At first I thought randomness only mattered in games, from simulating rolling a dice to how Minecraft generates new worlds with caves, mountains, and villages that always look different. I assumed randomness was just for variety in play and had little place in art or design. Watching Casey Reas’ talk completely changed that assumption. I was amazed by the art you can generate using randomness. What struck me most was how a set of simple rules, combined with small unpredictable changes, could create results that felt alive and unique. His examples showed me that randomness is not just a tool for unpredictability but also for discovery, allowing new patterns and visuals to emerge that no one could have planned in advance.
Before, I believed coding should always be exact, like solving a math problem where the answer must be correct. Reas showed me that art can be structured yet open-ended, where randomness works as a collaborator rather than an obstacle. Seeing grids of dots or lines shift in slightly unexpected ways made me realize that unpredictability is what gives the piece depth and character. I now think the best balance is to set clear boundaries for the work, such as the palette, the number of elements, or the layout, but then leave space for randomness to control movement, position, or interaction. That way the work keeps its structure but also grows in ways no one could have fully imagined. For me, the optimum balance is when structure provides a stable foundation for the art to not look completely random like scribbles, while randomness adds the spark that makes each result surprising and engaging.