Made with Amiga in Italy

Incomparabile · 21 January 2003, 22:53

www.elena-fractals.it

You must accept pop-up window to see images

Fred the Fop · 21 January 2003, 23:45

They make wonderful desktop pictures

Thanks for the link! Amiga lives, who needs AmigaOne!

andreas · 25 January 2003, 02:38

that's one woman doing all this.
Look at the AUTHOR sub-page.

25 January 2003, 03:10

Best fractals I've seen. Calling fractals as art is lame though.

Mr Softy · 25 January 2003, 15:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Burseg
Calling fractals as art is lame though.

I do not agree.

25 January 2003, 16:30

Fractals are just mathematical functions.

If my poop had a nice gradient color it would look better, alas it's just brown.

Mr Softy · 25 January 2003, 18:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Burseg
If my poop had a nice gradient color it would look better, alas it's just brown.

If you look close enough, you can see art in a lot of things. That's why I love noise, for instance.

Actually I believe that you love demos, right? Well demos are nothing more than a code; the chips and circuits interpret this, and boom! Art. Not far from a fractal, finally... Very mathematical anyway.

And if you forget what poop is, just for a moment, I mean, by completely leaving outside your head what it IS, I am damn sure you can see some beauty within it...

(half joking)

25 January 2003, 18:35

Any digital artwork is code but the tool that works as an interface between the creator and the artwork defines whether or not the product is art. In fact don't like the word "art", let's say it defines whether or not the resulting piece is "intended".

In a painting program, you control directly the result, how the piece looks like but fractals are indirect results of mathematical functions. I'm not speaking of craftsmanship, digital environment is the future but I'm speaking of the mindwork behind the resulting product.

I agree you on the poop actually. It has a smell like nothing else!

Syko · 02 February 2003, 18:57

Burseg, by that defenition, photographs can't be art...

I'd say that although anyone can execute the same programme on the same system and get the same result, the art lies in choosing from the infinite number of possible pictures the small sub-set that consitute 'good' pictures.... That takes a level of skill, interpretation and artistic appreciation that most people never develope, even though they can appreciate the results. It's definately art!

02 February 2003, 19:38

Choosing a good picture within randomly generated ones is not actually producing it. Photography is not just grabbing visuals that is already around. Since photography troubled me for years in the uni. I can suggest that a photograph of an object has absolutely no relevance with the actual identity of the object therefore depending on one's control over the machine and the object as the tools, along with the materials in the dark room a photograph can be a product of mind or just another documentary image.

Amiga1992 · 03 February 2003, 14:50

I agree with Burseg, really. The fact that you can chose a pretty fractal doesn't make you an artist (or mean you have a quality for arts/graphic expression), IMO.

Syko · 04 February 2003, 17:01

Never refered to them as an "artist" merely that they had artistic appreciation, and the ability to apply it to the choice of picture.

The reason I feel it counts as art, is that I've produced hundreds of fractals and not found any intrinsic reason why two very similar pictures could be differentiated as to their artistic merit. This shows that either; I don't have this ability, or, that I have not developed it. Since they do, and have, and, I feel it is this ability that allows people to create art, rather than just pictures; This indicates that the art is in the choice of picture, however that picture is acheived, wether through paint, photography, or computer.

One example is that their are hundreds of thousands of "snaps" (if not milllions) and almost without exception these have no artistic qualities of any kind, and yet it is possible to pull from these a very small number which have merit, and deserve a larger display - my dad has taken hundreds and has maybe 10 - 15 that are 'good'. So the choice of picture can be just as important as how it is produced.

04 February 2003, 17:23

I don't care a little on how a pic is produced. When a discussion on craftsmanship arises hand laborers (classic painters) start blaming photographers and digital artists for not working with their "hands". That's not the point. Any media can be a tool to reach the destination. The point is, with fractals you don't mean to do what you aim therefore you can't be described as the creator.

A beautiful landscape isn't art yet it's beautiful and that's what a fractal might ever be. Art on the contrary, doesn't even have to be beautiful. If we directly link "beauity" with "art" we have the wrong formula.

Syko · 04 February 2003, 18:07

I'm definately not going to start to argue weather art=beauty or not, as that one hasn't been resolved in the last 2 thousand years!

Personally I don't think its that important either way...

A professional photographer will frequently take 100+ pictures to get the one they want. They willl vary exposure, aperture etc. They will vary the developing solution, time in solution, print exposure, and that's before considering any filters. They do this because they cannot always get exactly what they aim for, and so have to scatter their approach to get the best result - although this may not even be the best possible result! This is not so very different from taking 100+ fractal images from around the same coordinates and choosing one as the best - although knowing the best point to start from is also an artistic value judgement.

The essential aspect of both proccesses is that the operator involved makes a choice based on their artistic ability and appreciation, thus producing art from chaos. The painter or sculptor also has this choice, but one stage earlier as they don't need to winnow through physical alternatives - they can do this mentaly with each step of the production, always making an artistic desision on how to procceed. None of this is altered if anyone can use the same tools as the artist and recreate the same image.

The art is in the choice.

04 February 2003, 18:28

You have an empty 2000x3500 300dpi canvas. Now "choose" what to do.

Syko · 04 February 2003, 18:35

Amiga1992 · 04 February 2003, 19:30

I think one of the main problems I have with fractals is that they mean pish all. yeah it's beautiful, but does it say something? Besides "I am made of MAD mathematics, foo", I don't think it says anything else.

Incomparabile · 04 February 2003, 21:36

Consider what my teachers says:

"You can make a program to create all possible images with 256 colours, 320 x 240 pixel.

In those images created randomly, you will find art, your face, a rare photo in the top of Everest...

04 February 2003, 21:40

Art made by "no one" can't have a reason to exist. Akira's point it is strong. No message is transmitted to the viewer since no human involved therefore there is nothing to appreciate. Again I can use my poop example here. You can't call it art. Why? Because it is ugly? No, because of the reasons I listed here.

Syko · 05 February 2003, 18:09

Art is everywhere, it just needs someone to say "Look, there it is!" the act of choosing creates it (although it may not be any good as 'art').

Art has no message other than it's own existance. Any percieved message is based on interpretation of the producer and/or the experiencer.

Oh, and "all possible images with 256 colours, 320 x 240" can't possibly be "created ramdomly" it is the mathmatical expresion of all possible values of the 76800 points in the picture - all 19660800 of them.

21 January 2003, 22:53	#1
Incomparabile Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Urbino / Italy Age: 42 Posts: 110	Made with Amiga in Italy www.elena-fractals.it You must accept pop-up window to see images

25 January 2003, 02:38	#3
andreas Zone Friend Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Germany Age: 50 Posts: 5,857	not "they" that's one woman doing all this. Look at the AUTHOR sub-page.

02 February 2003, 19:38	#10
oldpx Posts: n/a	Choosing a good picture within randomly generated ones is not actually producing it. Photography is not just grabbing visuals that is already around. Since photography troubled me for years in the uni. I can suggest that a photograph of an object has absolutely no relevance with the actual identity of the object therefore depending on one's control over the machine and the object as the tools, along with the materials in the dark room a photograph can be a product of mind or just another documentary image. Last edited by Burseg; 02 February 2003 at 19:44.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Amiga speaking Italy	lukezab	Amiga scene	5	14 January 2009 14:39
Varius amiga Buy Italy or Europe	Dexther	MarketPlace	3	26 February 2008 22:42
ST games that never made on Amiga...	the wolf	Retrogaming General Discussion	8	07 March 2004 18:04
What do the Amiga, a woman coder from Italy and a dislike of math have in common?	Pyromania	Amiga scene	6	17 April 2003 15:12
What do you think it was the best movie that made to the amiga and why ?	Shatterhand	Nostalgia & memories	14	08 September 2002 04:41

21 January 2003, 23:45	#2
Fred the Fop flaming faggot Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Versailles Age: 55 Posts: 2,808	They make wonderful desktop pictures Thanks for the link! Amiga lives, who needs AmigaOne!

25 January 2003, 03:10	#4
oldpx Posts: n/a	Best fractals I've seen. Calling fractals as art is lame though.

25 January 2003, 16:30	#6
oldpx Posts: n/a	Fractals are just mathematical functions. If my poop had a nice gradient color it would look better, alas it's just brown.

25 January 2003, 18:35	#8
oldpx Posts: n/a	Any digital artwork is code but the tool that works as an interface between the creator and the artwork defines whether or not the product is art. In fact don't like the word "art", let's say it defines whether or not the resulting piece is "intended". In a painting program, you control directly the result, how the piece looks like but fractals are indirect results of mathematical functions. I'm not speaking of craftsmanship, digital environment is the future but I'm speaking of the mindwork behind the resulting product. I agree you on the poop actually. It has a smell like nothing else!

02 February 2003, 18:57	#9
Syko Now got GSX750F :)) Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Halifax UK Age: 60 Posts: 584	Burseg, by that defenition, photographs can't be art... I'd say that although anyone can execute the same programme on the same system and get the same result, the art lies in choosing from the infinite number of possible pictures the small sub-set that consitute 'good' pictures.... That takes a level of skill, interpretation and artistic appreciation that most people never develope, even though they can appreciate the results. It's definately art!

03 February 2003, 14:50	#11
Amiga1992 Registered User Join Date: May 2001 Location: ? Posts: 19,654	I agree with Burseg, really. The fact that you can chose a pretty fractal doesn't make you an artist (or mean you have a quality for arts/graphic expression), IMO.

04 February 2003, 17:01	#12
Syko Now got GSX750F :)) Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Halifax UK Age: 60 Posts: 584	Never refered to them as an "artist" merely that they had artistic appreciation, and the ability to apply it to the choice of picture. The reason I feel it counts as art, is that I've produced hundreds of fractals and not found any intrinsic reason why two very similar pictures could be differentiated as to their artistic merit. This shows that either; I don't have this ability, or, that I have not developed it. Since they do, and have, and, I feel it is this ability that allows people to create art, rather than just pictures; This indicates that the art is in the choice of picture, however that picture is acheived, wether through paint, photography, or computer. One example is that their are hundreds of thousands of "snaps" (if not milllions) and almost without exception these have no artistic qualities of any kind, and yet it is possible to pull from these a very small number which have merit, and deserve a larger display - my dad has taken hundreds and has maybe 10 - 15 that are 'good'. So the choice of picture can be just as important as how it is produced.

04 February 2003, 17:23	#13
oldpx Posts: n/a	I don't care a little on how a pic is produced. When a discussion on craftsmanship arises hand laborers (classic painters) start blaming photographers and digital artists for not working with their "hands". That's not the point. Any media can be a tool to reach the destination. The point is, with fractals you don't mean to do what you aim therefore you can't be described as the creator. A beautiful landscape isn't art yet it's beautiful and that's what a fractal might ever be. Art on the contrary, doesn't even have to be beautiful. If we directly link "beauity" with "art" we have the wrong formula.

04 February 2003, 18:07	#14
Syko Now got GSX750F :)) Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Halifax UK Age: 60 Posts: 584	I'm definately not going to start to argue weather art=beauty or not, as that one hasn't been resolved in the last 2 thousand years! Personally I don't think its that important either way... A professional photographer will frequently take 100+ pictures to get the one they want. They willl vary exposure, aperture etc. They will vary the developing solution, time in solution, print exposure, and that's before considering any filters. They do this because they cannot always get exactly what they aim for, and so have to scatter their approach to get the best result - although this may not even be the best possible result! This is not so very different from taking 100+ fractal images from around the same coordinates and choosing one as the best - although knowing the best point to start from is also an artistic value judgement. The essential aspect of both proccesses is that the operator involved makes a choice based on their artistic ability and appreciation, thus producing art from chaos. The painter or sculptor also has this choice, but one stage earlier as they don't need to winnow through physical alternatives - they can do this mentaly with each step of the production, always making an artistic desision on how to procceed. None of this is altered if anyone can use the same tools as the artist and recreate the same image. The art is in the choice.

04 February 2003, 18:28	#15
oldpx Posts: n/a	You have an empty 2000x3500 300dpi canvas. Now "choose" what to do.

04 February 2003, 18:35	#16
Syko Now got GSX750F :)) Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Halifax UK Age: 60 Posts: 584

04 February 2003, 19:30	#17
Amiga1992 Registered User Join Date: May 2001 Location: ? Posts: 19,654	I think one of the main problems I have with fractals is that they mean pish all. yeah it's beautiful, but does it say something? Besides "I am made of MAD mathematics, foo", I don't think it says anything else.

04 February 2003, 21:36	#18
Incomparabile Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Urbino / Italy Age: 42 Posts: 110	Consider what my teachers says: "You can make a program to create all possible images with 256 colours, 320 x 240 pixel. In those images created randomly, you will find art, your face, a rare photo in the top of Everest...

04 February 2003, 21:40	#19
oldpx Posts: n/a	Art made by "no one" can't have a reason to exist. Akira's point it is strong. No message is transmitted to the viewer since no human involved therefore there is nothing to appreciate. Again I can use my poop example here. You can't call it art. Why? Because it is ugly? No, because of the reasons I listed here.

05 February 2003, 18:09	#20
Syko Now got GSX750F :)) Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Halifax UK Age: 60 Posts: 584	Art is everywhere, it just needs someone to say "Look, there it is!" the act of choosing creates it (although it may not be any good as 'art'). Art has no message other than it's own existance. Any percieved message is based on interpretation of the producer and/or the experiencer. Oh, and "all possible images with 256 colours, 320 x 240" can't possibly be "created ramdomly" it is the mathmatical expresion of all possible values of the 76800 points in the picture - all 19660800 of them.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)