The Painter's New Eye: Evolving Technologies of Vision and the Transformation of Pictorial Art and Aesthetic Theory
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.64229/z0t0ee11Keywords:
Visual Technology, Painting, Aesthetic Theory, Art History, Mimesis, Perception, NeuroaestheticsAbstract
This article presents a comprehensive examination of the profound and reciprocal relationship between technological advancements in visual representation and the evolution of painting practices and aesthetic theory. It posits that tools and technologies are not merely passive instruments but active agents that fundamentally reshape the painter's perceptual framework, compositional strategies, and ontological understanding of the image. The analysis proceeds chronologically, tracing the impact of key visual technologies: the optical devices of the Renaissance (e.g., camera obscura, lenses), the advent and pervasive influence of photography, the development of motion pictures, and the contemporary digital revolution (encompassing digital imaging, CGI, VR, and AI). Each section meticulously examines how these technologies precipitated crises in and subsequently redefined existing aesthetic norms, such as mimesis and linear perspective, while simultaneously catalyzing the emergence of new artistic movements, from Realism and Impressionism to Cubism, Photorealism, and post-internet art. The article synthesizes art historical analysis with philosophical aesthetics and insights from the emerging field of neuroaesthetics to demonstrate that the "eye" of the painter is a historically constructed entity, continually reconstituted through its dialectical dialogue with technology. Consequently, aesthetic value is shown to be a fluid construct, contingent upon the available means of seeing and making. The conclusion posits that in the current digital age, characterized by algorithmic generation and virtual spaces, painting is undergoing another fundamental metamorphosis, challenging and expanding traditional notions of authorship, materiality, and the very boundaries of the art object.
References
[1]Berger, J. (1972). Ways of seeing. British Broadcasting Corporation and Penguin Books. https://archive.org/details/waysofseeing00john
[2]Kaufman, J. (1992). Life in the Lab: A Working Visit to a Holography Studio. Leonardo, 25(5), 497-502. https://doi.org/10.2307/1575763
[3]Scharf, A. (1968). Art and photography. Penguin Books. https://archive.org/details/artphotography0000scha
[4]Mazzone, M., & Elgammal, A. (2019). Art, creativity, and the potential of artificial intelligence. Arts, 8(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts8010026
[5]Elgammal, A., Liu, B., Elhoseiny, M., & Mazzone, M. (2017). CAN: Creative adversarial networks, generating "art" by learning about styles and deviating from style norms. arXiv preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1706.07068
[6]Grau, O. (2003). Virtual art: From illusion to immersion. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/7104.001.0001
[7]Gallese, V., & Freedberg, D. (2007). Motion, emotion and empathy in esthetic experience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(5), 197-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.02.003
[8]Steyerl, H. (2009). In defense of the poor image. e-flux journal, 10(11), 1-9. https://www.e-flux.com/journal/10/61362/in-defense-of-the-poor-image/
[9]Parisi, L. (2019). The alien subject of AI. Subjectivity, 12(1), 27-48. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41286-018-00064-3
[10]Haraway, D. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203873106
[11]Dolphijn, R., & van der Tuin, I. (2012). New materialism: Interviews & cartographies. Open Humanities Press. http://openhumanitiespress.org/books/download/Dolphijn-van-der-Tuin_2013_New-Materialism.pdf
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Benjamin Lee Kai Keat, Ilya Bulatov (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.