Why The Invisible Boxes?

While Liu Bolin uses his body as a canvas (to perfectly blend in with the surroundings), Cayeteno Ferrer paints delivery boxes to make them disappear in front of our very own eyes! I’m pretty sure it must have taken ages for Ferrer to finish these boxes, yet I’m puzzled what is the meaning behind his work? Ok, I realize some installments are very hard to understand, yet I don’t see any purpose nor story in these…





71 Replies to “Why The Invisible Boxes?”

    1. what do you think Z2d4th, that he uses a magical invisible paint, of course its only correctly viewable from one angle. It isnt actually see through and the edges and 3d object must have edges and angles that match correctly which can only be seen from one angle.

    2. It’s only invisible in one angle, if it were invisible in any angle, then the box is made from crystal or… the magic of photoshop uuuuuhhh

    3. As it is painted onto the boxes, I suppose it is in just one correct viewing angle.
      Nevertheless, I love this one!

    4. Jeez! You didnt have to be so mean about It glp. But yeah Its only viewable from one angle. Cool illusion, I love this site!

  1. I think they are studies.. Not to mention how neat would it be to have a box that has a invisability cloak on it like that.. I can think of ten things I can do with a phantom space like that..

  2. @Vurdlak:

    Come on dear friend, there doesn’t have to be a certain purpose for this. This is simply called ART! It’s purpose is for us to see, enjoy and admire and, in my humble opinion, these boxes surely manage all three! Don’t you agree, Vurdlak? :)

    @Z2d4th:

    I am almost completely sure that the illusion works only from the right angle, my friend!

  3. THIS ILLUSION SHOULD BE CALLED AS FOLLOWS “TRANSPARCY BOXES” OR TRANSPARENT BOXES” ITS A CAMAFLAUGE TO BLEND INTO THE SURROUNDINGS ITS NOT EVEN INVISIBLE ITS AN ORDINARY BOX THAT IS CAMAFLAUGED TO BLEND INTO THE SURROUNDINGS NO ILLSUION JUST SOME GOOD OLD PAINT AND A PLAIN BROWN BOX! HAHAHA

  4. Probably because it’s fun! I do it, too, but usually just with pieces of paper and as a painting excercise in colors and textures. =]

  5. i’d give him points for sheer awesomeness. imagine walking by one of those boxes and then doing a doubletake. I’d gather satisfaction from getting that reaction from somebody.

  6. i think its only one, i had the same question. i like how he did the boxes DARKER than the things around them, and kept the stamps and writing. i think it looks sooooo cool :D

    and also who CARES if there’s no story, they just look awesome.

  7. Very impressive! I’m sure these only work from the angle of the photograph. As to the why – probably the only and best answer is “Because he can” – but isn’t that true of all art? I like it.

  8. It seems interesting to me to juxtapose the ubiquity of everyday objects (even trash) and to make them be able to “disappear” within their native environment.

    Isn’t that the same idea as with Liu Bolin’s work?

  9. I would imagine they’d only be “invisible” from exactly one precise perspective. Move slightly, and it would destroy the illusion.

  10. I guess it might be some kind of protest against littering? Meaning something along the lines of “the cardboard box is made of a fifth of a tree, don’t waste it” or “recycle the box, don’t let it lying around”.

  11. No controversy here. The artist is merely making a “fool the eye” painting for the same reason Julian Beever makes his astounding sidewalk chalk creations. It’s a smile. And like Beever’s it has to be viewed from a precise viewing spot or it is distorted and loses all of its “optical illusion” effect. I admire the talent it takes to do this well — mixing the colors alone to match the background that closely is quite a feat. Add to that the “photorealism” paint technique, and it shows a clever idea done very well. Beyond that, there is no marketability for such creations. Does there need to be? Artists must create — it is in their DNA. Some get paid. Most do not, even if they’re very good at what they do.

  12. I hope the artist dosn’t have a delivery route in my area! I have enough trouble as it is noticing boxes on my porch because I enter my house through the garage.

  13. Okay anyone else wondering why/how he any of the writing or other labels on the box was allowed to show through the paint so well? and if you look at the miller lite bottle… it looks more like a picture rather than a painting? were these boxes photo shopped or paper wrapped rather than painted?

    1. very nice.
      not so hard to make.
      take a photo and make a transformation in some more advanced image processing program. then print it on a transparent paper and glue on the box.

  14. i saw cinees symboles so it coud mean that lots of other contries are working in australia anf the invisable side is no one notices

  15. I´m guessing no!
    If you would look at the box on the last picture from the side you would clearly see that it is not invisible.

  16. plexi glass boxes .. the third pic is blue color transparent. the first pic the bottle is keeping the painted box straight and its under it .. you can see the empty space down..

  17. QUOTE – Cayetano Ferrer uses existing forms in order to engage in a dialog about the constant flux of the built, contemporary environment. Using inkjet prints on existing objects/architecture that reveal what these objects ultimately obscure, Ferrer exposes the relationship between the built and the rebuilt, surface and hidden, as well the delicate matter of history and memory as the present paves over the recent past in a bid to enrich economies. Ferrer’s work is a gentle push/pull between permanence and obsolescence, inviting consideration of evolution, mutation and modification in our relationship to our immediate environment. – ThreeWalls Staff

  18. this can easily be done with Photoshop. you tale a pi with the box and one without, you erase the box with some opacity and it looks transparent.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *