What do you think of this digital art?

I like it. It’s gimmicky, to be sure, and any one image wouldn’t hold my view for long. I’d rather look at a still photo, or better yet, a painting, than something that keeps yanking my attention to one spot. But these images are nicely done and are low-key enough to be tasteful.

@Jeruba Glad you like it. I think it’s more exciting than a typical photograph. I’m reminded of those paintings and pictures in Harry Potter movies where the images move constantly. I’d like to see a lot of these hanging on my wall. The possibilities are endless. : )

Here’s more

@mazingerz88 I was literally just thinking abou the pictures in Harry Potter when I read your comment.

I thought of these (maybe NSFW), which I first stumbled onto 10 years ago or more.

[Added] Like your linked pictures, @mazingerz88, I can’t stay with them for long. I prefer a still. But they are nice for what they are.

Ten seconds in and I’m over it. I don’t want my eye to be pointed to a specific coordinate or distracted from exploring the canvas on my terms. These images do not ask questions. They answer them. Art is supposed to ask questions.

My grandmother had a Cat Clock with wagging tail and moving eyes. She had a Jesus face with a constant waterfall and a woodpecker sculpture that dipped into the water for a drink every thirty seconds. The mystery was in the mechanics. And once the mechanics were uncovered, the mystery faded, and the exploration ended. I don’t want novelty that competes mechanics against message.

Why can’t art answer questions?

I like them.

Pretty frickin cool @mazingerz88 .

I like them. They are pretty clever.

Ha neat, I like these a lot. It feels like it’s haunted. But nah, really cool. It’s all like, real, but not real.

@Symbeline A life size photo of ten zombies on my wall done this way, with only pus moving? I’m sure you’ll visit! Lol.

@mazingerz88 You know it. :)

Those photos make me think of the animatronics—like in Small Small World or Pirates of the Caribbean at the Magic Kingdom.

@Jeruba I can’t see the images off that link.

I think it is cool, I have seen that application before, but to me it looks more like photography with a trick than real art. It is not as deep to me as an Ansel Adams print. Who knows the direction creativity will go, maybe in the future no one will ever take paint to canvas, etc.

Has a kind of ‘wow’ factor, and I enjoyed looking at them. I don’t think I’d want one on my wall, though… it would probably annoy me after a while. Maybe if I could turn the effect off and just turn it on when new people come over. :D

I’ve seen these before and I think they’re clever. I like them best when the moving effect is very small and subtle.

@augustlan I like the idea of being able to turn it off. Wish got hold of this idea 8 years ago as I would have liked to see him with his tail wagging while looking up and smiling at me.

@ANef_is_Enuf “Why can’t art answer questions?”

IMO, there are better ways of answering question. Statistics, mathematics, science, philosophy and even editorials offer an attempt at doing so to varying degrees. Art invites the viewer to ask, “why didn’t I see that in that way before?” and “why do I feel the way I do about it?”. It opens another doorway that was previously unrealized. It challenges the viewer to broaden their perspective on reality, leading to more questions which demand the viewer to answer for themselves in relation to their personal life experiences. Art enlightens, sometimes gently, subtly, and sometimes very offensively, and boldly.

This is why vulgar photojournalism is often considered as art.

Currently, LYTRO is a new technology that when exploring the mechanics, can only answer “how”, like lifting the curtain of a magician or OZ. But when put into the hands of a visionary artist, it challenges the viewer to ask of themselves “why”. And in that answer, enlightenment is won.

click on any image in the lytro gallery and then click your mouse through different coordinates of the image

If one asks “why do I feel the way I do about it?”, and they answer for themselves “because the mechanics or technique is cool”, then that is not art. But if their answer is “because I’ve won enlightened to the mind of another, and form an entirely new perspective of my own from it”, then that is art. Art breeds new art formations in the mind of the viewer.

It’s kind of cool, but a big part of my appreciation of art comes from an appreciation of how much work went into it. As someone who’s very familiar with the process of creating digital art, I’m pretty sure not a whole lot of work went into these. There are a few possible ways in which these might have been created, and some of the ways would take a lot of effort, but others (and I suspect they used the easy ways) are quite simple.

They’re neat to look at but not super impressive. To me.

It’s cool!!