not long ago i went to the yahoo questions/answers board & typed in the word
"fractal." one of the main discussions: are fractals really art? well. this was news
to me since i've been painting fractals for about 6 years. but i suppose this debate
is inevitably common to all relatively new art forms. as a child in a museum i
remember being told we wouldn't go into the "abstract" gallery. why? because
"that's not real art." this was during the late 1960's btw, when in general the
"abstract as valid art" dilemma was mostly resolved i believe. in the end what's
considered art changes as do its labels & categories. history's most blatant
example of this is vincent van gogh, who was never considered a "real" artist by
the contemporary establishment, who never sold a painting in his life, & whose
works now sell for increasingly mindboggling amounts. in the end, beauty (or
worse, "truth") is in the eye of the beholder. i'm sure some debate still exists as
to whether or not computer paintings are considered "valid" art. it's probably best
to consider the computer as just another medium, like watercolor or oils. to those
who have resolved this main question, fractal painting should be simply
considered as another form of digital art.
herein lies the problem: a common misconception of fractal art seems to be
that all you do is load a formula into a fractal program. & bam! it immediately spits
out a perfect fractal. with a bare minumum of human effort, no less. (what a great
fantasy, i wish it were that easy.) in reality the base formula is closer to the
relationship of a stick figure drawing to a finished oil painting. that is not to say
that sketches cannot possibly be art, obviously they can be. but a base equation
is better considered as a backbone for the finished design. the base equation
itself is also not static. the analogy of a human face comes to mind here. while the
"set design" for any face usually involves a fixed pattern (i.e., 2 eyes, nose,
mouth, etc.) & therefore likened to a base equation, all human faces are
inherently unique & potentially interesting. each fractal is similarly relatively
unique & may change greatly depending on the functions used, number of
iterations, mathematical filters, etc. the possibilities from one basic equation are
virtually endless--& may be endless for all i know, re: some mathematical infinity
concept. the challenge therefore for a fractal artist is to create something true &
original & maybe even (gasp) "says something." & basically this is the same
challenge as for every other art form.
now, it is true that digital art is a different medium. i sometimes find myself
missing the smell of turpentine. there's a hands-on tactile or sensory experience
you get from "traditional" drawing or painting that's a bit lacking in most digital
art. increasingly more & more artists are beginning with digital art, instead of
moving to it from other mediums, so perhaps they don't understand the shift of
technique takes a bit getting used to. but one of the reasons i've been so
intrigued with fractals is that i used to draw a lot of very similar things by hand.
the old-fashioned way, using pencil & a compass & protractor. (i suppose many
"modern" digital artists might find this a bit quaint.) so rather than being
something "new," it's a basically a continuation. & the advantage of painting with
a fractal program over say painting in adobe is i don't have to fight with the
mouse to get it to act like a real brush. fractal explorer is entirely different from
adobe & for some reason i get so involved i don't miss the turpentine so much.
fractal art itself has a long sound historical basis. interest in geometrical art
goes back many thousands of years: greek wall edgings, moorish architectural
tesselations, mandalas, escher's works to name a few. geometry was considered
art on an everyday basis in a myriad of different cultures. & art & philosophy have
usually enjoyed a close connection (especially in that elusive thing called
"inspiration"). the pinnacle of this was the ancient pythagorean ideal, which
viewed mathematics as the approach to mystical godhead itself. not only in
perfection of form & the beauty of planetary revolution (the fabled music of the
spheres), but as an expression of infinity. & infinity can be mathematically
proven, you can start counting & go on forever. perhaps people were able to feel
this connection better in ancient times, when higher math was a relatively new
idea & the insights into it perhaps more profound. while many consider
pythagoreas to be the father of modern mathematics, they sometimes forget he
considered things not only from a practical basis, but a philosophical & aesthetic
viewpoint. this is in direct contrast to the modern view that math only reflects
cold, unfeeling & relentless science. & worse, it's eternally boring. truthfully i
think it's often the fault of modern teaching methods: i find great irony in the fact
that i paint fractals when so many of my geometry teachers were, shall we say,
uninspiring. math classes have this bad habit of teaching you the how but not the
why. in short, modern humans have developed a dichotomy between art &
science in which one disdains the other. occasionally attempts are made to
reconcile the two viewpoints, & perhaps they are not as polarized as they once
were. (i'm reminded here of einstein's space & van gogh's sky, an excellent book
by lawrence leshan & henry margenau which works to resolve this.) it's pretty
clear that any discussion as to whether or not fractals are "really art" is probably
a symptom of this acquired art/science dichotomy. strangely enough, far from
being "cold & unfeeling," you hear of more & more scientists finding god in the
laboratory. physicist stephen hawking is known to be eloquent on this subject,
altho fritjof capra, author of the tao of physics, might possibly be credited with
beginning this trend. perhaps returning to the perspective of pythagorus? the
principles of mandala art might best join the two viewpoints: people who practice
meditation often spontaneously visualize geometrical forms. this is scientifically
documented, tho modern science does not currently explain why the human
brain is coded to do this. those who are more philosophically inclined may speak
of "mental planes of existence," or "archetypal levels" which are said to have a
strong connection with higher math. ultimately the key word here may be
"abstraction," emphasizing its philosophical meaning. the word "abstract" itself i
believe a bit lost lately, because it's now so commonplace in the art world. with
this in mind, in general fractals may fall into the realm of "traditional" abstract art,
& might do much to bridge the gap between art & science.
on a practical level, fractals can be a difficult medium to work in. challenging
might be a politer word. i am not a mathematician, so i have my limitations. this
means while you can easily sit down with a protractor & a french curve & paint
the resulting design, the same is not necessarily true of painting a fractal.
similarly if you're painting from scratch in adobe, you can easily choose your
color scheme & do whatever you like. with a fractal however, color is actually a
(sub)math equation & is much trickiery to apply than oil or an adobe paint layer.
with a fractal you have simultaneously a great deal of freedom as well as great
limitations--if you are trying to create a coherent piece of art. with fractals color &
form are too closely connected, & if you change one you often change the other.
this can drive you utterly insane if you are trying to create a "pure" fractal. i have
been known to spend an incredibly stupid amount of time trying to "fix" a fractal
to get exactly what i have in mind, & the awful part is it's often something you can
fix in adobe in about 5 seconds. i have about 900 folders filled with fractals that
"almost there" but the color keeps slipping off or something. in the end it's like
the old oil painting adage, where you finally have to say, enough is enough, it's
finished. & in the end most artists, whatever medium, are rarely satisfied,
therefore they continued to seek... there are many definitions of art, but if you
think of art as a search for truth, & to express this truth, you will understand
painting a fractal as well as any other medium. a fractal can be an expression of a
math form in itself, but this is not all it is. there's simply too much potential
creativity involved, annoying as it can be sometimes, to limit it to this. just as in
oils, you indeed paint a fractal, can even paint it in different styles. this is in direct
contrast to the idea that an anonymous program spits out a prefabricated shape.
you can paint a fractal so it looks like an oil painting, a sketch, or a cartoon-- just
any other digital medium. & it can be just as time-consuming as any other form of
art. maybe even more so, if you're one of those people who can whip out a
finished oil landscape in an afternoon--i'm not one of those ;) i assume they can
do this because they have their art down to a "formula," which in a way is not that
dissimilar from a fractal, hint hint.
in the end, fractal art is a modernized method of a very traditional aesthetic
form. altho most fractal programs do come with some preset base equations, in
which limitless possibilities exist, you can usually write your own equations
as well. & then the skiy's the limit :)
"fractal." one of the main discussions: are fractals really art? well. this was news
to me since i've been painting fractals for about 6 years. but i suppose this debate
is inevitably common to all relatively new art forms. as a child in a museum i
remember being told we wouldn't go into the "abstract" gallery. why? because
"that's not real art." this was during the late 1960's btw, when in general the
"abstract as valid art" dilemma was mostly resolved i believe. in the end what's
considered art changes as do its labels & categories. history's most blatant
example of this is vincent van gogh, who was never considered a "real" artist by
the contemporary establishment, who never sold a painting in his life, & whose
works now sell for increasingly mindboggling amounts. in the end, beauty (or
worse, "truth") is in the eye of the beholder. i'm sure some debate still exists as
to whether or not computer paintings are considered "valid" art. it's probably best
to consider the computer as just another medium, like watercolor or oils. to those
who have resolved this main question, fractal painting should be simply
considered as another form of digital art.
herein lies the problem: a common misconception of fractal art seems to be
that all you do is load a formula into a fractal program. & bam! it immediately spits
out a perfect fractal. with a bare minumum of human effort, no less. (what a great
fantasy, i wish it were that easy.) in reality the base formula is closer to the
relationship of a stick figure drawing to a finished oil painting. that is not to say
that sketches cannot possibly be art, obviously they can be. but a base equation
is better considered as a backbone for the finished design. the base equation
itself is also not static. the analogy of a human face comes to mind here. while the
"set design" for any face usually involves a fixed pattern (i.e., 2 eyes, nose,
mouth, etc.) & therefore likened to a base equation, all human faces are
inherently unique & potentially interesting. each fractal is similarly relatively
unique & may change greatly depending on the functions used, number of
iterations, mathematical filters, etc. the possibilities from one basic equation are
virtually endless--& may be endless for all i know, re: some mathematical infinity
concept. the challenge therefore for a fractal artist is to create something true &
original & maybe even (gasp) "says something." & basically this is the same
challenge as for every other art form.
now, it is true that digital art is a different medium. i sometimes find myself
missing the smell of turpentine. there's a hands-on tactile or sensory experience
you get from "traditional" drawing or painting that's a bit lacking in most digital
art. increasingly more & more artists are beginning with digital art, instead of
moving to it from other mediums, so perhaps they don't understand the shift of
technique takes a bit getting used to. but one of the reasons i've been so
intrigued with fractals is that i used to draw a lot of very similar things by hand.
the old-fashioned way, using pencil & a compass & protractor. (i suppose many
"modern" digital artists might find this a bit quaint.) so rather than being
something "new," it's a basically a continuation. & the advantage of painting with
a fractal program over say painting in adobe is i don't have to fight with the
mouse to get it to act like a real brush. fractal explorer is entirely different from
adobe & for some reason i get so involved i don't miss the turpentine so much.
fractal art itself has a long sound historical basis. interest in geometrical art
goes back many thousands of years: greek wall edgings, moorish architectural
tesselations, mandalas, escher's works to name a few. geometry was considered
art on an everyday basis in a myriad of different cultures. & art & philosophy have
usually enjoyed a close connection (especially in that elusive thing called
"inspiration"). the pinnacle of this was the ancient pythagorean ideal, which
viewed mathematics as the approach to mystical godhead itself. not only in
perfection of form & the beauty of planetary revolution (the fabled music of the
spheres), but as an expression of infinity. & infinity can be mathematically
proven, you can start counting & go on forever. perhaps people were able to feel
this connection better in ancient times, when higher math was a relatively new
idea & the insights into it perhaps more profound. while many consider
pythagoreas to be the father of modern mathematics, they sometimes forget he
considered things not only from a practical basis, but a philosophical & aesthetic
viewpoint. this is in direct contrast to the modern view that math only reflects
cold, unfeeling & relentless science. & worse, it's eternally boring. truthfully i
think it's often the fault of modern teaching methods: i find great irony in the fact
that i paint fractals when so many of my geometry teachers were, shall we say,
uninspiring. math classes have this bad habit of teaching you the how but not the
why. in short, modern humans have developed a dichotomy between art &
science in which one disdains the other. occasionally attempts are made to
reconcile the two viewpoints, & perhaps they are not as polarized as they once
were. (i'm reminded here of einstein's space & van gogh's sky, an excellent book
by lawrence leshan & henry margenau which works to resolve this.) it's pretty
clear that any discussion as to whether or not fractals are "really art" is probably
a symptom of this acquired art/science dichotomy. strangely enough, far from
being "cold & unfeeling," you hear of more & more scientists finding god in the
laboratory. physicist stephen hawking is known to be eloquent on this subject,
altho fritjof capra, author of the tao of physics, might possibly be credited with
beginning this trend. perhaps returning to the perspective of pythagorus? the
principles of mandala art might best join the two viewpoints: people who practice
meditation often spontaneously visualize geometrical forms. this is scientifically
documented, tho modern science does not currently explain why the human
brain is coded to do this. those who are more philosophically inclined may speak
of "mental planes of existence," or "archetypal levels" which are said to have a
strong connection with higher math. ultimately the key word here may be
"abstraction," emphasizing its philosophical meaning. the word "abstract" itself i
believe a bit lost lately, because it's now so commonplace in the art world. with
this in mind, in general fractals may fall into the realm of "traditional" abstract art,
& might do much to bridge the gap between art & science.
on a practical level, fractals can be a difficult medium to work in. challenging
might be a politer word. i am not a mathematician, so i have my limitations. this
means while you can easily sit down with a protractor & a french curve & paint
the resulting design, the same is not necessarily true of painting a fractal.
similarly if you're painting from scratch in adobe, you can easily choose your
color scheme & do whatever you like. with a fractal however, color is actually a
(sub)math equation & is much trickiery to apply than oil or an adobe paint layer.
with a fractal you have simultaneously a great deal of freedom as well as great
limitations--if you are trying to create a coherent piece of art. with fractals color &
form are too closely connected, & if you change one you often change the other.
this can drive you utterly insane if you are trying to create a "pure" fractal. i have
been known to spend an incredibly stupid amount of time trying to "fix" a fractal
to get exactly what i have in mind, & the awful part is it's often something you can
fix in adobe in about 5 seconds. i have about 900 folders filled with fractals that
"almost there" but the color keeps slipping off or something. in the end it's like
the old oil painting adage, where you finally have to say, enough is enough, it's
finished. & in the end most artists, whatever medium, are rarely satisfied,
therefore they continued to seek... there are many definitions of art, but if you
think of art as a search for truth, & to express this truth, you will understand
painting a fractal as well as any other medium. a fractal can be an expression of a
math form in itself, but this is not all it is. there's simply too much potential
creativity involved, annoying as it can be sometimes, to limit it to this. just as in
oils, you indeed paint a fractal, can even paint it in different styles. this is in direct
contrast to the idea that an anonymous program spits out a prefabricated shape.
you can paint a fractal so it looks like an oil painting, a sketch, or a cartoon-- just
any other digital medium. & it can be just as time-consuming as any other form of
art. maybe even more so, if you're one of those people who can whip out a
finished oil landscape in an afternoon--i'm not one of those ;) i assume they can
do this because they have their art down to a "formula," which in a way is not that
dissimilar from a fractal, hint hint.
in the end, fractal art is a modernized method of a very traditional aesthetic
form. altho most fractal programs do come with some preset base equations, in
which limitless possibilities exist, you can usually write your own equations
as well. & then the skiy's the limit :)
fractals: the "new" art form.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |