Monsters vs. Aliens © Dreamworks Animation

I’m an avid NPR listener and I was intrigued by a segment a few weeks back that discussed the resurgence of 3D in the movie theater. The Dreamworks film, Monsters vs. Aliens, saw a $58 million opening weekend of which $24 million was from 3D screens (ref). Over 40% of the film’s revenue came from less than 10% of the screens. When 3D glasses first hit the big screen it was a less than desirable experience.  The alignment was less than par and many movie goers would leave feeling queasy. This is a far cry from the experience of today. People are more than willing to pay extra for the immersion and they will have many more chances in the near future.

“….G-Force on July 24, Final Destination: Death Trip 3-D on August 14, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs on September 18, the reworking of Toy Story in the 3-D format October 2, Astro Boy on October 23, Disney’s A Christmas Carol on November 6, Planet 51 for Thanksgiving and, finally, James Cameron’s long-awaited Avatar.” – from Slashfilm

Another 3D project caught my eye yesterday as well. A Google employee has leveraged his 20% time by creating a 3D video viewer for YouTube. You can see one view in the video below. Click the video and visit it on YouTube to see a dropdown of many different 3D option (e.g. anaglyph red/blue).

Artists have been capitalizing on perception for thousands of years, so I set out to find examples in our collection.  My esteemed colleague, Ed, pointed me to a technique called Trompe-l’œil (French for “trick the eye”). A quick search of the collections yielded some interesting results.

Still Life by Edwaert Colyer demonstrating Trompe-l'œil

Still Life demonstrates a perceived 3D scene from a 2D work and conversely we have 3D works that appear flat from the initial vantage point. Most notable is Robert Irwin’s, Untitled, which is anything but flat.

Untitled by Robert Irwin

Finally, a shout out to the sidewalk chalk artists.

World by Julian Beever

Do you have any favorites that “trick the eye”?

(On a tangent, NPR had a similar segment discussing the upcoming series of movies based on board games. Greatly looking forward to Candyland.)

"Portrait of James Whitcomb Riley" by John Singer Sargent

Within the first week of my internship, I made two exciting discoveries here at the IMA. One was The Prado in Google Earth and the other, which I found upstairs in the American Galleries was the John Singer Sargent painting, Portrait of James Whitcomb Riley.

For those who aren’t already familiar, The Prado Museum and Google Earth have teamed up to create an interactive site for the museum, which can be accessed on the internet through Google Earth. The application creates a 3D view of the museum and incredibly detailed imagery of 14 masterpieces found in the museum, including works by Velasquez, Rubens, and Rembrandt, and Goya. According to the Associated Press article, the project involved 8,200 photographs of the works and an assumedly hefty bill (footed by Google).

The end product allows a viewer to zoom in on an image made up of 14 billion pixels. According to Google, that’s 1,400 times more detailed than the image a 10 megapixel camera could take – it’s quite remarkable. I watched the trailer for the project and was amazed. As one observer noted, you can actually see what appears to be a blemish painted on the rump of a women in the Rubens’ painting, The Three Graces. From what I can remember of Rubens in my art history classes, such an addition would be typical of his humor. I downloaded Google Earth at home in hopes of exploring the paintings beyond what the trailer shows, but unfortunately, my computer couldn’t handle the navigation very well, and I was left slightly frustrated. Hopefully your computer is faster.

So, how does this relate to discovery number 2? – Portrait of James Whitcomb Riley

I have recently read several posts, both on the IMA Blog and on other blogs, that discuss the use of technology in museums. The Prado in Google Earth raises the question: Can digital imagery ever replace the real deal? Would it matter if every museum offered all of their works in a manner similar to the 14 offered by Google Earth from The Prado? Would patrons stop entering the galleries and opt for the computer based imagery?

John Singer Sargent leads me to my answer.
Can technology replace the real deal? No.
Why? Brushstrokes.

I was a painting major in my undergraduate studies at DePauw University, and John Singer Sargent is my favorite painter. I studied his technique, I wrote papers on him, and I tried painting like him. My infatuation with this artist is founded upon his brushstrokes.

My painting professor adamantly told me that a painter should always paint from life, as Sargent most always did. He would say, “Painting from a picture will flatten your image and your painting will not have the same effect as it would if you were to paint from life.” For me, Google Earth has the same effect on a painting. I want to see the brushstrokes in person, in 3D space – not on a computer screen. (Google calls it 3D, but it’s not the same…)

My point here is that no matter how cool The Prado in Google Earth is, no matter how close the computers can zoom in on the brushstrokes, (at this point you might have to check it out to really know what I mean), I am always going to want to see the real thing. Yes, Google offers me the chance to zoom in on brushstrokes in a way that my own eyes would not allow me to do but that, for me, will never replace the intimacy of viewing the actual canvass on which the paint was applied. As Prado Director Miguel Zagaza says, “What we don’t see is the soul. The soul will always only be seen by contemplating the original.”

"Lady Agnew of Lochnaw" by John Singer Sargent

This is why I will one day travel to the National Galleries of Scotland, where my favorite Sargent painting, Lady Agnew of Lochnaw, hangs.