New Works Based on Eye-Centered Portraits, 2006
by Devorah Sperber

Artist Statement

I am interested in the link between art and technology, how the eyes prioritize, and reality as a subjective experience vs. an absolute truth.  As a visual artist, I cannot think of a topic more stimulating and yet so basic, than the act of seeing —how the human brain makes sense of the visual world. –Devorah Sperber, 2005

My latest works expand upon the concepts explored in the Ljubljana Print Biennale installations. Like the LPB works, they offer direct visual “experiences” related to the *biology of vision. At first glance, the thread spool installations appear to be a random arrangement of spools of thread. A clear acrylic sphere placed in front of each work shrinks and condenses the thread spool “pixels” into a recognizable image while also rotating the imagery 180 degrees like the human eye. This shift in perception functions as a dramatic mechanism to present the idea that there is no one truth or reality, emphasizing subjective reality vs. an absolute truth.

I am currently assembling six new thread spool works (each eight feet in diameter). The works are based on the centered-eye phenomenon in historical portraits including portraits and self portraits by da Vinci, Vermeer, Picasso, Rembrandt, Renoir, and Van Eyck.  This concept was inspired by a recent survey of 3/4 view portraits over the past two millennia which revealed that one eye tended to be placed symmetrically at or near the vertical axis of the canvas throughout the history of Western portraiture (SEE DOCUMENTS). I stumbled upon this study while researching the LPB works-- both the Mona Lisa and The Last Supper are perfect examples of eye-centeredness. 

In addition, I am constructing a series of smaller works (36”- 42” h), also based on the centered-eye concept, using thousands of Swarovski crystals (a new medium for me), chenille stems, and possibly map tacks.  Each work will consist of two symmetrical images, created by dividing historical portraits along the vertical axis, and horizontally flipping or mirroring each side to create two new symmetrical images.  I included a page of small digital renderings of just a few of the images I have experimented with from the thousands of possibilities. My current thought is to select a couple of works by da Vinci and also a wide range of artists, styles, and time periods to show the vastness of the centered-eye phenomenon in portraiture. I would also like to construct one work based on a portrait in the collection of the Brooklyn Museum.

I believe the new works would enhance the LPB installations and offer viewers a diverse, yet cohesive experience of my current body of work.  I have several museum exhibitions scheduled, for which I plan to show the LPB installations along with a selection of new works (and perhaps a couple of recent works) related to art history and the biology of vision. I would welcome the opportunity to debut some of my new works along with the LPB installations at the Brooklyn Museum. 

Overall, my new works exemplify my ongoing interest in visual perception, the link between art, science, and technology through the ages; the feminist art proposition of bringing genres into "High Art," and providing direct visual “experiences” that are compelling enough to stand on their own without any explanation.   - Devorah Sperber, 2006

EXPERIENTIAL AND EDUCATIONAL COMPONENTS:

I collaborated with the education department at the Montclair Art Museum to develop discussions and hands-on activities related to my installation for school groups and families. I am currently working with the director of MASS MoCA Kidspace to develop a curriculum for an exhibition and artist residency in 2008.

The “element of surprise” inspires active seeing and curiosity. The first time people experience my work, many have an initial sense of disbelief. “No Way” is a common phrase, along with WOW, HOLY…, laughter, “come here, you gotta see this,” followed by “how’d HE do that?”

These direct visual “experiences” can be used to stimulate discussions about visual perception, optics, science, or art history. Science-related topics could include mirrors and optics: how a clear viewing sphere and the human eye rotate imagery 180 degrees (and that the world is actually upside down) or why a mirror flips your face left to right and yet not upside down. 

School groups could be challenged to find symmetrical components throughout the museum such as the centered-eye phenomenon in portraits, symmetry in architecture, sculpture, and antiquities.  Personally, since I became aware of this phenomenon in portraits, my experience of viewing portraits (and paintings in general) has radically shifted along with my friends with whom I’ve shared this concept.  When one eye is centered, the phenomenon is so immediately apparent; I’m surprised I never noticed it before.

The human brain is hard-wired to solve puzzles.  I believe the “art-going” audience will be hard pressed to resist the temptation to “Name That Painting” which could be challenging with some of the small works or more obscure portraits. It may be advantageous to have postcard-sized blank cards available for people to hold up in order to block out the center portion of the small mirrored works.  By blocking out the two center/mirrored portions, the two visible portions will reveal the portrait.

AUDIENCE: 

Based on past exhibitions in public spaces and public works, my use of ordinary materials, combined with the element of surprise, makes my work appealing to a broad audience. When a thread spool installation was installed at the Albany International Airport for 6 months, blogs and the visitor sign-in book indicated people were being dragged (often against their will after a long day of travel) by family members to see the work.  The same has happened in a Puerto Rico train station where my 60’ w thread spool work has earned the distinction of being the favorite work of art by the people who use the trains and by the security guards.  And as one would expect, children respond to the thread spool works and optical devices with awe and wonder.

Although my work is not Feminist Art, I doubt I would be using thread spools as a material, or engaged in my low-tech, labor intensive processes, had I not read the book “The Power of Feminist Art.”   I believe the audience for The Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art will be receptive to my work (when it opens in March).

The work’s conceptual aspects and art-historical references make the work appealing to the art-going audience, and to people who are truly curious and interested in learning about art and science.

Recent Sculpture Magazine article "The Art of Seeing: A Conversation with Devorah Sperber" which describes my conceptual concerns).

INSTALLATION OPTIONS: 

If my exhibition is presented in the first floor gallery, I’d like to explore installing work on the existing curved wall.  

“After The Last Supper” was installed as an open ended trapezoid in Ljubljana.  Depending on the arc of the wall, it may be possible to install LS on the inner (concave) surface of the curved wall. While developing this work, I explored the possibility of building a self-supporting, curved hanging apparatus for this work (it was not possible due to the tight time frame and $).  The trapezoidal shape was intended to function like a curved hanging apparatus, in that the entire thread spool installation would be visible from a single sphere positioned in the center.  The image on the left is of an earlier curved thread spool work.

If the existing wall is not curved enough for the Last Supper, it may be possible to install smaller works on the curved wall.  In this situation, I would explore the possibility of installing “After The Last Supper” at a 90 degree angle in a corner of the gallery (each wall section ~15’w) or as a trapezoid set into a corner like in Ljubljana (right) ideally with a little more space left and right.

I do not foresee additional expenses associated with including new works, other than a couple more days needed for installation, and perhaps some minor labor to make slight modifications to the top of the curved wall if it is possible to install “After The Last Supper” on the concave side. 

The thread spool works illustrates specific visual experiences related to the biology of vision such as: how the human eyes and brain process sensory data-- Photons bouncing off the spools of thread reach our eyes where they are turned into a pattern that is sent to the primary visual cortex where the rough shapes are recognized.  The pattern is then sent to higher regions where colors are recognized and where thread spool identities are encoded along with other knowledge we already have about thread spools.  This direction of flow is called “feed forward,” meaning the data is moving from bottom to top (eyes to brain).

Traffic flowing from top to bottom is called feedback or top-down processing. There are 10 times as many nerve fibers carrying information down as there are carrying it up. So what we see is based on what neuroscientists call “top down processing.” And what we see depends on the framework built by past experience that interprets raw data.

When the top (or brain) is convinced it knows what it is seeing (in this case, initially fixating on what appears to be a random arrangement of thread spools), the bottom level of data (the recognizable image) is overruled.  This may explain why my use of thread spools create such a jolt or ‘WOW” experience when the viewer finally sees the representational imagery in the viewing sphere, as the brain abruptly shifts focus from the individual spools to the whole recognizable image.

The brain can only hold or assemble one image at a time, so its initial fixation on the individual spools does not allow the recognizable image to emerge until the thread spools are seen through the viewing sphere or from a significant distance.  However, once the viewer “sees” the image in the thread, the brain can shift back and forth from focusing on the individual spools to the whole recognizable image.  And once the viewer “knows” the image is visible in the thread, he or she can not erase it.  Thus, the thread spool installations function as neurological primers, by making the image recognizable without the viewing device once the brain has been primed.  

NOTE: I digitally manipulated the images before constructing them from thread.  The images are negative-spherized/concave.  The convex curve of the sphere counteracts the concave distortion so that the image seen in the sphere looks like the original portrait (above), and not convex/bulbous like the digital rendering (below). 

However, since the thread spools are still all the same size, the grid pattern created by the spools will appear convex/bulbous, but not the actual image. Very few people will be aware of this nuance (see Rembrandt and Renoir thread spool installation and sphere images).

RECENT RELATED WORKS:

The following works from 2004 reflect my interest in the link between art, science and technology through the ages, and that artists have used the technologies of their eras, as many artists today use ours.

“After Holbein 1 & 2” are constructed from thousands of chenille stems, and are based on Holbein’s painting “The Ambassadors” (1533).

Like the original painting, my enlarged skull, which measures 8’w, is only visible from an extreme angle.

In order to create the elongated skull, Holbein either utilized anamorphic perspective, a mathematical technology attributed to Leonardo da Vinci, or an optical device as suggested by David Hockney in his book “Secret Knowledge.” 

In “After Holbein 1,” I transformed the entire Holbein painting into a seamless in-the-round anamorphic “rug,” with the image only visible in a mirrored cylinder.  

The reflective cylinder can be seen as a metaphor for the brain and the swirling colors in the “rug” as the raw data which is organized/ assembled by the brain/cylinder to form a recognizable image (see notes on the biology of vision for more details).

Medium: chenille stems, mixed medium frame, polished stainless steel cylinder
Dimensions: 72” diameter x 35” h

LPB WORKS:

My concept was based on the technology of print making and how mechanical reproductions alter images of artworks as they exist in “the mind’s eye.” I believe this may be due to the loss of experiential components such as the intended relationship of viewer to artwork, scale, and site-responsiveness. I selected da Vinci’s Last Supper and Mona Lisa because they are two of the most recognizable and reproduced images in the history of art.

My goal was to reintroduce the experiential effects of scale, monocular vision, resolution and spatial frequencies on vision, which Margaret Livingstone wrote about in her book “Vision and Art: The Biology of Seeing.”  I suspect most people are surprised when they see the original paintings in person and experience the relative small scale of the Mona Lisa (21 x 30 inches), the subtle effects of her elusive smile, The Last Supper’s large scale (15’ x 29’), and the 3 dimensional illusion of the mural as an extension of the site.

“After The Mona Lisa 1” is life-sized (measuring 21 x 30”) and is constructed from 425 spools of thread so the image resolution is very low. Yet when seen through the sphere, the thread spools condense into a recognizable image, conveying how little information the brain needs to make sense of visual imagery it has already been exposed to.

“After The Mona Lisa 2” is an enlarged rendering of her facial features (85” h + 35” ball chain x 85”w). Unlike the original painting, in which the smile is best seen with peripheral vision, as studied by Margaret Livingstone, by moving the sphere up, down, left, and right, the distortion of the sphere itself causes the smile to appear, morph, and disappear using central vs. peripheral vision.

“After The Last Supper” At 29 feet wide, it is life-sized rendering of de Vinci’s Last Supper, cropped top and bottom. It is constructed from nearly 21,000 spools of thread hung to form an open-ended trapezoid. The two side panels of the trapezoid accentuate the illusion of 3 dimensional space, in reference to the original mural’s illusion of being an extension of its architectural site.  It may be possible to install this work on the inner surface (concave) of a curved wall to create the same effect (that was my original plan for this installation).

Leonardo da Vinci suggested that in order to appreciate the illusion of three-dimensionality, paintings should be viewed with only one eye and from a distance. The sphere offers this perspective, by focusing both eyes on a single point in the sphere, and by shrinking the image as though it is being seen from a great distance.

Devorah Sperber is a New York-based artist whose sculptures, composed of thousands of ordinary objects, negotiate a terrain between low and high tech. Her labor-intensive works explore repetition and the effects of digital technology on perception, scale, and subjective reality. -Patricia Phillips, Executive Editor, Art Journal