Generative art – sense or senseless?

Generative art

Sometimes I don’t know what to think of generative art. I don’t know if these images I created could be called (or what ‘they’ called) art, or if they are just some other renders. Sometimes it feels nothing more than lines, colors. Some people who see it really love it, but at some moments I don’t know how to think about it.

senseless.colors.04 senseless.colors.06

But take a look at it, they have so many details (see the big sizes if you have a flickr account). I cannot count the lines, but can have a endless watch to see if there’s a message in it. A secret sign or something else I didn’t coded. How can such useless lines be that interesting? I don’t get it..


A lot of people ask me how to create this images. If you don’t want to learn to code, just freak out with photoshop. First, when you really want to this: learn a coding-language, like actionscript. Download a nice actionscript-editor, like FlashDevelop. This makes coding more easily & comfortable. You also could learn processing. I don’t know a lot about it, but I’ve seen wonderful things created with it.

4 responses to “Generative art – sense or senseless?”

  1. Maryl says:

    I’m amazed by your work, I’m inlove with abstract art, gives you more creativity when it comes to give your own meaning to the images.

    I would love to see a Tutorial of How to create images like yours, I’m going to keep checking out your work.

  2. nelsdrums says:

    This latest bunch of images take on a very painterly and hand-drawn look. Very cool!

  3. Hailei says:

    I also think about this question often. It’s hard to find out the answer. Sometime I call my generative work useless things, but they are really beautiful or colorful and give you some kind of sense of beauty and enjoyment. The other people would think it’s magic. I recommend we try to find the answer by asking other type of abstract artist the same question: What do your works do?

    By th way, I am you contact on flickr (username: Dillone)

  4. Batuhan says:

    These are artworks, of course. Virtually any art form is dealing with controlling randomness wheter it be a conscious act or not. Depends on where you are standing. For example a painter uses brushes, and choses certain brushes for certain tasks because the bristles on a particular brush has an observable statistical quality in it. And it is a tool for making order out of randomness. Even pure randomness has a quality in it, if a single sample in pure whitenoise would be alive, it would probably say “look how uniformly distributed we are, perfect!”. I can’t think of a single art form that doesn’t deal with things like this.

    Similarly, computer is a tool, and it helps as build tools to make stuff happen. It isn’t something like “you press a button and it happens”, you actually build the tools you need to make things happen, like a painter making her own brushes, canvas and paint… And similarly, every art form deals with serendipty. its in the heart of creation. You try, evaluate, change things, evaluate, change, evaluate… and so on. Sometimes you get what you want, sometimes you can’t. Other times you get more than what you asked for and it makes you day.

    In generative art, I can’t think of a single issue that voids the “artfulness” of the process of creating, or the end result. I think there is none.

    I enjoyed your stuff by the way, keep up!

Say something interesting

Please link to code from an external resource, like