Interesting that he wants to keep it all digital and prefers it not made tangible.
Seems like it would be much harder to make any sort of living from your work by limiting the format to just digital.
Really cool nonetheless.
Generative Art Finds Its Prodigy
11–20 of 112 posts
Re: Generative Art Finds Its Prodigy
#12I know art is whatever people describe as art but I can't really get behind this specific kind of creation. To me this creates as much emotion as a gravatar and reminds me of my dabbling in fractal art. Just hit random until something nice comes out.
It's cheating because it was done on a computer! It's a fairly common attitude that creating with a computer is somehow inferior, from Tron missing out on a special effects Oscar because computer graphics was 'cheating', to pretty much every designer being told at some point 'it can't be that hard, it's all done on a computer right?' Expected better from HN though.
Well at risk of waking a tiger, I think his view was one of intentionality.
Whereas he did not say it was because it was made with a computer, that sort of feels like putting words in his post.
I think cool generative art is the space stuff like no man's sky, and spore. I know it's maybe considered low brow but it was interesting to me.
Re: Generative Art Finds Its Prodigy
#13Discovered him on Twitter last year and was immediately blown away to see how his compositions resembled futurist and constructivist works to an uncanny extant. (Malevich, Kandinsky et al.) There is something about his choice of color palette that makes him really stand apart.
Re: Generative Art Finds Its Prodigy
#14I don't think we're being radical enough. I think this kind of art is fantastic, but it copies human-designed art. Let's do things that aren't possible with paint or crayons - let's do multi-dimensional time-shifting video art.
I guess we need to do stuff that looks like 'normal' art first, to get people used to it.
Re: Generative Art Finds Its Prodigy
#15Another interesting artist in this genre: https://twitter.com/inconvergent https://img.inconvergent.net/
Shameless plug: Inspired by "inconvergent" I have built a plotter and started working on my own generative art realised with pen and paper:
https://www.instagram.com/framedbyher/
Re: Generative Art Finds Its Prodigy
#16Apparently, he published all of his code (I didn't see any mention of where). Regarding the color -- he mentions being careful with the palette, but I wonder how he gets it to turn out correctly (assuming it's RNG). It seems like you would have to keep generating new instances until you find one that looks pleasing. One algorithm that comes to mind: 1. Choose a color palette and initial resolution. 2. Implement gener…
I don't think this algorithm is very common. In particular, the colour palette can usually be chosen last, and a lot of generative art (at least all that shown in the article) will not need multiple resolution passes. I think a more common discovery/refinement process is to go from more random to less random, or random in particular kinds of ways. For example, you can specify the values or distributions (or at least ranges of values) for particular parameters based on things you think will look good or which should end up similar in ways you like to things you've found already.
Generative art is a search in an extremely high dimensional space. The more you go into it aiming for something in particular, the more nailed down it is and the closer to traditional art (and the harder to pull off well IMHO, think how much difference slightly changing the position of one of the elements in these images would make, versus slightly changing the position of someone's eye). If you go looking for "new and interesting" or "looks good" without really aiming for anything in particular, it can be a lot easier to find good things.
I've seen a couple of really interesting talks recently about the surprising successfulness of objective-less search by Ken Stanley:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXQPL9GooyI (40 min.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZBViI8ZaU0 (90 min.)
He started off looking at human-directed machine-evolved generative art, and ended up with a far more general discovery.
Re: Generative Art Finds Its Prodigy
#17I don't think we're being radical enough. I think this kind of art is fantastic, but it copies human-designed art. Let's do things that aren't possible with paint or crayons - let's do multi-dimensional time-shifting video art. I guess we need to do stuff that looks like 'normal' art first, to get people used to it.
Doing something that is only possible with machines in art is indeed what I think this "genre"/period needs in order to be seen as something truly unique and new.
As you point out this is merely creating the same kind of art with a new tool. The use of Processing to create familiar works is the same as picking up a piece of charcoal for the first time in human history and using only one of its worn-down edges to create hand print images on a rock wall. It's interesting and fresh, but it's not taking advantage of the medium.
Re: Generative Art Finds Its Prodigy
#18Joshua Davis [0] has been doing generative art (mostly Flash/actionscript) since late 90’s. Took a class of his once and it was amazing (as is his art).
If OP subject is prodigy, Davis is the grandfather.
Re: Generative Art Finds Its Prodigy
#19I know art is whatever people describe as art but I can't really get behind this specific kind of creation. To me this creates as much emotion as a gravatar and reminds me of my dabbling in fractal art. Just hit random until something nice comes out.
"Just hit random until something nice comes out."
Reformulate as 'have a system for building new bodies, add a little bit of randomness, and have an environment that selects for survival' and you have life.
Re: Generative Art Finds Its Prodigy
#20So if a modern artist paints random shit they are crap but if a computer does it, it's cool because durr computers are kool long live hackerz