Stuff That Isn't Other Stuff

pilou

Conceptual

arail1

Lacks the 'noir' quality of your other work. Whether that's good or bad I'm not sure. You should start looking for a gallery. Gavin Brown?

Stinkie

[Thanks for the comments, lads.

@arail1 said:

Lacks the 'noir' quality of your other work.Whether that's good or bad I'm not sure.

Neither do I. Still - one needs to keep trying out new things.

@arail1 said:

You should start looking for a gallery. Gavin Brown?

Bit too early, I think. Besides that, a fancy gallery in New York? Tad out of my reach, for the time being.

Edit: The idea seemed so outlandish, I actually sent them some images. $ 10 000 000 says they tell me to b*gger off. You a betting man?

arail1

@unknownuser said:

Edit: The idea seemed so outlandish, I actually sent them some images. $ 10 000 000 says they tell me to b*gger off. You a betting man?

The idea isn't in any way outlandish.
Yes, I'm a betting man but I've got substantial wagers on CSIQ and YGE against Obama's and China's carbon reduction statements. I'll stick to that game.
They're not going to tell you to bugger off, but you probably won't hear from them. Not yet. It cost a New York gallery $50,000 to $100,000 to mount an artist's first one person show. ($10,000 to $20,000 monthly rent on gallery, staff salaries, advertising, etc.). So it's rare they jump at the bait when they first see it. Too often younger artists bail out to another career which means all that investment would be down the drain. They like to see some indication that you're in it for the long haul. Choose 8 to 10 galleries that show work you like and send them stuff every couple of months or at whatever pace you feel comfortable with. And keep at it.

You will have to tackle (if you haven't already) the conceptual issue of what your artwork is. Is the digital file the work or is the final output (a photograph?) the work? It's rather like the dilemma of earthworks or conceptual art - what is it that is sold? Is the photograph of the piece the thing or is that just a picture of the art, no different than what you'd see in a magazine.

Your work is strong and interesting in and of itself but an intelligent response to this question is one way you can immediately distinguish yourself from other artists.

Stinkie

Some interesting points. Thanks.

@arail1 said:

They like to see some indication that you're in it for the long haul. Choose 8 to 10 galleries that show work you like and send them stuff every couple of months or at whatever pace you feel comfortable with.

This is good advice. I think I may just do that.

@arail1 said:

You will have to tackle (if you haven't already) the conceptual issue of what your artwork is.

I know. I'm no fan of self-exegesis, but I'm aware there's no way around it.

EDIT: The more I think about your suggestion to send select galleries work on a regular basis, the better I like it. This'll provide me with deadlines, and it'll make me think twice about what I'll include, and what not. Possibly, just possibly, this might even lead to, er, thematic clusters - which may be useful with regards to how the images, ehm, 'communicate amongst themselves'.

Hm. Thematic clusters. Must be the sauvignon.

FoXar

Hmm interesting, all this talking about gallery's, as my mom's an artist (and I was following the course 'Art and Architecure/Interior Design at high school) I'm sure your work could find a nice spot in gallery's, my mom has a few contacts in Antwerp (Belgium/Centre Europe) for free as well paid gallery's,
I doubt it may interest you as it's far far from where you are located, but oh well, I felt like telling you

Besides all this, I really like the form of the faces and the overall shapes, if there's one kind of 'design stream?' I'm really in love with, it should
be this one.
If you're interested in discovering more from these forms in architecture and overall design I would seriously
suggest you to take a look in the magazines 'Mark' and 'Frame', great magazines with a step before on unique
architecture.. Just suggesting, the chance you know them already might be quite big

Cheers,
Roevens Johannes ^^

Stinkie

@foxar said:

my mom has a few contacts in Antwerp (Belgium/Centre Europe)

As do I.

@foxar said:

I would seriously suggest you to take a look in the magazines 'Mark' and 'Frame', great magazines with a step before on unique
architecture..

Thanks for the tip.

Stinkie

Last one, I promise.

remus

As tasty as ever stinkie, and happy birthday

Stinkie

Thanks, Remus.

whistles sad tune while he thinks of his lost youth

Stinkie

This is the last one. Don't see the need to start a new thread for it.

What Happens In The Mountains, Stays In The Mountains

Edit: needs cropping.

Edit 2: like so:

kwistenbiebel

I actually like the uncropped version more as it is a bit menacing.
Cool stuff all the way, stinkie. And Happy birthday

arail1

@unknownuser said:

I know. I'm no fan of self-exegesis, but I'm aware there's no way around it.

I would not want to be misunderstood here. Artists self-exegesis of the This piece illustrates Man's Inhumanity to Man sort tend to give me hives. But your work, or anyone else who is working from a computer model, raises interesting questions. Let's imagine your first show (at the Gagosian Gallery) - does the announce card say An Exhibition of Photographs by Stinkie? (I doubt the long term commercial viability of that name by the way). But are they photographs? And if so, of what? No camera was involved and nothing was photographed.

These are potentially interesting questions. Is the score the music or is the performance the music? Is the photograph the work or the negative? Are your digital files just the source that the final work is derived from or are they themselves the work of art? Would a collector buy a print or the digital file? If Larry Gagosian wanted to carry your show over to one of his European galleries, would framed prints be sent by Fedex or would the digital file be emailed with attachments to a printer?

Just some idle speculations before going out to dinner.

Stinkie

@kwistenbiebel said:

I actually like the uncropped version more as it is a bit menacing.
Cool stuff all the way, stinkie. And Happy birthday

Thanks, Kwist. Can't tell yet what version I'll go with. Komt tijd, komt raad.

@arail1 said:

Artists self-exegesis of the This piece illustrates Man's Inhumanity to Man sort tend to give me hives.

Hm, yes. I think we agree here.

@arail1 said:

(...) does the announce card say An Exhibition of Photographs by Stinkie? (I doubt the long term commercial viability of that name by the way). But are they photographs? And if so, of what? No camera was involved and nothing was photographed.

No, it wouldn't say 'photographs'. It'd say 'works', or something in the same vein. First, because I'd rather not dress my work up as something it isn't (quite the contrary - I'd emphasize its nature). Second, because -ideally- the show wouldn't solely consist of computer generated images. I'd like some gouaches (large abstracts), watercolors (ditto), reliefs (plywood + carpet) and sculptures (ditto) in there as well. And some pastels - those'd be the horrific cherry on top.

@arail1 said:

Are your digital files just the source that the final work is derived from or are they themselves the work of art? Would a collector buy a print or the digital file?

The files are just the source - the way they're presented, printed or on a screen, is an integral part of the 'end product', and specific to each separate work - as is the scale, dpi, compression, choice of paper, choice of screen, choice of frame etc.