Aharon, I suspect (like you?) that there is some inherent quality of VR 
that as artists we either intentionally or unintentionally exploit. If your 
questioning seeks to expose this it may be useful to explore the question 
by reviewing other media. But undeniably the opportunity for discovery lies 
in the medium of VR itself.

You state that 'the promise of Photography is to take photo's' what does 
this mean? Our expectations of photography and it's effects have evolved 
over time - if we are to refer to it's cultural meaning rather than a 
technological meaning, which I assume as artists we are.

Do you intend to frame your question in an art context or are you framing 
your questions in a wider domain?

I'm not intending to cut your discussion short, just clarify to the 
context. Are we referring to VR as a technology or as a medium or both? Are 
these different discussions?

I think the essential premise of asking 'what is VR' is a valid and timely 
one.

A web based resource reviewing VR as a technology can be found at:
http://www.isx.com/~jisdale/WhatIsVr.html 
<http://www.isx.com/~jisdale/WhatIsVR.html
What Is Virtual Reality?
A Web-Based Introduction
Version 4 - Draft 1, September, 1998
by Jerry Isdale

Cheers

Taylor

-----Original Message-----
From:	aharon [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:	01 November 1998 23:10
To:	[log in to unmask]
Subject:	Virtual and Reality


At the end of the last meeting, (29/11/98) Simon suggested it could be
useful in the next meeting to have a debate (or there about) regarding VR.
Maybe talking a bit on the mailing list could assist in shaping such a
debate??

The terms Virtual and Reality convey a load of meanings, some of which are
contradictory to each other.
Are we talking about virtual as almost (real) like simulation, as with a
certain virtue, as a 'non-real' (environment), are we simply talking about
3D, or interactivity? Are we talking about reality as it might appear to a
Western educated person, as reality might appear to a quantum physicist, as
it might appear in abstract art, as it might seem for a Capitalist, as
hyper-real, as an augmented phenomenon, as classical realism, or as a
generated phenomena?
These type of arguments are not VR specific, definitions of reality and
arguments about ways of its virtualization are a kind of a civilized
tradition. For example, wrecking statues of a conquered city, or abstract
Vs figurative painting. The uniqueness of VR in the context of this long
historical process is the medium's own promise which is embedded in its
name. The promise of Photography is to take photos, Sculpture is to sculpt
be it with materials, assembled objects, society, environments etc..
Painting is to paint, Performance Art is some kind of performance, action
or even a theatrical work - but these and others mediums do not promise a
certain effect which defines them, VR does. VR promises a combination of
two illusive terms which mean many things to many people.
This is more than just a theoretical anecdote, because it might have some
historical significance.
a) The current collection of technologies, researches, developments and
associations which come under the banner of Virtual Reality have some
common goals which include dynamics of interactive interfaces, some
measures of disbelief suspension and real time events and objects
manipulation. If the VR community will argue amongst itself about what is
'true' VR (i.e. true measures of virtuality and reality), there will be a
fragmentation into opposing groups which might drive both developers and
funds away. Moreover, a fragmentation might lead to un-cooperative
situation among the various groups - which might weaken the propagation of
the medium as a whole.
b) The whole thing is transitional. VR will not retain its name and the
current strands of VR will evolve into very different mediums.
c) All of the above.

Either of these VR futures might not occur, but the possibility they might
and their relevance to current situation in VR - could point at some ideas
for action. VR, whether it is 2D, 3D, Desktop, HMD, Environmental,
Distributed, Animated, 3D-DigiTV, or what ever - should embrace its
differences. The various perceptions regarding what is VR, should and could
be embraced by both application and content developers. At the end of it,
no one would be seriously willing to swear with their life that they know
exactly what VR's shape, form and practice will be like in 30 years time.
We each have different interests, wishes and dreams regarding what VR is,
should and could be, and that in it self is very powerful.  Powerful enough
to take the medium into its next steps?..

Regards,
aharon

[log in to unmask]
without meaning -
     you can not be misunderstood
http://www.yummybaby.force9.co.uk/



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%