I make it no secret that I’m a fan of the Animated GIF (Graphics Interchange Format). I admit it’s an attraction along the lines of “Hey wait a second, who’s dissing Jersey?” But I’ve been a fan, and have long endured the raised eyebrows of those that I keep a blog on the matter.

There are obvious obstacles before one professes one’s love for this medium, that go far beyond the GIF’s limitations of 8 bits per pixel and only 256 colors. There’s the fact that doing a google search for “Animated GIFs” will expose your eyes (and brain) to some of the most vapid & egregiously tacky sequences that the web has ever produced. And if you’re spared from that deep dank corner, you’ll most verifiably be in the other realm of GIFs that usher you through the complete mindset of the inane post-post-ironic, nonsensical pop culture realm of reference. Think singing hamster, the peanut-butter jelly time banana, or dancing baby. The medium lends itself to be juvenile in a way that no modern person wants to be associated with. But you’ve come this far in an article that bears this title. Some strange part of your soul wants to love these retarded image children as much as I do, so let me make my plea in defense of the Animated GIF.

In terms of structure, the GIF is simply crude stop-motion animation. It allows you to add images in succession, to determine the interval between each image, and then to determine the number of times said sequence is to be repeated. The only reason most GIFs are done with three or four frames is that web content developers will always concerned with a webpage’s upload time. That’s the concern that fuels Google’s stark frontpage – it focuses on function and reduces load time, unlike its’ overstimulated distant cousin (and pretty much every other news website), msn.com. Any stop motion animation could thus be done through the Animated GIF format, including but not limited to, the recent motion picture film The Fantastic Mr. Fox. I’m not saying that it’s a smart idea, I’m just arguing that it’s technically feasible.

So why then, are Animated GIFs relegated to the basement of internet culture, while stop-motion animation, arguably just as crude a medium, is still a fascination among artists today? One could argue that stop-motion animation doesn’t require the technical savvy of the animated GIF, and can still be done with the most accesible of materials. In the case of Mr. Fox, clay. But that’s only half-true, because that animation depends on the translation of the video camera technology to piece together the sporadic movement in a narrative fashion; something that we do in real life as often as our hearts beat.

Here, I’ll Devil’s-Advocate myself by pointing out the lack of the hand altogether in the Animated GIF. With stop-motion, the creator is still constructing the scene by hand, be it in clay, construction paper, or what have you. Although tedious, the act of moving the arm of a character a half of an inch, shooting a few frames of video and infinitely repeating, connects the maker with a more traditional idea on the process & pain in the making of artwork. And a byproduct of the hand-done process is the penchance for human error. Not in a something’s wrong manner, but more in the charming and labored look that defines stop-motion animation. The final product encompasses the bygone whimsy of antiquated technology.

The Animated GIF, and the computer-heavy process of creating one, separates the artist from his/her traditional mode of making, while replacing the charmed look of the hand, with that of a pixel taking a dump all over your beautiful images. And in digitizing the process, the aura of labor associated with stop-motion animation is also removed.

But at the heart of all animated GIFs, as well as stop-motion animation, is a series of images that when viewed in succesion, convey movement. The GIF is the only pure image format that can do so (not JPEGS, PNGS or TIFFS), and up until YouTube invented & then popularized Flash Video, was the only way one could see movement on the web. Without the implications of the hand that are ever-present with animation, the GIF is a creation whose sole creator is the computer.

Now this may be a stretch, but you’ve come this far already. I’m all for technology and the internet. You won’t find me holding onto a film camera as if I’ve just Sophie’s Choice’d it back into existence. But ultimately our computers are machines that are stuck in static modes. They read very precise code, and store information as you want them to be stored. But in reading a GIF file, your compu-tron is simply attempting to incorporate the majesty of movement into its’ oeuvre. The resulting image is a childlike and spastic interpretation of fluidity; a device that is furiously clashing with the limits of its’ own self.

That leads us to the greater question of medium versus content. Why should all Animated GIFs be ridiculed for the juvenile enthusiasts (including myself) that harness it’s power strictly for stupid? Should all videos be condemned for the vast library of pornography? Or all sports be mocked for the mere existence of curling? Although both examples are in larger fields with much more variety, the greater point is the same. In the same broader sense, Internet Art bears a burden similar to the Animated GIF, even though as I’ve noted before, it has an incredible and unprecedented access to a user base that is both active and attentive. I say this type of problem is a culture problem to be blamed on not only the producers of, but also the consumers of bad animation rather than a condemnation on the medium itself.

In conclusion, I think I’ve revealed my geek flag more than I originally intended to. But PLEASE also note that I’m not trying to propel the Animated GIF into the conversation of contemporary art and inclusion into the gallery scene. I’m simply asking that you, dear reader, check your pre-conceptions before dismissing any single thing as something not worth considering. Yes, this requires much more effort than ascribing to basic notions of good and bad, taste and tasteless. But I believe, as artists, it is our inherent duty to challenge those sometimes subconscious definitions, even if, and almost ESPECIALLY if, it is in defense of something so oft overlooked as the Animated GIF. To quote Anton Ego, monologue-ing near the end of Ratatouille…

The world is often unkind to new talent, new creations, the new needs friends. Last night, I experienced something new, an extraordinary meal from a singularly unexpected source. To say that both the meal and its maker have challenged my preconceptions about fine cooking is a gross understatement. They have rocked me to my core.

And alas, I leave you with my most recent GIF. I hope you enjoyed the read.