Pretty what should have been expected after we alienated skill from art.
Art technicians: The industry’s dirty secret, or all part of the process?
11–20 of 159 posts
Re: Art technicians: The industry’s dirty secret, or all part of the process?
#12A few friends have worked as technicians for a very well known British artist.
As far as I can see he pretty much hires every art graduate within a reasonable radius of his art factory. They do the majority of the production work, to his specifications. Eventually they get bored and leave to do their own stuff.
Another guy I know is a sort of 'special projects' consultant for artists, figuring out particular logistical or engineering challenges. It sounds really fun.
Re: Art technicians: The industry’s dirty secret, or all part of the process?
#13As an artist, this article makes me so upset. The people doing the actual work should be getting credit. Of course the people coming up with the ideas should be getting credit too. When one person comes up with the idea and another with product, it's a collaborative work and credit should be shared. Artists who try to pass off a work they merely collaborated on as exclusively their own are despicable.
Not to undermine the technicians, but there is a certain view to it. Let's say an artist comes up with an idea for an intricate lounge chair. It takes them two days to sketch it on paper. Art technician and manufacturing engineer work together to draw "schematics" of the chair in some CAD software to actually manufacture the chair, which takes them full two months of labor. Would their work be more or less significant if it was generic stool?
Re: Art technicians: The industry’s dirty secret, or all part of the process?
#14For as long as there have been artists, there have been apprentices. Sometimes those apprentices went on to become renowned masters, sometimes they languished in obscurity.
Except that's not even remotely the issue being discussed here.
This is about artists going to people who are already experts in their field and having them construct the art, but taking (or being given) all of the credit for it.
Re: Art technicians: The industry’s dirty secret, or all part of the process?
#15Pretty what should have been expected after we alienated skill from art.
Skill and art are not necessarily linked. It's possible to be a craftsman without being an artist, and vice versa.
Think of a fabricator as an OEM. iPhones are manufactured by Foxconn, and I'm sure their technicians contribute greatly to the manufacturing and design, but it's still the Apple logo that gets stuck on the back.
Re: Art technicians: The industry’s dirty secret, or all part of the process?
#16For as long as there have been artists, there have been apprentices. Sometimes those apprentices went on to become renowned masters, sometimes they languished in obscurity.
Except that's not even remotely the issue being discussed here. This is about artists going to people who are already experts in their field and having them construct the art, but taking (or being given) all of the credit for it.
This happens all through society. I take credit for all sorts of things I couldn't have done without my shirt. My shirt was made by shirtmaking experts who were paid, peanuts probably, and that's good enough. So where do you draw the line? The thing about the shirt maker is that they are interchangeable, whereas I, with the things I take credit for while wearing the shirt, am not. I have authorship. The shirtmaker doesn't.
Re: Art technicians: The industry’s dirty secret, or all part of the process?
#17Pretty what should have been expected after we alienated skill from art.
Skill and art are not necessarily linked. It's possible to be a craftsman without being an artist, and vice versa. Think of a fabricator as an OEM. iPhones are manufactured by Foxconn, and I'm sure their technicians contribute greatly to the manufacturing and design, but it's still the Apple logo that gets stuck on the back.
I wouldn‘t call an iPhone a piece of art though.
Re: Art technicians: The industry’s dirty secret, or all part of the process?
#18As an artist, this article makes me so upset. The people doing the actual work should be getting credit. Of course the people coming up with the ideas should be getting credit too. When one person comes up with the idea and another with product, it's a collaborative work and credit should be shared. Artists who try to pass off a work they merely collaborated on as exclusively their own are despicable.
Isn’t this kinda like the the difference between a chef and a cook?
Many cooks work for a chef, and some grow on to become chefs.
Re: Art technicians: The industry’s dirty secret, or all part of the process?
#19As an artist, this article makes me so upset. The people doing the actual work should be getting credit. Of course the people coming up with the ideas should be getting credit too. When one person comes up with the idea and another with product, it's a collaborative work and credit should be shared. Artists who try to pass off a work they merely collaborated on as exclusively their own are despicable.
Not necessarily. It's the same as with many creative fields.
An architect comes up with the overall concept and, if they're famous, gets their name on the building. But they still have a roomful of structural engineers figuring out how to stop it falling down.
Or a musician. Creating an album takes a team of session musicians, producers, engineers etc. But it's the artist's name that goes on the front.
Re: Art technicians: The industry’s dirty secret, or all part of the process?
#20Pretty what should have been expected after we alienated skill from art.
Skill isn't required to make or present something that has an emotional reaction. Major artists have often had external craftspeople - Leonardo Da Vinci had a workshop.