[sudont]

It’s still a niche market. There’s been some success for Algorithmic art, but it’s not as if Jared Tarbell will be in MoMA tomorrow. It still needs to prove itself. The best place if you want to sell out and make money would be to do something dumb and fun for an iPhone. Brian Eno’s Bloom and Justin Oulette’s Sharps are good examples of what you can do with a touchscreen and a basketful of APIs.

More importantly I would suggest the Arduino, it can interact with Processing and allows you to control physical objects with your code. Carlos Amorales, the mexican artist, works primarily in digital forms, but only sells his work printed intaglio; the art world still prizes physical originals. Hopefully this isn’t a disappointment to you.

If you’re willing to use your code as part of an installation, you’ll have much more success than just trying to sell the digital files. I’m an experienced lithographer, and can give some advice if you’re interested in printing your creations. (Remember, physical originals.)

But, remember. You’re a sophomore and thinking of your future, that’s amazingly precocious (in the best way). Don’t get too worried yet!

[dzuc]

Not Tarbell specifically but: http://www.moma.org/interactives/exhibitions/2008/elasticmin...

Just do a find on this PDF for the word Processing: http://www.moma.org/interactives/exhibitions/2008/elasticmin...

It's also worth noting that the New Museum has an entire organization devoted to new media work (rhizome.org)

[Banekin]

Arduino seems really interesting, I'll have to check that out, thanks a ton.

It seems backwards that an artist has to produce something physical for it to be valuable, but I have no problem doing that if it's necessary. If I were to make prints like you said, do you think slight differences in the same idea would be justification for a higher price? For instance, put some random properties into a visualization, and churn out 1000 copies of that, so each one is relatively unique. Do you think that would be viable?

[sudont]

Well, that’s the art world for you. Ideas and execution are equally intertwined, executing good ideas means you’re not just some bum. But, an edition is especially infuriating for anyone who knows what github is.

Since artist originality is prized, anything “churned” out would be considered bad taste at best, and an exercise in money grubbing at worst. I’m not exactly sure how well a giclée monoprint would sell, especially in a very large edition. Better yet would be to set up two plates: one that is common between the prints, and then another where you add the random visualization. That’s a monotype (commonality), rather than a monoprint.

As you’re just getting into producing art, I’d say keep your editions low, around 10-30 to start. You’ve heard the parable of grading the ceramics class, right? The professor divided the students into two groups. [a] was graded on the raw volume of pots produced, 50 was a C, 100 was an A. [b] was graded on the quality of their final pot. A perfect pot was an A+. On the final day, the [a] students actually had all of the best pots, as [b] students wasted their time dreaming up the “perfect” pot instead of practicing.