A definition and here’s what it means to me.
New Media Art?
An untitled portrait drawing gets photographed and then manipulated, you might see this process a lot in my work from 2015, 2016 and even in 2017, still, it isn’t always how I work, but it is was a big part of my process over the last 20 months. Is it digital art or new media art?
Even though the resulting new media works produced during 2015 and 2016 the last 2 years are were well thought out experiments that resulted in new original physical works, it has had been a difficult process for me to make the mental shift and recognising the value of the work. I know what it took to make this happen but since the early 1990’s I’ve been struggling with what was considered ‘digital art.’
Mostly, digital art, was synonymous with commercial art, even though at times artists made digital art that was not. Still, that was the primary application and perception. New tools weren’t recognised as ‘fine art’ and I believed that. Subsequently, I rarely dabbled in digital art unless it was for a paying ‘graphic arts’ or ‘textile’ design job.
How could something be fine art if it’s digital? Even though attitudes have transformed over the last few years and ‘digital art’ has become more acceptable it’s taken quite a few years to be elevated and accepted. Words and definitions still matter — even though visual artists don’t always think that’s true.
Veritably, David Hockney who was born in 1937 regularly creates works using an iPad. As a well-known painter he has street cred and has always embraced technology — fame and fortune have its perks — back in the 80s, he used Quantel’s Paintbox to create art. At the time, it was primarily used in TV, Film & Advertising production and was not accessible to most people.
We live in an age where the artist is forgotten. He is a researcher. I see myself that way. — David Hockney
Art in the Age of Digital Reproduction: Hockney’s iPad Paintings
A Disclaimer
As a still to be known artist, I feel as if a disclaimer is required. It goes something like this —
My art starts with traditional materials and methods…
Even though that is, in fact, true what that really means is that in my mind it is necessary to justify my work. I’ve even so far as to create definitions for my work — it isn’t digital art, although it is at some point technically — I call the resulting works — New Media works.
A Definition
New media for me is defined as something vastly different than a ‘digital’ work even though it has passed through the digital realm, it has the following attributes:
1. It is not a ‘print edition’ from a photograph of an original work. A print edition is different because it is a photograph of a work and the digital file, slide or negative is printed on paper, canvas, metal, etc. as a direct replica of a work.
2. It is a new work created from a work that clearly is different (at least in my case since I prefer to use a traditional medium first) or it is created entirely in the digital world but it must meet condition number 3.
3. It must come into our physical reality.
Perhaps other artists struggle with these definitions or maybe they are simply technically wrong. — words matter. So I prefer to call my last experiments and creations by digital means New Media and I’m sticking with that.
Would you add something to this definition of new media? Let me know how you feel about new media works. Do they have more value when they become reality? Do you destroy the resulting digital files for eternity or keep a backup? Do you make works of the same file in various sizes? What are your limits? I have my own set of rules but want to know what you think. Let me know in the comments section.