ARTBASE (2)
BIO
Jim Andrews does http://vispo.com . He is a poet-programmer and audio guy. His work explores the new media possibilities of poetry, and seeks to synthesize the poetical with other arts and media.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: what is the name for this type of work?
> a genetic algorithm is basically a mathematical model of evolution
> (not the kansas schoolbook one, but the darwin one....)
> you start out with giving a (parent) a set of data, lets say
> a set of strings (the strings are bearing the "genetic information"
> like in the DNA). then you reshuffle in order to get a new string.
> There are several variants of reshuffling (for details see
> crossover etc. in wikipedia), like reversing the order of
> letters in one string or mixing two different strings (thats
> how humans do it...). in this way you get NEW strings.
> now you have to choose which one should be your new parent strings.
> this choice is often based on rules (choice of the fittest)
> sometimes its up to you like e.g. in the genetic art program
> Kandid:
> http://kandid.sourceforge.net/
In this project, is the "genetic information" the graphics themselves or properties of the graphics?
> so the term genetic ALGORITHM (GA) is more or less settled, the term
> genetic ART however not. some people denote with this term
> artwork which involves genetic algorithms or at least some
> evolutionary principles, in this case they call these kind of
> artwork also evolutionary. a very nice example is e.g.
> Golan Levins alphabeth synthesis machine:
> http://alphabet.tmema.org/
>
> other people mean with genetic art artwork where you fumble around
> with real genes, like Eduardo Kac and his green bunny. Here the
> evolutionary aspect is not important, the remixing of genes
> however is.
>
>
> > Concerning the method of selection in Kate & Michael's piece of the
> > images, I don't know whether it's totally random.
> >
>
> i think its random, it would be interesting to implement a rule base GA.
would it be accurate to say that they leave the 'evolution' to the livejournal images (they draw the images from that database)? the database simply changes over time, though (rather than 'evolving'), so maybe not. i guess the crucial thing, if i understand correctly, is that the change be based on the previous iteration?
> > I see you're pretty seriously into art, programming, and math at
> > http://daytar.de . Interesting work!
> >
> >
> yes may be i am a bit too serious about everything...:-)
>
> you have also very nice stuff on your webpage. unfortunately
> i couldnt see the shockwave parts, since i am breeding on linux.
> i am skeptical wether this problem will be resolved with
> adobes new shopping spree. ..
Someone on this list, perhaps a year ago, pointed out that it is possible to run Shockwave under Linux. I could be wrong, but I think it was via Crossover. You are correct, however, that there is no official Linux version of Shockwave from Macromedia.
ja
> (not the kansas schoolbook one, but the darwin one....)
> you start out with giving a (parent) a set of data, lets say
> a set of strings (the strings are bearing the "genetic information"
> like in the DNA). then you reshuffle in order to get a new string.
> There are several variants of reshuffling (for details see
> crossover etc. in wikipedia), like reversing the order of
> letters in one string or mixing two different strings (thats
> how humans do it...). in this way you get NEW strings.
> now you have to choose which one should be your new parent strings.
> this choice is often based on rules (choice of the fittest)
> sometimes its up to you like e.g. in the genetic art program
> Kandid:
> http://kandid.sourceforge.net/
In this project, is the "genetic information" the graphics themselves or properties of the graphics?
> so the term genetic ALGORITHM (GA) is more or less settled, the term
> genetic ART however not. some people denote with this term
> artwork which involves genetic algorithms or at least some
> evolutionary principles, in this case they call these kind of
> artwork also evolutionary. a very nice example is e.g.
> Golan Levins alphabeth synthesis machine:
> http://alphabet.tmema.org/
>
> other people mean with genetic art artwork where you fumble around
> with real genes, like Eduardo Kac and his green bunny. Here the
> evolutionary aspect is not important, the remixing of genes
> however is.
>
>
> > Concerning the method of selection in Kate & Michael's piece of the
> > images, I don't know whether it's totally random.
> >
>
> i think its random, it would be interesting to implement a rule base GA.
would it be accurate to say that they leave the 'evolution' to the livejournal images (they draw the images from that database)? the database simply changes over time, though (rather than 'evolving'), so maybe not. i guess the crucial thing, if i understand correctly, is that the change be based on the previous iteration?
> > I see you're pretty seriously into art, programming, and math at
> > http://daytar.de . Interesting work!
> >
> >
> yes may be i am a bit too serious about everything...:-)
>
> you have also very nice stuff on your webpage. unfortunately
> i couldnt see the shockwave parts, since i am breeding on linux.
> i am skeptical wether this problem will be resolved with
> adobes new shopping spree. ..
Someone on this list, perhaps a year ago, pointed out that it is possible to run Shockwave under Linux. I could be wrong, but I think it was via Crossover. You are correct, however, that there is no official Linux version of Shockwave from Macromedia.
ja
Re: make your own MMOG
> http://www.multiverse.net/
>
> Definitely could have net art applications.
>
> >From the site:
>
> There are no upfront costs. We only make money when you make money,
> and if you never charge a cent, you never have to pay us anything.
>
> Haven't delved in much yet...
Inerestin. I take it you didn't see that it's only for Windows? I can't
imagine that would go over very well with you!
Sounds very nice but I don't see any downloads. I guess we'll just have to
wait and see.
ja
>
> Definitely could have net art applications.
>
> >From the site:
>
> There are no upfront costs. We only make money when you make money,
> and if you never charge a cent, you never have to pay us anything.
>
> Haven't delved in much yet...
Inerestin. I take it you didn't see that it's only for Windows? I can't
imagine that would go over very well with you!
Sounds very nice but I don't see any downloads. I guess we'll just have to
wait and see.
ja
Macromedia is no more
Macromedia has very quietly ceased to be:
http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/200512/120105MACRAcq
uisitionClose.html
ja
http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/200512/120105MACRAcq
uisitionClose.html
ja
Re: manifest
the internet had list serves and newsgroups before there was a Web.
i had an internet account in those days, but a wholly textual thing it was; i was more interested in print.
it was only when the web started that i became interested in publishing online. and i'm a writer, primarily, not a visual artist.
art is not about explanations.
i've been doing some surfing recently using 'stumble upon.' you specify categories of web sites you're interested in, and then you click a button and some web site from those categories comes up. i find that the sites i stay longer than a glimpse on have something mysterious about them and they don't put too much stuff on one page. if i ask myself 'what is this?' that's good. if they then proceed to explain what it is at length, i'm out of there. i find i'm not looking for explanations or comments about anything. just for the thing itself. and not reams of information all at once. focus. in surfing this way, i find i really don't care if it's the answer to the universe and everything if it's scattered and verbose. i'm out of there if it is. there's just too much text on the planet to bother to sort it all out. maybe it's just me, though.
concerning lists and newsgroups, they're great.
do you read archives of lists?
i think that's rare. mostly the discourse is evanescent.
when movies introduced sound, silent movies died. not because all the 'talkies' were better films. sound is higher bandwidth of human feeling (mostly via the human voice) and of the world itself and its atmospheres than just text.
i know there's people who still like just text/text only. and that's fine.
print does that quite well, by the way. books. magazines. chapbooks. etc. at least 2500 years of work there.
ja
http://vispo.com
> why bother making web art, mov. files, video, etc., when you can
> explain your ideas on a listserv?
> whats the point?
> please tell me.
> couldn't we all just explain the work and then move on?
> why do we need the online manifestation?
> Big Question,
> no responses
> Eric
i had an internet account in those days, but a wholly textual thing it was; i was more interested in print.
it was only when the web started that i became interested in publishing online. and i'm a writer, primarily, not a visual artist.
art is not about explanations.
i've been doing some surfing recently using 'stumble upon.' you specify categories of web sites you're interested in, and then you click a button and some web site from those categories comes up. i find that the sites i stay longer than a glimpse on have something mysterious about them and they don't put too much stuff on one page. if i ask myself 'what is this?' that's good. if they then proceed to explain what it is at length, i'm out of there. i find i'm not looking for explanations or comments about anything. just for the thing itself. and not reams of information all at once. focus. in surfing this way, i find i really don't care if it's the answer to the universe and everything if it's scattered and verbose. i'm out of there if it is. there's just too much text on the planet to bother to sort it all out. maybe it's just me, though.
concerning lists and newsgroups, they're great.
do you read archives of lists?
i think that's rare. mostly the discourse is evanescent.
when movies introduced sound, silent movies died. not because all the 'talkies' were better films. sound is higher bandwidth of human feeling (mostly via the human voice) and of the world itself and its atmospheres than just text.
i know there's people who still like just text/text only. and that's fine.
print does that quite well, by the way. books. magazines. chapbooks. etc. at least 2500 years of work there.
ja
http://vispo.com
> why bother making web art, mov. files, video, etc., when you can
> explain your ideas on a listserv?
> whats the point?
> please tell me.
> couldn't we all just explain the work and then move on?
> why do we need the online manifestation?
> Big Question,
> no responses
> Eric
Darwin exhibition Web site
I've been reading the Web site ( http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin )
concerning the current exhibition on Darwin's work at the American Museum of
Natural History in New York. It's well written and engaging, if you'd like
to check it out. It outlines in an exciting, understandable way how Darwin
came to his notion of evolution. It also has an interesting video talking
with scientists from many fields and the importance in their work of the
theory of evolution. And there are good resources there for teachers.
ja
http://vispo.com
concerning the current exhibition on Darwin's work at the American Museum of
Natural History in New York. It's well written and engaging, if you'd like
to check it out. It outlines in an exciting, understandable way how Darwin
came to his notion of evolution. It also has an interesting video talking
with scientists from many fields and the importance in their work of the
theory of evolution. And there are good resources there for teachers.
ja
http://vispo.com