ARTBASE (1)
BIO
born in 1962 in Lier, Belgium.
studied filology at Louvain, Belgium.
worked a lot in bars and restaurants before i became obsessivly addicted to producing stuff on computers.
i once won a design contest of cgi-magazine and they let me go to New York for four days, that was nice.
i think in terms of writing mostly (or programming, but those are very similar processes for me)
painting is a very different process and i'm very bad at it but i do it anyway because i like the differences it produces and i like the freshness of amateurism, i guess.
what i produce new media-wise is also very much influenced by my daily practice of webdesign and programming with its concerns of usability and the pragmatic approach it implies.
studied filology at Louvain, Belgium.
worked a lot in bars and restaurants before i became obsessivly addicted to producing stuff on computers.
i once won a design contest of cgi-magazine and they let me go to New York for four days, that was nice.
i think in terms of writing mostly (or programming, but those are very similar processes for me)
painting is a very different process and i'm very bad at it but i do it anyway because i like the differences it produces and i like the freshness of amateurism, i guess.
what i produce new media-wise is also very much influenced by my daily practice of webdesign and programming with its concerns of usability and the pragmatic approach it implies.
Re: the random
>
> Use of the random needn't, of course, simply represent a
> failure to take responsibility for decisions that would have
> better been made by us.
> Instead, it can help us explore the decisions we do make, why
> we make those decisions, and can *occassionally* offer us
> alternatives that are preferable.
>
> ja
> http://vispo.com
>
Well, that's exactly how i use random elements: to see what's in the soup.
If it looks promising, keep on cooking.
Sure one can't object to using randomness as a creative method, i never
meant to suggest anything like that. I do however perceive a tendency to
abandon the artistic quest (prematurely?) at that stage, not out of lack of
responsibility or lazyness or artistic vision (whatever that may be and,
well, let's be generous), but simply for not seeing the point to continue,
and not feeling the need to do so. (anyone seriously doubting whether
anything is possible after this stage might have a look at mez's
contribution to the discussion submitted while i was making this up, my
thumbs stuck deep in muddy water)
No need because
a) the result is fascinating/spectacular/beautiful/meaningful/(fill in your
blank) enough as it is or
b) going further would only ruin things by superimposing structures on the
work that can only be ascribed to the identity of the author. Putting your
personal grid over things just ruins the sight of the big picture.
Now this frame of mind is totally alien for me. I know it's there, i
understand it and i don't feel inclined to criticize it (the idea strikes me
as rather prepostorous), but i don't feel it, i don't live it. Far from
being prescriptive in any way, i can only try to analyse it. So, looking
back, at first i simply didn't grasp what i thought was a very curious
paragraph in Zev's last mail:
"I've also had repeated experiences with works of art over the years, mainly
paintings that I go back to look at, but also music, literature, films. Each
time my perception of them is different, so in that sense there is no
repetition."
Repetition? Starting from a paragraph of 'sunt quibus...' indicating the
camp of collaborating artists, it dumps those poor sods who keep mingling
their juices till something capable of quenching a dying thirst of some
senile individuals, in the doomed factory of endless repetition. An
extremely rare candour, a statement of some importance on contemporary art,
i presume. But no, not the pre of interpretation, because i'm not absolutely
certain that i do know now, either. I merely assume it means that in view
of previous artistic production anything the artist does now on his own will
only result in repetition, a highly suspect building on a tradition that is
per se incapable of producing anything new.
Who ever mentioned novelty, btw? Soit. En disant: assumptions are wicked,
you can't discuss things based on assumptions. Any point of view is
meaningless. In the end.
So enter the liberating use of randomness allowing the artist to let the
conceptual artpiece speak for itself, uncorrupted by the equally suspect ego
that would only blind the audience by its mischeavous personal ambitions,
its blabla_sex_blabla_frustration_Lacanian drab and all that mess standing
in the way of the pure, preferably collaborative artistic vision. You see:
even as i write this, the horrible beast of my ego comes out, doing exactly
the opposite of what i promised myself and you reading it.
But that is exactly the point: what's with this seemingly global
condemnation of the personal approach that i merely describe from my little
backward provincial pony stable? Why does a little, rather random sigh from
my pseudo-French cuisine draw out these grave rhetorics? What's wrong with
me minding my own business? What's so terrible about using your private and
destined-to-be-humble configuration to produce a little sieve and amuse
yourself in a pond you call your own?
Everything of course. Manovich will have it declared illegal by the end of
the year. April will supposedly be the cruellest month.
Jim's little historic expose expertly shows the 'mediatic' use of random,
that can ofcourse only be advantageous in the working process. Going over to
music one could add a spiritual dimension to that, referring to Cage's
approach that explicitly favours the stochastic element over the forced
authoring/ordering in order to generate a playfullness, a Zenlike
affirmation of life. Pierre Boulez invented the term aleatory music to
post-modernistically differenciate his habit of giving his performers the
liberty to partake in the composing process from what seemed highly suspect
at that time, a positive impulse towards the spiritual. Talking of
repetition, you might say we're in a new Cage age, but considering the
fashionable commercially automated zennification of Zen, it's more likely
anything spiritual is being caged and the age with it. For the sole and pure
purpose of movement. Does IT move? Sell.
I shouldn't bother. I must not move. I should sit still, have my pond frozen
over, seek comfort in boozing with the others of the undead, like a decent
de-generation-ed artist is supposed to. Father Google will come with an
abundance of Xmas candy, i can hear his sledge hammer in the distance
already. Mother Amazon's gone manic, sniffing blood in dead matter,
collecting on thrash gone random wherever she can.
dv @ Neue Kathedrale des erotischen Elends
http://www.vilt.net/nkdee
> Use of the random needn't, of course, simply represent a
> failure to take responsibility for decisions that would have
> better been made by us.
> Instead, it can help us explore the decisions we do make, why
> we make those decisions, and can *occassionally* offer us
> alternatives that are preferable.
>
> ja
> http://vispo.com
>
Well, that's exactly how i use random elements: to see what's in the soup.
If it looks promising, keep on cooking.
Sure one can't object to using randomness as a creative method, i never
meant to suggest anything like that. I do however perceive a tendency to
abandon the artistic quest (prematurely?) at that stage, not out of lack of
responsibility or lazyness or artistic vision (whatever that may be and,
well, let's be generous), but simply for not seeing the point to continue,
and not feeling the need to do so. (anyone seriously doubting whether
anything is possible after this stage might have a look at mez's
contribution to the discussion submitted while i was making this up, my
thumbs stuck deep in muddy water)
No need because
a) the result is fascinating/spectacular/beautiful/meaningful/(fill in your
blank) enough as it is or
b) going further would only ruin things by superimposing structures on the
work that can only be ascribed to the identity of the author. Putting your
personal grid over things just ruins the sight of the big picture.
Now this frame of mind is totally alien for me. I know it's there, i
understand it and i don't feel inclined to criticize it (the idea strikes me
as rather prepostorous), but i don't feel it, i don't live it. Far from
being prescriptive in any way, i can only try to analyse it. So, looking
back, at first i simply didn't grasp what i thought was a very curious
paragraph in Zev's last mail:
"I've also had repeated experiences with works of art over the years, mainly
paintings that I go back to look at, but also music, literature, films. Each
time my perception of them is different, so in that sense there is no
repetition."
Repetition? Starting from a paragraph of 'sunt quibus...' indicating the
camp of collaborating artists, it dumps those poor sods who keep mingling
their juices till something capable of quenching a dying thirst of some
senile individuals, in the doomed factory of endless repetition. An
extremely rare candour, a statement of some importance on contemporary art,
i presume. But no, not the pre of interpretation, because i'm not absolutely
certain that i do know now, either. I merely assume it means that in view
of previous artistic production anything the artist does now on his own will
only result in repetition, a highly suspect building on a tradition that is
per se incapable of producing anything new.
Who ever mentioned novelty, btw? Soit. En disant: assumptions are wicked,
you can't discuss things based on assumptions. Any point of view is
meaningless. In the end.
So enter the liberating use of randomness allowing the artist to let the
conceptual artpiece speak for itself, uncorrupted by the equally suspect ego
that would only blind the audience by its mischeavous personal ambitions,
its blabla_sex_blabla_frustration_Lacanian drab and all that mess standing
in the way of the pure, preferably collaborative artistic vision. You see:
even as i write this, the horrible beast of my ego comes out, doing exactly
the opposite of what i promised myself and you reading it.
But that is exactly the point: what's with this seemingly global
condemnation of the personal approach that i merely describe from my little
backward provincial pony stable? Why does a little, rather random sigh from
my pseudo-French cuisine draw out these grave rhetorics? What's wrong with
me minding my own business? What's so terrible about using your private and
destined-to-be-humble configuration to produce a little sieve and amuse
yourself in a pond you call your own?
Everything of course. Manovich will have it declared illegal by the end of
the year. April will supposedly be the cruellest month.
Jim's little historic expose expertly shows the 'mediatic' use of random,
that can ofcourse only be advantageous in the working process. Going over to
music one could add a spiritual dimension to that, referring to Cage's
approach that explicitly favours the stochastic element over the forced
authoring/ordering in order to generate a playfullness, a Zenlike
affirmation of life. Pierre Boulez invented the term aleatory music to
post-modernistically differenciate his habit of giving his performers the
liberty to partake in the composing process from what seemed highly suspect
at that time, a positive impulse towards the spiritual. Talking of
repetition, you might say we're in a new Cage age, but considering the
fashionable commercially automated zennification of Zen, it's more likely
anything spiritual is being caged and the age with it. For the sole and pure
purpose of movement. Does IT move? Sell.
I shouldn't bother. I must not move. I should sit still, have my pond frozen
over, seek comfort in boozing with the others of the undead, like a decent
de-generation-ed artist is supposed to. Father Google will come with an
abundance of Xmas candy, i can hear his sledge hammer in the distance
already. Mother Amazon's gone manic, sniffing blood in dead matter,
collecting on thrash gone random wherever she can.
dv @ Neue Kathedrale des erotischen Elends
http://www.vilt.net/nkdee
back()s now has a history
back()s : a body of back()s over time :
<http://www.vilt.net/nkdee/backs.html> http://www.vilt.net/nkdee/backs.html
A history of back()s: <http://www.vilt.net/nkdee/backs.jsp>
http://www.vilt.net/nkdee/backs.jsp
backs.html is a simple html file that has javascript:history.back() written
all over it.
backs.jsp collects the changing rollover images. Updates will be highly
irregular but i hope frequent.
The idea is that you'd place a link to backs.html on a page you need to
consult frequently for your work. You can then sneak into the Cathedral for
a moment and get out of it rapidly when your boss comes your way.
I made this because my statistics show that most people visit the Cathedral
during working hours.
greetings,
dv @ Neue Kathedrale des erotischen Elends
<http://www.vilt.net/nkdee> http://www.vilt.net/nkdee
<http://www.vilt.net/nkdee/backs.html> http://www.vilt.net/nkdee/backs.html
A history of back()s: <http://www.vilt.net/nkdee/backs.jsp>
http://www.vilt.net/nkdee/backs.jsp
backs.html is a simple html file that has javascript:history.back() written
all over it.
backs.jsp collects the changing rollover images. Updates will be highly
irregular but i hope frequent.
The idea is that you'd place a link to backs.html on a page you need to
consult frequently for your work. You can then sneak into the Cathedral for
a moment and get out of it rapidly when your boss comes your way.
I made this because my statistics show that most people visit the Cathedral
during working hours.
greetings,
dv @ Neue Kathedrale des erotischen Elends
<http://www.vilt.net/nkdee> http://www.vilt.net/nkdee
Re: Fw: hell's cold
ok, now i remember. byebye.
dv
_____
Van: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org] Namens manik
Verzonden: vrijdag 13 januari 2006 17:33
Aan: list@rhizome.org
Onderwerp: Fw: RHIZOME_RAW: Fw: hell's cold
----- Original Message -----
From: manik <mailto:manik@ptt.yu>
To: dirk <mailto:dv@vilt.net> vekemans
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Fw: hell's cold
Dirk wrote:
>sure, i mentioned your name 'cause you reacted rather noisily to my little
announcement (the ussr thing).
We don't remember history of "our relationship"-blank,sorry ...
Dirk:
>That's how social interaction on these lists works. No need to deconstruct
the way you brush your teeth each time you >brush your teeth (if you are in
the habit of brushing your teeth)
No Big Boy,I don't brush my teeth:Eagle came every morning and clean my
jaw,eating live flesh.
Dirk:
>i mentioned your name on my blog too (http://nkdee.blogspot.com) because i
kinda like some of your work, so there'll >be another 14 or so individuals
on the planet who will know about it next week.
There's two kind of perverted man:one who work in silent(dangerous one),and
second who talk around about his virtue,actualy he's one who hates,boring
incomplete change of man(you are one of those).
Of course you've put MANIK'S works on your blog,that's question of
quality,not about your comlex.
MANIK welcoming 14
individuals you enlighten with our blog.
Vaya con Dios.
chill out sister, people are dying out there
dv
dv
_____
Van: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org] Namens manik
Verzonden: vrijdag 13 januari 2006 17:33
Aan: list@rhizome.org
Onderwerp: Fw: RHIZOME_RAW: Fw: hell's cold
----- Original Message -----
From: manik <mailto:manik@ptt.yu>
To: dirk <mailto:dv@vilt.net> vekemans
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Fw: hell's cold
Dirk wrote:
>sure, i mentioned your name 'cause you reacted rather noisily to my little
announcement (the ussr thing).
We don't remember history of "our relationship"-blank,sorry ...
Dirk:
>That's how social interaction on these lists works. No need to deconstruct
the way you brush your teeth each time you >brush your teeth (if you are in
the habit of brushing your teeth)
No Big Boy,I don't brush my teeth:Eagle came every morning and clean my
jaw,eating live flesh.
Dirk:
>i mentioned your name on my blog too (http://nkdee.blogspot.com) because i
kinda like some of your work, so there'll >be another 14 or so individuals
on the planet who will know about it next week.
There's two kind of perverted man:one who work in silent(dangerous one),and
second who talk around about his virtue,actualy he's one who hates,boring
incomplete change of man(you are one of those).
Of course you've put MANIK'S works on your blog,that's question of
quality,not about your comlex.
MANIK welcoming 14
individuals you enlighten with our blog.
Vaya con Dios.
chill out sister, people are dying out there
dv
Re: Fw: hell's cold
sure, i mentioned your name 'cause you reacted rather noisily to my little announcement (the ussr thing). That's how social interaction on these lists works. No need to deconstruct the way you brush your teeth each time you brush your teeth (if you are in the habit of brushing your teeth)
i mentioned your name on my blog too (http://nkdee.blogspot.com) because i kinda like some of your work, so there'll be another 14 or so individuals on the planet who will know about it next week.
chill out sister, people are dying out there
dv
-----Original message-----
From: "manik" manik@ptt.yu
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:02:42 +0100
To: list@rhizome.org
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Fw: hell's cold
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: manik
> To: list@rhizome.org Dirk Vekemans
> Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 11:29 PM
> Subject: hell's cold
>
>
> Hi Dirk,
> You've mentioned my name in one sentence,I find that interesting as
> introduction in wide consideration relationship between > random-deliberate,
> predictable-unpredictable...I find art history-aesthetic-philosophy > could be good for
> reflection about those things,or for polemic at least.Those disciplines > are equal important as programming(for example).
> I'm not "programming artist"or"software artist",my personal interest for > Rhizome_Raw list writing's to define
> clean message:we are different people and our "role"in this time we live > together
> on this planet is to understand that this difference is not reason for > intolerance,...on the contrary.
>
> Cheers
> MANIK
> PS:
> Fact that Mondrian belong to Dutchman is not reason for you to be so > upset.
> I also mentioned Americans in that mail,and so far they're happy with > that.
>
>
>
> Apologies, MANIK from hell, i was out all day and perhaps it's because > i'm
> too tired but much as i feel obliged to anwer when addressed, i find it > near
> impossible to respond to your remarks in a meaningful way now: you start
> from mistaking my sigh of incompetence to deal with a concept for a
> definition of a word, and continue in a random fashion of pre-emptive
> strikes to nail my male but against an imagenary wall, it seems. My next
> mail in this thread kinda contradicts everything here, no? Anyway, i'm > not
> from the Netherlands, so there's no need to drag those fine people into > this
> and if you'd care to take a look at what i try to do, you might agree > i'm
> not after any kind of total control.
> How is hell these days anyway? i kinda miss the heat, sometimes.
> dv
>
>
> _____
>
> Van: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org] Namens manik
> Verzonden: donderdag 12 januari 2006 3:41
> Aan: list@rhizome.org
> Onderwerp: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: draw-something
>
>
> Hi Dirk,
> This is MANIK from hell.
> Let's get to work:for you randomness mean same as a concept("For me
> randomness, the concept, ...)
> This is interesting idea and I dare to see rot of it could be in > Dutchman's
> fight for fertility land,fight against nature(fait against randomness of
> see, the concept of other entity,God maybe.)American Pioneer have some > of
> that madness but they were cruel murder if is necessary,and of curse God > was
> good/necessary for pardon of sins)."So help me God!",they said and kill > some
> Iraqi child,or Indian,it doesn't matter.
> Man have to established full control,he's uber alles,he rule over > nature-in
> this moment this represent retro-modernistic concept with element of
> fascism(genetic control and modular stile of space/mind strategic
> organization),fancy,inn,mostly in design,and fashion,in
> "modular"architecture etc...Significant historical example were > Mondrian's
> neoplasticism,and Le Corbusier buildings.But even in Mondrians work was
> element of randomness,intentionally provoke suspense(Bugi-Vugi serial > from
> NYC,40-this,...to much randomness,to many blots).
> I think that you wish people-machine who work perfect until they > stop.One's
> for ever,The End!(?)Plastic doll who you could bore when became nasty?
> My humble experience with mechanism who investigate > random/rule-tarot,and
> similar discipline are para-scientist,worthless and extremely personal > as an
> experience and they're in strange co-relation with J.Koons
> statement(paraphrase):"We have to be objective and reduce influence of
> subconsiousnes."Which mean that we can see our self's in every sense of > this
> word(future,destiny,...)but what's the purpose?If you are afraid of > concept
> act like they doesn't existed.If you hate randomness there's no Superman
> anymore(he broke his neck and die)to save us.It looks to me that we must
> live with legs spread between random and predictable.See explanation of
> card"Chariot",and legend about Medusa,Orpheus&Eurydice,emotions?:)
> Cheers
> MANIK
>
>
> For me randomness, the concept, is a nightmare, it's quicksand, it is > the
> one thing i can think of that's worse then (pick any random worst > horror).
> The day Superman solves random we'll all go to heaven (yes, even you > manik).
>
> Try it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random
> They (we) can't even get the wikipedia article straightened out.
>
> dv
>
>
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > Van: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org]
> > Namens Pall Thayer
> > Verzonden: woensdag 11 januari 2006 15:55
> > Aan: Rob Myers
> > CC: Rhizome Raw list
> > Onderwerp: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: draw-something
> >
> > Hi Rob,
> > I was looking at this and find it interesting. Thanks for
> > sharing the code with us. There are a couple of questions
> > that come to mind. I'd like to know if you have any plans of
> > making the lines more "pencil"- like by creating a more
> > expressive line. I feel this is an issue that has been
> > largely overlooked by people working with automated drawing
> > processes. They tend to look really flat and dead because of it.
> > AARON, for instance, suffers from a severe case of flatness
> > that could be easily cured by some simple, maybe even random,
> > variation in line thickness and length. There's an
> > interesting project called Freestyle that's working on this
> > (among other things) at http://
> > freestyle.sourceforge.net/index.php (source available).
> >
> > Also, I noticed this on your blog:
> > "The shapes are random. The colours are random. At worst I'm
> > showing one in every three of these images.
> >
> > Randomness gives good results far more often than it should.
> > Is it the heuristics I'm coding in, or is aesthetics really random?
> >
> > Time to start adding rules."
> >
> > I think it has to do with the range of data. Random is going
> > to use the whole range of data equally whereas something like
> > weather is going to be concentrated in predictable area's of
> > the full range.
> > Personally, I think it's really interesting to see what
> > happens with different types of data. If you experiment with
> > different data sources, I think you'll find that they each
> > have their own significant character which could in turn be
> > interesting to mix together.
> >
> > Pall
> >
> > On 10.1.2006, at 18:56, Rob Myers wrote:
> >
> > > I have been working on my program draw-something.
> > >
> > > There's a Flash version (made with MTASC):
> > >
> > > http://draw-something.robmyers.org/
> > >
> > > And the Lisp version now makes multiple figures and
> > coloured figures:
> > >
> > > http://www.robmyers.org/weblog/2006/01/11/purely-random-colour/
> > > http://www.robmyers.org/weblog/2006/01/08/draw-something-drawing/
> > > http://www.robmyers.org/weblog/2006/01/08/a-change-of-algorithm-for-
> > > draw-something/
> > >
> > > Source for all versions available from sourceforge CVS
> > along with some
> > > recent release bundles:
> > >
> > > http:://rob-art.sourceforge.net/
> > >
> > > - Rob.
> > > +
> > > -> post: list@rhizome.org
> > > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> > > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/
> > > subscribe.rhiz
> > > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > > +
> > > 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
> > p_thay@alcor.concordia.ca
> > http://www.this.is/pallit
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > +
> > -> post: list@rhizome.org
> > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> > http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in
> > the Membership Agreement available online at
> > http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> >
>
>
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
i mentioned your name on my blog too (http://nkdee.blogspot.com) because i kinda like some of your work, so there'll be another 14 or so individuals on the planet who will know about it next week.
chill out sister, people are dying out there
dv
-----Original message-----
From: "manik" manik@ptt.yu
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:02:42 +0100
To: list@rhizome.org
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Fw: hell's cold
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: manik
> To: list@rhizome.org Dirk Vekemans
> Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 11:29 PM
> Subject: hell's cold
>
>
> Hi Dirk,
> You've mentioned my name in one sentence,I find that interesting as
> introduction in wide consideration relationship between > random-deliberate,
> predictable-unpredictable...I find art history-aesthetic-philosophy > could be good for
> reflection about those things,or for polemic at least.Those disciplines > are equal important as programming(for example).
> I'm not "programming artist"or"software artist",my personal interest for > Rhizome_Raw list writing's to define
> clean message:we are different people and our "role"in this time we live > together
> on this planet is to understand that this difference is not reason for > intolerance,...on the contrary.
>
> Cheers
> MANIK
> PS:
> Fact that Mondrian belong to Dutchman is not reason for you to be so > upset.
> I also mentioned Americans in that mail,and so far they're happy with > that.
>
>
>
> Apologies, MANIK from hell, i was out all day and perhaps it's because > i'm
> too tired but much as i feel obliged to anwer when addressed, i find it > near
> impossible to respond to your remarks in a meaningful way now: you start
> from mistaking my sigh of incompetence to deal with a concept for a
> definition of a word, and continue in a random fashion of pre-emptive
> strikes to nail my male but against an imagenary wall, it seems. My next
> mail in this thread kinda contradicts everything here, no? Anyway, i'm > not
> from the Netherlands, so there's no need to drag those fine people into > this
> and if you'd care to take a look at what i try to do, you might agree > i'm
> not after any kind of total control.
> How is hell these days anyway? i kinda miss the heat, sometimes.
> dv
>
>
> _____
>
> Van: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org] Namens manik
> Verzonden: donderdag 12 januari 2006 3:41
> Aan: list@rhizome.org
> Onderwerp: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: draw-something
>
>
> Hi Dirk,
> This is MANIK from hell.
> Let's get to work:for you randomness mean same as a concept("For me
> randomness, the concept, ...)
> This is interesting idea and I dare to see rot of it could be in > Dutchman's
> fight for fertility land,fight against nature(fait against randomness of
> see, the concept of other entity,God maybe.)American Pioneer have some > of
> that madness but they were cruel murder if is necessary,and of curse God > was
> good/necessary for pardon of sins)."So help me God!",they said and kill > some
> Iraqi child,or Indian,it doesn't matter.
> Man have to established full control,he's uber alles,he rule over > nature-in
> this moment this represent retro-modernistic concept with element of
> fascism(genetic control and modular stile of space/mind strategic
> organization),fancy,inn,mostly in design,and fashion,in
> "modular"architecture etc...Significant historical example were > Mondrian's
> neoplasticism,and Le Corbusier buildings.But even in Mondrians work was
> element of randomness,intentionally provoke suspense(Bugi-Vugi serial > from
> NYC,40-this,...to much randomness,to many blots).
> I think that you wish people-machine who work perfect until they > stop.One's
> for ever,The End!(?)Plastic doll who you could bore when became nasty?
> My humble experience with mechanism who investigate > random/rule-tarot,and
> similar discipline are para-scientist,worthless and extremely personal > as an
> experience and they're in strange co-relation with J.Koons
> statement(paraphrase):"We have to be objective and reduce influence of
> subconsiousnes."Which mean that we can see our self's in every sense of > this
> word(future,destiny,...)but what's the purpose?If you are afraid of > concept
> act like they doesn't existed.If you hate randomness there's no Superman
> anymore(he broke his neck and die)to save us.It looks to me that we must
> live with legs spread between random and predictable.See explanation of
> card"Chariot",and legend about Medusa,Orpheus&Eurydice,emotions?:)
> Cheers
> MANIK
>
>
> For me randomness, the concept, is a nightmare, it's quicksand, it is > the
> one thing i can think of that's worse then (pick any random worst > horror).
> The day Superman solves random we'll all go to heaven (yes, even you > manik).
>
> Try it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random
> They (we) can't even get the wikipedia article straightened out.
>
> dv
>
>
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > Van: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org]
> > Namens Pall Thayer
> > Verzonden: woensdag 11 januari 2006 15:55
> > Aan: Rob Myers
> > CC: Rhizome Raw list
> > Onderwerp: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: draw-something
> >
> > Hi Rob,
> > I was looking at this and find it interesting. Thanks for
> > sharing the code with us. There are a couple of questions
> > that come to mind. I'd like to know if you have any plans of
> > making the lines more "pencil"- like by creating a more
> > expressive line. I feel this is an issue that has been
> > largely overlooked by people working with automated drawing
> > processes. They tend to look really flat and dead because of it.
> > AARON, for instance, suffers from a severe case of flatness
> > that could be easily cured by some simple, maybe even random,
> > variation in line thickness and length. There's an
> > interesting project called Freestyle that's working on this
> > (among other things) at http://
> > freestyle.sourceforge.net/index.php (source available).
> >
> > Also, I noticed this on your blog:
> > "The shapes are random. The colours are random. At worst I'm
> > showing one in every three of these images.
> >
> > Randomness gives good results far more often than it should.
> > Is it the heuristics I'm coding in, or is aesthetics really random?
> >
> > Time to start adding rules."
> >
> > I think it has to do with the range of data. Random is going
> > to use the whole range of data equally whereas something like
> > weather is going to be concentrated in predictable area's of
> > the full range.
> > Personally, I think it's really interesting to see what
> > happens with different types of data. If you experiment with
> > different data sources, I think you'll find that they each
> > have their own significant character which could in turn be
> > interesting to mix together.
> >
> > Pall
> >
> > On 10.1.2006, at 18:56, Rob Myers wrote:
> >
> > > I have been working on my program draw-something.
> > >
> > > There's a Flash version (made with MTASC):
> > >
> > > http://draw-something.robmyers.org/
> > >
> > > And the Lisp version now makes multiple figures and
> > coloured figures:
> > >
> > > http://www.robmyers.org/weblog/2006/01/11/purely-random-colour/
> > > http://www.robmyers.org/weblog/2006/01/08/draw-something-drawing/
> > > http://www.robmyers.org/weblog/2006/01/08/a-change-of-algorithm-for-
> > > draw-something/
> > >
> > > Source for all versions available from sourceforge CVS
> > along with some
> > > recent release bundles:
> > >
> > > http:://rob-art.sourceforge.net/
> > >
> > > - Rob.
> > > +
> > > -> post: list@rhizome.org
> > > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> > > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/
> > > subscribe.rhiz
> > > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > > +
> > > 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
> > p_thay@alcor.concordia.ca
> > http://www.this.is/pallit
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > +
> > -> post: list@rhizome.org
> > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> > http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in
> > the Membership Agreement available online at
> > http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> >
>
>
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
a place in the Cathedral to link to (to visit while at work)
http://www.vilt.net/nkdee/backs.html
greetings,
dv @ Neue Kathedrale des erotischen Elends
http://www.vilt.net/nkdee
greetings,
dv @ Neue Kathedrale des erotischen Elends
http://www.vilt.net/nkdee