013.
Web. 28 Apr 2013.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/05/us/light-sculpture-is-set-for-bay-
bridge.html?_r=2&>.
Keating, Larry, dir. The Artist and the Computer. Bell
System,
1976. Web. 28 Apr 2013. <http://lillian.com/documentaries/>.
Leo Villareal: Animating Light at the
Nevada Museum of Art. YouTube,
2011.
Web. 28 Apr 2013.
<http://youtu.be/kkFRQgbI5qM>.
