‘Can recognizably photoshop generated 3D objects be perceived as ready made sculptures on photography?’
Asks Andrey Bogush
@Andy Price: Due to photographs flatness, I feel that they have more to do with collage.
@PeterAinsworth: or indeed appropriation and re-contextualization in photography
@PeterAinsworth: not what is depicted its about being flat. Needs physicality Sculpture from past participle of sculpere to carve
@andreybogush: But don’t we perceive them more 3D(cons. more sculptural) than anything else depicted on photographic image?
@PeterAinsworth: ‘readymade’ has specific history in terms of surrealism. Comes from objet trouve so in that sense no
@PeterAinsworth: Also I think the term sculpture implies physical 3-D so if it is produced as a print then could be sculpture
@PeterAinsworth: I think the collage is a nearer approximation to this concept
@gmarlowe: Photos aren’t necessarily reality. Images are representations of an artist’s views/concepts
@rzyrzy: no i don’t think so. photos aren’t necessarily reality. the images are representations of a specific artist’s views/concepts
@rzyrzy: it just so happens that photography as a medium in general is far more convincing and easily believable than say, a painting
@rzyrzy: technology in camera based art just allows for more seamless visual trickery, it doesn’t make those “objects” actually exist.