An audience wants to believe an artist brought their idea into being in some way human that a 3D printer can’t replicate, but the cold reality is producing an object from a CAD model is much more efficient than handbuilding it with clay or carved foam. It’s an obvious example of an artist hoping to preserve the otherworldly allure of their work, which is common practice in the art world. Despite the fact that his art practice is heavily tied to digital media and the Internet, Satterwhite does not mention his use of 3D printing to produce his work the only hint is found in the work’s listing of material: nylon. His solo show at an LA art gallery exhibited several sculptures like the one pictured above. In the same year, artist Jacolby Satterwhite was blowing up on the art scene and dabbling with 3D printing technology, unbeknownst to gallery goers. While these artists shamelessly ride the hype cycle, other artists have deliberately avoided to mention their use of 3D printing to make their work.Īt CES 2014 3D printing hype seemed to explode. Sure, the novelty of objects showcasing what can be done with a 3D printer are interesting, but there’s not a lot being said otherwise.

Just search google for images of “3d printing art” and you will understand why the technology has a stigma for producing artwork that is rather generic, closer to design than art, so closely linked to the technology it is more like a proof of concept.

I haven’t seen this discussed elsewhere, but I don’t think it is a secret that the art world is perhaps the one realm of influence where 3D printing is actually maligned. The occasion of international sculpture day serves as good excuse to survey how 3D printing has influenced the fine arts and assess whether the technology’s potential to “disrupt” has been fully realized.

3d printed paintings