ANTILOG_22Mar15a

###

ANTILOG_22Mar15a

###

13:08 2015-03-22

* I am working on my mathematical fluency, my procedural fluency;
* To become fluent in the language of mathematics, I'm trying to learn to use terms like "intractable quantities" or "infeasibly large", "unfathomably minute", "arbitrarily closely", "almost surely", "vanishingly small", and so on;
* I have been contemplating the idea of a universal image generator;
* The image generator basically takes a format, say a 200 pixel x 200 pixel square and GENERATES ALL POSSIBLE CONFIGURATIONS of that image space;
* The number of possible images in a similar image space is astronomically large, yet FINITE;
* What you get, though, are mostly patterns of random dots; You get combinations of pixel location and color value, but the unversal generator mostly produced homogeneous "noise images";
* One could potentially categorize generated images into categories of Intelligible vs. Unintelligible;
* The majority of possible images would be in the Unintelligible category; all nearly indistinguishable from pure noise or pure noise functions;
* One could speak of "meaningful pictures" or "valid pictures";
* The space of images is infeasibly large for even the "perceptually distinguishable" images provided by the universal visual pattern generator;
* I like to think of it as a toold for making "interesting noise";
* In real practical reality, most designs reflect some internal logic rather than being completely random;
* Every finite set is computable, so the universal visual pattern generator CAN produce all possible images for a given pixel space; it will just take an inordinate amount of time;
* Note: We can view all possible functions of time as signals;
* Note: The sample space of an experiment or random trial is the set of all possible outcomes or results of that experiment;
* Therefore, the universal visual pattern generator is experimental, acting in sample space of possible outcomes of experimental process;

* We are speaking of the "universal set" of possible images;

* A finite number of things can be represented in bounded pixel space;

* One can see a given configuration of pixel space as an "encoding" of that space;

* Only an infinitely sized canvas can truly have an infinite number of possible configurations of its image space;

* The "image universe" is a noise field;

* Again, image space is predominantly filled with noise, the universe is majoritively noisy;

* See: DEPICTION, in 2D representations;

* Note: think of moral temperature reasings as scalar fields; think NOISE FIELD;

* An infinite canvas with infinite possible values for each pixel, that is the only way to achieve true infinity in image space;

* What we have essentially is a bounded scalar field;

* It's a noise field because it is predominantly noise images;

* Think of generating functions, the generating function that generates the set of possible images;

* Is the set WELL-ORDERED?;

* The set of all images in image space will contain a subset of all possible images called "Impressionist paintings", as well as "Cubist paintings" and "Pop art";

* How can we reason about the contents of the image space?;

* What is a "cubist image", what is its minimal length description?;

* If we speak only of a 200 pixel by 200 pixel image where each pixel can only take on one of two values, Black or White, then we can posit the existence of the "Completely White Canvas" vs. "The Completely Black Canvas"; Every other possible configuration of black and white pixels falls in between those two extremities;

* (TO BE CONTINUED...)

ANTILOG_20Mar15a

###

ANTILOG_20Mar15a

###

16:41 2015-03-20

* I am working on outlining my Serial Method;
* I want to prove once and for all how I achieve a geometric increase in efficiency in my art practise, in part via The Serial Method, a.k.a. The Switch Method ("manning the SWITCHBOARD");
* This will sound as a non sequitur, but it is at the heart of the foundation of my concept of "Construction-Land" a.k.a. "C-Land";
* Part of it has to do with "discretization of parts";
* In David Allen's Getting Things Done time management / workflow management methodology, on works on getting tasks and projects "out-of-mind" by recording them externally and then breaking them into actionable work items;
* What I do is work on countless projects, discrete part by discrete part;
* The work of art is broken into discrete parts, building blocks, and all day what I do is add blocks to various projects, building block by building block;
* I can "conceive" of the total work of art, but everyday WORK is done at the level of the PARTS;
* By working with interchangeable parts, I'm able to get an increase in productivity, in output;
* I also recycle a lot of my waste/exhaust, in the form of noise or errors or other waste/exhaust;
* (TO BE CONTINUED...)

ANTILOG_18Jan15a

###

ANTILOG_18Jan15a

###

20:05 2015-01-18

* I have been making more and more of my digital images, using the "evolutionary" method that I've devised over the past year or so.
* I started doing experiments using only the pixelization function as well as the "Difference" blend mode for layers. I'm making progress. I also started making images with the dimensions 1024 pixels by 1024 pixels.
* I started experimenting with a PhotoMosaic program. I find that if I use a "noise" image as the main image, and use a "population of images" of my digital designs as the fodder for the PhotoMosaic program, that I get some interesting results.
* Here is an example of one of my latest series of investigations via image processing:

* I'm also working on some new techniques that I will be experimenting with in Painting.

* I also have been studying some Linear Algebra, finalizing my "approach" document, i.e. the documentation of my "approach" with regard to Visual Design (Visual Design Methodology).

* I am looking at "additive synthesis" as well as "linear combinations" as well as the "superposition principle" as Concepts that I want to use to describe my budding evolutionary art practise.

* I wrote a piece on Medium about my evolutionary art practise called Evolving The Fittest Image.

ANTILOG_13Jan15a

###

ANTILOG_13Jan15a

###

20:45 2015-01-13

* I am beginning to learn the ropes of the IPython Notebook.
* I believe that to be a real "data scientist" or "mathematician" or whatever I want to call myself in my new life, post-artist, I have to use the TOOLS of the TRADE. IPython Notebook is one of those tools, in my conception of the "beginner".
* That is, I want to start with the right tools AT THE OUTSET. That's why I'm also busy learning the ins and outs of the HDF5 format. With H5 AND the IPython Notebook, I should be able to do something pretty amazing.
* For now, I don't have much going on with regard to said Notebooks. What I want to do is use HDF5 in new and interesting ways, maybe as a sort of "literary" format, where I keep lab reports fitted to the actual format. It's hierarchical and for the moment that seems "simpler" than using a relational database, at least from my perspective.
* What I would like to do, though, is to use the IPython Notebook format to teach simple mathematical concepts. I want to USE the Notebook format to TEACH HOW to use the IPython Notebook format itself, to teach simple math concepts.
* The common thread here, or "guiding principle" is that to learn science, you learn through the tools of science. To teach science, you teach through the use of the tools of science.
* That means that I am having to get my scientific METHOD down pat. That's partly why I started this ANTILOG: To document the everyday practise of "becoming-a-scientist".
* I have been an artist my whole life and it has stopped being interesting to me. To make it interesting again, I began to RESEARCH MYSELF. That is, I began to RESEARCH my own "Practise".
* What resulted was a kind of "Research Practise of Practise Research". Research-as-Practise + Practise-as-Research.
* I then started a new project called The Archives-Project that was my first test subject for my Research Practise or Art-Based Reflective Practise. I also started another project tentatively called "20 Years of Data" whose first chapter is called The Datatypes Project: Abstract Assemblage.
* It is in the latter project that I am learning mathematical concepts, objects, spaces, mathematical "entities" in the mathematical ontology (foundational) so that I can TEACH the same concepts to others.
* What happened is that a) I was always secretly in love with mathematics, but didn't dare tell anyone for fear of being publicly shamed and b) I have had enough of hearing people tell me they "suck at math".
* I think that's just false. I think math is simple, people just maybe haven't been TAUGHT the right way. There are much more complex and complicated concepts in everyday speech that arise than in simple mathematics. Besides, in math, every concept is a kind of leverage point to learning new concepts. It's a science, so you start with the basic concepts and work your way up.
* Wherever you stand on the Mathematics Ladder, you are always at some "rung". To get to the next rung of the ladder, you have to learn a few concepts. The first concepts you learn at whichever rung, are always simple. You move simple concept by simple concept, up the ladder.
* Math is simple if you take it concept by concept and go at your own pace. There's nothing too "abstract" for human thought. It only gets "too abstract" when you are in super advanced math mode, and for that we have a handful of geniuses in the world capable of operating at the HIGHEST MATH MODE. The rest of us are all "beginners" in comparison to the few real math geniuses that exist at any given time on planet earth.
* So pick up where you left off and add a concept or two. I think math isn't just beautiful, it's really good for your soul, good for the heart. It requires discipline in your thinking. You have to learn mathematical THINKING, and that is a profoundly and powerfully USEFUL thing to have, a veritable ASSET.

* With that being said, I have continued making these evolutionary art pieces in the interim, these digital images. I have written about it in one of my blogs, a piece which has actually become rather popular.

- Another Visual Experiment: The Evolutionary Art of Process-Painting

ANTILOG_31Dec14a

###

ANTILOG_31Dec14a

###

07:43 2014-12-31

* I've made several new attempts at creating a visual art ("design") that could eventually be done entirely by computer, in an automated manner.
* I'm also looking closely at my documentation methods, trying to improve my record-keeping in general. The goal of that is to have a body of work of documented methods, processes, techniques, methodologies, etc.
* The goal in that is to make my work "reproducible". Since my work is mostly "experimental", I want others to be able to reproduce the "experiments".

###

###

16:50 2014-12-31

* So I made several other ventures into the realm of Generative Art / Procedural Generation. I'm not sure where I'm going with this right now, but I know it is amazing work that I am doing. Let me lead you directly to my latest entry into the Laboratory Notebook:

* Another snippet from the 29th of December, 2014, before the one I posted above. This shows that I have been working on surface and with surfaces for a long time. I will be writing more about my "delta-workspace" theory, which is essentially the formal study of the continuously changing 3D workspace of the art studio/sound design + research abloratory. These early pieces of documentation will be used in the creation of new ones, as this is a "hyperreflexive" design practice.

* I will also be writing a lot about my new "Unified Field Theory of Experience", which has a lot to do with me navigating the 3D workspace and lifespace that I inhabit every day (see: concept of "habitance").

* The idea is to paint a surface, a canvas in this case, with a treatment that makes it look like it could be an old wall with flaking paint.
* The concept is that this is something we see in everyday life, concrete walls or things of the sort that are "aged" or "used", i.e. have fallen victim to "wear & tear".
* Now, it is my contention that what we call "Patina" in the arts, is precisely this "wear & tear", that is, the visible "effects" of it.
* My idea was to paint what looked like "Old Surfaces", whatever that means.

* Here is a digital example of something I made last August, 2014.

* Here we can see the "Texture" of which I speak, the "Texture of Old Surfaces".

* It looks like it might be an old piece of cloth or something.

* The general idea in this series of experiments is to try to UNDERSTAND HISTORY. I want to grasp WHAT HISTORY IS, what it is that makes things look old, what it means to be old & withered and tearing at the seams. I want to study HOW PATINA WORKS and how it GIVES VALUES TO THINGS.

* As they say, All solid things turn to air. I just want to understand the underlying processes involved.

* More to come.. I am just getting started, with the official relaunch of the "ANTILOG" circa 2026.

Sincerely,

Chief Art Operator @ The Art Operation @ The Historiotheque 

ANTILOG_30Dec14a

###

ANTILOG_30Dec14a

###

00:48 2014-12-30

* I am still experimenting with images. I am making digital images; I am "generating" them I should say. I am generating digital images starting from the initial conditions of "pure Gaussian white noise", more or less.
* I'm trying to be thorough, methodical, and systematic about it, but for now I'm unable to do the operations I want to do solely through direct numerical computation. I have to use an image editing software, and that upsets me. What I need to be doing is writing Python programs to do the same basic operations. In due time.
* This is what I've got for now:

* The experiment is simple: I'm trying to go for the "most complex beauty". That is, by utilizing simple rules and only simple rules, I am experimenting with the (computational) generative emergence of complex beauty. I'm not sure I said that right. Let me begin again.

* The idea right now is to use the SIMPLEST RULES, and only the simplest imaginable, to GENERATE images. I want those images to a) be BEAUTIFUL and b) I would like there to be at least "some" complexity.

* The idea is not to produce Low-Complexity Art. I want there to be entropy and complexity and NOISE basically. That's the thing. This isn't about Compression. This is about maximizing the user experience, and I think I need a high-enough level of complexity to achieve that.

* Another example:

* I am ONLY using primitive (basic) operations. I generate noise, I pointillize, and I pixelize. That's about it. And I play with colors. I'm not doing anything I couldn't do through numerical computation alone. At least ideally, that's the goal.

###

07:55 2014-12-30

* I made some more images. For now, though, I want to recollect the research I was doing recently on Derivatives.

* Basically, what I came to understand is that a derivative is more or less just a rate of change. When I say something is "the first derivative of x with respect to time" I'm making a statement about the rate of change of a variable with respect to time.

* I am basically just saying something about a changing quantity.

* You have an input value and an output value. It is saying there is a functional relation between the two.

* Math and science are basically just The Study of Change. (Signals are also changes in quantities.)

###

08:30 2014-12-30

* I'm still obsessed with this record-keeping/documentation thing. Look at it this way. I've been doing a lot of experimenting with image processing. I've been exploring and experimenting with Python for 3 or 4 years now. I'm also playing with some simple software to manipulate images.

* What I want is to document the process. No experiment should ever go without records written down in the laboratory notebook.

* On the subject of notebooks, I've been having trouble installing the IPython Notebook on my Windows computer. It's okay because it will work on the Linux machine, but it reminded me how difficult things are on the Windows platform. It's always configurating this, configurating that. It never ends. Stuff only half-works part of the time.

* With that being said, I'm likely to end up reinventing the wheel since none of the computational resources that I would need exist. I'll have to write my own libraries/modules. That's okay.

* With the digital images, though, I'm following a very precise step-by-step procedure, an "algorithm" except that for now I'm doing it all by hand.

* I keep trying to use only the most basic functions that I know I will be able to perform through numerical computation. I've already done the math, I just need to translate it into Python code.

* Funny enough, the Processing platform (Processing.org) has a new Python Mode. I tried to install that on the Windows machine and she was a no-show. Error somewhere in installation.

* As always, run into a problem, have no one to turn to for guidance. Back to square one.

* I made this a short while ago. As you may know, I've been working on The Refcards-System now for years. I made a little Refcard to go in the collection:

* Note: It's winter in my heart of hearts.

###

10:46 2014-12-30

* ANOTHER REFCARD FOR THE REFCARD-SYSTEM:

ANTILOG_29Dec14a

###

ANTILOG_29Dec14a

###

22:09 2014-12-29

* Have been working hard on multiple aspects of my "Magnum Opus" for the last several months.
* Am trying out new techniques in visual design. Am also studying visual culture, material culture as thoroughly as I can.
* My documentation methods have been lacking. I have tried to be as meticulous and systematic as possible in my documentation practises over the years and yet find that I'm still not thorough enough.
* For instance, experiments in visual arts done in the Atelier need to be inscribed in the appropriate Laboratory Notebook. I have the notebooks, I just haven't been keeping proper records.
* I need to continue what essentially has become a Longitudinal Study of myself as a self-portraitist, as well as just a professional painter proper.
* This is important so that I can keep track of my "Growth Landmarks" I am calling them. You know in your life, in the enterprise that you practise, you have "growth spurts". These need to be documented. It's part of the general "Archive-Your-Life" attitude and methodology.
* I did this earlier today:

###

22:33 2014-12-29

* Over the last month or two, I have been doing experiments in painting. First of all, I spent the last several months, almost a half-year, "Reinventing Myself". That took some time and for most of that period, I wasn't the most prolific artist in the world.
* I still did some work, but not as much as I usually do. So now a month or so ago, I began producing again at full volume, and that's partly why I realize now how important documentation is.
* For instance, I have been looking at "textures" in painting. I made a few paintings recently on this subject of Textures. Here, have a look at one of them:

* The idea is to paint a surface, a canvas in this case, with a treatment that makes it look like it could be an old wall with flaking paint.
* The concept is that this is something we see in everyday life, concrete walls or things of the sort that are "aged" or "used", i.e. have fallen victim to "wear & tear".
* Now, it is my contention that what we call "Patina" in the arts, is precisely this "wear & tear", that is, the visible "effects" of it.
* My idea was to paint what looked like "Old Surfaces", whatever that means.

* Here is a digital example of something I made last August, 2014.

* Here we can see the "Texture" of which I speak, the "Texture of Old Surfaces".

* It looks like it might be an old piece of cloth or something.

* The general idea in this series of experiments is to try to UNDERSTAND HISTORY. I want to grasp WHAT HISTORY IS, what it is that makes things look old, what it means to be old & withered and tearing at the seams. I want to study HOW PATINA WORKS and how it GIVES VALUES TO THINGS.

* As they say, All solid things turn to air. I just want to understand the underlying processes involved.