4 ms·

I've experienced what you're talking about as maybe the fundamental challenge in making computer-based art. Computers love to follow rules. Come up with some in

I've experienced what you're talking about as maybe the fundamental challenge in making computer-based art. Computers love to follow rules. Come up with some interesting rules, and they will spit out interesting pictures/music. It's much much harder to figure out how to tell the computer "okay, but break the rule just a little bit, at the appropriate time". Codifying breaking the rules as its own rule is...well, so far it's mostly eluded me.

TuringTest 8y ago
Maybe there's an opportunity to combine computers and hand-made choices. Art using a mixture of several generative tools and manual tweaks by the artist on the final result could achieve that goal of "breaking the rules just a little bit", especially if the generative tools are parametrical and easy to customize, maybe with direct manipulation on the generated canvas.
- egfx 8y ago
  If you're interested in this. Combining generated art with manual tweaks. Look into http://gif.com.ai http://gif.com.ai You're in for a pleasant surprise.
- Jupe 8y ago
  Like this? https://www.flickr.com/photos/abstractusinterruptus/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/abstractusinterruptus/
crucialfelix 8y ago
Definitely check this artist out: https://twitter.com/quasimondo/status/1035626920090718209 https://twitter.com/quasimondo/status/1035626920090718209 "If I let the machine decide which images to keep, I must admit that I am probably not ready yet for its sense of aesthetics and originality and my heart bleeds seeing which ones it discarded."
samfriedman 8y ago
I feel like that's an interesting balance in generative art: I want to make something that is aesthetically pleasing or at least interesting to look at, but I also want to be surprised. If the process is really heavily stochastic, then you'll have to do a lot of manual curation to produce the final work. If it's heavily rules-based, then you might not find anything novel after the first few images.
crucialfelix 8y ago
I don't think it's really about computers. These 20th Century artists were deeply involved with systems, rationality, the rise of machines, futurism, the jarring new perceptions that technology was hurling everybody into. The quaint criticisms people are voicing today about generative art (as if this was new) are the exact same ones everybody was having in the early part of the 20th century. Authorship lol: https://d7hftxdivxxvm.cloudfront.net/?resize_to=width&src=https%3A%2F%2Fartsy-media-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fi-8Le397-h2ZTgLM1iMegw%252FMarcel_Duchamp.jpg&width=1200&quality=80 https://d7hftxdivxxvm.cloudfront.net/?resize_to=width&src=ht...
xyproto 8y ago
Check out "glitch art" and also this: https://giphy.com/explore/tverd https://giphy.com/explore/tverd It is debatable if any rules are really broken, but using glitches is at least an attempt.
- dsnuh 8y ago
  There's also a pretty active subreddit at https://www.reddit.com/r/glitch_art https://www.reddit.com/r/glitch_art if you like these sorts of images. I think most of the time you end up with something that's cool, but mostly just "wallpaper". Occasionally you'll get something really cool and evocative that can stand on its own.

TuringTest 8y ago

Maybe there's an opportunity to combine computers and hand-made choices. Art using a mixture of several generative tools and manual tweaks by the artist on the final result could achieve that goal of "breaking the rules just a little bit", especially if the generative tools are parametrical and easy to customize, maybe with direct manipulation on the generated canvas.

egfx 8y ago
If you're interested in this. Combining generated art with manual tweaks. Look into http://gif.com.ai http://gif.com.ai You're in for a pleasant surprise.
Jupe 8y ago
Like this? https://www.flickr.com/photos/abstractusinterruptus/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/abstractusinterruptus/

crucialfelix 8y ago

Definitely check this artist out: https://twitter.com/quasimondo/status/1035626920090718209 https://twitter.com/quasimondo/status/1035626920090718209 "If I let the machine decide which images to keep, I must admit that I am probably not ready yet for its sense of aesthetics and originality and my heart bleeds seeing which ones it discarded."

samfriedman 8y ago

I feel like that's an interesting balance in generative art: I want to make something that is aesthetically pleasing or at least interesting to look at, but I also want to be surprised. If the process is really heavily stochastic, then you'll have to do a lot of manual curation to produce the final work. If it's heavily rules-based, then you might not find anything novel after the first few images.

crucialfelix 8y ago

I don't think it's really about computers. These 20th Century artists were deeply involved with systems, rationality, the rise of machines, futurism, the jarring new perceptions that technology was hurling everybody into. The quaint criticisms people are voicing today about generative art (as if this was new) are the exact same ones everybody was having in the early part of the 20th century. Authorship lol: https://d7hftxdivxxvm.cloudfront.net/?resize_to=width&src=https%3A%2F%2Fartsy-media-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fi-8Le397-h2ZTgLM1iMegw%252FMarcel_Duchamp.jpg&width=1200&quality=80 https://d7hftxdivxxvm.cloudfront.net/?resize_to=width&src=ht...

xyproto 8y ago

Check out "glitch art" and also this: https://giphy.com/explore/tverd https://giphy.com/explore/tverd It is debatable if any rules are really broken, but using glitches is at least an attempt.

dsnuh 8y ago
There's also a pretty active subreddit at https://www.reddit.com/r/glitch_art https://www.reddit.com/r/glitch_art if you like these sorts of images. I think most of the time you end up with something that's cool, but mostly just "wallpaper". Occasionally you'll get something really cool and evocative that can stand on its own.