un didi

Things evolve:

Veronica and me (Dimitrie). This could have looked better, but alas, we had to make a 1m x 1.3m model in the same time.

Galeria 115, in a sa expozitie de arta digitala “ArtPartTwo“, contine si urmatoarea lucrare, care place la noi:

Ce ne chinuim cu Zaha Hadid, Jean Nouvel, sau Foster? Unite d’habitation explodat in aer. Sau Corbusier drogat. Asta’i viitorul in arhitectura.

I am wondering. Computational art/ Generative art takes a lot of programming. It’s quite a lot of work - compiling algorithms from different sources and inventing your own for those special needs that surely arise etc etc etc. Yet g. a. is a manifesto of two things (at least this is how i see it), the first being the concept and the second being the use of the computer as way of creating art in its purest.
So we are tackling two tricky subjects. The concept/idea you want to express (or not!) must be proper for deployment in a digital medium with pure digital tools (code). Sometimes one must stop when programming becomes more important than concept and vice-versa. It’s a tricky balance.

And second, I think I’ll program some boids playing tag you’re it. And map their trajectories. And throw them in a perlin noise vector field. And add some genetic evolution algorithms. And implement collision detection. And do that nifty Diffusion Aggregation Algorithm. And better my color palette. And add sound interaction. Or, better even, generate sound. Binary networks anyone?

Oh, and there’s one more thing. “It” has to look good. Aesthetic. Guten nacht.