[-empyre-] showing 3d art

["Melinda Rackham" <melinda@unsw.edu.au>]

kathy, melantie, lina and taylor,

as curators of contemporary arts spaces perhaps you could  you comment
further on this..

kathy wrote:
" we failed to raise significant
exhibition funds to enable the show to travel and to create a catalogue
(comments from various funding agencies were mainly along the lines that
they could not see the reason to put virtual work in a physical space, and
that the 
'art' was not significant enough"

Roya wrote:
"Maybe big 3D is much more of a thing for real space / gallery / museums
presentation after all? The situation is comparable with other art
(traditional/new) genres where equipment and tools become increasingly
expensive (read exclusive) in order to add 'value' to the final piece (see
Rauschenberg's Titanium paintings). I personally don't have a lot of trust
in exclusivity"

 3d art that is made within the paramenters and soft/hardware restrictions ,
and designed to be seen in the networked environment,  takes on a new
context and arua perhaps in a gallery because it commands big space for
video projection.. therefore floorspace = artistic significance and value in
the real estate/funding criteria of gallery/museum syetem.

how do you get networked works, into your gallery if they are not large
scale installations.
which of course leads on to what the future of payments to 3d onlien artists
if the work isnt showing in a  gallery or musem space? does this mean to be
paid artist must fit into existing gallery criteris that is designed to show
painting and sculpure..

melinda