Talk:Kinechromatic art

Merge discussion
This article (Kinechromatic art) should stand alone, because it is about two dimensional art. Kinetic art and Kinetic sculpture should be merged because they are both about three dimensional art. Bus stop 17:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


 * On further reading, Kinechromatic does seem quite different than the usual concept of kinetic art/sculpture. Though Kinetic art tries to touch on 2D aspects with "...or implied, as in the Op art paintings of Bridget Riley and others." We could add Kinechomatic to that sentence. --sparkit TALK 17:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

rm prod
I've reverted the PROD here. I agree that sources are very weak, although there is one on Palatnik already here.

Part of the problem is that 'Kinechromatic art' was a neologism in the 1950s, so work under that precise title is probably limited to Palatnik. However Frank Malina was working in a very similar genre at the same time, but calling them Lumidynes (sometimes given as 'Lumedyne', although I'm sure an engineer like Malina would have use the Lumi- base). Takis is another contemporary who worked with similar techniques, although better known for his magnetic works.

It's possible that we end up renaming (or merging) this article and broadening the scope of what (or at least who) is covered here. However I'm convinced that there was a genre of 'kinechromatic' art happening in the post war decades, using similar techniques, by a number of independent artists. That's worth covering.

In passing I note that the Palatnik ref comes from Leonardo online. Is this the same Leonardo that was founded 60-ish years ago by Malina? Andy Dingley (talk) 17:25, 8 August 2012 (UTC)