Roz Dimon
Since the beginning
Works in Shelter Island, New York United States of America

I could draw before I could talk. My kindergarten teacher called my parents and said, “Have you seen this child draw?" They had. It lumped onto one child of five and came not only from my father’s deft surgical hands but two grandmothers, both artists.

My drawings and paintings for many years now are created with a digital brush and canvas. I graduated from the Lamar Dodd School of Art from the University of Georgia and moved to New York City in 1981 where my early paintings increasingly filled with pixels as a response to our information age. I took one of the earliest courses in digital art in 1984 at The School of Visual Arts, which set me on a course that is continuing to this day. I cultivated these skills working as an Art Director at The Wall Street Journal Online and other corporations at the World Trade Center, while participating in some of the earliest international fine art exhibitions of digital art. Meanwhile, my work was acquired by corporate collections (AT&T). However my classical underpinnings are ever evident. It has always remained about painting, drawing and storytelling.

After 9/11, a period of deep spiritual introspection led me to explore classical iconography and apply it to the new media landscape. This resulted in the discovery of a new form of animated web painting and storytelling, a DIMONscape®; a single painting that is many paintings, combining infinitesimal layers of imagery and words.

One of these works has recently been acquired by the 9/11 Memorial Museum for their permanent collection and is also in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art.
As I look back on my early oil paintings on canvas, I can see how the line work and color so clearly align with my recent digital works. They are of one accord, the same artist—one uses the tools of the past to honor a continuing legacy while the other looks to inform and imagine the future; to lead others into an understanding of where we are and how we are evolving . . .

I feel strongly that it is time for a new call, which while ancient must be realized anew, for artists to bring sense, meaning, and yes, hope, to the wondrous age we live in using the tools of our time to do so.
A southerner who calls New York home since 1981, my husband and I divide our time between Manhattan and Shelter Island.

Roz Dimon, 2013
Discussions (15) Opportunities (0) Events (2) Jobs (0)

101 Cassette Labels

It's the writing on the topic that I'm appreciating here Moss. Good stuff connecting well-researched media discourse to the larger heart pulse of what it means to create, be human... which opens up the channels, invites discussion. The analog-digital analogy - I may never look at a cassette tape quite the same way. You got something going here... and the imagery is fun. Rozolution


Interview with Erik Adigard

I can't say that I understood every thing you were saying here, but even the confusing parts were intriguing and thoughtful, pertinent to the times we live in.

It's interesting to note that during The Renaissance, what is generally regarded as one of the highest points in time for art and culture... the beauty, vision and content of a piece were inseparable from the skill and craftsmanship that gave it heft. Also there was no distinguishing between fine and commercial art.

I appreciate the dialogue you are opening up here. I speak as an painter/designer/communicator who increasingly finds my most important offerings are grounded in all three... and occasionally transcend to something else.

It could be argued that our new digital age provides the platform for a new renaissance and way of thinking that could augment an explosive change for the way we think about art in the next millennium. I think it does. We just need to wrap our arms around it.

Conversations like this are the beginning...


Information Painting Manifesto for the 21st Century

An image is worth a thousand images.
As images become increasingly less rarefied due to the digital explosion (much like words became democratized at the time of the Gutenberg Press, the time is ripe for artists to use their imagination and intellect to harness this visual proliferation, shaping a new visual vocabulary and dimension for exploration.

The paintbrush re-ascends the throne.
We are on the cusp of a golden age of painting as we load our new brush with all media. Much like the word became a necessary and valued construct to the novel, the photo becomes a key building block in the new primacy of information painting. This exponential leap forces us to rethink the picture and its inherent makeup (components). The photograph changed the painter’s role as a visual recorder of the universe but never say never... as the digital age now allows the painter to take control and asserts that the photograph, while important, is just one more component she/he loads on the digital brush. The old adage “A picture is worth a thousand words,” is now “A picture is worth a thousand pictures.” (and words, videos, etc.) Today’s digital brush is loaded not with Alizarin Crimson but with all media.

A new calling for today’s artist
Image-makers should be where wordsmiths were in the time of Shakespeare, but we have to take the reins and go for it. It is time to create a new visual vocabulary and dimension in art for understanding the information age we live in. Artists today have an opportunity to create beauty that brings sense to the world - a call to make complex things comprehensible and accessible; in the process making a radical break with the current concept of "avant-garde."

The new cave wall as ephemeral screen
The new canvas of the 21st century has no physicality and yet has an inexhaustible capacity to hold thousands of layers and bytes of visual data... a new universe for science and the human imagination to coalese in a visual explosion and intimacy that may go even beyond the senses in its immediacy and touchless touch. (Something Marshall McLuhen spoke about as regards television, "We don't just watch television, we get in touch with it. )


Roz Dimon

Tue Sep 09, 2008 00:00 - Wed Sep 10, 2008

United States of America

NPR/Long Island radio interview "In The Morning with Bonnie Grice ... here I discuss my show "Information Woman, currently at The Grace Institute in Manhattan (2nd Avenue 64/65), August 11-Sept. 26th, open Mon.-Fri., 9-5. Opening is Wed. night, 9/10, 5:30-7pm. Show spans a period of 27 years from earliest Information Paintings (oil on canvas) to most recent DIMONscapesTM. Also on this broadcast we discuss issues of art/faith and what I feel is the greatest calling for artists in this age of information... to bring access, meaning, enlightenment to a culture besieged by an onslaught of visual information.



This thread's getting long I agree. A few thoughts before signing out of this one:


Sharing is an act of giving -- authorized in some part by the giver.

Creative Collaboration is something both parties agree to. I wrote in this thread earlier that anyone who wants to creatively collaborate with me should send me a proposal via email.

Referencing: All of art somehow references itself all the way back to the first drawing on the cave wall. At the
same time we are all part of a larger social order, an original voice often still erupts not from the pack, but from the individual. We wouldn't want to lose that celebration of or recognition of individuality even as we go forward in a complex visual world that requires increasing collaboration. When words reached a global high in literacy, footnoting was part of the equation, giving credibility to all words & ideas while still coming under the name of one book by one author. (And the discussion we are having here is also going on in the writers’ world today where authors' words are being copied without citing sources, but on the other hand freedoms are sometimes being repressed in the protection of the same. A similar conundrum that we have here.)

Stealing is theft, and I would argue that the artistic glorification of it is getting a bit worn, especially in our Information Age where there is so much information free for the taking and yet it is so difficult to protect one's words, images and ideas. Perhaps we need a new honor code much like Creative Commons adds on top of the copyright -- but one that addresses patents. A friend of mine stated that we probably won't figure all this out for another 50 years as the internet has turned our world upside-down as regards the blurring of so many issues (mentioned in a post above that I made Jan. 31) This discussion is a beginning...

I think the calling for the next generation of artists is to bring meaning, understanding, yes beauty to our contemporary world. While I admire Duchamp's brilliance, we don't need another urinal to understand how nuts, evil or mad the world is. Innocence may be forever lost but there is still possibility for meaning and understanding - especially in a world where one has access to and can digest so many points of view at once. (Someone here argued "and what if Duchamp had patented the ready-made?" That made me laugh as I feel we have more ready-mades and conceptual art than we need at this point... a statement like this is most brilliant in it's first offering, just like Warhol's soup cans. It can be re-enacted over and over with some degree of excitement but it gradually loses its edge and connectivity to the world.)

Time to move forward. We are on the cusp of a golden age of painting with a new brush. Yes - photography is taking the 2nd position as we load our brush with all media. We digital image-makers could be where wordsmiths were in the time of Shakespeare, (as an outcome of the Gutenberg Press) but we have to take the reins and go for it. We are in a new Information Painting Age -- Do we degrade it, hack it or take it to new heights working within the world? I'm for the latter. Artists today have an opportunity to create beauty that brings sense to the world - a call to make complex things comprehensible and accessible; in the process making a radical break with the current concept of "avant-garde." (Which at this point usually lands art in the back pages of Arts & Leisure... closer to Leisure. Yawn.)

To Erika Lincoln... thank you for your post where you attempt to clarify the differences between patents/copyright/trademarks and where you end with "There are more, personality rights, ect. Law is a complex thing but to say that it is evil is not fair and a simplified response. I think that as an artist one should be aware of all of these things -- that does not mean be an expert."

I am not an expert either but I do know that patents last, at the most, 17 years, (whereas copyright law has become increasingly more restrictive, lasting in some cases now a lifetime!) and have to be continually revised and updated (and yes, my lawyer will probably make a lot more than I ever will) and then the patent expires so all can jump in. Trade secrets can be taken to the grave and I'm not big on secrets but I do like some protection from theft. You're correct Ethan. If I were more ruthless and ONLY driven by money it would be smarter not to share any of this online. However everything is not mutually exclusive. I didn't set out to create a process that is inventive and patentable, but I think I have - we'll see. I like to share and yes, I also like to make money. And what's so bad with getting the patent, starting a DIMONscapesTM school and teaching the method to others? Or as I stated above - working with Creative Commons to somehow change how this whole process works? However, I would first have to have a patent to do so. Even they state that it is advisable to first have a copyright to use their system - which is for copyrighting not patenting. One reason I would really like to succeed in licensing this process is so I can, yes, develop and share my process while making some $$, and who knows, maybe make a small dent for the better in the new landscape.

Trademarks: I agree with Marshall McLuhan that naming things is important in the Information World. It helps one identify something that is new, as how else to easily explain a new concept as one talks about it with others over and over? Remember that word Daguerreotype? I've trademarked this artwork DIMONscapesTM. After working 30 years to make something I truly feel is unique, I'd like my name to be associated with it. Plus I think it's a good name for the more high-end, complex side of the process, which is where I want to focus, both alone in my studio and in creative collaboration with others. (Hey it may look simple but that's part of the new calling: taking complexity and making it look easy, understandable... that doesn't mean it isn't hard as hell to do.)

I have always preferred insurrection from within. No amount of screaming and whining about patents while professing to be "artists who love to steal" will do a whit to change patent law. At the same time, there is a duality to every system for both good and evil so I understand the concerns expressed here as regards patents. Even though they were designed to "promote the progress of science and useful arts," human beings have an extraordinary way of messing things up. So yes patents aren't perfect. However, I think I've explained that messy or not, I’m going for it.

Capitalism has lots of faults; however, it’s still the system I prefer to work in even as I sometimes rail against it. An individual should be able to protect an idea for a given time unless it is crucial for world peace -- which, while I feel the DIMONscapesTM are important, they probably don't qualify. (On the other hand, Hedy Lamarr & George Antheil’s patent for Spread Spectrum Technology was rather important along those lines, although neither she nor he made a dime from it.*) Artists should not be exempt from such protections as we are not gods but mere mortals. (Of course I speak for myself.) To make real change in the world, artists have to come down off their pedestals and work IN the world. By bringing this discussion to Rhizome I think it invigorates our thinking on all these issues and regardless of our disagreements, it’s not detrimental to art or artists or Rhizome... it's exciting.

If I don't get the patent I'll hold a party at Rhizome and we can all toast one another's mutual health and visual sharing/exploitation going into the future.

Sincerely yours,

“ terrible”

*Who were both artists and scientists respectively; she, an actress (Ecstasy) and he, a musician.