The works of Tim Berresheim are manmade but he uses a tool that isn’t much appreciated in the art world - or rather - the art market… but nevermind, Tim doesn’t care and we shouldn’t either. It’s fresh! His works deliver great new perceptions and they are the product of man and his CPU powered tool. Digitally made artworks that go beyond surreal, post horizontal, and sometimes create themselves with the painter’s codes. We had a little chat at the most recent Art Cologne:
Tim, you primarily work with computer generated visuals to compose surreal environments. How have you been attracted to use that medium and what fascinates you about it?
I am fascinated by the possibilities of contemporary image production, which can also cause alarming effects, like an empty alarm, which is not caused by fear or euphoria, but by what we could call what-the-fuck-is-going-on? Working with these new tools feels like opening a treasure chest full of visual beauty. Rare imagery or rare effects, whether they are elaborated or not, are possible to cause this kind of alarm. The flood of images in everyday life seldom has this quality.
And what does ‘surreal’ mean to you?
While surrealism means a methodology for artefact production by altering the psychic state of the author by for example, automatism, drugs, sleep deprivation. However, I am more interested in causing a state of alarm which does not depend on these kind of manipulations.
Would you describe yourself as a painter or would you go for being a sculptor if 3D printing becomes a standard?
I feel most comfortable with the idea of calling myself a “maker of images”.
Did you ever consider CGI printed sculpture?
I haven’t considered 3D printing yet as the resulting product isn’t able to transcend what it is... in my eyes it is such, due to the technical limitations at the moment, just an excuse for a real artefact.
How do you perceive CGI in regards to aesthetics?
Using CGI automatically implies being part of the same world as contemporary film and advertisement. At the same time it is a challenge to mark the difference to those economically driven areas.
How would CGI find its place in a historical context (art wise)?
I see a great chance here to add a new model to the existing models, as there are collage, readymades, or conceptual art.
You are already working with simple algorithms - the early stage of AI developments - what did you discover working with those? Is the artist a manipulator?
It is necessary to dive deep into the structure of the applications to gain knowledge of how to manipulate those apps for your needs. These apps are designed to create an illusion of reality and art production has to question these abilities.
What is most important for your artistic outcome or what could be considered fulfilment?
I’d be totally happy if my work would add knowledge to the mentioned models. It can’t be, that we are still dealing with and handling methods like the collage as if it were still the 1890s.
Is the digital artist still a bastard to the art circus, because collectors are still looking for ‘handmade’ analogue stuff?
Not a bastard but the ugly stepchild probably for some reason. All the collectors use digital tools to collect, archive, show and communicate art, but when it comes to dealing with the actual artwork, there can’t be enough oil on the canvas.
I believe that software is the next industrial revolution, would you agree and how will the solitary artist survive?
I agree that we are in the middle of a new technical revolution and as long as collectors still insist on analogue products, artists working with digital tools might have to look for different markets.
words : MRK