GMU:Algorithmic Art/Grayson Daniel Bailey: Difference between revisions

Line 235:

=='''Human Processed Algorithm 4 //''' 111218==

{| border="1"

|-

! style="width: 50%" | Result

! style="width: 50%" | Algorithm

|-

| [[Media:InstructionsUpload.pdf|Human Processed Algorithm 4]] <br><br>

'''''Inspiration // Mimetic Operations'''''

In response to the question of human value in image processing, I am not quite sure that there remain any. When it comes to mimetic operations, obviously the computer has a much higher capacity for reproduction through various methods, but it is also a strong argument that the discrete operations that are computationally possible for image processing determine that human image processing is never quite comparable. In this algorithm, the user is asked to divine compositional areas on transparent 'analysis card'. The element of divining areas 'compositionally' is still innately human, although the concept of 'composition' is challenged by the superior state of computational logic. It is the opinion of the author, at least, that the in the pure pursuit of image processing, the human ingenuity that is involved in human image processing is not enough to define it as a valued asset, and can be seen as more as a sentimental remnant of aesthetics, rather than an operative advantage.

'''''Inspiration // Multi-Media Operation'''''

While a human image processing is not completely valuable, the operational ability to utilize multi-media, and double sided objects to create third outcomes presents a possible value of the human processor, not as a divining member, but as a complex organic machine which can perpetrate discrete methods without too much explanation. These combined operations along with composition perhaps reach for an objective human value within the process, but it is hard to say if they reach something truly distinct from what the computer is able to produce - although it might not easily produce objects in physical space, it is capable of 3d modelling operations which approximate the exact results in a virtual method. The general conclusions from the design of excercise were of the limitations of human value in any method of image processing. In the pursuit of algorithmic execution, human ability lies elsewhere.

|-

|}

=='''Final Project //''' 011819==

{| border="1"

@@ Line 235: / Line 235: @@
 =='''Human Processed Algorithm 4 //''' 111218==
+{| border="1"
+|-
+! style="width: 50%" | Result
+! style="width: 50%" | Algorithm
+|-
+| [[File:Bright.png|400px|HPA4 R1P1]][[File:Dark.png|400px|HPA4 R1P2]]
+| [[Media:InstructionsUpload.pdf|Human Processed Algorithm 4]] <br><br>
+'''''Inspiration // Mimetic Operations'''''
+In response to the question of human value in image processing, I am not quite sure that there remain any. When it comes to mimetic operations, obviously the computer has a much higher capacity for reproduction through various methods, but it is also a strong argument that the discrete operations that are computationally possible for image processing determine that human image processing is never quite comparable. In this algorithm, the user is asked to divine compositional areas on transparent 'analysis card'. The element of divining areas 'compositionally' is still innately human, although the concept of 'composition' is challenged by the superior state of computational logic. It is the opinion of the author, at least, that the in the pure pursuit of image processing, the human ingenuity that is involved in human image processing is not enough to define it as a valued asset, and can be seen as more as a sentimental remnant of aesthetics, rather than an operative advantage.
+<br> <br>
+'''''Inspiration // Multi-Media Operation'''''
+While a human image processing is not completely valuable, the operational ability to utilize multi-media, and double sided objects to create third outcomes presents a possible value of the human processor, not as a divining member, but as a complex organic machine which can perpetrate discrete methods without too much explanation. These combined operations along with composition perhaps reach for an objective human value within the process, but it is hard to say if they reach something truly distinct from what the computer is able to produce - although it might not easily produce objects in physical space, it is capable of 3d modelling operations which approximate the exact results in a virtual method. The general conclusions from  the design of excercise were of the limitations of human value in any method of image processing. In the pursuit of algorithmic execution, human ability lies elsewhere.
+|-
+|}
+=='''Final Project //''' 011819==
 {| border="1"