There are many questions which are raised by this new work. One of them is to how and where do these animations sit in relation to contemporary art? Are these moving abstract images, which are played out on a flat screen, guided by the same
rules/restrictions as painting? Does art shown on the internet (even in the context of the host of the established art gallery) have the same value as work shown in a gallery setting?

The spatial concerns present in the work are of massive interest to me. The relationship between the objects and the virtual space they inhabit is a complex one. The interior (virtual) space is defined and outlined by the objects and the tension develops due to the optical play between the frontal nature (exterior)of the picture plane and the virtual space of the image. The different degrees of spatiality, contrary to the ‘real’ Minimalist installations cannot be physically entered into by the viewer. Could phenomenology still be used to describe our relationship with these virtual spaces/objects? What would happen if the gap between the physical
and virtual world grew closer?

By using technology to make and show art challenges what art is and how it is viewed. The cultural heritage that has ‘trained’ us in approaching certain art forms, such as paintings, has not necessarily provided us with a vocabulary to understand others, such as new media. The internet extends art beyond institutions and allows the viewing of the artworks to be made at a choice of the viewer.

Where does this leave the relationship between the artist and the gallery?