Page 4 of 4 [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Meadow
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Dec 2009
Age: 66
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,067

15 Dec 2009, 2:06 am

RampionRampage wrote:
Meadow wrote:
RampionRampage wrote:
Meadow wrote:
I think it would be interesting to hear whatever someone thought or interpretation was about my painting or artpiece. I think it would only facilitate more inspiration and creativity.


I love when interpretation makes my work sound *way* cooler than it is. :-D


Precisely :D


My former poetry teacher dissected 'RampionRampage' and by the time she was done I literally said, "This is one of those things where I sound way more awesome than I am."
She wasn't clear on what "Rampion" was -- she knew ramps are scallions. By the time she was done fussing about with research, she was referencing Falstaff (shakespeare) and the like. :wink:


Feedback or attention can be overwhelming, including the positive kind (at least for me anyway), but that sounds fun. :)



Spazzergasm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,415
Location: Maine

15 Dec 2009, 10:26 am

idiocratik wrote:
I went to college for art (for a while). I always hated having to present my work, because I don't have some grand intent for any of it. I'll have an idea and try to put it together. No emotional connections, no elaborate reasons, and yet that's what art professors want to hear.

I can't imagine putting up my work in a gallery somewhere and overhearing some pompous art critic trying to grasp for something that isn't even there.


same. i never have any explanations. it's a picture because it's not supposed to be composed of words. there!



b9
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2008
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,003
Location: australia

15 Dec 2009, 10:36 am

Janissy wrote:
b9 wrote:
[
i like to create art with "numbers" derived from formulae.
the following pictures are ideas formed purely from logic.
.


Those are beautiful pictures. I bet if you put them on flickr or cafepress you would get a lot of interest. Did you like using kaleidoscopes and spirographs when you were a kid?


yes i did for a small while. kaleidoscopes became boring to me because they always repeated their patterns on the same plane of expression after one revolution of the ...."barrel" i guess it may be called (the thing you twist).
after three revolutions, i put the devices down as i had seen enough. then when i dismantled one and saw the source pattern, and the manner of segmental reflection, i lost interest completely.

maybe i am a philistine but there one goes.

i liked spirographs on the night of the christmas that i got one. after a while i saw that there was a very limited number of expressions achievable with a spirograph.
the cogs had various numbers of teeth, and before long, i could visualize what pattern that marrying the cogs (inner to outer cogs , and outer to inner cogs) would trace, so i did not bother to do it in physicality for long.

they looked like loop laced doilies, and so once i had made about 3, i had seen them all.

i more liked to look at things like feathers through microscopes, and i liked to see that the same overall pattern was re-expressed in ever diminishing planar extensions (endlessly (almost)).
i believed the length of the "coastline" of a small feather would be many hundreds of kilometers, if it could be stretched out to a straight line.

an arbitrary example on a larger scale may be that the coastline of Norway (capital "n" to not upset norwegian members) is 25,148 km, and i am fascinated about progressive invaginations that themselves are invaginated on a smaller scale, and the process of invagination can be eternally subdynamic if one is not in the physical world of substance.

there are so many things in nature that can be seen to follow similar "subordinations" of design.

i think that i do not want to share with artists, my patterns. they will correctly say that my patterns convey no emotion whatsoever, and they were not the product of my dexterous hand. all they are are inevitable expressions of my formulae that create them.

but for me the fun is in the formula, and not it's physical representation, however i am delighted to see that some formulae create pleasing and intrictate patterns. i look carefully at the pictorial result of each formula, but i never really look at the pictures more than once.

i am not saying that i write a formula without an image in mind. i do try to achieve a pre-imagined image in my mind, but i have more fun crafting the code to achieve the image, than looking at the finished result.

i am sorry i am not very connected with how to reply to people at the moment, and i have written too much, and i am "dying" to get to the end of this sentence.



b9
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2008
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,003
Location: australia

15 Dec 2009, 10:59 am

BoringAaron wrote:
B9, how does the mathematical formula for a fractal picture work? I know the wider areas represent low numbers and the tiny parts are higher numbers, but I never saw the actual math involved.


i can not possibly answer this comprehensively in this post.

there is so much to say.

i suggest for you to google "fractal mathematics" and "fractal formulas" (people rarely use the word "formulae")

never the less i can pm you (i do not like to pm people at all) with the code i wrote to achieve any of those pictures i posted.

the code is very long, and unless you can intuitively decipher code, it is not of much value to do so. you would have to "decipher" it because i wrote my own interpreter to handle the coding of my programs that execute my formulae.

but if you wish, i can post code to you.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

15 Dec 2009, 11:00 am

b9 wrote:
i think that i do not want to share with artists, my patterns. they will correctly say that my patterns convey no emotion whatsoever, and they were not the product of my dexterous hand. all they are are inevitable expressions of my formulae that create them.

but for me the fun is in the formula, and not it's physical representation, however i am delighted to see that some formulae create pleasing and intrictate patterns. i look carefully at the pictorial result of each formula, but i never really look at the pictures more than once.

i am not saying that i write a formula without an image in mind. i do try to achieve a pre-imagined image in my mind, but i have more fun crafting the code to achieve the image, than looking at the finished result.

i am sorry i am not very connected with how to reply to people at the moment, and i have written too much, and i am "dying" to get to the end of this sentence.

I don't agree that your fractals convey no emotion. There's emotion in the choice of colors. Also, it's not true that all artists have a completely original picture in their mind that they create. Art can also be a process of discovery where the person creating the art doesn't necessarily have complete conscious control over the end result. Even if the patterns come from a formula this doesn't mean they aren't legitimate creations.

I also have some fractal artwork which I created several years ago if anyone is interested.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/13669377@N02/sets/72157603750309894/detail/



SpongeBobRocksMao
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,774
Location: SpongeBob's Pineapple (England really!)

15 Dec 2009, 5:32 pm

I've been good at art for ages. :) It all started with drawings of cartoon characters, to comic strips, to paintings. Now I do a lot of art, and I think it's fun. :) In fact, I study Art at school for my GCSEs. :)


_________________
Who lives in a pineapple under the sea?
SpongeBobRocksMao!
Absorbent and yellow and porous is he!
SpongeBobRocksMao!