June 25th, 2008
Bernd & Hilla Becher, Gravel Plants
Lately I have become interested in artists for whom collecting is central to their process. Dealing with taxonomies and systems of classification, their work is, at least in part, a critique of the activities of museums and collecting institutions or individuals. Fundamentally, these artists are exploring notions of identity through quantitative assessment. Here, identity is expressed through an ontology—a system of objects, representing a particular and unique perspective. A collection seeks to establish a framework by which to formalize, structure and express its content. Through their work, these artists critique that framework at different levels—relating to individual identity, the role of the institution, or society at large.
Read the rest of this entry >
May 30th, 2008
Felice Varini, 1996
My interest in the geometric plane within a three-dimensional space probably stems from it existing as a concept without true precedent in reality—yet, unlike the pure, unsituated two-dimensional surface, it simulates an aspect of reality, namely a spatial arrangement conveying, or representing, an experience. As such, it exists at the threshold of the real, yet is at the same time inherently conceptual.
Read the rest of this entry >
November 10th, 2007
The relationship between mapping and data visualization is somewhat ambiguous and generally ill-defined. In most cases, the two concepts are inextricably linked, and the terms mapping and visualizing are often used interchangeably. Yet, after some reflection it seems apparent that the two concepts are indeed distinct, that there are differences, and defining both in relation to each-other seems somehow imperative to understanding the territory.
Read the rest of this entry >
October 6th, 2007
Josh On, They Rule
All visualization begins with a hypothesis. As previously determined, visualization is an expressive medium, and as such aims to communicate abstract ideas through the use of data. Any successful visualization, therefore, allows drawing conclusions about the underlying data. These conclusions, while often revealing or surprising even for the author of the piece, are nonetheless driven by a particular hypothesis—a hypothesis as general as simply selecting a type or range of data for its perceived interest- or insight-generating qualities, or as specific as setting out to prove a certain claim based on the characteristics of the data source.
Read the rest of this entry >
September 17th, 2007
Lisa Jevbratt, 1:1 Interface: Every(IP)
In his article “Visualization Criticism—The Missing Link between Information Visualization and Art”, Robert Kosara analyzes the gamut of data-based visualization between the two poles of pragmatic and artistic visualization. On pragmatic visualization techniques, he writes: “Pragmatic visualization techniques are also often general, and can be applied to many different data sets. This is considered a strength, because the user can gain experience with the method and apply that to different data, rather than having to start from scratch again.” The opposite is true for artistic visualization, which communicates a specific concern, using data as a proof that the concern is real. As opposed to pragmatic visualization, which aims for generalization, artistic visualization aims for specificity in the relationship between representation and subject matter.
Read the rest of this entry >