Reply to questions

You note well that people are still drawn to art that is not digital.

What does Uglow mean when he says the digital is generative? What does he mean when says the digital is contextual? What does he mean when he says the digital is collaborative? How is art a form of teleportation per Uglow? What are the implications of the ubiquity of digital technology for art per Uglow? Is digital art profitable per Uglow?

The same technology that is used to make art can also be used to pirate artistic productions.

Do you foresee a way that technology can prevent such pirating?

Post 1 (AT)

After reviewing this article, some of the main points I noticed were the following…

 In the past, shops just so happened to have gotten their start up in east London. This included the system of internet servers, mass communication firms, and website’s like and TweetDeck. is a music website and TweetDeck is a social media dashboard. The start-ups just happened, it was not planned by anyone. The determining factors were town chemistry, time, space, money, education and culture technology. The technology did not stop, people in nearby neighborhoods continue to work on new applications, what we call new apps today.

James Bridle is a British writer who set up individual website, which is kept more a conversational piece and posting different parts, pieces of what took place, usually by video, photos, and text caption. This took place in May 2011. This also led to one important capture that took place because of this, was Osama bin Laden. This was also due to Bridle’s expertise in online publishing. He was a part of the Really Interesting Group (RIG). These designers – designed a piece of art put together by different pictures from the different artist that generated a large piece of art consisting of many different pieces.

Technology began to take on new images such as ways of scanning and printing images. The computer’s eye (lens) start to change to a robotic view. I would also refer the view to an eagle eye. Bridle points out that what he started will either be accepted or rejected by people. Bridle, used to refer to the increasing appearance of the visual language of digital technology and the Internet in the physical world, and the blending of virtual and physical. Bridle was excited about the all the conversation he started about this.

In summary, computer programmers play a great role in (building), bugging, and debugging systems. This is important to the inside programing world and also the outside world, because this effects our future.


Wiles, Will. “What do we uncover when we look through digital eyes? – Will Wiles | Aeon Essays.” Aeon, Aeon, 22 Nov. 2017,

Post 2 (DW)

· This week I have chosen to review Tom Uglow’s, The Arts Electric.  He begins by asking us to consider what our great grandchildren will say about what was culturally relevant from our time?  Uglow thinks that it will be the rise of digital technology. However, he points out that this technology has not affected every aspect of our culture.  We are still- still as he puts it.  At the time of this article, there were not theater productions that act out someone’s online profile. 

Uglow says, “Old is frequently better than new” when he talks about the arts.  Many of us prefer the old traditions over the fancy light shows.  However, we will likely use technology as a way to make a new form of art.  Uglow explains that digital is not just a computer, but all of the things that a computer is capable of doing.  He tells us that with instant information, we must filter out what we do and do not want to experience on our own.  It used to be that time would filter out unwanted or unnecessary information.   

Uglow argues that we should be carried away by the art itself not by the media in which we are enjoying it.   We should let the words, the dance, the production take us into our own idea of fantasy.  With the constant stream of information, art does not always have the same staying power it once did.  We are exposed to it, enjoy it, and then quickly move on to something new.  A point it appeared that Uglow was trying to make is that art is always behind in currency.  Van Gough did not become famous until after his death.  That being said, art has not actually caught up to the digital age of technology that we are currently in.  After reading this article, I am not sure if we have just become complacent or if we are afraid of the change. 


Uglow, Tom. “Digital art is what you can do, not how you did it – Tom Uglow | Aeon Essays.” Aeon, Aeon, 20 Nov. 2017,

Post 3 (Pat S)

· I chose the TED talk How computers are learning to be creative by Blaise Aguera y Arcas. At the start of the talk he introduces the relationship between perception and creativity. Arcas goes into detail about how the brain is interconnected and operates. He shoes diagrams and drawings by researchers that illustrates the complexity of the brain. Arcas does a great job by explaining perception with a picture of a bird. It is easy for a human brain to see the picture and see that it is a bird. With modern technology, it is now possible for a computer to see the image and also perceive it as being a bird. From my understanding, the computer is using a system of networks and neurons, similar to that of the brain, to come up with the same perception as that of a human brain. This can be seen using Googles image search technology. Arcas then transitions into what if the process is reversed: the neuron network has the knowledge names and labels and the network to identify them, but with no image. This then allows the computer to create an image based off of that information and the result ends up being a tessellated/distorted and unique image of what the computer perceives the known to be. This is a form of creation. Arcas shows multiple examples of this and the results are amazing and what I would think to be considered a form of Art. The possibilities of this technology are endless and he closes with examples of a computer that is able to create its own poetry.


I think the issue that may arise from this technology is if it can be considered art. By definition art is an expression of human skills and knowledge. So technically it cannot be considered art. But as E.A. Bussianeri states, “Art is in the eye of the beholder, and everyone will have their own interpretation”. With that quote I believe it is acceptable to see what the technology creates as art.



Need a similar essay? We have qualified writers who can assist. Click ORDER NOW to get a special bonus- Up to 18% Discount Offer!!!

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
error: Content is protected !!