Category: Spring 2024 – Aaron (Section 001)

For this assignment, I am not sure I drew my inspiration from the right place; I ended up being inspired by the Club Penguin dance floor. For some reason, while playing around with different-sized squares in p5js, that was all I remembered when I aligned them.

For reference:

The sketch:

While it isn’t the same proportions as the Club Penguin dance floor, It was because I wanted it to be more visually appealing with the size. After all, this is supposed to be an art piece…

let numTiles = 10; // Number of tiles across and down
let tileWidth;
let tileHeight;
let colors = [];

function setup() {
  createCanvas(600, 600);
  tileWidth = width / numTiles;
  tileHeight = height / numTiles;

  // Initialize colors array with bright colors
  for (let y = 0; y < numTiles; y++) {
    colors[y] = []; // Create a nested array for each row
    for (let x = 0; x < numTiles; x++) {
      colors[y][x] = color(random(255), random(255), random(255), 255);
    }
  }

  frameRate(10);
}

function draw() {
  for (let y = 0; y < numTiles; y++) {
    for (let x = 0; x < numTiles; x++) {
      // Randomly change the color of each tile to mimic the dance floor lighting effect
      if (random() < 0.1) { // 10% chance to change color each frame
        colors[y][x] = color(random(255), random(255), random(255), 255);
      }
      
      fill(colors[y][x]);
      rect(x * tileWidth, y * tileHeight, tileWidth, tileHeight);
    }
  }
}

I would say the effect function confused me so often when it came to understanding it because I didn’t want the colors to change so frequently. Still, also the issue that came up was the sketches I had taken down in class did not fully explain how things worked when it came to the randomness part and how quickly it would change, so hopefully, in the upcoming classes, I will get better at note taking so that when it comes to coding, I get to understand it better when I go back and take a look at it.

The artwork is supposed to represent a grid filled with random circles, squares, and triangles, each with a unique color. The number of shapes in each grid tile is also randomly determined, adding an element of unpredictability to the artwork. The black background and semi-transparent colors contribute to a visually dynamic and intriguing composition. The outer loop iterates through the x-axis, and the inner loop through the y-axis, creating a grid of tiles. The use of a while loop inside the nested loops allows for the random generation of multiple shapes within each tile. The switch statement is employed to choose between drawing circles, squares, or triangles based on a randomly generated shape type.
The element of interaction is when the user clicks on it, it alters the composition randomly every time with new colors and grids. This intricate dance creates a mesmerizing grid of shapes, each telling its own colorful story. And if you click on it rapidly, you can see some shapes forming on their own and the whole artwork feels like it’s moving.
I think the artwork effectively utilizes loops to create a visually engaging and dynamic composition. The randomization of shape count and type introduces an element of surprise, making each iteration unique. For future work or improvements, I could experiment with additional parameters such as varying the size or rotation of shapes, and introducing gradients. I also envision expanding the symphony of this visual experience by integrating sound. Each shape could emit unique tones, creating a multi-sensory journey. Additionally, exploring interactive elements, allowing users to dynamically influence the composition in real-time, could open up new dimensions for artistic expression and engagement.
The inspiration came from my desire to make something very vibrant with popping colors and simple shapes. Changing the “tileSize” and playing with different outcomes every time was a really fun experience until I found the visuals I most loved. As I reflect on this creation, I find joy in the harmonious chaos that emerges.

function setup() {
  createCanvas(600, 600);
  noLoop(); //Only draw once
}

function draw() {
  background(0); //Start with a black background
  let tileSize = 10;

  for (let x = 0; x < width; x += tileSize) {
    for (let y = 0; y < height; y += tileSize) {
      let shapeCount = floor(random(1, 5)); //Determine how many shapes to draw in each tile
      let i = 0; //Initialize while loop counter

      while (i < shapeCount) {
        //Generate a random color for each shape
        fill(random(255), random(255), random(255), 200);

        //Randomly choose a shape to draw
        let shapeType = floor(random(3)); // 0, 1, or 2
        switch (shapeType) {
          case 0: //Draw a circle
            ellipse(
              x + tileSize / 2,
              y + tileSize / 2,
              tileSize * 0.5,
              tileSize * 0.5
            );
            break;
          case 1: //Draw a square
            rect(x + 10, y + 10, tileSize - 20, tileSize - 20);
            break;
          case 2: //Draw a triangle
            triangle(
              x + tileSize / 2,
              y + 10,
              x + 10,
              y + tileSize - 10,
              x + tileSize - 10,
              y + tileSize - 10
            );
            break;
        }
        i++; //Increment while loop counter
      }
    }
  }
}

//Allow for regenerating the artwork on mouse press
function mousePressed() {
  redraw(); //Redraw everything
}

When you change “tileSize”:

The juxtaposition of the artificial, conventionally associated with rigidity and logical order, and the organic, characterized by spontaneity and fluidity, has been historically observed, as Reas illustrates in his talk, since humans ventured into the arts and the sciences. I especially enjoyed Reas’ chronicling of the journey of digital creators and artists marrying these two by exploiting “parameterized change” to give dynamism to their work, starting with the courage of early artists like Jean Arp. I also appreciated his demonstration of how he systemized the process of introducing controlled randomness in his work by formulating algorithmic elements and processes, like element 5 and process 18 that he used to produce the artwork below. As someone who has an understanding of the mathematical quantification of randomness, as defined by measures of entropy, and has also been interested in studying the historical emergence of artistic abstract and surrealist works, I was delighted to see Reas illustrate how both can be integrated, via computational methods, to produce pleasing digital artworks.

It was thought-provoking and almost ironic to see an algorithmic process attempting to simulate constrained randomness. Randomness, by its very nature, assumes the lack of regularization or adherence to a set of well-defined instructions. However, it is indeed possible, as shown by Reas, that despite their antithetical nature, randomness and order can co-exist and synergize to produce beautiful pieces of art.

One thing that caught my attention is Reas’ emphasis on producing from chaos an emergent homeostasis that is balanced and patterned. In the above example, for instance, Reas notes that repeated iterations of his process produce similar-looking, almost “unified,” results. This is essentially a product of “parameterizing” randomness. As Gerhard Richtar also states: “above all, it’s never blind chance: it’s a chance that is always planned, but also always surprising.” In a sense, randomness, then, becomes this beast that needs to be tamed, through order, to produce art that is organic and new, but still has an emergent form to it to be meaningful. This could also be demonstrated by the incorporation of symmetry in the Fractal Invaders animation to produce forms that can be readily interpreted by the viewer but were not necessarily manufactured by the artist.

This got me thinking: why can we not embrace randomness in art in its own right, without the need to constrain it or tame it in any way? Can we re-wire our brains to enjoy the unexpected jitters of white noise? Or derive pleasure from looking at TV static the way we would Renaissance paintings in museums? Lastly, if truly random art were to exist, where would that place the artist?

When we hear the word “Chaos” our minds automatically think of destruction and overall something negative. Casey Reas explored the meaning of this word and it reshaped my mind in terms of its meaning. Reas included many applications of “chaos” in beautiful pieces of art and explored how chaotic nature could be.

One concept that really stuck with me was the concept of randomness. Casey Reas’s talk opened my eyes on the ways in which the idea of randomness is perceived in art. I genuinely believe that randomness is sometimes important and Reas highlights that at one point.

Another concept that stuck out for me was the part where he talked about combining art with biology. Being a Psychology major student, I am very interested in one’s mind and knowing that it is possible to merge both of my interests into one made my day. I am truly satisfied after watching this talk.

Digital art has always been criticized because of its algorithm, as it challenges the old-fashioned traditions of painting, making music, videos et cetera. I believe that Casey Reas’ Eyeo talk on chance operations is a good argument on why modern artists still remain artists.

The way he is trying to explain the whole documentation process that has to happen in order for digital art to be created is very valuable. We do not only hear about the steps, but also we have the chance to see everything that goes behind digital art.

My favorite part of the talk was when he quoted the fact that ‘ a chance is always planned’, meaning that without the person, everything would just be a random code that has no beginning and no end. The human is what makes it have value.

In the end, I have to admit that after having watched this video I can certainly say that I have gained more respect towards digital creators.

For this assignment, I drew inspiration from Bill Kolomjec’s artwork titled “Random Squares.” My initial concept involved an interactive scenario where squares responded dynamically to the mouse’s location, a concept realized in my first sketch.

Wanting to add an extra layer of complexity, I decided to explore the interaction with an object. This led me to create another sketch where the interactive background adjusted its size following the object’s location such as a ball, but I managed to do so without the ball, providing a unique twist to the overall concept.

As I continued to refine my project, I experimented with colors and various sizes. Introducing random markings within the framework, I enhanced the visual appeal of the interactive background. Through this exploration, I gained a deeper understanding of P5js, marking a notable achievement in my creative journey.

let x = 100;
let y = 100;
let dx = 2;
let dy = 3;
let length = [];
let scl = 0.1;

function setup() {
  createCanvas(600, 600);
}

function draw() {
  background(220);
  
//   fill(255);
//   ellipse(x, y, 30, 30);

  x = x + dx;
  y = y + dy;
  if (x > width || x < 0) {
    dx = dx * -1;
  }
  if (y > height || y < 0) {
    dy = dy * -1;
  }

  for (let i = 0; i < 600; i += 20) {
    for (let j = 0; j < 600; j += 20) {
      let distance = dist(x, y, i + 7.5, j + 7.5); // Center of the rectangle
      
      let rectSize = map(distance, 0, width, 5, 100); // Adjust these values for the desired size range

      fill(i / 3, j / 3, 300);
      rect(i, j, rectSize, rectSize);

This talk from Casey Reas at the Eyeo Festival really changed the way I look at randomness, order and chaos in art. But how?

Structure:

Casey has structured his talk in a way that made me connect with what he was saying, kind of like a short story about art based on this algorithms and randomness.

Starting of from nature, he demonstrates the art in nature and its tendency to be chaotic as well as our purpose as humans: to create order. This dates back to the first century A.D. so we can see that humans have been very conscious about this idea of maintaining some kind of harmony in art as well as adding a random element.

A big turn of events, and two pieces which really gathered my interest in the subject are this 1916 piece by Jean Arp:

This piece was considered extremely radical back in the day since it broke the rules of bringing order into art, where he just put down random pieces of paper and created this image. Thinking differently really changed the way art was looked at. Another interesting art piece is “Three standard stoppages” by Marcel Duchamp:

Duchamp really explored the idea of getting out of reality and not using the metric system. This two pieces describe what I really feel about art, or life at all: Why are we constraining ourselves between units of measurement and concepts of order when we can unleash our wildest dreams and create something that has never been created before? Great things always came when people thought out of the box 🙂

Furthermore with digitalization and computers, we can see digitalized art taking shape as well as some interesting works that perfectly describe the part of chance and randomness in art.

Personal takeaways and projects I love:

My favorite piece that was shown in this talk from Casey is Tissue prints which was made by him. It really changed the way I think about algorithmic art and the complexity of it, as well as encouraged me too look at projects on a deeper level. More on the project can be seen on the link below:

https://reas.com/tissue_p/

Another thing to look at which is similar to this is my recent group project for the Understanding IM Class. It combines algorithm, chance, randomness and adds a personal element.  Feel free to explore on the link below:

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/137TySRw-u-CEIeXmAb7DMut26ogBrSnD-C2KJfH1zT8/edit?usp=sharing

The patterns… where have I seen them throughout my life?

The Alpha particle tracks inside the Bubble Chamber apparatus in a Physics laboratory. [Source]

On calculus textbook covers [Source].

Casey Reas’s talk on using code to make generative art with a grip on randomness caught my attention. The whole idea of finding this sweet spot between order and chance in art is super intriguing, especially when you can let randomness guide you a bit without it taking over the whole identity of the piece. This is something that I look forward to incorporating into my IM pieces throughout the semester.

Reas’s example of ‘The Tissue Work,’ inspired by neuroanatomist Valentino Braitenberg, and the controlled randomness they used to simulate conceptual vehicles and patterns over time was mind-blowing. It’s like a dance between structure and surprise. I love the notion of randomness being a “jumping off point” in art – a way to explore possibilities without losing control over the essence of the work.

This example brought several artists to mind, one of them being Farhad Moshiri an Iranian artist known for his intricate yet playful pieces, and I believe his ability to dance on the thin line between intricacy and randomness is what makes his work admirable. Here is an example of one of his pieces:

Another artist that instantly comes to mind is Jackson Pollock, known for his drip painting. As a child, I had a love-hate relationship with this category of artwork because I believed the artist did not deserve the credit for the piece, and that there was not much to it. However, after admiring his work and listening to people’s perspectives I fell in love with the idea of “letting loose” which is exactly what this piece consisted of, allowing gravity and change to create something, with minimal control and high spontaneity. This proposes the question, is the art the final piece or the process of creating it?

So, I agree with Rea’s idea that embracing randomness in art feels like tapping into a world of creative possibilities. Artists from way back to today are showing us how to walk that fine line between order and chance, making the relationship between art and technology evolve in the most fascinating ways.