|
I noticed that nobody has suggested that these images are not Art. From the OP, "Glitch art is defined as, 'the aestheticization of digital or analog errors, such as artifacts and other 'bugs', by either corrupting digital code/data or by physically manipulating electronic devices." That isn't Art, or at least, the concept behind the aesthetic isn't explained at all in your opening post. Why add digital corruption to these images? Without an answer to that, this seems more like a photoshop tips & tricks thread. Art is a mode of expression, not a photoshop layer.
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2012 21:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 20:47 |
|
|
casa de mi padre posted:gently caress you I literally cried at some of these images ... viewed in the proper context they are DEFINITELY art!!! Could you explain the context for the pictures? Maybe I just don't "get" the aesthetic. Resplendent Spiral posted:It is the expression and embrace of seldom-seen spontaneous errors in digital media in the absence of proper error detection & correction and the subsequent creation of new forms of visual media arising thereof Yes, but to what end? What is the meaning of these uncorrected errors? Can you explain to me why this is Art, but an actual, "spontaneous" corrupted image would not be?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2012 18:05
|
|