The unique properties of a digital painting. A "digital locking" and the authorization. Reflections of the cultural observer Vladimir Zalessky. A culturological essay
Аннотация: The unique properties of a digital painting. A "digital locking" and the authorization. Reflections of the cultural observer Vladimir Zalessky. A culturological essay.
The unique properties of a digital painting. A "digital locking" and the authorization. Reflections of the cultural observer Vladimir Zalessky. A culturological essay.
Gradually, a market for digital works of fine art is emerging.
One of the important prerequisites for creating such a market is to ensure the uniqueness of a digital painting. The buyer spent money on the purchase, and he has the right to have a unique thing.
If we approach the problem of ensuring uniqueness from a general position, we can identify two main methods for ensuring uniqueness.
The first method is a kind of "digital locking", which in modern conditions means the use of blockchain technology.
The second method is the authorization of a digital work of fine art. That is, placing an analog author's fragment on a digital painting.
For a variety of reasons - obvious and not obvious - "digital locking" is now mainstream. The audience is under mild hypnosis because of the active use of more and more new terms from the field of digital technologies, terms with not always clear (exact, unambiguous) content, terms that replace and complement each other. It's nice to be not only the owner of a painting depicting clear water (when rivers turn into streams of a chemical solution), but also a modern person who easily throws not entirely clear a near-scientific terms around himself... Such a mysterious style of behavior can even contribute to the resale of digital works of art at higher prices .
If ensuring the uniqueness of digital paintings through the use of blockchain technology is mainstream, then it would be natural to feel a slight movement towards discrediting such a method of ensuring uniqueness as authorization.
For example, you can use the phrase "buying an autographed reproduction."
Reproductions of traditional, analogue, paintings were not so bad from a commercial point of view (as a means of generating income) - this is evidenced, for example, by the biographies of Salvador Dali and Nicholas Roerich.
"Master engravings" by Albrecht Dürer (for example), produced with the help of a printing press in mass circulation, were sold throughout Europe and enjoyed tremendous popularity.
The modern public is showing great interest in works of fine art of advertising character, which are produced - in accordance with their purpose - in millions of copies.
But centuries of analog painting have been imprinted in the memory of generations, and along (together) with these centuries, a certain wariness in relation to 'reproductions' has entered the collective memory.
Not everyone understands the difference between analog and digital pictures. Therefore, one can play on the relic emotions associated with "buying an autographed reproduction" ("buying an autographed print").
Thus, we can see at least two methods for ensuring the uniqueness of digital paintings: digital locking (digital closing) (the use of blockchain technology) and authorization (placing an analogue author's fragment - for example, an author's inscriptionon - on a digital painting).
Each of these methods has its own advantages. It is possible that authorization, if approached from a general standpoint, has more advantages (comprehensibility, obviousness ... - for example).
However, if the use of blockchain technology contributes to the formation of a market for digital works of fine art, then one should not be overly critical to this method of ensuring the uniqueness of digital paintings.
[MMDCXC. The African fine art without brushes and without oil paints. Reflections of the cultural observer Vladimir Zalessky. A culturological note. - January 14, 2022.].
January 15, 2022 05:54 AM
Translation from Russian into English: January 15, 2022 06:57
Владимир Владимирович Залесский 'Уникальные свойства цифровой картины. 'Цифровое замыкание' и авторизация. Размышления культурного обозревателя Владимира Залесского. Культурологический очерк'.
{ 2721. Уникальные свойства цифровой картины. 'Цифровое замыкание' и авторизация. Размышления культурного обозревателя Владимира Залесского. Культурологический очерк.
MMDCXCI. The unique properties of a digital painting. A "digital locking" and the authorization. Reflections of the cultural observer Vladimir Zalessky. A culturological essay. }