 |
|
|
|
|
| Conductor: Anonymous |
Date Posted: 07/15/03 |
|
|
|
Over the past 10 years there has been a revolutionary marriage of computers and art. We're now starting to see some of these works appear in shows and galleries. Today, I'm conducting an interview with Steven Friedman. Steven is one of those artists who is using computer technology to produce some stunning works of art on a whole variety of subjects.
A: Steven, thank you for being here.
S: Your welcome!
A: The term you've coined to describe your technique is Digital Natural Media. How did you come up with that phrase and how does it distinguish itself from other forms of computer art.
S; Perhaps the hardest aspect of this type of medium is to come up with a good name for it. Computer Art is far too broad, and for another thing, my work is not completely done on the computer. Digital Painting is a part of it, but again it doesn't encompass the whole range of techniques that I use. The digital artistic revolution spans a wide spectrum from 3D fantasy landscapes to straight digital photography. My particular style closer resembles traditional art mediums such as oils paints, pastels, watercolor, etc. - hence I've coined the term Digital Natural Media.
A; I must say from looking at your work you certainly have created the look of traditional mediums. How do you compare yourself to artists who work in traditional mediums.
S: I'd say we're alike in many ways, but also very different in many ways. We're alike in that we both need to know our tools and mediums - be it paint and paintbrush or camera, digital stylus, and software. In my case it has taken me years of exploring a lot of different graphics software programs and a lot of techniques both documented and un-documented to get to where I am today - and I am still discovering new things. On the other, there is a completely different approach to the way I work from the way a "traditional medium" artist works.
A: How is that?
S: Well when a painter works they first have to plan how big a canvas or paper sheet they are going use, and plan their canvas. Next they plan and sketch design elements and then layer colors that they have to create from scratch, and then blend using brush or palette knife. That may be over simplistic, but that would be an fairly accurate description. My own technique is completely different. I start with a photograph so the elements of my design are already there. I also don't have to care wit about my final size since I can size it any way I want at the printing stage. I also use color differently. Instead of mixing on a palette, I use the digital technology to alter the hue, correct the tonality, or increase or decrease the saturation as I work. In this respect I have a far greater degree of control over my color palette.
A: Would it be fair to say your work is closer to altered photography then?
S; Yes and no. I see photography as working with three primary "dimensions". These are Light, Composition, and Color. All of the design elements basically "live" within these dimensions - even Black and white photographs. While some photographers use digital enhancements to alter these, at the end of the day, they still stay well within these 3 basic dimensions. What I have done with my Digital Imagery is to actually add two new dimensions that have always resided in the traditional art medium domain - that being texture, and impressionistic abstraction. So at the end of the day, my images have crossed out the boundaries of photography and take on the artistic characteristics that have allowed other mediums to create great works of art. To simply describe my work as altered photography would be like saying pottery is altered mud. Both are true to some extent, but grossly over-simplify the process.
A; In what other ways does working with a computer give you advantages over a traditional artists?
S; To begin with it is not just working with a computer. The entire process uses many tools. There is the camera, the computer and peripherals, the software, and then there is also the printer and final strata that the image is printed onto. Many people simply latch onto the computer part, but ignore the other tools that are every bit as important. But to answer your question, this entire process -camera, computer, printer, etc. - really gives me an incredible amount of artistic freedom. For starters, it frees me from my lack of physical artistic talent (i.e. realistic drawing, hand-eye coordination….) and allows me to focus on drawing out my creative vision. It permits me to do radical experimentation with an image or idea quickly and at very little expense. It's very much a discovery process of experimenting, and then seeing where that effort goes, and then experimenting some more until I start to see the whole thing start to gel. Very few traditional medium artists have that freedom - for one thing, I can literally change the "medium's" look I started with to something completely different without changing the design elements. So I may start out thinking I'm going to go with a realistic watercolor rendition, but at the end of the day come up with an abstract pastel look without ever switching my tools.
A: Some artists say that computer art is simply push button art - there is no real craft or talent to it, it's simply trial and error. How do you respond to that criticism?
S: When I was doing straight photography, I heard the exact same criticism leveled at that medium. Now few people would discount the artistic contributions of Edward Weston, Ansel Adams, and an entire generation of fine art photographers. Heck, when tube paints were first introduced in the late 19th century, some critics said that wasn't really true art. In every generations those on the cutting edge of new techniques or tools always seem to draw the criticism of those who've done it the "old fashioned way". Simply because I use different tools, does not in any way diminish the artistic merit of the work.
A: Where do you see this digital art revolution taking us in the next 10 years.
S: Anywhere and Everywhere! Don't forget, this is the very first generation that will be raised with a computer in the home -- not to mention the fact that even as little as 4 years ago the cost of a system that could do this type of work would cost as much as a good used car. Now color printers and high end systems can be had for the cost of a moderately price stereo system. My real hope is that schools will embrace this art form in their curriculums since that really tends to do more to spawn creative innovation than any of the museums or galleries. In comparison, it wasn't until schools starting teaching photography as fine art, that photography truly became accepted in the fine arts community.
A; Where do you see your own efforts going over the next few years?
S: I'm just starting to scratch the surface of exploring this medium. I seem to hit a plateau, and then I find a new technique and then off I go. I'd guess my next thing is to try to perfect the craft and be able to add things to my images that even at close scrutiny would fool the average person into thinking that it is a traditional medium. Next I'd like to get more bold and try things I've never thought of before. Maybe combining things and even mediums - I might even start to use REAL paint on the images. Finally, I really want to try to educate people about what it "is" and what it "Is not". There are still a lot of shows out there that exclude any form of digital art - for whatever reasons. I really feel that this is both unfair and crippling to starting artists who don't have gallery representation or other means to promote their work. The questions should not be "how was it done" but how well does it effectively and creatively fulfill the artistic vision that the artist was striving for.
|
|
 |
|
 |
