Tyler Hobbs

I love generative art. I've only really dabbled in it myself, but if you want to see what professional-quality generative art looks like check out the work of Tyler Hobbs [0]. He uses the Clojure library Quil [1] to make his pieces, which in my opinion is one of the most fun and intuitive ways to make generative art. [0] https://tylerxhobbs.com/ [1] http://www.quil.info/

It's no secret! I used Tyler Hobbs' method which has a great write up here: https://www.tylerxhobbs.com/words/a-guide-to-simulating-watercolor-pai… Then I tweaked it until it look good for use in my app.

Hehe I don't mind, it is my favorite off topic, I love pen plotting. I use it to draw my generative art, which you can see here: https://muffinman.io/art/ As for the engraver, keep in mind that AxiDraw is only using the weight of the pen (engraver) to press on a surface, so you might need to add some weight for it to work. But please be careful not to damage the servo motor or the plotter. Tyler Hobbs did something similar, he was using a drill bit to remove fresh paint from mirrors: https://www.tylerxhobbs.com/works/mirror-removal People are doing all kinds of wacky stuff with plotters. I want to try using a brush along with markers. I think the combination of the two can be used to create interesting effects.

Looks neat! I'm wondering why/how the first two results pictures (under "Values For num_steps") in https://tylerxhobbs.com/essays/2020/flow-fields have flow lines that are crossing each other. The paths follow a direction field, so that shouldn't happen except where the gradient vector vanishes, which doesn't seem to be the case there.

Great work by Tyler, love his dedication to not just the work itself but also documenting the process, the technology and last but not least reflecting on the "art" of it: https://tylerxhobbs.com/essays

Judging generative art on how complicated the code is that it is generated by misses the point. For the "art" aspect the code is just a tool. It can get quite complicated but it does not have to. Other aspects as "controlled randomness" are far more important. Concerning the "I could have done that in an hour" objection: Most photos are taken in less than 1/250 seconds but no one would use this as an argument against the artistic status of a picture. This essay by Tyler Hobbs contains some thoughts on generative that I found insightful concerning the relationship of art and code: https://tylerxhobbs.com/essays/2019/code-goes-in-art-comes-out

I work in the crypto industry right now - my job is to keep bad guys from stealing XXX millions of dollars. I've also worked on a team that has done the tech side of several record breaking NFT's sales. And I've sold my own NFTS for fun, and strangers have bought them (wat!). I'm not a "believer". Crypto is indeed full of idiots - and scammers - and crazy people who will say anything to see the token they hold go up - and scammers - and crazy people chasing a 100x buck - and more scammers. And even ignoring the scams, it's like living in an alternate Alice-in-Wonderland world where the rules of normal physics, normal economics, and normal society no longer seem to apply. It is truly a frothing zoo of non-normality. And yet I'm not a "skeptic" either. There are really, really hard technological problems out there, and there are really wonderful people working on them. In the middle of the economic silliness, there's a lot of new things around groups and economics being tried. And amidst the flurry of insanity in NFT world, there is some genuinely good art being created. For example, take the stuff this person creates (https://tylerxhobbs.com/fidenza). The process of making it is exactly the kind of stuff hackernews loves, and it is genuinely good art. It's stuff I put on the wall. The whole game around who gets to pay a stupid amount of money to say they own it (https://opensea.io/assets/0xa7d8d9ef8d8ce8992df33d8b8cf4aebabd5bd270/7… of them doesn't diminish the fact…

The source code is visible on-chain - it can be queried from the smart contract, but also it has been etched into the data of the “script upload” transaction. This is how ArtBlocks and other projects can fetch the script and display it. But that doesn’t mean the code is open source! Just like scripts on a website (which are also easy to see), the author decides on how to license the work. I often suggest GenerativeArtistry as a simple starting point if you already know a bit of JavaScript and want to understand how it works on a basic level[1]. Tyler Hobbs' blog (OP link) also has some great essays on generative art[2], as with the blog of Anders Hoff[3], and also lots of other resources in awesome-creative-coding repo[4]. [1] - https://generativeartistry.com/ [2] - https://tylerxhobbs.com/essays [3] - https://inconvergent.net/#writing [4] - https://github.com/terkelg/awesome-creative-coding

Tyler Hobbs writes about generative art, including getting started and improving. Some of his tips are Clojure-specific, and others are more general. I found the essay on flow fields especially interesting. https://tylerxhobbs.com/essays/2020/flow-fields

Check out flow fields, eg.: https://tylerxhobbs.com/essays/2020/flow-fields

A lot of the examples here feel very simar to Tyler Hobbs work... https://tylerxhobbs.com/essays/2020/flow-fields

After cleaning up my bookmarks i narrowed down my "Creative Coding" folder to these. "Generative Design: Visualize, Program, and Create with JavaScript in p5.js": http://www.generative-gestaltung.de/2/ Articles by Tyler Hobbs specially the one on "Flow Fields" : https://tylerxhobbs.com/essays/2020/flow-fields Articles by Sighack specially the one on "Watercolor Techniques": https://sighack.com/post/generative-watercolor-in-processing "Steve's Makerspace" on Youtube: https://youtube.com/@StevesMakerspace

related but with a more artistic slant: https://tylerxhobbs.com/essays/2016/a-randomized-approach-to-cicle-pac…

Creating a watercolor filter which can be applied to an image dragged into a website <canvas> element is on my list of Fun Things To Do Over The Holidays - but having previously looked at the the mechanics that need to feed into the filter ... well it looks like I'd be jumping down a rabbit hole of complex maths and generative art approaches[1][2]. It's a complex problem space and I'm not sure I have the brain power and tenacity to do a good job of it. [1] - Tyler Hobbs (2017) - a guide to simulating watercolor paint with generative art - https://tylerxhobbs.com/essays/2017/a-generative-approach-to-simulatin… [2] - Curtis|Anderson|Seims|Fleischery|Salesin (undated) - Computer-Generated Watercolor - https://grail.cs.washington.edu/projects/watercolor/paper_small.pdf

Thank you! I totally agree; the curation part is by far the hardest part for me. Tyler Hobbs writes about the curation process nicely here: https://tylerxhobbs.com/process I've not tried anything in 3D yet, that's a nice idea.

I really enjoy seeing algorithmic works of art that have a touch of human control. That's also a nice write up on Tyler's process. For those interested he mainly uses Closure: https://tylerxhobbs.com/process

Learn a polygon-modeling tool. The obvious choice is Blender, but Houdini and Cinema4d are also good alternatives if you're willing to pay up. Learn the basics, a little bit of sub-division modeling (it'll take a month of youtube tutorials to get that down), a little bit of particles work, a little bit of lighting setups, a little bit of generator/matrix/cloner functions, flow fields and forces, etc. in your chosen modeling tool. When you have this down, dive into programming -- Blender and Cinema4d can let you do a lot with python coding and geometry/scene nodes; likewise for Houdini but with a custom DSL called 'Vex'. And that's where a lot of magic is done. If you're a particularly talented programmer, you can skip that part and write your own ray-tracing code like Michl (https://www.instagram.com/iamasoyboy/) or otherwise do 2d-stuff like Tyler: https://tylerxhobbs.com/essays/2020/flow-fields Keep exploring and checking out what others are doing. There's r/generative: https://www.reddit.com/r/generative/top/?t=all et al. for inspiration. In comments, artists will more often than not share the code they use to come up with their art.

One of the better ones I've found is Tyler Hobbes [0]. I recently found the "Bridges Archive" online [1]. It's a goldmine of ideas (I won't link to them but they have tilings, space filling algorithms, multi-scale Truchet patterns and many more). I favor the ideas rather than the implementation as I already know how to program so you may do better with learning something like processing/p5.js [2]. In terms of raw ideas, I've found Jared Tarbell to be a huge inspiration [3] [4]. I'm sure I'll get lashed on here for the mere mention of NFTs but I've found there are consistently awesome generative art being displayed on Twitter for artists showing their work and advertising their NFTs for sale. One resource that I've found to be pretty consistently good is fxhash.xyz [5] [6]. Looking for #fxhash tags on Twitter will probably give you rich results. I also have my own NFTs whose source code I've released as CC0 if you want to take a look [7] (none are for sale right now) along with a half assed attempt at making a list of resources for generative art [8]. There's plenty of "awesome" generative art lists [9] as well as many examples and other projects on p5.js [2]. And of course there's always Reddit [10] [11]. Oh and "Coding Train" is deceptively deep, packing complex ideas in a kind of "cutesy" veneer but still managing to tackle topics that run the gamut of easy to incredibly difficult [12]. There's really too many resources to list. It depends on what level you're at.…

Again, I think the act of "owning" it creates a much different relationship between the collector and that art than simply looking at it. They have skin in the game because they either spent money on the piece, or were able to mint it by being in the right place at the right time. To be sure, a lot of the "advocacy" is exactly what you describe, where people are just trying to push their bags. But the advocacy I'm talking about is more about the social element of discussing the art with other people in the community. The website is certainly a valid way to display a limited generative art collection, but it's a different experience. It means that the artist _can_ curate the collection and hide some of the rough edges of the algorithm... but then it loses some of its magic. NFTs have sort of enabled a new sub genre of generative art [1]. [1] https://tylerxhobbs.com/essays/2021/the-rise-of-long-form-generative-a…