GMU:Bild zu Ton, Ton zu Bild/Projekte: Difference between revisions

Line 57:

My project is about music generating pictures by computer, and more espacially with Pure Data. The aim is to create a kind of numeric painting illustrating different sources of sounds and music, with simple forms, colors and movements.

Artists :

Artists and Influences:

For this project, I thought a lot about 3 artists : '''Kandinsky''', '''Fishinger''' and '''McLaren'''.

'''Kandinsky''', because one of his focus was to translate music by painting. His forms, lines, colors act like interruptions, pieces of rhythms, notes, and give a feeling of music in one picture. I could say that my goal would be to recreate a kind of living Kandinsky's painting, but there is a big difference between his work and my project, even bigger than the question of movement itself : the '''composition'''. The pictures of Kandinsky are over-composed, really calculated, whereas with computer generating imagery, I can only get a '''random result''', I mean in the way I use it. Here I just can configurate some possible kinds of forms, movements or colors, but the way they appear (''size, appearence, location, RGB result or opacity'') depends of music and computer more than me. So I can't chose exactly the result, and plan a composition .

'''Kandinsky''', because one of his focus was to translate music by painting, or at least to paint like a composer. His forms, lines, colors act like interruptions, pieces of rhythms, notes, and give a feeling of music in one picture. I could say that my goal would be to recreate a kind of living Kandinsky's painting, but there is a big difference between his work and my project, even bigger than the question of movement itself : the '''composition'''. The pictures of Kandinsky are over-composed, really calculated, whereas with computer generating imagery, I can only get a '''random result''', I mean in the way I use it. Here I just can configurate some possible kinds of forms, movements or colors, but the way they appear (''size, appearence, location, RGB result or opacity'') depends of music and computer more than me. So I can't chose exactly the result, and plan a composition.

[[File:Example.jpg]]

However we can notice the code of Kandinsky, which could be the beginning of a automatic process.

With '''Fishinger''' and '''McLaren''', the movement is here, even if it's still ofen a question of composition, especially with Fishinger. But we can find a kind of random result with the scratched footages of McLaren, and this idea of ''savage interruptions or marks''.

Pure Data :

In my work, I use mainly 2 kinds of informations : the ''pitch'' and the ''amplitude''. For some sources (percussion, piano, ..), I use ~~also~~ the ''attack'' information.

In my work, I use mainly 2 kinds of informations : the ''pitch'' and the ''amplitude''. For some sources (percussion, piano, ..), I also use the ''attack'' information.

==[[Maria Schween]]: Was ist eine Frau?==

@@ Line 57: / Line 57: @@
 My project is about music generating pictures by computer, and more espacially with Pure Data. The aim is to create a kind of numeric painting illustrating different sources of sounds and music, with simple forms, colors and movements.
-Artists :
+Artists and Influences:
 For this project, I thought a lot about 3 artists : '''Kandinsky''', '''Fishinger''' and '''McLaren'''.
-'''Kandinsky''', because one of his focus was to translate music by painting. His forms, lines, colors act like interruptions, pieces of rhythms, notes, and give a feeling of music in one picture. I could say that my goal  would be to recreate a kind of living Kandinsky's painting, but there is a big difference between his work and my project, even bigger than the question of movement itself : the '''composition'''. The pictures of Kandinsky are over-composed, really calculated, whereas with computer generating imagery, I can only get a '''random result''', I mean in the way I use it. Here I just can configurate some possible kinds of forms, movements or colors, but the way they appear (''size, appearence, location, RGB result or opacity'') depends of music and computer more than me. So I can't chose exactly the result, and plan a composition .
+'''Kandinsky''', because one of his focus was to translate music by painting, or at least to paint like a composer. His forms, lines, colors act like interruptions, pieces of rhythms, notes, and give a feeling of music in one picture. I could say that my goal  would be to recreate a kind of living Kandinsky's painting, but there is a big difference between his work and my project, even bigger than the question of movement itself : the '''composition'''. The pictures of Kandinsky are over-composed, really calculated, whereas with computer generating imagery, I can only get a '''random result''', I mean in the way I use it. Here I just can configurate some possible kinds of forms, movements or colors, but the way they appear (''size, appearence, location, RGB result or opacity'') depends of music and computer more than me. So I can't chose exactly the result, and plan a composition.
+[[File:Example.jpg]]
+However we can notice the code of Kandinsky, which could be the beginning of a automatic process.
+With '''Fishinger''' and '''McLaren''', the movement is here, even if it's still ofen a question of composition, especially with Fishinger. But we can find a kind of random result with the scratched footages of McLaren, and this idea of ''savage interruptions or marks''.
 Pure Data :
-In my work, I use mainly 2 kinds of informations : the ''pitch'' and the ''amplitude''. For some sources (percussion, piano, ..), I use also the ''attack'' information.
+In my work, I use mainly 2 kinds of informations : the ''pitch'' and the ''amplitude''. For some sources (percussion, piano, ..), I also use the ''attack'' information.
 ==[[Maria Schween]]: Was ist eine Frau?==