The beauty of randomness. Using an algorithmic formula to create a visual design. Writing rules that calculate and then generate a work that could not be realized in any other way (or really time expensive). Joshua Davis is a well-know designer experimenting with this type of computational design. In ‘Creative Code’ by John Maeda he explains:
“In my own work, the end result is never static; by making room for as many anomalies as possible, I write programs that create unique compositions. I program the “brushes,” the “paints,” the “strokes,” the rules, and the boundaries. However, it is the machine that generates the compositions: The programs draw themselves. I am in a constant state of surprise and discovery, because the program often compiles something I would never think of executing, or which would take me hours to create manually. [...]
Macromedia Flash is my primary piece of software. I know its limitations, but I very much like hacking it; it is just like finding new and different ways to use paint.
Basically, I am still the same artist I was as a painter, only my tools have changed. Fundamentally, art and design have been taught as very static processes: executing style and method to arrive at an end result. I am rewriting the rules, redefining the process.”
I’m really intrigued by his work. Look at this poster he did for the BMW Z4 Coupe.
Don’t get me wrong, i’m a big fan of his work. But he asks 450 euros for one print. Offcourse it’s a unique generated piece, but he can press the space bar once more, to generate a whole new random print. So how limitid is it really? Way too expensive if you ask me.
This is a dilemma that every graphic designer has with digital technology, the concept of ‘the original’ is not clear anymore. This problem is also brought up by Bruce Wands in Art of the Digital Age:
“Paintings are original works of art, traditional printmakers refine a work to end up with an artist proof that sets the standard fora n edition of prints, and even photographers have adopted the concept of editions and originals. Since a digital file is stored electronically and can be reproduced with all its elements intact, how does it relate to the concept of the ‘original’?
The value of an individual print in the commercial digital art world is dependent on how many multiples there are, and offcourse how unique it is. But i’m not sure, if a print from a work made by Joshua Davis is that unique..
A just graduated CMD student wrote his thesis about algorithmic design, so if you wanna find out more: Thesis, Jeroen Braspenning
By the way it’s in Dutch.
Joshua Davis
Jeroen Braspenning
It’s truly awesome. Although I cannot really see what a BMW has to do with that poster…
Hmm, there isn’t any. Except this obscure explanation: ” Artists love to venture along and even beyond the ragged edge, pushing the envelope as they work and progressively redefining what is possible.
Just a few years ago, the design of the new BMW Z4 Coup
I’ve been at a workshop of Joshua Davis last year and he showed us that every item he used in the poster is a drawing of part of the BMW Z4. Pretty amazing….
Did you know he also created the welcome page of the website of Tool (the band) http://www.toolband.com
Wow, very nicely written article. A very good point indeed about the costs of the piece and to a further extend, the “originality” of digital art in general…
I bet lots of artists are aware of this fact, but they are happy the discussion about this “problem”. I for one am not fond of this kind of art in general, exactly because of that fact. For me a lot of the passion and the personal touch in the art itself seems gone or, in lesser extent, love for the craft itself. Don’t get me wrong, there are a lot of beautifull pieces out there. But with the prices we have to pay to get something where an “original” could be one click away from the next “original”, it’s hard to get past that price barrier…
All in all, very nice article and good job on the backstory!
I wanted to sent you guys my thesis i wrote about this subject, but then i noticed that you already mentioned it. I think another important aspect is the role of the designer. As soon as a new piece of artwork is hidden below the spacebar, what does it say about the person tapping it ? The whole idea that Joshua Davis wrote a program which is learning his aesthetic vision is scary. One day he can sell this program, and everybody can generate artwork from which people will think that it is a genuine Joshua Davis. In this concept the programmer/scripter is the artist, it gives another meaning to the role of a designer.