Abstract This paper examines mural painting in the digital and AI age and asks what follows for reproducibility, authenticity, and cultural meaning. The point of departure is Benjamin’s aura, recast through three linked ideas: situated aura, as the co-presence of body, work, and site; file aura, as the value an image acquires through capture, addressability, and circulation; and situational non-commutability, as the limit that blocks substitution of one order by the other. Methodologically, the study relies on a qualitative, theoretical–analytical approach across esthetics, media studies, and the philosophy of technology, and then tests the claims against emblematic cases in mural practice and adjacent domains. The analysis shows that place and scale do more than frame murals; they co-produce experience. Material relief and process traces—time pressure, contact with passersby, heat or dust and the fatigue they induce—enter the surface as indices of a lived interval. Community work binds content to local memory. High-fidelity capture may raise file aura; it does not rebuild those conditions as the same world. Translation changes order, not medium. The study outlines how authenticity persists and adapts under pervasive mediation: mural painting endures as a strategy of irreproducibility because it anchors experience in site, scale, material, community, and performance—vectors that resist translation into code without essential loss. The paper closes with practical implications: design choices that strengthen non-commutability, documentation protocols that treat context as part of the work, and curatorial, technological, and policy frameworks that reinforce situated aura rather than attempt to replace it.
Pereira et al. (Sun,) studied this question.