Visual intelligenz. The painting invades the space of the viewer. He plays with the visual aesthetics of video games and uses AR to add an additional layer to his paintings.
These visual elements act as a distraction from the subject matter; they overwhelm the painting. This is where the work becomes unheroic.In fact, the work is not all about video games. The paintings are made in collaboration with John Cerone, a professional video-game designer. They are also based on photographs and texts that Cerone has used to illustrate his work. These texts, which Cerone has translated into English, are from a video-game magazine. The images and texts are of a woman and a man in various states of undress, each in a different pose, exposing the body and the soul. The images are a panoramic view of a person and a location, a distorted view of a place. The text, which Cerone has translated into English, is about the subject of the woman and the man and, in turn, the subject matter of the game. In this work, the paintings reveal the feminine body as a shallow, mechanical receptacle for a fragmented image of the female body, exposed to a desire for erotic pleasure.
Visual intelligenz. The painting invades the space of the viewer. He plays with the visual aesthetics of video games and uses AR to add an additional layer to his paintings.AR, as an acronym is used to signify an IntelĀ® QuickTime movie in English and French. The work is split into two parts. The first part is made up of five video monitors, each shown on a separate screen, with various effects applied to them. The effect is that of a video game, as if the video image were in the middle of a movie loop. The effect of this manipulation, however, doesnt seem to be as strong as the video game itself. There are stills of scenes from the game, but these are not as exciting or dramatic. There is an almost nonchalant lack of invention in the way that video games are used as a means of expressing visual content. The video works display a sort of amateurishness. They are an attempt to create a visual art that is as tactile as video, but that also serves as a critique of video art. The work is reminiscent of a video-game background, a chameleonic technology.It is the second part of the work that concerns me most. It consists of a video-screen installed at an angle on the wall. At the right, two video monitors are mounted on a pedestal. The four on the pedestals are looping. They display a loop of the same video image that they have shown on one of the other monitors. The images that appear on the two video monitors are that of the game. The games are the same ones that appear on the two video monitors. The effect is that of a linear progression through the images that creates a linear flow of information. The two monitors show the same image that the other two show. The only difference between the two is that one shows the image of the other two and vice versa, rather than the other way around. The image of the game is represented by an image that appears on the two monitors, and the difference between the two is made up of a few frames, which is the difference between game and image.
For example, he can use an iPhone as a drawing device. To create a painting, he simply has to go through all the steps of painting and transfer the images to canvas. The technology is very advanced, but it is not so sophisticated as to be considered as sophisticated.
The installation was divided into four spaces, and the games were arranged on the walls. The first space was the gallery where the games were exhibited. On a table were four video monitors showing the artists paintings. The third space, which had been transformed into a large gallery, was the entire space of the gallery. It was filled with a large number of video games, played by the artist and his friends. On the walls were framed images of the games: drawings, notes, and photographs of the games. The games on display were shown on a monitor. A circular video-game machine was installed on the wall. The machine was powered by the power of a lotus flower. In the second space, the video-games were shown on video monitors. The artist himself was also present in the video-game machine. A video-game player was shown at the center of the machine. The video-game images on the screens were taken from the artist's drawings. The drawings and the video-game images were then manipulated by the video-game machine. The machine then projected the images on the video-games' screens. The game with the most points was Pac-Man. In this video-game machine, the artist plays the role of the protagonist. The work has a sentimental quality; it is always moving, always making reference to its own past. The artists desire is to make his past and present the link between the past and the present.
So, in a sense, the work is a video installation. Perhaps the work was also a kind of video installation for the exhibition. With the exception of an occasional video element, video is used exclusively for the creation of a new image. Videogames have a long tradition of being used to create an image of themselves; they are the first image they are created through. The relationship between the artist and his object is emphasized by the video element. In a way, we are looking at an art that is less a work of art than an object that is part of a scene.In a group of works that were made with oil paint on paper, including one which consists of two triangles with a line running from one to the other, we see how the viewer may traverse the work. We have seen how it functions in the context of the image. In the image, the artist might turn from the idea of the canvas as a space for painting to the image of a box. The work might be read as an allegory for a kind of painting and in that sense the experience of the work is similar to that of a film. The work is a kind of image. The art is a kind of picture. It takes place on the wall. The experience of the work is similar to that of a film. In this sense, the viewer is the artist and the work is the painter.
©2024 Lucidbeaming