Kalter Rauch
Iterator
Posts: 198
|
|
« on: June 04, 2017, 12:57:46 AM » |
|
It seems there are 2 main schools of thought in fractal art. One side says a rendering must only show what is possible within a formula while the other side relegates the math to yet another tool at one's disposal.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Sabine
|
|
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2017, 11:07:46 AM » |
|
Indeed, there seems to be the mathematical school and the artistic. For me there's beauty in both, just maybe the pure mathematical beauty isn't seen by many while it is more bewildering and special in my eyes. On the other hand, no bad in making maths look sexy
|
|
|
Logged
|
sabine62.deviantart.com
|
|
|
Sockratease
|
|
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2017, 01:04:24 PM » |
|
I moved this here since it has absolutely no relation to our Board Rules and Guidelines!
As for the topic at hand, both sides are correct.
It depends if you are being a Scientist/Researcher about things, or an Artist.
Neither is the only way to do things.
In the 3D Art communities I plague with my presence there is a never-ending battle between those who claim that everyone should strive for Photo-Realism in their work and those who claim that the only goal is an Aesthetically Pleasing end product relative to what the Artistic Situation calls for at the moment.
I say if you want Photo-Realism, get a fluffing camera and go take a picture! I see no point in photo-realism unless you are compositing your final work into a film or photograph. Only then is realism at all important to me.
Relating that to fractals: If the finished product looks better, it doesn't matter if it's "pure math" or heavily post-worked in an image editor for Artistic purposes. If, however, you are trying to prove that some particular Fractal Formula makes some specific pattern, then it should represent the math as closely as possible (to which I'd add that in such cases the work should be "pure" monochrome as well, coloring can misrepresent what you are looking at!).
|
|
|
Logged
|
Life is complex - It has real and imaginary components. The All New Fractal Forums is now in Public Beta Testing! Visit FractalForums.org and check it out!
|
|
|
Chillheimer
|
|
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2017, 08:27:05 PM » |
|
1.to be honest I am absolutely convinced that it should actually be forbidden to colorize fractals. they are math and nothing else. black or white! 2. fractals could never ever be art! art is human. fractals are math. even if you do so much editing and photoshopping that you can't recognize the fractals as source --which is strictly prohibited, see 1.)-- they never are art. because a computer was necessary! the human is only a tool for the computer, putting in numbers, searching for existing good spots, finetuning faders. if it's not with a brush it is not art. everybody knows that. go home, do something worthwhile. paint some fluffy bob-ross clouds!!!!111!1!eleven or do some actual art like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yves_Klein#Monochrome_works:_The_Blue_Epoch and earn some real money! fractals art.. pfff..
|
|
|
Logged
|
--- Fractals - add some Chaos to your life and put the world in order. ---
|
|
|
Sockratease
|
|
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2017, 09:14:57 PM » |
|
1.to be honest I am absolutely convinced that it should actually be forbidden to colorize fractals. they are math and nothing else. black or white! 2. fractals could never ever be art! art is human. fractals are math. even if you do so much editing and photoshopping that you can't recognize the fractals as source --which is strictly prohibited, see 1.)-- they never are art. because a computer was necessary! the human is only a tool for the computer, putting in numbers, searching for existing good spots, finetuning faders. if it's not with a brush it is not art. everybody knows that. go home, do something worthwhile. paint some fluffy bob-ross clouds!!!!111!1!eleven or do some actual art like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yves_Klein#Monochrome_works:_The_Blue_Epoch and earn some real money! fractals art.. pfff.. Hmmm... Maybe this does belong in Board Rules and Guidelines after all!
|
|
|
Logged
|
Life is complex - It has real and imaginary components. The All New Fractal Forums is now in Public Beta Testing! Visit FractalForums.org and check it out!
|
|
|
3dickulus
|
|
« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2017, 11:07:32 PM » |
|
My 2 cents worth... It's math!!! and colors represent angles, slope, proximity etc, so colors are math too (with respect to fractals) These images "become" art when someone says "I would like a framed print to hang in the den, how much will that cost?" and this is especially true when the creator/artist does not save settings, only images, so a recreation will never look exactly as the original does, maybe close but not exact. They are also art when someone uses the image, say, as a desktop background and actually derives some pleasure from just looking at it. just mho edit: I do agree with Chillheimer in that the image generated from a math formula(s) should not be retouched or otherwise enhanced post render.
|
|
« Last Edit: June 05, 2017, 04:52:27 AM by 3dickulus, Reason: agree »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
1Bryan1
|
|
« Reply #6 on: June 05, 2017, 03:15:21 AM » |
|
By definition art is 'the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.'.
Math is art. mathematicians appreciate math primarily for its beauty and are quite emotional about them.
Rendering is art. the images produced are primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
Math and Rendering: for every person that says 'wow - such a beautiful {formula/image}' , there is a person that says 'meh'.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
hobold
Fractal Bachius
Posts: 573
|
|
« Reply #7 on: June 05, 2017, 09:14:47 AM » |
|
I suck at selecting a motif, at composition, colouring. I'm reasonably good at programming. I'm reasonably good at math.
Consequently the imagery that I produce is usually plain, bland, sterile. It is, IMHO, not art. It can still be interesting, though, showing structures in abstract math that you don't get to see otherwise. There are marvels and wonders up there (fractal or otherwise) that are, IMHO, worthy of exploration.
"Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder."
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Chillheimer
|
|
« Reply #8 on: June 05, 2017, 10:02:11 PM » |
|
edit: I do agree with Chillheimer in that the image generated from a math formula(s) should not be retouched or otherwise enhanced post render.
hm, seems like my sarcasm was lost in translation. I'm 100% on the "fractals are art"-side! And (as long as you don't claim it is pure, unedited mathematics) you should enhance the beauty or whatever you want to achieve with an image. For me it is what you do with the tool that you have in your hand. Be it a brush, a chisel, a musical instrument or a naked formula and a computer to work with it. When you zoom into the mandelbrot set, knowing the rules to find - or should I better say create? - beautiful patterns, then you create it in that very moment. probably for the first time in human history. So it has always been in there, even with or without you computing it? maybe...but: "Every block of stone has a statue inside it and it is the task of the sculptor to discover it." Leonardo DaVinci
|
|
|
Logged
|
--- Fractals - add some Chaos to your life and put the world in order. ---
|
|
|
3dickulus
|
|
« Reply #9 on: June 06, 2017, 01:35:05 AM » |
|
@Chillheimer yes, I suppose I should clarify, unedited/unretouched would be a category of "pure" fractal art. It is definitely art, Axolotl comes to mind as a combination of fractal and mathematically generated objects, and on the flip-side, Mr. Alexx's works are certainly art with fractals and imaginative enhancement to complete the artists vision. The programs are the tools, the math is the stone, I expect that FractalForums.com will remain on the bleeding edge of this phenomenon
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
thargor6
Fractal Molossus
Posts: 789
|
|
« Reply #10 on: June 06, 2017, 01:53:53 AM » |
|
hm, seems like my sarcasm was lost in translation. :hurt
Don't worry, was very obvious, I think (and I liked it) Cheers!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Kalter Rauch
Iterator
Posts: 198
|
|
« Reply #11 on: June 07, 2017, 08:18:06 AM » |
|
I was using ChaosPro long before Gimp which I started using only a year ago, and it seems that the same impulse to make primitive air stenciled handprints is at work...
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Kalter Rauch
Iterator
Posts: 198
|
|
« Reply #12 on: June 07, 2017, 08:27:09 AM » |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Kalter Rauch
Iterator
Posts: 198
|
|
« Reply #13 on: June 07, 2017, 09:21:17 AM » |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Kalter Rauch
Iterator
Posts: 198
|
|
« Reply #14 on: June 12, 2017, 05:29:35 AM » |
|
No matter how rule-driven there is always a fore and background and therefore set and setting.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|