Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Innocenti, P. (2012)
Languages: English
Types: Other
Subjects: Z665, AM
In this paper I am discussing the repositioning of traditional\ud conservation concepts of historicity, authenticity and versioning\ud in relation to born digital artworks, upon findings from my\ud research on preservation of computer-based artifacts. Challenges\ud for digital art preservation and previous work in this area are\ud described, followed by an analysis of digital art as a process of\ud components interaction, as performance and in terms of\ud instantiations. The concept of dynamic authenticity is proposed,\ud and it is argued that our approach to digital artworks preservation\ud should be variable and digital object responsive, with a level of\ud variability tolerance to match digital art intrinsic variability and\ud dynamic authenticity.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • [1] Christiane Paul, Digital art, 2. ed., Thames & Hudson, 2008; id. (ed.), New Media in the White Cube and beyond. Curatorial Models for Digital Art, C. University of California Press, Berkeley, 2008; Alain Depocas, Jon Ippolito, and Caitlin Jones (eds.), Permanence Through Change: The Variable Media Approach, Guggenheim Museum, New York and The Daniel Langlois Foundation for Art, Science & Technology, Montreal, 2003; Oliver Grau and Rudolf Arnheim (eds.), MediaArtHistories, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2007; Wolf Lieser, Digital Art. Neue Wege in der Kunst, h.f. ullmann, Berlin, 2010.
    • www.bampfa.berkeley.edu/about/avantgarde; 404 Object Not Found. What remains of Media Art?, 2003. Sadly this project is no longer available online. A project description is at http://nimk.nl/eng/404-object-not-found-what-remains-ofmedia-art; V2_ Capturing Unstable Media, 2003, http://capturing.projects.v2.nl/; Matters in Media Art: collaborating towards the care of time-based media, since 2003, www.tate.org.uk/about/projects/matters-media-art; packed.be, since 2003www.packed.be/; PANIC (Preservation webservices Architecture for New media and Interactive Collections), since 2003; this project website is being preserved by the National Library of Australia at http://pandora.nla.gov.au/tep/49720; Inside Installation Project, 2004-2007, www.insideinstallations.org/home/index.php; 40yearsvideoart.de, 2004- 2006, www.40jahrevideokunst.de/main.php?p=3; Ludwig Boltzmann Institut - Medien.Kunst.Forschung, 2005-2009, http://media.lbg.ac.at/de/index.php; Forging the Future: New Tools for Variable Media Preservation, 2007-2008, http://forging-the-future.net/; DOCAM - Documentation and Conservation of the Media Arts Heritage project, 2005-2009, http://www.docam.ca/.
    • [9] Some aspects of my research have been published in Perla Innocenti, “Theories, methods and testbeds for curation and preservation of digital art”, in: IS&T Archiving 2010 Preservation Strategies and Imaging Technologies for Cultural Heritage Institutions and Memory Organisations Conference, 1-4 June 2010, The Hague, pp. 13-17.
    • [10] Woolgar, S.,'Technologies as cultural artefacts, in: Dutton, W. (Ed.), Information and Communication Technologies - Visions and Realities, Oxford University Press, 1996.
    • [11] Ross, S. “Position Paper on Integrity and Authenticity of Digital Cultural Heritage Objects,” in: Digicult. Integrity and Authenticity of Digital Cultural Heritage Objects, Thematic Issue 1, August 2002, pp. 6-8, www.digicult.info/downloads/thematic_issue_1_final.pdf.
    • [12] Phillips, J. “The reconstruction of video art. A fine line between authorised re-performance and historically informed interpretation,” in: Irene Schubinger (ed.), Reconstructing Swiss Video Art from the 1970s and 1980s, JRP Ringier, Zurich, 2009, pp. 158-165; and Johannes Gfeller, “The reference hardware pool of AktiveArchive at Bern University of Arts. A basis for a historically well-informed re-performance of media art,” in: Schubinger 2009, pp. 166- 174. Some useful reflections are also published in: Erma Hermens, and Tina Fiske, T. (eds.), Art Conservation and Authenticities. Material, Concept, Context, Proceedings of the international conference held at and in Howard Besser, “Longevity of Electronic Art,” in: David Baerman, and Franca Garzotto (eds.), International Cultural Heritage Informatics Meeting: Cultural Heritage and Technologies in the Third Millennium, Proceedings from the ichim01 Meeting, Milan, Italy, September 3-7, 2001, vol. 1, Archives & Museum Informatics, Pittsburgh, 2001, pp. 263-275, www.archimuse.com/publishing/ichim_01_TOC1.html.
    • [13] Rinehart 2007.
    • [14] Ross, S. “Approaching Digital Preservation Holistically,” in: Tough, A. and Moss, M. (eds.), Record keeping in a hybrid environment : managing the creation, use, preservation and disposal of unpublished information objects in context, Chandos Press, Oxford, 2006, pp. 115-153.
    • [15] UNESCO (National Library of Australia), Guidelines for the Preservation of Digital Heritage, Report, 2003, § 16.7, http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001300/130071e.pdf.
    • [16] Innocenti, P. Interview on curation and digital preservation of time-based/media art of with Richard Rinehart, Berkeley Art Museum (BAM), 25 March 2010).
    • [17] Goodman, N. Languages of Art: an Approach to a Theory of Symbols, Oxford University Press, London, 1969 (in particular the chapter on Art and Authenticity and on The Unfakable).
    • [18] Butt, J. Playing with History: the Historical Approach to Musical Performance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002.
    • [19] Dutton, D. “Authenticity in Art,” in: Jerrold Levinson (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics, Oxford University Press, New York, 2003, www.denisdutton.com/authenticity.htm.
    • [20] Kemp, J. “Practical Ethics v2.0,” in: Richmond, A. (ed.), Conservation. Principles, Dilemmas and Uncomfortable Truths, Butterworth-Heinemann, London, Amsterdam, Boston, Heidelberg et al., 2009, pp. 60-72.
    • [21] Grigely, J. Introduction, in Texualterity: Art, Theory and Textual Criticism, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1995, p. 1.
    • [22] MacNeil, H. and Mak, B. “Constructions of Authenticity,” in: Library Trends, vol. 56, no. 1: Preserving Cultural Heritage, Summer 2007, pp. 26-52.
    • [23] Trant, J. “Emerging Convergence? Thoughts on museums, archives, libraries and professional training,” in: Museum Management and Curatorship, vol. 24, no. 4, Dec. 2009, pp. 369-387.
    • [24] In archives authenticity is “the quality of being genuine, not counterfeit, and free from tampering, and is typically inferred from internal and external evidence, including its physical characteristics, structure, content, and context.” see: The Society of American Archivists (SAA), A Glossary of Archival and Records Teminology, available online at: www.archivists.org/glossary/term_details.asp?DefinitionKey =9. In terms of evidence, “provenance is a fundamental principle of archives”, defined as “information regarding the origins, custody, and ownership of an item or collection.” See: The Society of American Archivists (SAA), A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology, available online at: www.archivists.org/glossary/term_details.asp?DefinitionKey =196.
    • [26] Innocenti, P. Interview on digital preservation on media art of with Dr. Bernhard Serexhe, ZKM  Media Museum, Karlsruhe, 12 August 2008.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article