Black and white robot icon ology

Where is this interest or desire to investigate a subtly distorted reality coming from? I am quite interested in it. It is almost like a scientific process: That is what happens in the series with the limousines Liine, Or, for example, in the series retarC , in which I thought that if I turned a crater upside-down it would look like a plateau.

This idea came to me when I saw pictures of underground explosions that created slight elevations on the surface. I experimented, and it worked with some of the craters. I realized that the light was crucial for creating this effect, and sometimes I inverted the image so that the light would come always from the left, making the illusion bigger. How do you characterize this interest in manipulating reality through photography? The case of the limousines had been in my head for over ten years because they look like normal cars that have been artificially stretched in a Photoshop, the first ones I saw where on television and in magazines.

I did this series mainly to satisfy my curiosity — how would the backgrounds look? Would the car seem like a normal car? Of course, there are second meanings: But all these interpretations depend on who is seeing it. I find a similar attitude in Untitled playing with Gould playing Bach in which the chosen frames gained a certain suspension, between a movement and a static side, which characterizes all the representations of passed, and unrepeatable, elements.

In what way can a picture result from video? As I explained previously, I fragemented small portions of the concert into hundreds of slices, sometimes in one, two or three frames, and with them I tried to compose music. The fact that each second of film consisted of twenty four photographs photograms , or twenty five in the case of television or PAL video, enabled each photograph to be accompanied by a moment of sound with a certain duration — in cinema, 41,66 thousandths of a second of sound.

This amount of time is more than enough to work with and, even eventually to stretch it in audio editing programes. If the sound is at 48KHz, it can still be divided into two thousand smaller slices.

This arouses my curiosity about the sound of a specific photograms that were filmed. In this same video there is a characteristic, which is very present in your work — the relation between image and music. How do you articulate these two elements and how do they coexist?

The combination of sound and image is, normally, one of those cases in which the whole is more than the sum of its parts. I think I have used it in a very different way in each work.

Sometimes the audio is used to increase the power of immersion of a given video, even to increase the realism. It can carry a more important message than the image, or it can simply be used to create an atmosphere. It can also be used to change the meaning of the image.

There is also music that I edit on CD and for which I create series of images or videos. I think I use music and audio in different ways and with different functions. Many of your pieces use elements that touch on the copyright issue and raise questions about the crisis of the current concept of intellectual property.

What is your feeling about these problems? It is a very complex issue of our times, in which we are surrounded by images, sounds, and words that belong to companies, while art continues needing the world around itself as raw material. Originally copyright served to stimulate literary creativity, and had a short period of duration, after which the creation entered public domain and became much more affordable. Up to the middle of the last century, classical music, blues, and a lot of other music only existed thanks to the recycling of musical heritage.

A lot of modern music would never exist if it were necessary to ask all the authors for authorization for samples sometimes hundreds of them. I believe that each case need to be individually analyzed. I think that the question should be raised only when profits that belong to the original author are being misappropriated. Not when we use a small part to comment, critique or pay homage, as a form of art. Therefore, no one will stop buying his records because of mine.

You often use digitally constructed images, such as the series of inverted craters, RetarC, or the two videos Place in Time , Sparky or H2O In what way are you interested in photography as a means to construct possible inexistent realities? For me, photojournalism is an example of how photography can construct reality. The pictures that appear in the newspapers and illustrate our recent history, are, to a greater or lesser degree, premeditated.

Even if I find this aspect interesting, I believe that in most cases I belong to the opposite field, using images to construct fiction. Do you see your images as photographs or are they closer to traditional pictorial representation, like painting or drawing? I undoubtedly see digital images as photography. In the case of 3D animation, which is closer to the concept of cinematic photography, all the concerns that we must have with these, and many more , are the same ones we have in 3D: If the scene is static, the moment is no longer crucial and we find ourselves in a photograph in which the moment is everywhere.

In 3D, a universe or theatre is created for each scene, and that would be impossible in the real world. And I depend on absolutely no one to do it, which is a relief. I can have an enormous city on top of a slice of pizza, and go in through a window of one of the buildings, go to the kitchen and find another slice of pizza on top of the table with another city on top.

I am also interested in this fractional side because it is very close to the tools provided by nature, which makes 3D for me, something that is natural and not artificial. I would dare to say that it seems less artificial than painting on a canvas.

Do you share this point of view in regard to your relationship between what you create and the elements you use as a starting point? I think that in cinema ecmenesia occurs when we see a film and establish our keyframes.

The remains are not the sequence but certain scenes and key points that vary from person to person. But our will to accept illusion, even in unlikely and technically imperfect cases, like the cinema of Ed Wood, the so called Suspension of Disbelief theory, interests me very much.

There are things that when we watched twenty years ago seemed highly credible and realistic and that nowadays are simply obsolete. What do you guys think? If there's any chance you can add the Medium icon it would be great! Thanks for your great work! Absolutely love your icons, thanks so much for providing them! I'm in real estate, any chance you could make the Zillow and Trulia icon?? I didn't actually think about it thanks for letting me know! I'll add it in the next round.

I love these icons. Thank you for sharing: Will you do an icon for bloglovin? I like very much your line. Congratulations for your work! Just one question, and I really hope not bother you with my question, but, about the phone icon, is it the "phone" really centered in the grey circle?

Looks like it is not comparing with all the others, or is just a visual efect of the simbol phone? Thank you very much again! All my best, Artur. Hey Artur yeah it was a little off, the new version should be up just try refreshing your browser, good luck! I know they are for social media but do you also have icons for phone, web and address?