hardcore conceptual digital art

Posted by MTAA | Thu Apr 21st 2005 2:45 p.m.

Hi Rhizome,

Had this idea and posted it to the mtaa blog today, but it sounds
familiar... anyone can direct me to something similar? Thanks.

++++

AIOTD: Art By Computers, For Computers
posted at 14:25 by T.Whid in /news/twhid

Two software programs are created. Program A creates art data which is transmitted to program B. Program B is programed in such a way that it has aesthetic criteria with which it evaluates Program As art data transmissions. The human witness doesnt view the art data, but Program B responds to the art data in a way that is discernible by the human witness.

Oh! I almost forgot. This is hardcore conceptual digital art.
  • curt cloninger | Thu Apr 21st 2005 3:26 p.m.
    Hi Tim,

    Not exactly the same, but Josh Davis of Praystation fame writes generative software that cranks out stuff like this:
    http://www.once-upon-a-forest.com

    Josh mentioned in San Diego last year that he got tired of sitting there hitting refresh and having to personally assess which iterations he liked and which he didn't. So he was working on a separate program, teaching it to harvest the iterations that he would be most likely to choose. So he runs the first software to autogenerate the art, then he runs the second software which simulates his particular tastes to observe the first software, choose which iterations Josh might like, store them in a folder, and discard the rest.

    Then I presume Josh would look through the folder himself at the iterations which made the cut and pick the ones he likes. Or he could write a third program to look through the folder and choose the ones he might like, etc. etc.

    peace,
    curt

    t.whid wrote:

    > Hi Rhizome,
    >
    > Had this idea and posted it to the mtaa blog today, but it sounds
    > familiar... anyone can direct me to something similar? Thanks.
    >
    > ++++
    >
    > AIOTD: Art By Computers, For Computers
    > posted at 14:25 by T.Whid in /news/twhid
    >
    > Two software programs are created. Program A creates �art data� which
    >
    > is transmitted to program B. Program B is programed in such a way that
    >
    > it has aesthetic criteria with which it evaluates Program A�s art data
    >
    > transmissions. The human witness doesn�t view the art data, but
    > Program
    > B responds to the art data in a way that is discernible by the human
    > witness.
    >
    > Oh! I almost forgot. This is hardcore conceptual digital art.
    >
    > ++++
    >
    > read M and me discussing it here:
    >
    > http://www.mteww.com/mtaaRR/news/twhid/
    > aiotd_art_by_computers_for_computers.html
    >
    > ++++
    >
    > re: net art market
    >
    > Bitforms has been trying. Napier tried to sell access to a
    > collaborative space. Not sure how successful he was.
    >
    > Selling straight-up digital art seems to be easier, as Curt mentioned,
    >
    > the McCoys do it within an installation/object context. Also Paul
    > Johnson, wolfgang staehle, Assume Astro Vivid Focus (sells AI files of
    >
    > his wallpaper, up to the collector to fabricate). You could count Paul
    >
    > Pfieffer too. All in all, I think digital media has been making some
    > real inroads into traditional art markets the last few years. Many
    > times this is under the guise of video, photographs or installations,
    >
    > but it's digital art nonetheless.
    >
    > Good luck!
    >
    > ===
    > <twhid>http://www.mteww.com</twhid>
    > ===
    >
    >
  • MTAA | Thu Apr 21st 2005 3:51 p.m.
    On Apr 21, 2005, at 5:26 PM, curt cloninger wrote:

    > Hi Tim,
    >
    > Not exactly the same, but Josh Davis of Praystation fame writes
    > generative software that cranks out stuff like this:
    > http://www.once-upon-a-forest.com
    >
    > Josh mentioned in San Diego last year that he got tired of sitting
    > there hitting refresh and having to personally assess which iterations
    > he liked and which he didn't. So he was working on a separate
    > program, teaching it to harvest the iterations that he would be most
    > likely to choose. So he runs the first software to autogenerate the
    > art, then he runs the second software which simulates his particular
    > tastes to observe the first software, choose which iterations Josh
    > might like, store them in a folder, and discard the rest.
    >
    > Then I presume Josh would look through the folder himself at the
    > iterations which made the cut and pick the ones he likes. Or he could
    > write a third program to look through the folder and choose the ones
    > he might like, etc. etc.

    LOL

    Thanks Curt.

    It is very similar in process, but the subject is different. He wants
    people to focus on the abstract form of his 2d compositions, whereas
    this computer to computer art idea is meant to focus folks on the idea
    of art creation and appreciation as the subject.

    It's interesting that two almost opposite motivations could have a
    similar process.

    Take care,

    >
    > peace,
    > curt
    >
    >
    > t.whid wrote:
    >
    >> Hi Rhizome,
    >>
    >> Had this idea and posted it to the mtaa blog today, but it sounds
    >> familiar... anyone can direct me to something similar? Thanks.
    >>
    >> ++++
    >>
    >> AIOTD: Art By Computers, For Computers
    >> posted at 14:25 by T.Whid in /news/twhid
    >>
    >> Two software programs are created. Program A creates �art data�
    >> which
    >>
    >> is transmitted to program B. Program B is programed in such a way that
    >>
    >> it has aesthetic criteria with which it evaluates Program A�s art
    >> data
    >>
    >> transmissions. The human witness doesn�t view the art data, but
    >> Program
    >> B responds to the art data in a way that is discernible by the human
    >> witness.
    >>
    >> Oh! I almost forgot. This is hardcore conceptual digital art.
    >>
    >> ++++
    >>
    >> read M and me discussing it here:
    >>
    >> http://www.mteww.com/mtaaRR/news/twhid/
    >> aiotd_art_by_computers_for_computers.html

    ===
    <twhid>http://www.mteww.com</twhid>
    ===
  • komninos zervos | Thu Apr 21st 2005 4:15 p.m.
    <FONT face="Default Sans Serif, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2><DIV><A href="http://www.once-upon-a-forest.com" target=_blank><FONT face="Lucida Console" color=#0000ff>http://www.once-upon-a-forest.com</FONT></A></DIV><DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><DIV>i liked that very much, but i feel if he/she had made it open fullscreen it would have been a better immersive experience, i was being bothered by the un-subtlty of the browser structure. i suppose i could have equally been distracted by the border of my computer monitor, but it is a suitably bland backdrop and one i have learnt to ignore.</DIV><DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><DIV>ps :joking: perhaps he could write a fourth program that reads it/views it/experiences it, for me, and tells me if i liked it.</DIV><DIV>komninos<BR></DIV><DIV>komninos&nbsp;zervos<br>lecturer,&nbsp;convenor&nbsp;of&nbsp;CyberStudies&nbsp;major<br>School&nbsp;of&nbsp;Arts&nbsp;<br>Griffith&nbsp;University<br>Room&nbsp;3.25&nbsp;Multimedia&nbsp;Building&nbsp;G23<br>Gold&nbsp;Coast&nbsp;Campus&nbsp;<br>Parkwood<br>PMB&nbsp;50&nbsp;Gold&nbsp;Coast&nbsp;Mail&nbsp;Centre&nbsp;<br>Queensland&nbsp;9726<br>Australia<br>Phone&nbsp;07&nbsp;5552&nbsp;8872&nbsp;Fax&nbsp;07&nbsp;5552&nbsp;8141<br>http://www.gu.edu.au/ppages/k_zervos<br>http://users.bigpond.net.au/mangolegs<br>http://spokenword.blog-city.com<BR><DIV><BR></DIV></DIV></FONT>
  • Pall Thayer | Thu Apr 21st 2005 4:20 p.m.
    I did a piece a few years back that did something similar to what you're
    proposing. Except, the generation and evaluation happened within the
    same program. It was called "Choirpiece for four computers". You can
    read about it and see pictures of it at http://www.this.is/pallit

    It was a musical piece that generated random midi note values that were
    then evaluated to see if they fit into the scale being used. The
    evaluation process also affected the duration of each note.

    Pall

    t.whid wrote:
    >
    > On Apr 21, 2005, at 5:26 PM, curt cloninger wrote:
    >
    >> Hi Tim,
    >>
    >> Not exactly the same, but Josh Davis of Praystation fame writes
    >> generative software that cranks out stuff like this:
    >> http://www.once-upon-a-forest.com
    >>
    >> Josh mentioned in San Diego last year that he got tired of sitting
    >> there hitting refresh and having to personally assess which iterations
    >> he liked and which he didn't. So he was working on a separate
    >> program, teaching it to harvest the iterations that he would be most
    >> likely to choose. So he runs the first software to autogenerate the
    >> art, then he runs the second software which simulates his particular
    >> tastes to observe the first software, choose which iterations Josh
    >> might like, store them in a folder, and discard the rest.
    >>
    >> Then I presume Josh would look through the folder himself at the
    >> iterations which made the cut and pick the ones he likes. Or he could
    >> write a third program to look through the folder and choose the ones
    >> he might like, etc. etc.
    >
    >
    > LOL
    >
    > Thanks Curt.
    >
    > It is very similar in process, but the subject is different. He wants
    > people to focus on the abstract form of his 2d compositions, whereas
    > this computer to computer art idea is meant to focus folks on the idea
    > of art creation and appreciation as the subject.
    >
    > It's interesting that two almost opposite motivations could have a
    > similar process.
    >
    > Take care,
    >
    >>
    >> peace,
    >> curt
    >>
    >>
    >> t.whid wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hi Rhizome,
    >>>
    >>> Had this idea and posted it to the mtaa blog today, but it sounds
    >>> familiar... anyone can direct me to something similar? Thanks.
    >>>
    >>> ++++
    >>>
    >>> AIOTD: Art By Computers, For Computers
    >>> posted at 14:25 by T.Whid in /news/twhid
    >>>
    >>> Two software programs are created. Program A creates �art data�
    >>> which
    >>>
    >>> is transmitted to program B. Program B is programed in such a way that
    >>>
    >>> it has aesthetic criteria with which it evaluates Program A�s art data
    >>>
    >>> transmissions. The human witness doesn�t view the art data, but
    >>> Program
    >>> B responds to the art data in a way that is discernible by the human
    >>> witness.
    >>>
    >>> Oh! I almost forgot. This is hardcore conceptual digital art.
    >>>
    >>> ++++
    >>>
    >>> read M and me discussing it here:
    >>>
    >>> http://www.mteww.com/mtaaRR/news/twhid/
    >>> aiotd_art_by_computers_for_computers.html
    >
    >
    > ===
    > <twhid>http://www.mteww.com</twhid>
    > ===
    >
    >
    >
    > +
    > -> post: list@rhizome.org
    > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
    > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
    > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
    > -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
    > +
    > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
    > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
    >

    --
    _______________________________
    Pall Thayer
    artist/teacher
    http://www.this.is/pallit
    http://pallit.lhi.is/panse

    Lorna
    http://www.this.is/lorna
    _______________________________
  • ryan griffis | Thu Apr 21st 2005 4:42 p.m.
    i know it's totally different, but this idea made me think of robert
    morris's "Box with the sounds of its own making" (1961) in some weird
    way...
    speaking of which - do they replace batteries in that thing?
    i thought this morris quote was pretty funny:
  • Pall Thayer | Thu Apr 21st 2005 4:46 p.m.
    Komninos Zervos wrote:
    > ps :joking: perhaps he could write a fourth program that reads it/views
    > it/experiences it, for me, and tells me if i liked it.
    > komninos

    Actually, that would be really cool! Make software that crawls the web,
    looking for art reviews by pre-picked critics. Evaluate their critiques.
    Make software that generates art-work and then emails the critics,
    telling them, "in their own words" what they think of the work. That
    would be awsome!
    --
    _______________________________
    Pall Thayer
    artist/teacher
    http://www.this.is/pallit
    http://pallit.lhi.is/panse

    Lorna
    http://www.this.is/lorna
    _______________________________
  • Christina McPhee | Thu Apr 21st 2005 5:22 p.m.
    -----Forwarded Message-----
    From: christina mcphee <christina112@earthlink.net>
    Sent: Apr 21, 2005 4:18 PM
    To: "t.whid" <twhid@twhid.com>
    Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: hardcore conceptual digital art

    i think (i am not totally sure) that this is kinda what AP (Artificial Paradises) is up to.
    http://1010.co.uk/

    c

    -----Original Message-----
    From: "t.whid" <twhid@twhid.com>
    Sent: Apr 21, 2005 1:45 PM
    To: rhizome <list@rhizome.org>
    Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: hardcore conceptual digital art

    Hi Rhizome,

    Had this idea and posted it to the mtaa blog today, but it sounds
    familiar... anyone can direct me to something similar? Thanks.

    ++++

    AIOTD: Art By Computers, For Computers
    posted at 14:25 by T.Whid in /news/twhid

    Two software programs are created. Program A creates ?art data? which
    is transmitted to program B. Program B is programed in such a way that
    it has aesthetic criteria with which it evaluates Program A?s art data
    transmissions. The human witness doesn?t view the art data, but Program
    B responds to the art data in a way that is discernible by the human
    witness.

    Oh! I almost forgot. This is hardcore conceptual digital art.

    ++++

    read M and me discussing it here:

    http://www.mteww.com/mtaaRR/news/twhid/
    aiotd_art_by_computers_for_computers.html

    ++++

    re: net art market

    Bitforms has been trying. Napier tried to sell access to a
    collaborative space. Not sure how successful he was.

    Selling straight-up digital art seems to be easier, as Curt mentioned,
    the McCoys do it within an installation/object context. Also Paul
    Johnson, wolfgang staehle, Assume Astro Vivid Focus (sells AI files of
    his wallpaper, up to the collector to fabricate). You could count Paul
    Pfieffer too. All in all, I think digital media has been making some
    real inroads into traditional art markets the last few years. Many
    times this is under the guise of video, photographs or installations,
    but it's digital art nonetheless.

    Good luck!

    ===
    <twhid>http://www.mteww.com</twhid>
    ===

    +
    -> post: list@rhizome.org
    -> questions: info@rhizome.org
    -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
    -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
    -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
    +
    Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
    Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
  • komninos zervos | Thu Apr 21st 2005 5:35 p.m.
    make it happen!
    komninos

    Pall Thayer <palli@pallit.lhi.is>
    Sent by: owner-list@rhizome.org
    22/04/2005 08:45
    Please respond to Pall Thayer

    To: Komninos Zervos <k.zervos@griffith.edu.au>
    cc: "t.whid" <twhid@twhid.com>, rhizome <list@rhizome.org>
    Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: hardcore conceptual digital art

    Komninos Zervos wrote:
    > ps :joking: perhaps he could write a fourth program that reads it/views
    > it/experiences it, for me, and tells me if i liked it.
    > komninos

    Actually, that would be really cool! Make software that crawls the web,
    looking for art reviews by pre-picked critics. Evaluate their critiques.
    Make software that generates art-work and then emails the critics,
    telling them, "in their own words" what they think of the work. That
    would be awsome!
    --
    _______________________________
    Pall Thayer
    artist/teacher
    http://www.this.is/pallit
    http://pallit.lhi.is/panse

    Lorna
    http://www.this.is/lorna
    _______________________________
  • MTAA | Thu Apr 21st 2005 5:35 p.m.
    thanks for everyone's responses :-)
  • Christina McPhee | Thu Apr 21st 2005 11:21 p.m.
    re : hardcore -- the perfect code for code system, for your musings :

    a few more refs re AP:

    http://www.clui.org/clui\_4\_1/lotl/v27/m.html

    "Another unrelated self contained system was installed at a remote location northwest of the DRS by Martin Howse and Jonathan Kemp, researchers from England. This system involves a network of solar powered sensor/transmitter pods that communicate with one another. Variations in external influences on each pod, including electromagnetic, sonic, physical vibrations, and temperature change, effect a signal which is transmitted at a frequency shared by each pod. This signal in turn effects the state of each pod, which responds with a variation, which in turn effects the signal, and so on. This compounded dynamic language system unites the individual units into a 'community
  • Rob Myers | Fri Apr 22nd 2005 12:48 a.m.
    I implemented a toy generate/evaluate system ("ae") as part of rob-art:

    http://rob-art.sourceforge.net/rob-art/ae.html

    It's all in one process rather than two programs.

    Here's an example of its output:

    Aesthetic:
    Criterion: emotional Property: medium chroma Weight: -0.990090351373
    Criterion: environmental Property: triangle Weight: -0.92098300276
    Criterion: environmental Property: smooth Weight: 0.464487999345
    Criterion: perceptual Property: pale Weight: -0.42954300998
    Criterion: cultural Property: very large Weight: 0.52576391209
    Criterion: political Property: oval Weight: -0.824683353734
    Criterion: spiritual Property: star Weight: 0.332525761786
    Criterion: emotional Property: scribbled Weight: 0.389517234695
    Criterion: historical Property: scribbled Weight: -0.394053851375
    Criterion: emotional Property: purple Weight: 0.657695420143
    Image:
    Figure: Property: smooth Weight: 0.77514274481 Property: medium sized
    Weight: 0.804924205912 Property: very small Weight: 0.134779215508
    Property: small Weight: 0.998254223669 Property: square Weight:
    0.877359494311 Property: triangle Weight: 0.770580597379
    Figure: Property: rough Weight: 0.294859738413 Property: smooth
    Weight: 0.386463663764
    Figure: Property: medium sized Weight: 0.257203904622 Property: very
    large Weight: 0.823282759862 Property: grainy Weight: 0.500935480986
    Figure: Property: very large Weight: 0.238379999714 Property: medium
    chroma Weight: 0.226417026224 Property: large Weight: 0.28003655038
    Property: smooth Weight: 0.640733831832 Property: pale Weight:
    0.0949973486808 Property: scribbled Weight: 0.306013047604 Property:
    red Weight: 0.3334115855
    Figure: Property: spiral Weight: 0.225828900109 Property: dark Weight:
    0.67675402324 Property: oval Weight: 0.00497709246932 Property: small
    Weight: 0.66997465332
    Figure: Property: circle Weight: 0.861863092243
    Figure: Property: very small Weight: 0.511500266605 Property: star
    Weight: 0.633589779492 Property: scribbled Weight: 0.857063666956
    Figure: Property: rich Weight: 0.764279205804 Property: smooth Weight:
    0.933009749928 Property: line Weight: 0.440738562043 Property: star
    Weight: 0.319753143385 Property: very small Weight: 0.703559370589
    Property: medium sized Weight: 0.110725644256 Property: bright Weight:
    0.684350809239 Property: rough Weight: 0.938225240413
    Evaluation: environmental - smooth -> 0.360044502743
    Evaluation: environmental - triangle -> -0.709691632443
    Evaluation: environmental - smooth -> 0.179507734001
    Evaluation: cultural - very large -> 0.432852364581
    Evaluation: cultural - very large -> 0.125331601214
    Evaluation: emotional - medium chroma -> -0.224173313051
    Evaluation: environmental - smooth -> 0.29761317566
    Evaluation: perceptual - pale -> -0.0408054470924
    Evaluation: emotional - scribbled -> 0.119197356083
    Evaluation: historical - scribbled -> -0.120585619979
    Evaluation: political - oval -> -0.00410452530944
    Evaluation: spiritual - star -> 0.210684924085
    Evaluation: emotional - scribbled -> 0.33384106951
    Evaluation: historical - scribbled -> -0.337729238838
    Evaluation: environmental - smooth -> 0.433371832113
    Evaluation: spiritual - star -> 0.106326157588
    Score: 1.16168094087

    This kind of generate/evaluate (like AI's "generate and test")
    aesthetic system was explored in Algorithmic Aesthetics (1978),
    available online at:

    http://www.algorithmicaesthetics.org/

    - Rob.
Your Reply