Algorithmic art

Algorithmic art or algorithm art is art, mostly visual art, in which the design is generated by an algorithm. Algorithmic artists are sometimes called algorists.

For the technique of performing basic arithmetic, see Algorism.
"Octopod" by Mikael Hvidtfeldt Christensen. An example of algorithmic art produced with the software Structure Synth.[1]

Overview
Further information: Mathematics and art
Simple Algorithmic Art, generated using random numbers

Algorithmic art, also known as computer-generated art, is a subset of generative art (generated by an autonomous system) and is related to systems art (influenced by systems theory). Fractal art is an example of algorithmic art.[2]

For an image of reasonable size, even the simplest algorithms require too much calculation for manual execution to be practical, and they are thus executed on either a single computer or on a cluster of computers. The final output is typically displayed on a computer monitor, printed with a raster-type printer, or drawn using a plotter. Variability can be introduced by using pseudo-random numbers. There is no consensus as to whether the product of an algorithm that operates on an existing image (or on any input other than pseudo-random numbers) can still be considered computer-generated art, as opposed to computer-assisted art.[2]

History
Islamic geometric patterns such as this girih tiling in the Darb-e Imam shrine in Isfahan, are precursors of algorithmic art.[3]

Roman Verostko argues that Islamic geometric patterns are constructed using algorithms, as are Italian Renaissance paintings which make use of mathematical techniques, in particular linear perspective and proportion.[3]

Paolo Uccello made innovative use of a geometric algorithm, incorporating linear perspective in paintings such as The Battle of San Romano (c. 1435–1460): broken lances run along perspective lines.

Some of the earliest known examples of computer-generated algorithmic art were created by Georg Nees, Frieder Nake, A. Michael Noll, Manfred Mohr and Vera Molnár in the early 1960s. These artworks were executed by a plotter controlled by a computer, and were therefore computer-generated art but not digital art. The act of creation lay in writing the program, which specified the sequence of actions to be performed by the plotter. Sonia Landy Sheridan established Generative Systems as a program at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago in 1970 in response to social change brought about in part by the computer-robot communications revolution.[4] Her early work with copier and telematic art focused on the differences between the human hand and the algorithm.[5]

Aside from the ongoing work of Roman Verostko and his fellow algorists, the next known examples are fractal artworks created in the mid to late 1980s. These are important here because they use a different means of execution. Whereas the earliest algorithmic art was "drawn" by a plotter, fractal art simply creates an image in computer memory; it is therefore digital art. The native form of a fractal artwork is an image stored on a computer –this is also true of very nearly all equation art and of most recent algorithmic art in general. However, in a stricter sense "fractal art" is not considered algorithmic art, because the algorithm is not devised by the artist.[2]

In light of such ongoing developments, pioneer algorithmic artist Ernest Edmonds has documented the continuing prophetic role of art in human affairs by tracing the early 1960s association between art and the computer up to a present time in which the algorithm is now widely recognized as a key concept for society as a whole.[6]

Role of the algorithm
Letter Field by Judson Rosebush, 1978. Calcomp plotter computer output with liquid inks on rag paper, 15.25 x 21 inches. This image was created using an early version of what became Digital Effects' Vision software, in APL and Fortran on an IBM 370/158. A database of the Souvenir font; random number generation, a statistical basis to determine letter size, color, and position; and a hidden line algorithm combine to produce this scan line raster image, output to a plotter.

From one point of view, for a work of art to be considered algorithmic art, its creation must include a process based on an algorithm devised by the artist. Here, an algorithm is simply a detailed recipe for the design and possibly execution of an artwork, which may include computer code, functions, expressions, or other input which ultimately determines the form the art will take.[3] This input may be mathematical, computational, or generative in nature. Inasmuch as algorithms tend to be deterministic, meaning that their repeated execution would always result in the production of identical artworks, some external factor is usually introduced. This can either be a random number generator of some sort, or an external body of data (which can range from recorded heartbeats to frames of a movie.) Some artists also work with organically based gestural input which is then modified by an algorithm. By this definition, fractals made by a fractal program are not art, as humans are not involved. However, defined differently, algorithmic art can be seen to include fractal art, as well as other varieties such as those using genetic algorithms. The artist Kerry Mitchell stated in his 1999 Fractal Art Manifesto:[7][2][8]

Fractal Art is not..Computer(ized) Art, in the sense that the computer does all the work. The work is executed on a computer, but only at the direction of the artist. Turn a computer on and leave it alone for an hour. When you come back, no art will have been generated.[7]

Algorists

"Algorist" is a term used for digital artists who create algorithmic art.[3]

Algorists formally began correspondence and establishing their identity as artists following a panel titled "Art and Algorithms" at SIGGRAPH in 1995. The co-founders were Jean-Pierre Hébert and Roman Verostko. Hébert is credited with coining the term and its definition, which is in the form of his own algorithm:[3]

if (creation && object of art && algorithm && one's own algorithm) {
     return * an algorist *
} else {
     return * not an algorist *
}

Types
Morphogenetic Creations, a computer-generated digital art exhibition using programmed algorithms by Andy Lomas, at the Watermans Arts Centre, west London, 2016

Cellular automata can be used to generate artistic patterns with an appearance of randomness, or to modify images such as photographs by applying a transformation such as the stepping stone rule (to give an impressionist style) repeatedly until the desired artistic effect is achieved.[9] Their use has also been explored in music.[10]

Fractal art consists of varieties of computer-generated fractals with colouring chosen to give an attractive effect.[11] Especially in the western world, it is not drawn or painted by hand. It is usually created indirectly with the assistance of fractal-generating software, iterating through three phases: setting parameters of appropriate fractal software; executing the possibly lengthy calculation; and evaluating the product. In some cases, other graphics programs are used to further modify the images produced. This is called post-processing. Non-fractal imagery may also be integrated into the artwork.[12]

Genetic or evolutionary art makes use of genetic algorithms to develop images iteratively, selecting at each "generation" according to a rule defined by the artist.[13][14]

Algorithmic art is not only produced by computers. Wendy Chun explains:[15]

Software is unique in its status as metaphor for metaphor itself. As A universal imitator/machine, it encapsulates a logic of general substitutability; a logic of ordering and creative, animating disordering. Joseph Weizenbaum has argued that computers have become metaphors for "effective procedures," that is, for anything that can be solved in a prescribed number of steps, such as gene expression and clerical work.[15]

The American artist, Jack Ox, has used algorithms to produce paintings that are visualizations of music without using a computer. Two examples are visual performances of extant scores, such as Anton Bruckner's Eighth Symphony[16][17] and Kurt Schwitters' Ursonate.[18][19] Later, she and her collaborator, Dave Britton, created the 21st Century Virtual Color Organ that does use computer coding and algorithms.[20]

Since 1996 there have been ambigram generators that auto generate ambigrams[21][22][23]

Genetic or evolutionary art relies on the principles of genetic algorithms to produce images iteratively. Artists define a set of rules or criteria, and the algorithm evolves images over successive generations to meet these criteria. This approach allows for the emergence of unexpected and unique visual outcomes, emphasizing the collaborative creativity between the artist and the algorithm.

While this article primarily focuses on visual art, it is essential to acknowledge the existence of algorithmic music. Similar to algorithmic art, algorithmic music leverages computational processes to generate melodies, rhythms, and harmonies. Composers use algorithms to create intricate musical compositions, sometimes incorporating randomness and generative elements to infuse unique character into their pieces

The Influence of Algorithmic Art on Contemporary Art and Culture

Algorithmic art has evolved from a niche creative technique into a dynamic force that shapes contemporary art and culture. This section explores the profound influence of algorithmic art on these domains, emphasizing its role in redefining artistic expression, pushing creative boundaries, and reflecting societal changes.

Redefining Artistic Expression

Algorithmic art challenges traditional notions of artistic creation. It offers a departure from the conventional artist's brushstroke or sculptor's chisel, and instead, it relies on mathematical formulas and computational processes. This shift in artistic expression allows for new dimensions of creativity and experimentation. Artists now use algorithms to generate designs, visuals, and even music, leading to a fusion of technology and art that redefines the boundaries of human ingenuity. Algorithmic art serves as a bridge between the worlds of art and technology. The algorithms that underpin these creations are often the result of innovative technological advancements. As technology continues to advance, algorithmic art adapts and thrives, embracing new tools and techniques. The integration of technology and artistic expression opens up uncharted territories, encouraging artists to explore unimagined possibilities in their works.[24]

Democratizing Artistic Creation

One of the notable impacts of algorithmic art is its potential to democratize artistic creation. Traditional art creation often relies on extensive training and materials, limiting access for many aspiring artists. In contrast, algorithmic art can be practiced by individuals with programming skills and access to a computer. This democratization of art creation empowers a broader range of individuals to become artists and participate in the artistic conversation.

Reflecting Contemporary Society

Algorithmic art is not just a creative endeavor; it is a reflection of contemporary society. In a world increasingly influenced by technology, algorithms play a significant role in our daily lives, from recommendation systems to data analysis. Algorithmic art embraces these influences, often incorporating data-driven or machine learning approaches to create art. This reflects the growing significance of algorithms in shaping our culture and invites discussions about the intersection of technology, creativity, and human existence. The incorporation of algorithms into artistic creation raises profound questions about the nature of creativity. Algorithmic art challenges the traditional romanticized view of the artist as a solitary genius and instead highlights the collaborative aspect between artists and their algorithms. It encourages us to reconsider what constitutes creativity and the roles of humans and machines in the creative process.[25]

Pushing Creative Boundaries

Algorithmic art encourages artists to push creative boundaries and explore uncharted territories. The endless possibilities offered by algorithms, from generative processes to data visualization, inspire artists to experiment and innovate continuously. As a result, we witness a constant evolution in artistic styles and techniques, often blending elements of traditional and algorithmic art. Algorithmic art has expanded beyond static visuals to include interactive and dynamic artworks. These pieces respond to user input or external data sources, creating immersive experiences for viewers. Interactive algorithmic art engages the audience in a dialogue with the artwork, allowing for a personalized and ever-changing experience, thereby transforming the passive observer into an active participant in the artistic process. New forms of AI image generation add a new aspect to the generation of art.[26]

Cultural Impact

The cultural impact of algorithmic art is palpable. It challenges traditional aesthetics and opens the door to novel forms of artistic expression. Museums, galleries, and cultural institutions now showcase algorithmic artworks, demonstrating their acceptance as legitimate forms of contemporary art. This cultural integration has contributed to the recognition of algorithmic artists and their contributions to the broader art world.

See also

References
  1. Hvidtfeldt Christensen, Mikael. "Hvitfeldts.net". Retrieved 2 October 2015.
  2. "Approximating Reality with Interactive Algorithmic Art". University of California Santa Barbara. 7 June 2001. Retrieved 25 December 2015.
  3. Verostko, Roman (1999) [1994]. "Algorithmic Art".
  4. Sonia Landy Sheridan, "Generative Systems versus Copy Art: A Clarification of Terms and Ideas", in: Leonardo, Vol. 16, No. 2 (Spring, 1983), pp. 103-108. doi:10.2307/1574794
  5. Flanagan, Mary. "An Appreciation on the Impact of the work of Sonia Landy Sheridan." The Art of Sonia Landy Sheridan. Hanover, NH: Hood Museum of Art, 2009, pp. 37–42.
  6. Ernest Edmonds (15 January 2018). "Algorithmic Art Machines". Arts. 7: 3. doi:10.3390/arts7010003.
  7. Mitchell, Kerry (24 July 2009). Selected Works. Lulu.com. pp. 7–8. ISBN 978-0-557-08398-5. This artist is notable for his place in the Fractal Art movement, as is his opinion and manifesto.
  8. Mitchell, Kerry (1999). "The Fractal Art Manifesto". Fractalus.com. Retrieved 27 December 2015.
  9. Hoke, Brian P. (21 August 1996). "Cellular Automata and Art". Dartmouth College. Archived from the original on 24 October 2015. Retrieved 24 December 2015.
  10. Burraston, Dave; Edmonds, Ernest (2005). "Cellular automata in generative electronic music and sonic art: a historical and technical review". Digital Creativity. 16 (3): 165–185. doi:10.1080/14626260500370882. S2CID 16101588.
  11. Bovill, Carl (1996). Fractal geometry in architecture and design. Boston: Birkhauser. p. 153. ISBN 0-8176-3795-8. Retrieved 28 October 2011.
  12. Conner, Elysia (25 February 2009). "Meet Reginald Atkins, mathematical artist". CasperJournal.com. Archived from the original on 20 April 2012. Retrieved 28 October 2011.
  13. Eberle, Robert. "Evolutionary Art - Genetic Algorithm". Saatchi Art. Archived from the original on 26 December 2015. Retrieved 25 December 2015.
  14. Reynolds, Craig (27 June 2002). "Evolutionary Computation and its application to art and design". Reynolds engineering & Design. Retrieved 25 December 2015.
  15. Chun, Wendy Hui Kyong (2011). Programmed Visions: Software and Memory. MIT Press. p. 2. ISBN 978-0262518512.
  16. Ox, Jack (1990). The Systematic Translation of Anton Bruckner's Eighth Symphony into a Series of Thirteen Paintings. Bruckner Symposium 1990. Linz, Austria.
  17. "Bruckner: Eighth Symphony visualized themes". Intermedia Projects. Retrieved 9 April 2018.
  18. Ox, Jack (1993). "Creating a Visual Translation of Kurt Schwitters' Ursonate". Leonardo Music Journal. 3: 59–61. doi:10.2307/1513271. JSTOR 1513271. S2CID 61693312.
  19. Ox, Jack (1993). "Ursonate: Movement I".
  20. Britton, David; Ox, Jack (2000). "The 21st Century Virtual Reality Color Organ". IEEE MultiMedia. 7: 6–9. doi:10.1109/MMUL.2000.10014.
  21. "Davalan Ambigram Generator". Davalan.org. Retrieved 1 April 2020.
  22. "The Make Ambigrams Ambigram Generator". MakeAmbigrams.com. Retrieved 1 April 2020.
  23. "Truly Science Free Ambigram Generator". trulyscience. Archived from the original on 30 September 2022. Retrieved 2 April 2020.
  24. Mazzone, Marian; Elgammal, Ahmed (March 2019). "Art, Creativity, and the Potential of Artificial Intelligence". Arts. 8 (1): 26. doi:10.3390/arts8010026. ISSN 2076-0752.
  25. Fuchs, Mathias; Wenz, Karin (2022-12-01). "Introduction: Algorithmic Art. Past and Contemporary Perspectives". Digital Culture & Society. 8 (2): 5–12. doi:10.14361/dcs-2022-080202. ISSN 2364-2122.
  26. Hutson, James; Harper-Nichols, Morgan (2023-04-01). "Generative AI and Algorithmic Art: Disrupting the Framing of Meaning and Rethinking the Subject- Object Dilemma". Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology: D. 23 (1).

Further reading
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Algorithmic art.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.