Digital images are small nodes in a huge net of information. As they become ingrained in my visual memory, I become compelled to arrange some in artistic ways. However, there are certain ways that digital images and icons work discretely in our thinking, like the flare of a message on a cellphone, that snaps the viewer to into an action.
I use digital images at a range of scale, from minute or molecular, to human-scale, to pre-visualize arrangements for many of my paintings. I snap photographs of architecture, designed spaces, environmental light, and many human expressions and gestures. The resulting collection is stored in volumes on my computer that I reference often when painting.
Icons, and thumbnail images, and logos are the types of nodes that stick in our highly-accessible memory. I can react and adapt to my surroundings quickly if digital images are symbolic, such as ordering coffee from a digital menu or separating a list of departures and return flights in an airport terminal monitor.
I think the creative power of Photoshop could be used more positively by media content makers, and therefore we could promote healthier and more just decisions in the general population. I agree with Margaret Russell, the editor of Architectural Digest, that an artist shouldn't inject an artificial environment into an image in a convincing way.
The artist has an obligation to spread the message and illuminate the truth in a photograph. That might involve adjusting the exposure to reveal all the subjects in a photo, rather than shrouding out certain information. In the case of the fashion industry, light & color can compliment a human figure better than removing it's natural wrinkles.
I was most impacted by the photo of Lenin addressing the Soviet troops
Comments
Post a Comment