The 2003 International Digital Art Awards is calling for "New Media" entries to accompany the annual print exhibition. It will be both online and "hard copy" touring exhibition travelling nationally across Australia and to Russia and the USA.
This is a new addition to the IDAA and as such we require artists to be able to create their entry as a dedicated page via their website(s) (no advertising please)… if selected we will link directly to the work. Artists can submit up to three works exploring any theme or new media style.
General rules for the IDAA can be found on the official website http://www.internationaldigitalart.com/IDAA/idaafront.html
Entries close 31 November for New media entries.
Enquiries to:
IDAA Director
mailto:[email protected]
CALL FOR ENTRIES
-
Type: discussion
Comments
> The 2003 International Digital Art Awards is calling for "New
> Media" entries to accompany the annual print exhibition. It
> will be both online and "hard copy" touring exhibition
> …
> General rules for the IDAA can be found on the official
> website http://www.internationaldigitalart.com/IDAA/idaafront.html
>
If I am not mistaken this competition is limited to static images. Does
anyone still refer to a static image as "digital art" any more? I'd call
it "digitally-produced art" maybe.
-Cf
[christopher eli fahey]
art: http://www.graphpaper.com
sci: http://www.askrom.com
biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com
Chris it's saying to "accompany" the print exhibition. It's main
focus has been on the printed image. The award has been establishing
itself over the past 3 years and now it will reflect and present
other digital styles.
If you really want to get caught up on -ISMs - I'm happy to re-brand
the term "static" to "digitally-produced art" just for you :)
-SD
> > The 2003 International Digital Art Awards is calling for "New
>> Media" entries to accompany the annual print exhibition. It
>> will be both online and "hard copy" touring exhibition
>> …
>> General rules for the IDAA can be found on the official
>> website http://www.internationaldigitalart.com/IDAA/idaafront.html
>>
>
>If I am not mistaken this competition is limited to static images. Does
>anyone still refer to a static image as "digital art" any more? I'd call
>it "digitally-produced art" maybe.
>
>-Cf
>
>[christopher eli fahey]
>art: http://www.graphpaper.com
>sci: http://www.askrom.com
>biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com
>
>
>
>+ AFK, tornado
>-> post: [email protected]
>-> questions: [email protected]
>-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>+
>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
[email protected]
–
Sure, why not?
There are plenty of printmakers who are doing images from digital sources.
THing is, you can't argue about 'purity', because there's no such thing.
So, limiting digital to dynamic and ephemeral media is an incomplete
strategy.
—– Original Message —–
From: "Christopher Fahey [askrom]" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 8:52 PM
Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: CALL FOR ENTRIES
> > The 2003 International Digital Art Awards is calling for "New
> > Media" entries to accompany the annual print exhibition. It
> > will be both online and "hard copy" touring exhibition
> > …
> > General rules for the IDAA can be found on the official
> > website http://www.internationaldigitalart.com/IDAA/idaafront.html
> >
>
> If I am not mistaken this competition is limited to static images. Does
> anyone still refer to a static image as "digital art" any more? I'd call
> it "digitally-produced art" maybe.
>
> -Cf
>
> [christopher eli fahey]
> art: http://www.graphpaper.com
> sci: http://www.askrom.com
> biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com
>
>
>
> + AFK, tornado
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
>
Steve Danzig wrote:
> If you really want to get caught up on -ISMs - I'm happy to re-brand
> the term "static" to "digitally-produced art" just for you :)
Patrick Lichty wrote:
> There are plenty of printmakers who are doing images from
> digital sources.
> THing is, you can't argue about 'purity', because there's no
> such thing.
I have no beef with digitally-produced artwork, no desire for ISMs, and
the word "purity" is utterly anathema to me. I was just confused for a
moment about the nature of the call for entries - because the term
"digital art" (for me) generally means art whose *native format* is
digital.
Here I will (sorta) argue against my previous post: in fact there is a
good argument to be made that a static image can be called "digital art"
as long as we are referring to the digital form. If a static image is
intended to be accessed, viewed, or distributed through digital means,
then it is certainly "digital art" regardless if it's
dynamically-generated, ephemeral, animated, interactive, etc. A simple
static web page is certainly a digital product, as is an MP3 or a
Quicktime movie.
However, if a static image's digital form (the file itself, i.e., the
JPG, PSD, EPS, etc) is not considered by the artist to be the "piece" -
that is, if a physical print of the image is the final piece - then is
it digital art? (I am asking a question, and it is not simply rhetorical
because I don't know the answer - perhaps to a digital image maker, the
prints and the JPGs are *both* artworks).
This brings to mind Sherry Levine's "After Walker Evans" work. Sherry
Levine "proved" that the implicit "value" of a photographic image was
not, in fact, in the image itself. Her reproductions of Walker Evans's
prints are explicitly NOT Walker Evans' own work, but only because they
are known to be reproductions, not because they look any different from
the originals. Outside of their historical provenance, they are
identical artworks, yet Walker Evans' prints will likely always cost
more than Sherry Levine's reproductions.
What "After Walker Evans" demonstrates is that the *physical form* of an
image (a print) and the *image itself* (the conceptual configuration of
black, white, and gray dots on a plane - or for that matter, a scan of
the image) can be separated and discussed separately. What "digital art"
means, to me, is that the image is liberated from physical form. That's
one of the key things I find interesting about all digital media:
whether it's an MP3 song, an MPEG motion picture, or a JPEG image, the
digital-ness instantly makes an art object into a
"potentially-inifinite-mulitiple" and makes it inherently different from
a vinyl record, a celluloid reel, or a paper print.
Again, I did not wish to come across as some kind of purist against
physical-artworks-from-digital-files, such as a iris print or a
stereolithograph sculpture. I do, however, suspect that a
digitally-produced physical artwork should be evaluated like any other
physical artwork, for example like a painting or drawing. Let's look at
the texture, the surface, etc. Was the physical object manipulated by
the artist's hand after the printing process? Digital image makers often
play with this, too, which is why they often use incredibly nice
d'arches paper and archival inks.
Anyway, I find it interesting that the show in question differentiates
between prints produced digitally and those produced conventionally. It
seems just about as arbitary a distinction as my differentiating between
artworks that exist only digitally and those that exist physically.
-Cf
[christopher eli fahey]
art: http://www.graphpaper.com
sci: http://www.askrom.com
biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com
> —–Original Message—–
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> On Behalf Of Patrick Lichty
> Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 11:52 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: CALL FOR ENTRIES
>
>
> Sure, why not?
> There are plenty of printmakers who are doing images from
> digital sources.
> THing is, you can't argue about 'purity', because there's no
> such thing.
> So, limiting digital to dynamic and ephemeral media is an incomplete
> strategy.
>
>
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "Christopher Fahey [askrom]" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 8:52 PM
> Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: CALL FOR ENTRIES
>
>
> > > The 2003 International Digital Art Awards is calling for "New
> > > Media" entries to accompany the annual print exhibition. It
> > > will be both online and "hard copy" touring exhibition
> > > …
> > > General rules for the IDAA can be found on the official
> > > website http://www.internationaldigitalart.com/IDAA/idaafront.html
> > >
> >
> > If I am not mistaken this competition is limited to static
> images. Does
> > anyone still refer to a static image as "digital art" any
> more? I'd call
> > it "digitally-produced art" maybe.
> >
> > -Cf
> >
> > [christopher eli fahey]
> > art: http://www.graphpaper.com
> > sci: http://www.askrom.com
> > biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com
> >
> >
> >
> > + AFK, tornado
> > -> post: [email protected]
> > -> questions: [email protected]
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give:
> http://rhizome.org/support
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > Membership Agreement available online at
> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> >
> >
>
>
> + AFK, tornado
> -> post:
> [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give:
> http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at
> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
Also it's in direct connection with photography in general.
From thumbnail high resolution digital c-prints to time square billboards
with space age materials. You may be right about purity.
Will it bring culture closer to clarity?
I just love how people lable everything.
Fuck it…I'm submitting some of my "ART"
and anyone can purchase a limited edition hand altered high resolution
c-print from my art dealer if they think its cool enough to hang on their
wall I'm down for selling it (at very reasonable prices mine you).
By the way, how big did you say your couch was again…haha ha.
I encourage everyone to make more art…it'll make you feel good.
Spread your message in the everyday.
Support working artists…
Brooklyn, NY - Wicker Park, Chicago - West Hollywood, LA
Cheers
Lee
on 9/29/02 11:51 PM, Patrick Lichty at [email protected] wrote:
> Sure, why not?
> There are plenty of printmakers who are doing images from digital sources.
> THing is, you can't argue about 'purity', because there's no such thing.
> So, limiting digital to dynamic and ephemeral media is an incomplete
> strategy.
>
>
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "Christopher Fahey [askrom]" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 8:52 PM
> Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: CALL FOR ENTRIES
>
>
>>> The 2003 International Digital Art Awards is calling for "New
>>> Media" entries to accompany the annual print exhibition. It
>>> will be both online and "hard copy" touring exhibition
>>> …
>>> General rules for the IDAA can be found on the official
>>> website http://www.internationaldigitalart.com/IDAA/idaafront.html
>>>
>>
>> If I am not mistaken this competition is limited to static images. Does
>> anyone still refer to a static image as "digital art" any more? I'd call
>> it "digitally-produced art" maybe.
>>
>> -Cf
>>
>> [christopher eli fahey]
>> art: http://www.graphpaper.com
>> sci: http://www.askrom.com
>> biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com
>>
>>
>>
>> + AFK, tornado
>> -> post: [email protected]
>> -> questions: [email protected]
>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>> +
>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>>
>>
>
>
> + AFK, tornado
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, Christopher Fahey [askrom] wrote:
> If I am not mistaken this competition is limited to static images. Does
> anyone still refer to a static image as "digital art" any more? I'd call
> it "digitally-produced art" maybe.
No, it's digital art. Non-static art, such as dance, theatre,
film, animation, ahs existed for a long, long time.
To say that 'moving images' are 'digital' art is sheer +
complete idiocy–but that's to be 'expected' coming from you.
`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002, steve danzig wrote:
> If you really want to get caught up on -ISMs - I'm happy to re-brand
> the term "static" to "digitally-produced art" just for you :)
>
> -SD
I hope not; catering to mediocrity–there's enough of that
already.
`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, Patrick Lichty wrote:
> THing is, you can't argue about 'purity', because there's no such thing.
Yes, there is. And one can produce Art in such states only.
> So, limiting digital to dynamic and ephemeral media is an incomplete
> strategy.
It isn't a strategy. In fact, strategy hasn't got anything to do with
it. It's mediocre labeling.
`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002, Christopher Fahey [askrom] wrote:
> I have no beef with digitally-produced artwork,
ye, you have 'no beef' with things as long they are debased.
> no desire for ISMs,
False pose.
> the word "purity" is utterly anathema to me.
Like totally. Absolut Evil ™.
> I was just confused for a
> moment about the nature of the call for entries - because the term
> "digital art" (for me) generally means art whose *native format* is
> digital.
Does it? Or is that your cut-and-paste delusional brain-cut out
which you raise up with confronted with the word?
> Here I will (sorta) argue against my previous post: in fact there is a
> good argument to be made that a static image can be called "digital art"
> as long as we are referring to the digital form. If a static image is
> intended to be accessed, viewed, or distributed through digital means,
> then it is certainly "digital art" regardless if it's
> dynamically-generated, ephemeral, animated, interactive, etc. A simple
> static web page is certainly a digital product, as is an MP3 or a
> Quicktime movie.
>
> However, if a static image's digital form (the file itself, i.e., the
> JPG, PSD, EPS, etc) is not considered by the artist to be the "piece" -
> that is, if a physical print of the image is the final piece - then is
> it digital art? (I am asking a question, and it is not simply rhetorical
> because I don't know the answer - perhaps to a digital image maker, the
> prints and the JPGs are *both* artworks).
Nice, thanks.
> This brings to mind Sherry Levine's "After Walker Evans" work. Sherry
> Levine "proved" that the implicit "value" of a photographic image was
> not, in fact, in the image itself. Her reproductions of Walker Evans's
> prints are explicitly NOT Walker Evans' own work, but only because they
> are known to be reproductions, not because they look any different from
> the originals. Outside of their historical provenance, they are
> identical artworks, yet Walker Evans' prints will likely always cost
> more than Sherry Levine's reproductions.
Does this REALLY bring Shery Levine's work to mind?!
> What "After Walker Evans" demonstrates is that the *physical form* of an
> image (a print) and the *image itself* (the conceptual configuration of
> black, white, and gray dots on a plane - or for that matter, a scan of
> the image) can be separated and discussed separately. What "digital art"
> means, to me, is that the image is liberated from physical form. That's
> one of the key things I find interesting about all digital media:
> whether it's an MP3 song, an MPEG motion picture, or a JPEG image, the
> digital-ness instantly makes an art object into a
> "potentially-inifinite-mulitiple" and makes it inherently different from
> a vinyl record, a celluloid reel, or a paper print.
Blarg. Compete nonsense.
> Again, I did not wish to come across as some kind of purist against
> physical-artworks-from-digital-files, such as a iris print or a
> stereolithograph sculpture. I do, however, suspect that a
> digitally-produced physical artwork should be evaluated like any other
> physical artwork, for example like a painting or drawing. Let's look at
> the texture, the surface, etc. Was the physical object manipulated by
> the artist's hand after the printing process? Digital image makers often
> play with this, too, which is why they often use incredibly nice
> d'arches paper and archival inks.
>
> Anyway, I find it interesting that the show in question differentiates
> between prints produced digitally and those produced conventionally. It
> seems just about as arbitary a distinction as my differentiating between
> artworks that exist only digitally and those that exist physically.
thanks. You've given your speech. Clap.clap.
> On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, Christopher Fahey [askrom] wrote:
>
>
>> If I am not mistaken this competition is limited to static images. Does
>> anyone still refer to a static image as "digital art" any more? I'd call
>> it "digitally-produced art" maybe.
Surely Digital Art is an appropriate blanket term. I define Digital Art as
any art that incorporates digital processes somewhere in its production
process. One could specify this further to say that Digital Art is that
which uses digital processes in some part in the presentation or
representation of the art work. Such a definition covers things like
computer animation copied onto VHS tape for presentation, etc. I also nicely
separates out conventional paintings where digital processes may have been
used only in the concept preparation, such as planning composition and
color.
Within Digital Art there are obviously sub-areas, like digital printmaking,
new media, etc. However Digital Art is a good term that should be
universally understood. Unfortunately, there are section of the art world
who only thing of Digital Art in a new media context.
As to whether a competition for Digital Art could limit itself to static
images, I think of course it could. As Editor of the print magazine that has
profiled the Top 100 IDAA images for the last two years the limitation in
2001 and 2002 to static images has certainly made it easier to do a good job
of presenting the images in print to a wide audience. Now we would find a
way to do it with non-static works, but in print it will not have the same
impact.
–
Wayne J. Cosshall
www.artinyourface.com
www.dimagemaker.com
www.internationaldigitalart.com
–Apple-Mail-9-9740744
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=US-ASCII;
format=flowed
Begin forwarded message:
> From: *SURFACE <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue May 20, 2003 8:39:49 PM US/Eastern
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Call for Entries
>
–Apple-Mail-9-9740744
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/enriched;
charset=US-ASCII
Begin forwarded message:
<excerpt><bold>From: </bold>*SURFACE <<[email protected]>
<bold>Date: </bold>Tue May 20, 2003 8:39:49 PM US/Eastern
<bold>To: </bold>[email protected]
<bold>Subject: </bold>Call for Entries
</excerpt>
–Apple-Mail-9-9740744–
A Virtual Memorial -
Memorial Project against the Forgetting and for Humanity
www.a-virtual-memorial.org
calls artists for contributing to
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rainforest Memorial -
5 minutes before 12 - Memorial for the protection and preservation of the
natural environment on Earth and its inhabitans
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Deadline 20 November for launch on 1 December
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sometimes, when there are new horror news about the environmental situation
on Earth, sometimes when we hear one of our favorite animals or plants are
threatened with instinct, be honest, most of us swear to become actively
somehow in order to do something for the preservation of our natural
enviroment, but when these reports are out of news, the daily life goes on
as if nothing had happened.
The Rainforest as one of the most important and endangered natural
environments represents a symbol for the entire threatened nature and the
indigenous peoples who are living in, each of these enviroments are much
closer to us than we think. The human himself is said to be his biggest
enemy, so it is up to all of us to protect the world we are living in and
safe and preserve it for future generations to prevent such negative effects
of globalization as exploitation of the natural resources through globally
operating companies, for instance, which work only for there private or
corporate profit on short notice,
but not for longterm social and public benefit.
The Rainforest Memorial would like to invite artists of all genre and media
but also any other people who feel solidarian
to take another short second of responsability by contributing an artwork,
a privat or political statement etc
and express this way the active solidarity against the insane desctruction
of the natural environment on Earth.
Art, as such, cannot change the world, but art can support the will to make
the changes, changes which are necassary for mankind to survive in an
environment which is worth to be living in.
Please submit your work or statement in one of the following digital file
formats:
URL of an existing net based work
text: .plain email or .txt
image: .jpg, .gif, png
max size 800x600 pixels and 200 Kb
movie: .mov (Quicktime), rm,ram (Real Video)
.swf (Flash), .dcr (Shockwave)
max. size 1MB
All serious submissions will be included.
Please send your submission together with your
1.First and family name
2. email address and homepage URL
3. Work title
4. Work URL or mediafiles
to [email protected]
Deadline 20 November, if you want to be included
when the project is launched onlne on 1 December
afterwards the project will be ongoing and
submission will be included immediately.
******************************************
Visit also the
Memorial for the Victims of Terror
and
Memorial for the Victims of Aids
and
[R]-[R]-[F] Festival
[Remembering-Repressing-Forgetting]
on
A Virtual Memorial -
Memorial project against the Forgetting and for Humanity
www.a-virtual-memorial.org
corporate member of
[NewMediaArtProjectNetwork] :||cologne
Announcement for a new project:
Euroscreen21projects: Video/Media Project 2005
Call for Entries: Deadline: November, 30, 2004
Digital Shorts: one minute
Theme: Point of View
Euroscreen21projects denotes a flexible European platform performed by Video/Media artists and culture institutions since 2003.
The concentration on geographical Europe takes up the current necissity in development policy: the promotion of dialogue and understanding among the various cultures.
Especially in times of an increasingly medialised world threatened by rising violence as well as the negative consequences of globalisation, the position of the individual or here as a focus, the artist’s point of view, seem to be of growing concern.
In 2005 the new Euroscreen21projects-DVD “Point of View” with digital short videos will be shown in museums, galleries and the world wide web.
Participanting artists and culture institutions who like to present this DVD in their countries are invited to extend the screening by own programs. The suggestion to present at other places is
not compulsurary for the entry of a video.
Application and more information:
http://www.euroscreen21projects.de
Please informe your colleagues or pin it on notice boards.
–
Short describtion:
2. Video/Media Art Project: Euroscreen21projects-2005
Call for entries:
http://www.euroscreen21projects.de
Deadline:
November, 30, 2004
Category:
Short digital art video. All genres
Theme:
Point of View
Participators:
Famous and young artists from European countries
Form:
Download PDF. There will be only one form. It alouds to present your video in culture institutions during the project time.
Project Website:
Artists, Urls, links and comments will be published on the project website. Locations of presentations will be actualized currently.
DVD:
It is planned that each participating artist will get a DVD with all videos.
Cost factor for you:
There is no entry fee.
One tape: DV mini or Digital 8
(Tapes can be only send back, if a sufficient envelope (Euro) is add.
No insurrance for lost material.)
Organisation:
Ba-No, Hubert Baumann and Judith Nothnagel, Germany in cooperation with culture institutes and private sponsors. [email protected]
Application:
all information at:
http://www.euroscreen21projects.de
call for entries
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
——_SmarterMail_NextPart_4727722704366432
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear Rhizome.org
ARTOPOS organizes an online exhibition. The selected works will be presente=
d by ARTOPOS in ART ATHINA, the biggest Annual Art event in Athens, Greece =
.
Please copy the text from the attached 'illegal_machines_call.doc' file and=
paste it to the
detritus
n 1: the remains of something that has been destroyed or broken
up [syn: debris, dust, junk, rubble]
Call for Entries/Open Call
Seton Hall University’s Walsh Gallery is currently soliciting submissions for a group thematic exhibition, Detritus, to be shown April 16, through May 25, 2007. Open to all artists working in any media, this exhibition will include art made from found and/or recyclable materials. Environmental and/or socially conscious themes are favored.
Eligibility
Detritus is open to all artists, working in any media. All forms of art are eligible. There is a limit of 5 entries per artist. Entrants must be 18 years of age or older to apply. All work must be ready for installation or hanging. Work must be available for the entire length of the exhibition. Sculptors may be required to supply pedestals.
Deadline
The Final deadline is Friday, January 26, 2007. All entries must be received (not postmarked) by this date, no exceptions.
Fees
There is a $15 entry fee regardless of the number of entries submitted (1 - 5). Details of artwork do not count additional (please limit details to 1 or 2 per submission). Please make check or money order payable to Walsh Gallery.
Prospectus
Complete details and application at http://library.shu.edu/gallery/Call\_for\_Submissions.pdf
Call for entries
The Koelner-Filmhaus celebrates it