John, if you don't mind my asking - what is your understand of procedural art or drawing as distinct from other functionality in Studio Artist. I'm writing a series of articles on generative art and there does seem to be a definition of procedural drawing apart from generative art as a process, but I haven't found much information available online. Really nice abstract work! thanks, Mark
My definition of procedural art is that the imagery is generated by algorithms or mathematical formulas. As opposed to something like manual painting. Where a person directly builds up an image by manually laying down a series of marks. Or digital photography. Where a person digitally records an image from the real world.
Applying an effect or series of effects to a source image in general probably does not really qualify as procedural art. At some point as you approach extreme abstraction maybe it might start to. Where the source image is really just being used as some kind of pseudo-random modulator to an algorithm that is generating the abstract output imagery. I guess you could argue that in different ways.
So generic auto-painting in Studio Artist where you are trying to render a source image in some painterly style i would not really define as procedural art. You mazy be applying some procedure to the source image to derive the output, but the result is still so source image based that i don't consider it procedural art. Now if you are primarily using mathematics to generate the imagery (as opposed to replicating the source image in some particular artistic style), then it might qualify as procedural art.
So you could program the paint synthesizer to generate abstract images via some algorithm. And that would qualify as procedural art.
What i'm doing to generate this particular image is to spatially modulate between 2 different abstract procedural images. So i built a MSG preset that generates one color abstract image in the R Out, G Out, B Out image channels. And a second color abstract image in the Tmp Rimg, Tmp Gimg, Tmp Bimg channels. And a third black and white abstract image in the Tmp Img channel.
I then use the 3C_MixMod processor to generate a single color output image in the R Out, G Out, B Out image channels. The black and white abstract image in the Tmp Img channel spatially modulates between the 2 color abstract images described above. All of this takes place in a single MSG preset.
There's kind of a balancing act between diversity and local coherence in abstract or real world imagery. This is one approach to try and generate both characteristics. Regular patterns or textures oftentimes are kind of boring. And random noise is also kind of boring. You want to try to have some local stability, but also non-local variation, and some global coherence. So spatially modulating between 2 different patterny images is one way to try and get local structure, non local variation, and some global coherence in the same image.
There's also a little post processing with one of the cast shadow lighting PASeq presets posted here recently. So that helps give more of a sense of subtle 3-dimensionality to the image.
Thanks, this clarifies, although I have a follow up question or two and if you don't mind will use some of your text so it's clearer what I'm asking about. I realize as you say we're talking about opinions and not textbook definitions.
Let's say we're not talking about auto-painting, but doing so with a tablet pen. There of course are algorithms going on in what's drawn - this is or is not procedural?
Agreed that extreme abstraction factors into the equation.
You said... "Applying an effect or series of effects to a source image in general probably does not really qualify as procedural art.Where the source image is really just being used as some kind of pseudo-random modulator to an algorithm that is generating the abstract output imagery." Wouldn't the use of MSG in drawing fall within that definition. Or, is part of it that while there might be randomness in using the Evolution Editor to explore, apply and create animation sequences, the use of a specific processor (with an underlying algorithm(s) not "pseudo-random" at all and therefore could be procedural. Could be argued in different ways, as you say. It sounds like you're saying you don't consider this usage in general procedural drawing in nature, but I'm not completely following you.
I'm trying to wade through the use of terms in a lot of what I'm reading, and to some people, it seems that the terms generative art, procedural art and algorthmic art (among others) are more or less interchangeable. What sets it apart for some, is as you might be suggesting, that the artist her/himself is creating or using a code editor to create or modify a script that creates mathematical formulas, programs such as Processing? Does using a great UI like Studio Artist eliminate what's created as acceptably being defined as generative?
In my net searches, one thing that intrigues me is that there are a category of fairly low end, low cost, limited functionaity drawing programs created largely in either Processing, Actionscriipt or html5/javascript that a lot of people are using in defining procedural drawing. One of the first ones, and there are a bunch of clones and newer projects out there, is called Harmony, written by mr. doob aka Ricardo Cabello. Google procedural drawing and there are a ton of references to Harmony and a bunch of clones.
There is something distinct about Harmony and it's offspring - as in Studio Artist using almost any (or certain?) paint synthesizer presets/brushes - you get that great distinct feeling there is some intelligence going on underneath your brush strokes. Brushes like sketch, web, fur, etc. fan out from the line and connect things for you. But again, why the definition seems limited to these programs, is what I'm trying to get at. I sure can ramble.
p.s. this anonymous comment, sort of works for me, helps me define what I'm seeing in certain usages of Studio Artist and the other programs mentioned: ..."I think “procedural” means that the tool is temporal, i.e. that the current behavior of the tool depends on past states. This means that quick, sharp brush strokes look different than broad slow ones. (also pen pressure)"
You're touching on a lot of interesting ideas. I'll try to jot down a few quick responses here. And i'll try to put together some kind of forum or blog post that delves deeper into this topic soon.
It doesn't matter if you write raw code, or if you use a higher level interface like Studio Artist. In either case, if you are working with an underlying procedural or generative algorithm(s) for creating art, then you are creating procedural art. It seems stupid to me to say that i'm creating procedural art when i use Studio Artist (because i wrote the code), but other Studio Artist users aren't (because they didn't write the code). Manipulating Studio Artist is really just a higher level way of manipulating underlying procedural processes.
I was trying to distinguish different approaches based on what the primary output imagery is generated from. If the primary output imagery is based on reproducing a digital photo, or is generated by manual painting, then i guess i'm arguing that the output isn't really procedural art. Reproducing a digital photo in some artistic style (like water color or oil paint rendition) involves some potential abstraction of the source image, but you're really just trying to reproduce that source image in some slightly altered state. And the imagery from a manual painting is created by you, not by some mathematical algorithm.
As i said, one could try to define things differently. The paint synthesizer is a procedural process. It might be using the source image as a modulator, but the underlying processing and image rendition is algorithmic. So if you define things that way, then everything auto-painted by Studio Artist is a form of procedural art. And since many of the manual paint presets have internal procedural processes going on inside of them, maybe those paintings are procedural art as well. If you choose to define it that way.
And there are certainly manual painting strategies where the artist basically follows some kind of algorithmic procedure. So you could argue that those kinds of manual paintings are really forms of procedural art. The artist is rigidly following the algorithm's steps manually rather than trying to encode them in some kind of computer language.
You bring up an interesting point, what about paintings where the paint itself incorporates some procedural art element (like a chaotic attractor for example). So you might generate output that tries to reproduce a source image. So if you step away from the painting, it basically looks like the source image. But if you get close, then each paint strokes is actually a fractal chaotic attractor (which is a common procedural art element). So the fine detail of the painting is definitely procedural art. Even though the macro imagery the painting is reproducing is a reproduction of a digital photo.
I kind of throw generative processes and procedural art into 2 different piles that may overlap. Here's a series of blog posts on generative art. And here's some blog posts on procedural art. Note that one of the posts overlaps. And i didn't tag any of the chaotic attractor posts as procedural art, although i certainly could have. And here's a post on MSG source image abstraction, which is working with source images but really focused on creating abstract art, and could probably be argues is a procedural art process.
So none of the terminology we're discussing is really definitive.
I guess people who are calling something like Harmony a procedural drawing tool are defining procedural drawing as any kind of internal sub-drawing algorithm built into a manual painting tool. So by that definition Studio Artist paint presets would pretty much all be procedural drawing presets. Harmony's 'procedure' is certainly pretty basic. I think this particular example is more about being an interesting example of meme propagation on the net. I don't think the art being generated is procedural art at all, it's all about manual digital painting. But because someone attached the 'procedural drawing' label to it, that label sounds cool and that meme propagated through the internet. My personal opinion.
The chaotic attractors are fascinating.. are there any chaotic attractor presets and associated movie brushes that ship with the program? I'd be interested when or if you might have them to post. Yes, it's exactly functionality like this that really expands the concept of procedural drawing. I'll be working on trying to recreate this.
I think a forum discussion for those interested or a blog post at some point would be great. Obviously I find this a very rich area for investigation.
You wrote: "...And since many of the manual paint presets have internal procedural processes going on inside of them, maybe those paintings are procedural art as well. If you choose to define it that way." I guess in light of what I spent a couple of days reading other people say about Harmony and other programs like it, yes, my thought was if that's procedural drawing, then any of the manual paint presets and certainly a brush created by MSG processors would fit within that definition. Again your point about the meme aspect puts a lot of this in perspective for me.
This reply was deleted.
You need to be a member of Studio Artist to add comments!
Comments
John, if you don't mind my asking - what is your understand of procedural art or drawing as distinct from other functionality in Studio Artist. I'm writing a series of articles on generative art and there does seem to be a definition of procedural drawing apart from generative art as a process, but I haven't found much information available online. Really nice abstract work! thanks, Mark
My definition of procedural art is that the imagery is generated by algorithms or mathematical formulas. As opposed to something like manual painting. Where a person directly builds up an image by manually laying down a series of marks. Or digital photography. Where a person digitally records an image from the real world.
Applying an effect or series of effects to a source image in general probably does not really qualify as procedural art. At some point as you approach extreme abstraction maybe it might start to. Where the source image is really just being used as some kind of pseudo-random modulator to an algorithm that is generating the abstract output imagery. I guess you could argue that in different ways.
So generic auto-painting in Studio Artist where you are trying to render a source image in some painterly style i would not really define as procedural art. You mazy be applying some procedure to the source image to derive the output, but the result is still so source image based that i don't consider it procedural art. Now if you are primarily using mathematics to generate the imagery (as opposed to replicating the source image in some particular artistic style), then it might qualify as procedural art.
So you could program the paint synthesizer to generate abstract images via some algorithm. And that would qualify as procedural art.
What i'm doing to generate this particular image is to spatially modulate between 2 different abstract procedural images. So i built a MSG preset that generates one color abstract image in the R Out, G Out, B Out image channels. And a second color abstract image in the Tmp Rimg, Tmp Gimg, Tmp Bimg channels. And a third black and white abstract image in the Tmp Img channel.
I then use the 3C_MixMod processor to generate a single color output image in the R Out, G Out, B Out image channels. The black and white abstract image in the Tmp Img channel spatially modulates between the 2 color abstract images described above. All of this takes place in a single MSG preset.
There's kind of a balancing act between diversity and local coherence in abstract or real world imagery. This is one approach to try and generate both characteristics. Regular patterns or textures oftentimes are kind of boring. And random noise is also kind of boring. You want to try to have some local stability, but also non-local variation, and some global coherence. So spatially modulating between 2 different patterny images is one way to try and get local structure, non local variation, and some global coherence in the same image.
There's also a little post processing with one of the cast shadow lighting PASeq presets posted here recently. So that helps give more of a sense of subtle 3-dimensionality to the image.
Thanks, this clarifies, although I have a follow up question or two and if you don't mind will use some of your text so it's clearer what I'm asking about. I realize as you say we're talking about opinions and not textbook definitions.
Let's say we're not talking about auto-painting, but doing so with a tablet pen. There of course are algorithms going on in what's drawn - this is or is not procedural?
Agreed that extreme abstraction factors into the equation.
You said... "Applying an effect or series of effects to a source image in general probably does not really qualify as procedural art. Where the source image is really just being used as some kind of pseudo-random modulator to an algorithm that is generating the abstract output imagery." Wouldn't the use of MSG in drawing fall within that definition. Or, is part of it that while there might be randomness in using the Evolution Editor to explore, apply and create animation sequences, the use of a specific processor (with an underlying algorithm(s) not "pseudo-random" at all and therefore could be procedural. Could be argued in different ways, as you say. It sounds like you're saying you don't consider this usage in general procedural drawing in nature, but I'm not completely following you.
I'm trying to wade through the use of terms in a lot of what I'm reading, and to some people, it seems that the terms generative art, procedural art and algorthmic art (among others) are more or less interchangeable. What sets it apart for some, is as you might be suggesting, that the artist her/himself is creating or using a code editor to create or modify a script that creates mathematical formulas, programs such as Processing? Does using a great UI like Studio Artist eliminate what's created as acceptably being defined as generative?
In my net searches, one thing that intrigues me is that there are a category of fairly low end, low cost, limited functionaity drawing programs created largely in either Processing, Actionscriipt or html5/javascript that a lot of people are using in defining procedural drawing. One of the first ones, and there are a bunch of clones and newer projects out there, is called Harmony, written by mr. doob aka Ricardo Cabello. Google procedural drawing and there are a ton of references to Harmony and a bunch of clones.
There is something distinct about Harmony and it's offspring - as in Studio Artist using almost any (or certain?) paint synthesizer presets/brushes - you get that great distinct feeling there is some intelligence going on underneath your brush strokes. Brushes like sketch, web, fur, etc. fan out from the line and connect things for you. But again, why the definition seems limited to these programs, is what I'm trying to get at. I sure can ramble.
Mark
p.s. this anonymous comment, sort of works for me, helps me define what I'm seeing in certain usages of Studio Artist and the other programs mentioned: ..."I think “procedural” means that the tool is temporal, i.e. that the current behavior of the tool depends on past states. This means that quick, sharp brush strokes look different than broad slow ones. (also pen pressure)"
You're touching on a lot of interesting ideas. I'll try to jot down a few quick responses here. And i'll try to put together some kind of forum or blog post that delves deeper into this topic soon.
It doesn't matter if you write raw code, or if you use a higher level interface like Studio Artist. In either case, if you are working with an underlying procedural or generative algorithm(s) for creating art, then you are creating procedural art. It seems stupid to me to say that i'm creating procedural art when i use Studio Artist (because i wrote the code), but other Studio Artist users aren't (because they didn't write the code). Manipulating Studio Artist is really just a higher level way of manipulating underlying procedural processes.
I was trying to distinguish different approaches based on what the primary output imagery is generated from. If the primary output imagery is based on reproducing a digital photo, or is generated by manual painting, then i guess i'm arguing that the output isn't really procedural art. Reproducing a digital photo in some artistic style (like water color or oil paint rendition) involves some potential abstraction of the source image, but you're really just trying to reproduce that source image in some slightly altered state. And the imagery from a manual painting is created by you, not by some mathematical algorithm.
As i said, one could try to define things differently. The paint synthesizer is a procedural process. It might be using the source image as a modulator, but the underlying processing and image rendition is algorithmic. So if you define things that way, then everything auto-painted by Studio Artist is a form of procedural art. And since many of the manual paint presets have internal procedural processes going on inside of them, maybe those paintings are procedural art as well. If you choose to define it that way.
And there are certainly manual painting strategies where the artist basically follows some kind of algorithmic procedure. So you could argue that those kinds of manual paintings are really forms of procedural art. The artist is rigidly following the algorithm's steps manually rather than trying to encode them in some kind of computer language.
You bring up an interesting point, what about paintings where the paint itself incorporates some procedural art element (like a chaotic attractor for example). So you might generate output that tries to reproduce a source image. So if you step away from the painting, it basically looks like the source image. But if you get close, then each paint strokes is actually a fractal chaotic attractor (which is a common procedural art element). So the fine detail of the painting is definitely procedural art. Even though the macro imagery the painting is reproducing is a reproduction of a digital photo.
I kind of throw generative processes and procedural art into 2 different piles that may overlap. Here's a series of blog posts on generative art. And here's some blog posts on procedural art. Note that one of the posts overlaps. And i didn't tag any of the chaotic attractor posts as procedural art, although i certainly could have. And here's a post on MSG source image abstraction, which is working with source images but really focused on creating abstract art, and could probably be argues is a procedural art process.
So none of the terminology we're discussing is really definitive.
I guess people who are calling something like Harmony a procedural drawing tool are defining procedural drawing as any kind of internal sub-drawing algorithm built into a manual painting tool. So by that definition Studio Artist paint presets would pretty much all be procedural drawing presets. Harmony's 'procedure' is certainly pretty basic. I think this particular example is more about being an interesting example of meme propagation on the net. I don't think the art being generated is procedural art at all, it's all about manual digital painting. But because someone attached the 'procedural drawing' label to it, that label sounds cool and that meme propagated through the internet. My personal opinion.
The chaotic attractors are fascinating.. are there any chaotic attractor presets and associated movie brushes that ship with the program? I'd be interested when or if you might have them to post. Yes, it's exactly functionality like this that really expands the concept of procedural drawing. I'll be working on trying to recreate this.
I think a forum discussion for those interested or a blog post at some point would be great. Obviously I find this a very rich area for investigation.
You wrote: "...And since many of the manual paint presets have internal procedural processes going on inside of them, maybe those paintings are procedural art as well. If you choose to define it that way." I guess in light of what I spent a couple of days reading other people say about Harmony and other programs like it, yes, my thought was if that's procedural drawing, then any of the manual paint presets and certainly a brush created by MSG processors would fit within that definition. Again your point about the meme aspect puts a lot of this in perspective for me.