Re: Cyber Gardening

Michael Carter Llaneza (mllaneza@mercury.sfsu.edu)
Wed, 23 Aug 1995 19:37:50 -0700

> In this way you could talk about a virtual world as a sort of
>installation where the viewers also take part in it's creation and
>continuing development. This is not unlike some landscape installations
>I have heard of and is very much in-line with your gardening concept.
>
>> Yes that's it. I think its the idea of architecture and gardening rather
>> than painter/sculptor that I was trying to make with my fast postings.
>>
> This makes a lot of sense. The artists we were discussing
>earlier, escher and dali painted things that were impossible to sculpt.
>I still thing that they present useful models of the possibilities of
>this new medium. If Dali or Escher were getting started now, I would bet
>that they would be working in 3D Graphics.
>

I agree with that. I was poking through some art URL's and found the
surrealist page (http://205.189.144.7/archiavv/vocab.htm) I posted. I was
instantly struck by the ease with which surrealist symbology could be done
in 3D. The hard part after that would be to add in sounds, motion, time,
interactivity....
You get the picture.

>> other media. I my sound foolish with all this but I think if a VRartist
>> wont to produces works of art which fully explore VR, then you have to
>>redefine
>> what it is that you are doing as an artistic parties. I do not wont to
>>be seen
>> as a painter who uses VR but as a VRartist who takes puts elements of
>>painting
>> in to his work.Or gardening, Architecture, sculptor, mathematics, and so on.
>>
> Even if your are producing work in a new medium, you can't toss
>away all of art history. Things like composition, color and such are
>very important to know regardless of the medium. (Granted the image I
>tossed onto the vworlds home page is particularly garrish).
>

We have to start somewhere... Fortunately there are quite a few art sites
on the WWW to provide us with reference. To say nothing of our local
libraries.

>> >Now I think there are three majors problems for VR creations:
>> >
<snip>
>>
> I've seen a couple different takes on this. A lot of current VR
>artworks "guide" their users through the piece. Personally, I haven't
>enjoyed this much. If I am in a space, I want to feel free to explore it
>in my own time and in my own fashion. This why I also don't particularly
>like being "on a wire" (being constrained in movement) in a virtual
>environment. It seems overly narrow in a virtual world.

Being 'on a wire' is something like watching a 3D surround movie. Wires
will probably be somewhat popular for a while. We can almost do that in
VRML already. The next step of course is to design worlds that are
'artistically worthwhile' to walk around in.

>
>> >- the third problem is more insidious: a large part of art is to show some
>> >things and to hide others: the people out of screen in a movie, the border
>> >of a picture and so on: the virtual world (with the multiple points of
>> >view) give the impression to be able to show everything; this could very
>> >castrating for the imagination of the visitors...
>>
>> I do not think that is right sorry
>> it is this very removal of the hidden which is the great gift of VR
>> and will mean a radical rethink in creating ART. But it is not true
>> that you can not hide things and events in a VR world, you can.
>>
>> The question is then HOW? and When?
>>
> Good points.
>
> Kevin

There, the list is back in action

Michael