Only a perfect geometry can create something this amazing…
ok. let me explain my reasoning for this one a bit.
First off. This is not quite as detailed as I would like. In my research for this topic, I looked at a lot of those popular 3d abstract techno design cult images.. I dont know what they are called, but they usualy consist of some 3d object in a foggy environment and some crazy light.. and then they bring it into photoshop and add a few text layers for depth and.. well, if u know the name of those, let me know. Anyway, I was thinkig that there was something cosmic about that style and that it also used geometry.
Traditionaly, as most of you know, sacred geometry is about the “golden ratio” the Fibonacci sequence 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, … you know, that stuff.
So, this image is about organic form with a geometric basis. This image uses colors that are warm and sacred.
I like the concept but I don’t see it in the execution. Do you mean something like Gmunk’s work? I get the depth and see the beginnings of this geometry you mention but I don’t see the Golden Ratio. Am I missing it?
no, your not missing it.
I am not using any actual geometry here. And I am not saying this image is like that other style, only that in my research i realized i would like to learn how to do that kind of stuff. I even went so far as to play around with some 3d objects i had made in swift 3d but in the end, i couldnt get it any where near what i would have hoped for. So, instead i just made this.
Inner Sanctum was a cool game! Cervical canal up ahead?
Bharper has something on the brain these days.
That is some sacred geometry, if I ever saw it.
If your thinking what bens thinking.
Then your right Tacosaurus.
Hmm…most of you can only guess at what I thought when I saw this image with this for the tagline:
“Only a perfect geometry can create something this amazing…”
So…I think what Ben’s actually shooting for is work like that of the stuff on CUBADUST ….then click EXPERIMENTAL. Gmunk (Bradley Grosh) is more motion-related ka-raziness that just makes my jaw drop.
Ben, I like the intention and throught process here…I can’t keep my mind from seeing something that wasn’t intended though.
Clever clever… the boy gets shut down for an all too graphic ode and brings it back with an oh so subtle allusion. I gots to give you props. You managed to say your peace after all. How O’Keefian of you.
My highest social morals don’t allow me to see this so-called “vaginal structure” you disgusting perverts speak of.
I only see a darling, budding, glorious rose in the spring time.
Or a box of Puffs, which ever way you want to look at it.
I immediately picked up on the not so subtle allusion but let the sleeping dog lie. You see what you want to see. And even though I don’t see the geometric precision that Ben was trying to capture he did manage to illustrate that context is everything.
oh, i am very very happy!
What is MORE sacred then that, I ask you?
FV- “Whats in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet”
yes, CUBADUST. gmunk. that shit is crazy. I was not shooting for that with what you see here, but I did play around a little. How do they do that. I guess I need to install 3ds max and see what I can do. And what do you call that style?
That style is called OVERWORKED RAVE FLYER STYLE!
A little too much electronica, the leading cause.
same subject as bharpers :D
I would have to disagree Taco. The amount of warring order and chaos unspoiled by anything remotely resembling humanity in that style really refreshing to me. No matter how overdone it is. And you can’t fake that style without serious skills, with both attention to detail and ability to see the big picture.
anyways, I suggested ‘sacred geometry’ because I’ve been looking into it a bit. I’ve been doing ‘pattern’ paintings like this for a while, and I’m studying this kind of geometry as part of that. It’s a challenge because a pattern like that is very static, and makes for a rather boring composition… but at the same time I’m compelled by pattern….
I definitely see the Fibonacci sequence here…did you use a script to generate those lines Ethan? Anybody remember that drawing tool/toy that was popular in the early/mid-eighties? You put the tip of a pen in this little disk and it rotated as you drew and created patterns similar to what you’ve got going on here.
yeah, it was called an ACID TRIP.
hahaa, acid trip …. I’ve never done acid actually, but my interest in pattern did coincide with some odd mushrooms I ate a while back….
yeah, I used a script (flash) to generate the circles in the right proportions.. I haven’t figured out how to script the spirals, so everything else was by hand….
I don’t remember that toy, I would be curious to see it tho…
Spirograph? I’m not sure if that’s how you spell it, but I had one and used the thing all the time. I loved it. you can actually still buy one on ebay. I think i might do it, they are sweet.
Apparently, someone in Hong Kong remembers Spirographs also because the Spirograph design is showing up on clothes. Commudesmax brought me back a little tshirt that has Spirograph designs all over it.
hey fv - don’t feel left out - I thought Ben’s image looked like a rose too.
I really like this second image - there just seems to be this perfect balance of geometrical shapes, and it’s sort of offset by the stars (or whatever they are) in the background (or foreground?) Very nice execution.
I have a Spirograph at home - those things are awesome to play with - you can do some cool stuff.
ok, everyone. stick out your tongues. daddies got a purple one for you next.
More fun with flash.
This is a modification of a script from the infamous Flash Math Creativity book, made by “friends of Ed.”
Print screened and photoshopped. etc..
so many ways to interpret this piece. definitely keeps the dialogue going. the horizon line strikes an interesting point of balance to the skewed/shifting coils. muted tones works for me as well.
this dsnlg just got the heart click.
thanks for the causation for pausation.
I had fun with this one. Once I had generated a pattern I liked from the .swf , I just had to compose the shot. I played around with various versions. But, I started to build physical objects out of various sized copies of the original coil image. I think something about the 3d nature of the coil lends itself to a sculpture like layout. I had a great time learning some of the math and scripting behind this.
I love slinkies! What a wonderful toy! Someone told me they are fun for a girl or a boy.
I really like this one, although I probably would have composed the “slinkies” a bit differently. Maybe there’s some way to reflect the curves from the golden rectangle. But maybe not. Maybe I’m just being a pain in the ass.
Oh, but now I’m watching the swf… Is that the same curve? Why does it look so different in your image?
slinkies, spirographs, and roses? what’s next?
this is great guys. i really like the direction this is going. i like the transition in perspective.
that swf is almost hypnotising to watch. maybe it’s because i’m cracked out on coffee. It’s quite hypnotic.
yeah, I guess it’s not the exact one. I kept changing the variables to get different results. So, this is the same basic algorythm, but with a different starting image and different variables.
Reminds me of that Yugop.com stuff. One of the earlier experiments, the circles track your mouse movements though. Click the fourteenth dot from the left.
I agree…with your comment, that is. ;D
this is more flash math. this time i did some ones that looked 3d but with space like lighting… then i brought them into photoshop and messed around with the scale and positioning and all that.
i think this is pretty damn good.
Really interesting…can we take a look at the original swf like before (in volley 3)?
I gave you a 2 because the craftsmanship of your piece lacks attention to the fine details.
The pattern and colors in the shape towards the back are beautiful and luminescent. I really love how it looks like it is twinkling. Kind of like a jellyfish in a blacklight or something naturally emitting light.
But, the Pshop brushes you used to blend the shape into the cloudy background are a bit too obvious and really don’t do anything to define the shapes.
4 for mood and color
1 for execution
2.0 for concept (I’m not sure if this really pushes the conversation any further)
I would actually like to see the original swf file too, I think this piece still has a lot more potential.
I guess I can agree with your critique FV. I struggled to make the edges a nice combination of random and jagged, but also fadded and not just hard edges. It’s always so hard to see how it will look from the eyes of someone who has never seen it, when you’ve been stairing at it for hours.
Any suggestions on how to get the edges better?
I think I was so happy to have achieved any amount of authentic depth and light that I may have rushed my way through this piece.
Here are the .swf’s.
I want to say upfront, that unlike before, I didn’t make any attempt to modify or change the scripts this time. So, these scripts are basicly identical to the way they were written by Paul Prudence from Friends of Ed’s, Flash Math Creativity.
Getting the edges better:
I’m not sure where to begin because I don’t know what your intention for the shape is. I would almost need to see your layers. I think it is a matter of preference. Right now I just don’t think it is subtle enough. The brushes just jump right out at me.
Here’s a sweet link, if you haven’t already seen it, I think this guy is pretty heavily influenced by Yugo Nakamura.
flash math and more
my intention for the shape was to create some asteroid like stellar object submerged in an etherial haze.
i think chiaroscuro is what these forms are missing. these shapes need some 3d. they look too flat to be these asteroids or stellar objects veiled in haze.
another tip would be to feather the cloudy stuff out a bit, so that it isn’t so abrupt against the shape in certain areas.
is this making any sense?
I dont know what chiaroscuro means, or is. But the rest makes sense. It’s funny, when I made that smaller one to the right, it looked very dimensional to me. Now when I look at it, it looks flat. The one in the front left still feels dimensional to me.
Chiaroscuro is a representation of dark and light. The interplay of shadow and light off of a surface of an object.
I think that the small object in the back right has dark and light areas. The problem, and the reason it’s flat, is because the inside of the object is flat to show the geometrical circles inside. So, if you look at the geometry, it looks flat. If you look at the edges, and ignore the circles, it looks more dimensional. If this hadn’t been a dsnlg about sacred geometry, i would have been tempted to make that obect more dimensional. This obviously has a lot to do with my discussion in the begining of this dsnlg about trying to lern to make those crazy 3d landscapes we’ve been discussing.
The circular pattern is from a ceiling design in the Museum of Islamic Art in Kuala Lampur Malaysia.
The progression of squares has some mystic significance, but I really couldn’t explain it.
The diagonal of each square forms the side of the next square.
My mother had these old Japanese Mandala prints in a box labeled “Sacred.” So, I opened it up and took out my favorite ones. They were so beautifull, so I pinned them on the wall.
I kept starring at them, trying to determine which piece I liked the best. I started cutting out the pieces I didn’t like so I could see the ones I did like, better. They made pretty patterns on the wall.
I hope she doesn’t mind.
The greeks, and the golden ratio and blah blah blah. It doesn’t seem anyone’s around to look at this stuff anyway…
well completed. that phrase has a nice, finishing ring to it.
People are lurking they’re just being shy. After looking through the entire, completed designologue again I see a surprising lack of geometric shapes. Sure, sure, even the gestalt of a png is made up of 1px squares but I’m not seeing anything more geometrically analytical here than in any other designologue. Is the medium the message or is the message the message? I’m not getting it from either in this case.
what does geometrically analytical mean, inman?
well, I can tell you a little about mine… although I wouldn’t claim that they’re particularly analytical…
The first one is the fibbonacci sequence we all know…
My second one uses the Shri Yantra which is a Hindu symbol. So putting it next to a buddha isn’t exactly accurate, but it’s a kind of mandala, which is used in buddhism (especially Tibetan Buddhism).
My third image uses an image from some Islamic architecture. I love Islamic architecture. It’s interesting to me that Islam forbids creating representations of divine figures (or so I’ve heard), yet the geometry of Islamic architecture conveys a very strong sense of the divine. Also I’m reading a book called Sacred Geometry where I read about that progression of squares. Like I said, I’m not sure I could really explain the significance of that, but it’s sort of an alternate to the fibbonacci sequence. The shell is just an example of the fibonacci sequence in nature.
And the last one … I just noticed that we hadn’t referenced the Greeks who came up with all that golden ratio stuff, very much relateded to the fibonacci sequence… but I didn’t incorporate any actual geometry. That’s Archemedes the Greek mathematician.
You know it’s difficult to stay motivated when it’s so slow around here…
Um, what do you mean, “what does it mean?” It means I’m not thinking before I type. ;D
I guess what I was expecting from this ‘logue was more of an exploration of geometry-inspired compositions and relationships. Again (I seem to be harping on this next point a lot lately), each building visually on the previous image much the way complex mathematical equations rely on previously authored equations. I don’t know where I expected the “Sacred” part to come in.
Anethon, personally I’ve lost interest in Designologue as a whole because nobody seems to be collaborating anymore. Each pair of designers is talking to their audience rather than each other.
That’s sad to hear. I think I’ve done ok as far as the “dialog” aspect of it. At the same time one of the things I like about dsnlg is that people are free to reinvent the image in each turn (as opposed to applying a filter to the last image, then pasting something new on top of that… which happens a lot in lesser image-swap sites)
… but a dialog is the main theme here anyway… have any idea when the next incarnation will happen?
sounds like Inman is bitter.
maybe you should take a break from the cpu.
Each pair of designers is talking to their audience rather than each other.
Its interesting how that does seem to be the case… But is that really so bad? Designologues become almost a debate style conversation, where participants address each others questions, but dont speak directly to them. Is the problem that its not as intimate as you would have liked? Is it this attitude thats the reason for the prospective parent/child/open forum-type Logues? Why am I asking so many questions?
Maybe the answer is a Secret Designologue where the participants do their 8 images, sharing them only with each other until the very end.
But probably not. Im just typing at this point.
have another hit, buddy!