4 ms·
I 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 pai
by wgx 8y ago
I 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.
- michaelscott 8y agoDoing 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.
- pharrington 8y agoIn my town we call that stuff "video games."
- tern 8y agoI think of most generative art as video games larping as "fine art."
- cpdt 8y agoHave you heard of the demoscene? The modern scene is, to a large degree, art as a computer-based audiovisual experience rendered in real time.