“Data visualizations.” Whether or not such data visualization are art might generously be described as an “open question.” Why? This is where the discussion gets interesting, if not messy. To a great degree, aesthetics is “behind the curve” of technology, failing to adopt/adapt basic definitions of art to accelerating image science, production, presentation and interpretation. Few aesthetes can knowledgeably compare (e.g., qualitatively) one data visualization to another, much less undertake an informed, integrative discourse, that would situated visualizations like senseFly’s Matterhorn(s) with “Old Media” versions, or any other, for that matter.

Moreover, as discussed earlier in the text, “art” has suffered an ongoing, dimensional “identity crisis.”* The tautology - “Everyone is an artist/Everything is art” (associated with comments by Beuys and Warhol and others) and its obverse (No one…/Nothing…) - have proven longevity in subverting aesthetic certainties. Successive waves of anti-art theorists, art-denier “artists” (e.g., Cindy Sherman) and territorial incursion by a “creativity industrial