Okay, one more bit of old business, but one that transitions into the now. I've been working on a series of looping 'generative drawing' animations, which on the one hand was just a bit of fun, formalist play, but if you think about it , also functions as a kind of 'Turing Test', which is a concept that's really driving me right now. How far can one push the parameters of an algorithmic system to produce something that is convincingly "expressive"? What are the boundaries of the 'gestural' in contemporary digital art and animation, which is increasingly automated and procedural?
If this is the kind of question that's important to you, then you've probably already argued for or against the encroachment of digital production into the vexatiously ever-widening parameters of what painting means. The authenticity of the artist making a mark, so to speak, may be subsumed behind the screen, mouse or tablet pen, but still manifests in a zone somewhere between the material and the computational ... in the case of this series of work, tweaking parameters of the system, until I arrive at my own kind of aesthetic confirmation bias.
A modified collection of these animations, titled GUIDE, was commissioned for the Electric Objects digital art streaming platform. The above video shows the anims playing on the custom EO screen (get yours today!), captured on a nice balmy afternoon at my studio here in Omaha.
You can watch a more detailed clip of the animations in the GUIDE collection on the website HERE.