Paul Thompson at digital surface

CASE STUDY

Context

Brief outline of the artist’s practice

My work is formed through practice-based research and is placed within the context of the transferred image. I have developed my digital practice from traditional methods of painting, printmaking and the multiple, through contextual study and action research. My recent work has evolved around the externalisation of constructs formed through walking and mapping using the concepts of manipulating the real, and shifting between past, present, memory and reality. I am at the nucleus of a personal artistic construct, founded upon mixing and remixing, which is generative rather than merely responsive to landscape.

Brief explanation of working process

Based upon experiential journeys and interventions, generated through mix and re-mix from the stimuli of the landscape @ 55 degrees north. My work promotes the percipient’s engagement of the artist’s experience through passive and proactive engagements – inviting the percipient to join the experience.

Relationship of digital technology to other processes/technologies

I have adopted a definition by Austin Museum of Digital Art, which defines digital art as-

“…art that uses digital technology in any of three ways: as the product, as the process, or as the subject.”

This provides the cornerstone of my practice in both contextual and practical terms. Within my practice I adopt a hybrid approach of input and output mix and remix between digital and traditional methods, my intention being to examine the boundaries of the physical and temporal.

Indication of how they regard the surface in terms of importance

Within my practice and process the surface plays a critical part in the construct, going beyond merely a support or ground either digital or physical. Through layering, transparency, mix and remix the quality of the surface is intended to interact with each and all layers within the construct.

Specific issues to the new piece of work

At what point in the development of the work is the size of the image fixed?

This is dependant initially upon the proposed format of the work and the intention as to whether it is to be an immersive or personal piece. In the case of an immersive public projected work for example a decision is made in terms of proposed size of projection which will effect decisions of intensity and composition as well as the proposed projection surface – form texture etc. Conversely if the work is intended for personal digital space such as iPod then another set of size / physical criteria will apply. If the work is intended for physical output through either digital or traditional fine art printmaking techniques then size is fixed in part by physical constraints of process.

At what point is the actual surface considered?

Frequently at the experiential gathering stage which, I undertake through fieldwork. My process involves collecting sonic and visual material (including still image video, drawing, and found object) at this stage I am often engrossed in the detail of the surface within the environment.

What factors determine the choice or creation of the surface in this new work?

Predominantly the visual interest and textural qualities of the surface, perhaps also the possibility for surfaces to interact within my mix and remixes. Furthermore possibly being catalytic in producing a surface of interest beyond its sum of parts is interesting.

How does working digitally contrast with other practises they have used?

Working purely digitally can be overly sterile and hence my need to hybridise my process on occasion. I have always naturally adopted the use of digital techniques as I have done with traditional media – perhaps the pleasure of manipulation transcends the digital physical boundary. Interestingly in recent years their has been a merging of my practice models and techniques.