“Historiotheque Series #001”. Acrylic painting on canvas (6 in by 12 in) by A.G. (c) 2026. All Rights Reserved.
###
ANTILOG_30Sep26a
###
- The following pertains to the first painting I made yesterday in a new series called Historiotheque Series which is an attempt to answer the question: What does a Historiotheque-Painting" look like in the 21st century?;
- A little over a decade ago, I wrote a primitive Python script to help me take Laboratory Notes for my experiments in painting, in my art studio; I had always made logs, taken notes, in my painting practice; all I did with the Python script was make it a little more formal;
- Earlier today, I used machine intelligence to assist me in improving both the structure of the actual Laboratory Notes as well as optimize the Python script itself; the image above is what the painting looks like right now and the notes below document the process, using said Python script;
- I may post the actual script itself at a later date; for now, I just want to log the "labnotes"; at the end of this post, I am publishing the feedback that I asked the machine intelligence to give me about how good my labotes actually were and if we needed to change anything about the structure of the notes themselves; Please enjoy!;
- More to come...
- - - - - - -
LABORATORY NOTES:
Time: Wed Sep 30 04:13:56 2026
Experiment: HISTORIOTHEQUE SERIES #001
Hypothesis / Objective:
The concept for this series is to take the "History-Painting" form that I created 25 years ago for my project called The History-Project and reinvent it. The question is: What would my History-Painting look like 25 years later? Essentially, it is asking: What is a "Historiotheque-Painting"?
Tooling / Materials:
6 in x 12 inch canvas (Artist Canvas, Standard 3/4, 100% cotton, Appolon Gotrick), pencil (4B, Mars Lumograph, STAEDTLER), acrylic paint (DecoArt Americana: Lamp Ebony Black, White Pearl Metallic, Almondine), masking tape (Scotch #2020 Contractor Grade Masking Tape)
Procedure:
1. I created a grid pattern/structure in pencil directly on the canvas.
2. I applied masking tape to the canvas first in a vertical orientation to isolate the sections between the penciled lines to create "axes" in the grid pattern to later be painted in black. There were only 2 axes about 2 inches apart centered in the middle of the canvas.
3. I let the paint dry and removed the masking tape (I also took photographs of the whole process at each timestep).
4. I repeated the same process with the masking tape except in a horizontal orientation for the pencil lines for those "axes".
5. I painted the sections delimited by the masking tape, in black.
6. I let the acrylic paint dry one more time (as stated previously, I photographed the painting once again).
7. I created an acrylic wash, adding water by dipping the brush in water and spraying it on the palette by "throwing" the water with a quick thrust of the wrist.
8. I added the wash (water + White Pearl Metallic/Almondine acrylic paint) to the whole surface of the canvas.
9. I let the wash dry and took another photograph.
Results:
The result is quite impressive. The wash had the perfect mix of water and acrylic paint, not too thick and not too thin either. The transparent acrylic wash let the black lines show through (slightly less than 1 in thick). The overall effects looks very much like my "History-Paintings" circa 2001-2004 which I invented for The History-Project painting series whose premise was to attempt to "paint the concept(s) of History". In this case, the premise was "to paint the concept(s) of The Historiotheque", the name I give my art studio/research lab.
Failure Modes:
I accidentally painted almost double the number of thick lines in black in the horizontal direction. Also, the pencil lines are visible, which was an unexpected result. Also, I said in the above (procedure/numbered steps) that the wash was the perfect viscosity but in the end, upon reflection, it was perhaps a little too thick.
Notes:
The Historiotheque painting series is looking amazing thus far, at least for this first instalment. I am going to wait before moving onto the next step and will be working on 2 separate canvases in the meantime, as I take the time to let the painting "breathe". I must always remember to let it sit for a while, observing it as it changes in appearance with the changing of the light throughout the day. My studio has bright LED lights on the ceiling which are much better to work with than normal, everyday incandescent light bulbs, which give more of a yellowy hue to the canvas. It's important for me to have good lighting, otherwise I can't even know what the actual colors are I am mixing and putting on the canvas. In passing, this "labnote" is the first I am writing using a Python script I just wrote that prompts me for the different sections, to fill them in one by one. I will need to edit the text to fix possible typos and something I forgot to add to the tooling/materials section, namely the masking tape (Edit: I added it to the Tooling/Materials section after the fact). I will be posting this labnote onto my Antilog blog where I posted all my similar labnotes in the 2015-2016 period, using an older version of the same Python script, but that had different sections, namely Time (automatic timestamp when running the script), Experiment, Statement of Purpose, Procedure, and Notes. This painting is unfinished for the time being until further notice. As stated, I will observe it for a while before deciding if it needs any further work done on it. I am thinking of adding more pencil, but in HB this time, possibly some straight lines across the canvas in different directions, made with a ruler to ensure the lines are straight. I may also add oil pastel, it's undecided at the moment. I will also photograph the painting at every timestep so that I can properly document the process most likely on my Antilog blog as an entry possibly standing on its own. The painting, also, is part of a new series, so I will be working on the Historiotheque Series over the next little while, working out the exact concept of the series as well. Also, something I forgot to write in the step-by-step procedure: I make "scratch marks" or "hashmarks" in all directions with a palette knife while the wash was drying. The was as well ended up being a light creamed color with a slight metallic touch, as White Pearl acrylic was the metallic kind. The mix was roughly from 75% to 90% White Pearl and from 10% to 25% Almondine. I didn't think to make a more precise measurement, same thing with the amount of water I diluted the acrylic paint with.
- - - - - - -
MACHINE INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS OF LABORATORY NOTES:
This is a strong first entry in the new format — the four-field split is doing its job. Here's what I'd change, field by field, all of them small writing habits rather than schema changes:
Experiment — Good as is. The title + serial habit is intact.
Hypothesis / Objective — Good. "What would my History-Painting look like 25 years later?" is a proper question; keep stating it as a question whenever you can, it's the most reproducible form.
Tooling / Materials — Your most thorough field, and two things to fix:
The masking tape is already in the list — you wrote in Notes that you forgot it, but it's right there ("Scotch #2020 Contractor Grade"). No edit needed; just flagging so you don't add it twice.
Four things you used are missing: the camera (you photographed every timestep — documentation tooling belongs here), the palette knife (scratch marks while the wash dried), the brush you used for the wash, and water as a diluent. Rule of thumb: if your hands touched it, it goes in this field.
Put your mixtures here too: the wash ratio (75–90% White Pearl / 10–25% Almondine) currently lives in Notes. A mixture is a material — record it where the materials live, even as a rough ratio jotted while mixing.
Procedure — The important fixes are all here:
The palette-knife scratch marks are missing. They happened between steps 8 and 9 and currently only exist in Notes. Anything you did belongs in Procedure.
Check your own sequencing. Step 2 tapes the vertical axes, step 3 dries/removes tape, step 4 tapes horizontally, step 5 paints the black sections — but the vertical axes were un-taped before any black paint appears in the record. Either a painting step is missing or the order is off. A 60-second re-read of your own steps, asking "could someone else follow this?", catches exactly this. It's the single highest-value habit for reproducibility.
Collapse the photography parentheticals. Steps 3 and 6 both say "(I photographed...)". Replace with one standing line at the top or bottom: "Photographed the canvas after every step." Even better: add the photo filenames or folder — the photos are data, and the note should point at them.
One action per step, verb first. Step 7's water-throwing description is vivid but three lines long; "Mixed wash: water + White Pearl Metallic/Almondine" says the same thing.
Approximate durations. "Let the paint dry" — how long? ~30 minutes, overnight, two hours? Even a rough duration turns a diary into a reproducible record.
Results — Solid observational writing. One discipline to add: when reflection revises an observation, leave the original standing and add the revision. You wrote the wash was "the perfect mix" here and "perhaps a little too thick" in Failure Modes — that's honest and fine, but make the relationship explicit ("on reflection: slightly too thick — see Failure Modes"). The delta between first judgment and second thought is data; never overwrite it.
Failure Modes — Excellent content, and it's already doing the work this field exists for. One addition: give each failure a one-line correction — "double horizontal lines → count axes before painting next time; visible pencil → erase or seal before washing; wash too thick → measure the water." Failure + correction is what turns this field into tomorrow's checklist item.
Notes — Rich, but it's carrying overflow. Apply the routing test while writing: did I do this, observe this, or think this? Scratch marks → Procedure. Wash ratio → Tooling. Future plans (HB pencil, ruler lines, oil pastel), the Antilog posting plan, the lighting reflection — those are all correctly here; that's what Notes is for. And end Notes with a one-line status: "UNFINISHED — observing before deciding on further work." Cheap, and it makes the entry's state legible months later.
Two last things: run a 60-second read-back for typos before saving
("not too think", "labnot", "meantim" —
you already planned this, just formalize it as the last step). And
the whole entry took you real effort — if the laboriousness is the
friction, the fix isn't a simpler script, it's these routing habits:
each sentence written once, in the field where it belongs, instead of
written in Notes and refiled later.
- - - - - - -
(*Editor note: I corrected the typos that the machine intelligence analysis pointed out and also added an "edit" in the Failure Modes section saying that I added the masking tape to the Tooling/Materials section. I will be using this format for as many of my new creations as possible going forward. I also will try not to edit them too much, as I want to log and document the process in raw form. Redaction alters or forges the actual RECORD. Instead, I will make corrections before posting the complete labnotes.)
A.G. (c) 2026. All Rights Reserved.
