Since Google Street View (GSV) was launched in 2007, it has been used for a variety of functions. Want to make sure you’re not visiting a sketchy area of town? If you see bars on the windows while panning around with GSV, it might not be the best place. Don’t want to knock on the wrong door for a friend’s housewarming party? Check out GSV and see what the home looks like before you go.
Google applications can help serve these purposes. But what about GSV becoming art? That’s right, artists and photojournalists are beginning to use Google’s Map, Earth, and Street View applications in their work with some controversy among their peers.
Wired recently reported some people are scouring GSV looking for the “accident” photos and other artistic images, creating a new form of photojournalism that has sparked some controversy about the use of this digital media in art and journalism.

This man is caught mid-run using Google Street View. Image 4 of "Street View: A Series of Unfortunate Events" by Michael Wolf. (Michael Wolf)
For example, former photojournalist Michael Wolf earned an honorable mention in February for his “Street View: A Series of Unfortunate Events”, which captures oddities found in GSV, in the Contemporary Issues category at the Word Press Photo Awards. Wolf and other artists using Google applications as their medium generally have cameras on their computer to capture images:
“It’s a real file that I have, I’m not taking a screenshot,” he told The British Journal of Photography [via Wired]. “I move the camera forward and backward in order to make an exact crop, and that’s what makes it my picture. It doesn’t belong to Google, because I’m interpreting Google; I’m appropriating Google.”

Google Street View captured children playing with each other or beating up their friend. Image 16 of "Street View: A Series of Unfortunate Events" by Michael Wolf. (Michael Wolf)
You can view Wired’s compilation of some accidental and other artistic images captured by artists and photojournalists using GSV.
In late July, NPR also covered art created using Google Maps and Google Earth. Jenny Odell, one of the artists mentioned, created a gallery called “Satellite Collectings” using aerial images of baseball diamonds, swimming pools, nuclear cooling towers, grain silos and more from Google Satellite View. NPR mentioned artwork from several others who have used these applications:
“Satellite Collections” is one of several art projects that have used the visual data supplied by Google’s Maps and Earth applications. Clement Valla’s gallery of warped bridges and roads culls artifacts of the program’s automated image stitching.
[. . .]
Odell usually likes to “wander” through the maps, turning labels off so she loses track of where she is. “It’s a lot like being in a plane,” she writes, “flying over your own country but not actually being able to tell where you are or exactly what you’re looking at. I like the idea of the Earth as an endlessly readable surface.”

This image by Jenny Odell is composed of 39 landfills taken from Google Satellite View. (Jenny Odell)
Google has also used its technology in an artistic way. Its Earth application was set up to view famous works of art in Spain’s Prado museum. Users can view The Prado in Google Earth at far more detail (1,400 times more megapixels) than a 10 megapixel digital camera would take.
Here’s a video of how Google did it in The Prado:





















































































































Comments (48)
Tyler520
Aug. 16, 2011 at 4:53pmArt is, by definition, “the sensual communication of an intellectual notion via an acquired talent.’
By definition, it cannot be considered art.
…nor can most of the garbage being peddled in “art” galleries these days, for that matter.
Report this comment
mobynowak
Aug. 16, 2011 at 12:46pmDon’t like being seen on a public street? Don’t use it. Don’t like your house to be seen from the street? Live in the forest. Don’t like to be seen by your fellow taxpayers? Don’t live on the tax-payer provided, plowed, cleaned, and policed street that allows you to conveniently drive to and from work, the store, your church, etc.
Report this comment
Cold War Vet
Aug. 15, 2011 at 11:13pmGoogle may have a 360-degree street view of your house! Get on Google, type in your address, and see if they have a “street view.” You might be surprised…
Report this comment
Ruler4You
Aug. 15, 2011 at 8:31pm“Art”? It’s surveillance! Nothing more.
Report this comment
mobynowak
Aug. 16, 2011 at 12:42pmSurveillance? What you see from a public street is somehow sacred, secret and an invasion of privacy? Hardly. Don’t like to be seen, build a fence. Live in the forest. Build a bunker.
Report this comment
Brizz
Aug. 16, 2011 at 3:16pmPeek-a-boo! Eye see you
Report this comment
Charles
Aug. 15, 2011 at 8:07pmthe answer to the headline question is no
Report this comment
Rayblue
Aug. 15, 2011 at 7:19pmEyeCatS @ pBase.
Report this comment
Rayblue
Aug. 18, 2011 at 5:35pmThank you for your views.
Report this comment
Gatekeeper
Aug. 15, 2011 at 5:28pmboring
Report this comment
Miami
Aug. 15, 2011 at 4:16pmYeah so liberals can see the homeless people their policies have created with out leaving the comfort of their elite penthouses/political offices.
Obama plays the victimhood to an artful level, attacking the private jetclass while wining and dining them for campaign donations. The hypocrisy is grotesque…
Definition of FASCISM
1
often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
Report this comment
PapaMcCain
Aug. 15, 2011 at 7:55pmI’m sorry did I miss something? I thought we were talking about Google pictures. One thing I’ve noticed both on the left and the right, each person will use whatever painful stretch they can in order to insult or inflame the “opposition”. You may consider yourself a self-righteous pious God fearing Christian conservative, but when it all boils down, you’re just another self-serving jerk.
Report this comment
MONICNE
Aug. 15, 2011 at 4:15pmLife imitates Art. Google imitates Life.
TEA
Report this comment
sizzlinsexybeckster
Aug. 15, 2011 at 4:00pmTaking street photos of people getting hurt or in trouble is not art. it is inhumane. It’s just a lazy form of “photography art” which is insane. People around here sure are getting really lazy.
Report this comment
DrFrost
Aug. 15, 2011 at 4:18pmHave you seen the car they drive around to take those photos? It’s all automated. The driver likely didn’t notice anyone getting hurt.
As for whether or not it’s art…. beauty is in the eye of the beholder. For me some of the photos qualify as art (the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance).
Report this comment
JJ Coolay
Aug. 15, 2011 at 6:27pmI always kind of thought art was intentional. This is just random photo taking for information gathering.
I guess I could be wrong on my definition of what art is, but I just think it’s something you intentionally capture or make or create.
Report this comment
WeDontNeedNoStinkingBadges
Aug. 15, 2011 at 7:25pm“Wolf and other artists using Google applications as their medium generally have cameras on their computer to capture images … I move the camera forward and backward in order to make an exact crop, and that’s what makes it my picture. It doesn’t belong to Google, because I’m interpreting Google; I’m appropriating Google.”
If it’s for copyright, you’ve got to use you’re own equipment. Two photographers can snap the same sunset and have their own copyrights. But one photographer cannot get the other’s picture, trim it with scissors, and claim copyright — in fact, he would’ve committed copyright infringement.
Report this comment
Brizz
Aug. 16, 2011 at 3:23pmBut do you like Warhol?
Report this comment
olddog
Aug. 15, 2011 at 3:23pmGoogle just bought Motorola, work closely with the BO administration, responsible for the downfall of the Egyptian president, need I go on? Hey it’s a good search engine but honestly folks the stuff com ing out of Google doesn’t smell to good to me… Do you people, Yep that’s You People, Trust Google?
Report this comment
jcizarter
Aug. 15, 2011 at 3:59pmI do not trust anyone but YHVH. period end of sentence
Report this comment
DrFrost
Aug. 15, 2011 at 4:11pmI use their search engine almost exclusively so I guess I’d have to say I trust them to provide me with a quality search engine. And I like google docs. I also think they have tried to do the right thing on occasion in the past (as with China). I wasn’t aware they were involved in any way with the turmoil in Egypt…. I’ll have to go google that…. or maybe I should use another search engine for that particular search…. hmmmm.
In general, though, I think it’s naive to expect corporations to do anything but try and maximize their profits while staying just inside the line of the law (and realize that “legal” has never been synonymous with “ethical” or “moral”).
Report this comment
jb.kibs
Aug. 15, 2011 at 4:27pmi don’t. i have tried to stop using anything google that i can…
Report this comment
TheGothicConservative
Aug. 15, 2011 at 10:33pmPlus Muslim terrorist are using Google Earth as a targeting system for missles to hit Israel
Report this comment
Patriot Z
Aug. 15, 2011 at 3:11pmart is subjective whats art to you may not be art to someone else. there are peeps who think davinchi, and rembrant suck balls. beauty is in theeye of the beholder and is cmpletly subjective. thats why i never believed it sould be fed funded at all. because if you force people to pay for art you force a definition of art.
Report this comment
goobert
Aug. 15, 2011 at 3:05pmProbably a different form of art in its own unique way. Why does everyone in here use this to blast Google. Like there street cars are doing something illegal. Just don’t go nude on your front lawn and use encryption on your wifi connections its not that hard.
Report this comment
Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Aug. 15, 2011 at 4:01pmMaybe, because the story was about Google? I don’t think anyone here walks nude on their front lawn, and most probably have encryption on their wifi, but they don’t ride around capturing packets with their cars. You can like Google, doesn’t mean I have to.
Report this comment
cntrlfrk
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:46pm‘
I say sue Google for taking pictures of people without their permission and distributing them on the internet.
Report this comment
jb.kibs
Aug. 15, 2011 at 4:34pmif they have a case… is it illegal to publish someones photo, taken in public, without their consent?
IE, i take pictures at a festival… i post them to my website… they have random people doing random things in them… i know for a fact that it isn’t illegal to do this, i see these pictures all the time online and on television… the news does this constantly for large events, sports, etc…
NOW, here’s where i say they DO have a case… Over any PRIVATE property.
they take a picture of you on private property and publish it to the public. i would say that is illegal without consent….
Report this comment
avgconservative
Aug. 16, 2011 at 10:11amAnyone can have their picture made when they are at a public activity… but when they step into a venue, that is different. Permission must be obtained to use photos when on private property or at a private event.
Report this comment
brotherjohn
Aug. 16, 2011 at 4:14pmThat’s the beauty of the system. Anyone who has a computer can post the first ridiculous thought that pops into their heads, like you for instance.
I’d love to hear how you would present your case, given the fact that all of the photos were taken from public streets.
I am no fan of Google, to the point that I will avoid using anything they produce, but seriously, pick your battles.
Report this comment
jado1981
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:36pmSo, according to this, can I bring my video camera and video the whole thing and then say it’s my own? It should be just as legal.
Report this comment
Brizz
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:36pmWWBanskyD???
Report this comment
Brizz
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:44pm**banksy**
Report this comment
Dustyluv
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:31pmI think they need funding from Congress to continue this beautiful crap…
Report this comment
Crimson Aviator
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:19pmI agree, art is relative. However, what I think is wrong is that a person would collect a series of screen grabs from street view and submit it as their own work. They did not take the photos there fore it is not their work and they should not receive awards, honorable mentions, or anything else for it. Sounds like they’re plagiarizing to me.
Report this comment
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:14pmGoogle, not safe for anything anymore.
Report this comment
Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:14pmI avoid Google any chance I get. That goes for Facebook, too. Both are way too invasive, IMO, and too close to this administration.
Report this comment
chickenfried
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:11pmThe only difference between art and smart is S&M. I don’t know why that matters to anyone and if you find it at all interesting that I wrote that, then you probably found the article interesting as well. If someone wants to spend all day moving that stupid oval around street pictures then by all means let them, but don’t call it art. Call it “I don’t have a job because of Obamanomics, so all I do with my time is peruse the internet voyeuristically in search of someone laying out topless in their backyard…while at the same time keeping a wary eye out for random happenstances”.
Report this comment
Nightjar
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:03pmArt, it’s all relative.
Report this comment
Nightjar
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:00pmArt can mean anything or any media whether is living or non living. It’s all about expressing one’s self or what an individual feels or experiences. It’s shared visions.
A painting is art, so is a dance form, a song, a poem, etc., so what’s the difference whether it’s a fantastic photo from some magazine or book or from Google images?
Enjoy it.
It’s all art.
Report this comment
Johnnyp1958
Aug. 15, 2011 at 1:58pmAnd this is an important story because ?
Report this comment
mils
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:03pmbecause…well….uh….hhmmmm…????
Report this comment
ArmyStandard
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:25pmmils
Posted on August 15, 2011 at 2:03pm
because…well….uh….hhmmmm…????
Hmmmmm… Uh… Yeah, I have nothing.
Report this comment
Glenn is Right
Aug. 15, 2011 at 1:54pmShould “The Blaze” continue to be considered news?
Report this comment
Apple Bite
Aug. 15, 2011 at 2:16pmYes. At the very least, a source of information outlet. Until MSM get their heads out of their cracksides, Yes.
Report this comment
mcmxl22
Aug. 15, 2011 at 3:44pmIf you don’t like it, don’t use it. Same for art. If you don’t like it, don’t look.
Why cant news sights have some fun sometimes?
Report this comment
PapaMcCain
Aug. 15, 2011 at 8:06pmI thought that it was going to be just that, an outlet for news that the mainstream ignore. So far all I’ve seen are articles designed with the sole purpose of fomenting anger and divisiveness. Take the headline for the current next story, “More teen violence: shooting at K.C. Plaza injures 3 while mayor ducks for cover”. Don’t have to read the article to know that a bulk of the comments will be from the mayor’s opposing party calling him a coward for ducking for cover. I am getting so sick and tired of what America has become. We are headed for either a total breakdown to 3rd world status, armed civil war, or totalitarian government in the name of safety. The time will come shortly when assassination will be the standard means of getting ones point across. And don’t tell me to leave, I fought for this country and political bullies won’t scare me off.
Report this comment