The Rothko painting, as you may have seen, is to me a very special invitation to the inside of yourself. By looking through the painting, your eyes tire of the generally neutral tone and as such grow to a blindness that is unique to his work. His studied notions of color exhaustion creates a field of neutral color in your vision that gives a hard-won reward of vision of humaneness. Your exact vision is dulled and your color peripheral vision takes hold. Unique on earth. You. Yet, shared. Rothko is master of this trick.
This is due to the color receptors of the eye being aggregated around the ball of the sclera of the eye (the white part) while exact vision is tone-sensitive rods within the precise vision surrounding your optical nerve. Rothko didn’t study anatomy that deeply, but found a relativist haven in color misperception.
And they are, and you are, truly unique and shared.
A response to a paper by Beat Signer I read this morning:
I just spent my morning reading an IT and UX paper by Beat Signer (and others). The paper, entitled, “ArtVis: Combining Advanced Visualisation and Tangible Interaction for the Exploration, Analysis and Browsing of Digital Artwork Collections” discussed an experiment to improve usability of the venerable Web Gallery of Art found at https://www.wga.hu/
What I found especially interesting about this paper was that the work it described sought a more responsible display of information to the history it presented.
I was taken by surprise by the clear speech in the following quote from the paper:
The contribution of ArtVis is twofold. In a first step, we have defined visualisation requirements for the exploration of the WGA data set. In a next step, ArtVis has been extended with a tangible user interface to attract and stimulate end users in museum settings.
It’s interesting because it frankly uses the word “contribution” in light of the UX projects’ utility. This is something we often don’t broach upon in the work of UX: it is a form of kindness to consider the frame of reference of our counterpart, the user.
We have come to a head in UX, reliant on large corporations to lead the way into information consumption patterns. I refer to UI Kits and standards documents such as Google’s Material. This need not be the case: we should be thinking of not the least time to success, but of the well-being of our users regardless of the investment of time.
Too often, we use such tools as the UI kit of Google Material habitually, considering the UI/UX simply handled. But it has grown tired a pattern. Front end developers should better consider the art and designers of UI should better consider the technology. Put simply, it’s not about us.
I applaud the attitude of bringing the concept of contribution to the consumption of art media. If you are to check the paper, itself, the application developed succeeds in improving the chances of virtual museum goers understanding and finding meaning in the myriad works of art.
The Boox is excellent now that it has Google Play on it. I find it my favorite reading device as well as a formidable note-taking device. Those of you students irritated by the sheer amount of books and notebooks you must carry around should look into getting one. Color is available, but it’s still a small screen. Frankly, the bigger a writing surface, the better.