Lend me your eyes
Dave Thier, contributor to www.forbes.com wrote on 27/3/2014: Facebook’s Oculus vs. Google Glass: The Coming War Over Our Eyeballs: Glass, by its nature, seeks to make technology disappear. Oculus wants to allow us to do things we can’t by pretending that they’re real.
Why do you use your technology? Do you use it to enhance the world around you, to navigate streets, check menus and dodge traffic? Or do you use it to escape the world around you, by losing yourself in online worlds, or maybe by talking to people thousands of miles away like they’re in the same room as you? They’re not mutually exclusive, but they are very different. It’s augmented reality vs. virtual reality. And now that Facebook has become the standard bearer for virtual reality in Silicon Valley following its purchase of the Oculus Rift, it squares off against Google and its Glass prototype in a fight for where tech sits in our lives.
On ArtNet News reality on the art market was reported:
Who’s Buying What? Ten Surprising Facts from AXA Art’s International Collectors Survey
Coline Milliard wrote on March 24, 2014 about the Collectors at TEFAF in Who’s Buying What? Ten Surprising Facts from AXA Art’s International Collectors Survey
The art world is constantly talking about “collectors” but – except for a few recognized personalities -they remain rather elusive creatures, often preferring anonymity to the limelight.
Art insurer AXA Art has attempted to strip away the mystery with their International Collectors Survey, published to coincide with TEFAF 2014. Tefaf’s annual report claims that online sales are growing at a dizzying 25 percent annually, but not all collectors are convinced. Only 34 percent of the respondents to the survey have purchased artworks online in the past, and 42 percent simply don’t see the point, saying that they couldn’t see themselves buy online in the future.
Three quarters of the surveyed collectors were male, and 73 percent aged 40-69. Art-lovers under 29 make up only 3 percent of the collectors surveyed.
43 percent of the collectors who defined themselves as investors purchase modern and Impressionist art as well as contemporary art.
You wouldn’t know looking at some art fair offerings, but only 14 percent of collectors go for video art and installation. The overwhelming majority (nine out of ten) collects painting, and more than half go for works on paper.
65 percent collect on “gut instinct” and only 21 percent use the services of an art consultant.
Conceptual art dominates and 80 percent of collectors say they buy art because “they love to own beautiful things and to surround themselves with them”.
Photography is a favourite: It’s their fourth choice after painting, works on paper, and sculpture.
Critics matter -but only a little bit more than Twitter.
Who said art publishing was in a dire state? According to the survey 58 percent of collectors turn to printed media, trade journals, newspapers, and books while seeking information on the art they purchase. Social media are not far behind, faring a solid 51 percent. It is worth noting that less than half the respondents said they found articles about trends on the art market and the value of particular objects relevant. What they want instead is information on individual artists.
While 95 percent of collectors go to art fairs and see them as a key source of information, an overwhelming majority, 73 percent, still prefer the personal service they get when buying in a gallery.
Read all >https://news.artnet.com
Glass is more! has more than 1200 Agenda items on expositions, sorted by country, and when the date has expired, the item is stored in the Archive to find all names, information and addresses.
Expositions about to open are among others The Coburg Prize for Contemporary Glass 2014 on 11/4/2014 and Bodytalk at Glasmuseet Ebeltoft, Denmark, open from 5/4/2014 to 28/9/2014
Two juried expositions that make me raise the question how one can choose quality from oceans of mainly Studio glass? Why do “nice” but bad, figurative works attract the attention of jurors and what can we learn about the composition of juries and their choices in compare to curators who determine their own contemporary themes and choices? How do the conditions of the organizers of these expositions force artists to choose if or not at all to enter? I think it would be much better to use the budgets for instance to pay at least for the works’ transport.
In Glass is more! one can find categories like Glass Art, Art, Design, Architecture, Books and Catalogues, Artists’ Portraits and Who=Who to give information on how glass is developing within the various disciplines.
I can only conclude that autonomous artists and curators make the most unconventional, revolutionary and interesting choices. They go for their vision, no matter what consequences may follow in the realization of the work or exposition.
I often wrote about how glass forced mankind to look and see better: Glass, the danger itself. Soap bubble and diamond, eye and marble, microscope and telescope, protector and weapon.
Ignore senseless glass art and look for the best! With or without Google glasses or Oculus or even when there is no glass at all! >MARTIN-GROPIUS-BAU BERLIN: Ai Weiwei – Evidence 3 April to 7 July 2014
PS: send us your favorite Jpeg on the expositions in Ebeltoft and Coburg, add your name, name artist and title work to be published in Glass is more! > firstname.lastname@example.org
©Angela van der Burght