Continuing on from Sequent 17 and taking the cue once more from the concepts in doodle 2016-11-09… a minimal approach, with lines as boundaries and where they overlap and hybridity expressed through visual language in three different but complementary ways; each way is a state of possible hybridity: an initial encounter, and two orthogonal cartesian interfaces.
Firstly, through the color gray, alluding to unknown (the gray area). Secondly, through overprinting, a literal metaphor for hybridity in the visual world and alluding to hybridity in others; the overprint is digitally simulated and deliberately mis-registered, and adds a state of imperfect hybridity to the work. Thirdly, through distorting visual perception by literal hybridization of the two colors.
This artwork was created in the digital world, and looks good on screen; however when taken into the real world, through digital print, it looks far better. To give a sense of appreciation of the different, some (digital) photographs — which, again, completes a cycle of digital to analog to digital.
The visual perception of the third instance is hard to capture.
There are three images as they are meant to capture three states: initial contact; horizontal hybridity; vertical hybridity. In this, I think they work well, and the visual language for hybridity in each also works. But on closer examination, especially of the photographs of the digital print, the area of hybridity is different in each, and these adds too much… would it be better to make a set of images where this is constant, and only the visual metaphor changes? Update Done in Sequent 20.comments powered by Disqus