Similar to yesterday's (Workshop 202012 #6) but with more subdued colors.

Low Iteration, Non-Fractal. I started posting these as Workshop because I did not think they fit into a collection. But after posting a few, it is clear that there is a theme here. Someday, I will re-categorize. Too much work today.

As with Workshop 202012 #4 this is bumpy, but continuous, except for tearing along a diagonal in the upper right. It is not a simple rip, there are many fragments. I like the conflict.

Yesterday, (Workshop 202012 #4) I got into some nerd talk about exponents of complex numbers. Don't worry, I am not going there today. Anyway, here is yesterday's image without the complex exponent. I had decided not to publish this one. It is colorful, but too repetitive, it feels like patterned wallpaper. I pulled it out of the trash bin to compare with yesterday's picture.

Another low-iteration non-fractal.

Warning, nerd talk follows. You may notice a discontinuity running up and right from the center. The underlying formula is this sequence of operations:

$ z = sin(z.re)+i*sin(z.im)+c\\z = a*z + b\\z = z^{0.9+i*0.1}$

z and c have the usual meaning, a and b are parameters. In this case

$ a = -1.0 + i*1.1\\b=0.0+i*0.1$

The first two lines are quite simple. If only the first two lines are used the resulting images are mildly interesting, but also forgettable. If we made the exponent in the third line 1.0, then it is just the identity function z = z, and basically we have just the top two lines.

The exponent in this case is, 0.9+i*0.1, is close to 1.0. It adds a little bit a spice, a little twist to the two-line set.

Complex exponentiation is not, in general, a continuous function. It is a multi-value function. That is an oxymoron since normally a function is defined as something that returns a single value. We define a proper function by picking one of the possible values. There is no way to pick values so that the resulting function is continuous.

So, adding the third line makes the picture more interesting, is also introduces the discontinuity.

Many twisting multicolor lines.

I used my fractal program to generate this. It is used in a rather non-fractal way, so do not call this a fractal. (I will skip the tutorial on fractals, please use google if the rest does not make sense.)

The underlying formula is very simple, generally affine transformations with a light sprinkling of the sine function. The number of iterations is kept low, usually single digits or teens. The coloring is not related to Julia set membership or escape-time. The Julia set for this formula is uninteresting, and there are not enough iterations to determine Julia set membership. (Just using fancy mathematical words to say "not a fractal'.)

The low iteration count provides a nice distortion of the basic line or sine wave. Color is based on the current z-value, not the iteration count. Each iteration is colored and overlays the previous.

More blended color bands.

I was working on tools or techniques. I draw a single fuzzy wavy line, not as the finished product, but as a prototype to study. How can I vary it? Size, color, waviness. How can this be used alone or with other tools to produce a finished piece?

Inevitably the prototype and experimentation lead to something that I want to finish and publish. Often those get lost because I am in 'tool' mode, and do not want to get distracted. They get set aside with the intention to revisit later, and later never comes.

Lately I have made it a policy when I get an interesting prototype to set aside tool development and try to develop a finished piece. Sometimes I can create something that is unique and interesting enough to be worthy of publication. Sometimes it is just a dead end.

To be clear, these are finished pieces, not mere experiments. I may not have started the day with the intention to end up here. Often you cannot plan creativity or inspiration.

Starting a new series, "Workshop". This is catch-all series. Nothing is really planned, there is no particular order. It is best summarized as "what I have been working on lately"

Here I overlay bands of color. The bands are mostly distorted sine waves. They are fuzzy on the edges to blend in with surrounding features.

Someday, I may reclassify these as part of a series. Or maybe not, and this is it, just a bucket of one-off items.

What? You decide.

Here the focus is provided by the illusion of a singularity or event horizon in the upper right.

Similar to Monochrome #13. Less density and the spiral is off-center.

No more words from me. If you have been following along you can add your own. I feel that I am either repeating myself or just stating the obvious at this point.

A spiral in the center.

I tried to move the spiral center off the canvas center, but that did not seem to add interest. So this time I stayed with my initial dead-center instinct.

Continuing with the variations. This time many of the dots are stretched along elongated sine waves, and everything is tilted about 30 degrees.

Normally I do not like the wall paper type of repetition. I think it is palatable here. It provides a pattern that is easily grasped.

More not-really-random dots. Variable sizes, and some are stretched.

The number of different sizes are limited. The stretching is limited to the orthogonal directions. The larger sized items are more rare.

Initially the image seems rather busy. The additions generate more interest than just same sized dots. By limiting the addition to just a few patterns, there is a competing simplicity.

I made several of these, with various feature rules. More or fewer sizes, more or fewer orientations. I like this one the best. I also find it depends on my mood. Sometimes I like the simpler ones, sometime the more chaotic ones.

Another random/not-random array of dots, similar to the previous post.

Consecutive dots, whether horizontal, vertical or diagonal seems to be the key ingredient. These lines are about the only thing that works. If I try to build, for instance, a section of a circle, or alternating dot/no-dot, it takes too much space and the image immediately jumps firmly to the not-random side of the ledger.

This one gets close to the random/not-random boundary.

There are several places with four or five consecutive dots. There is one place with seven dots on a diagonal. You would not expect this from a collection of random dots at this approximately 20% density.

That does not mean that there is a pattern. It is fun to try to discover a pattern. You start to see a pattern, and then it fades away.

As mentioned in Monochrome #1, many of these images arose from a now abandoned order and chaos series. As part of that series I asked what would happen if some dots were removed from a regular grid. What does the boundary between order and chaos look like. Or, in this case the boundary between random and not-random.

In this one you may notice symmetry from a flip across the lower left / upper right diagonal. The other diagonal teases at a similar mirror symmetry, but it is not there.

You may also see hyperbolic (Hyperbola) curves in the upper right and lower left quadrants. That is by design. So this one is not-random, although it is clearly closer to the random/not-random boundary than an obvious wall-paper type pattern of dots.

Lonely, Isolated.

This is Monochrome #3, with the fuzzy white dot either smaller or farther away.

I never tried using this as a template for finished art work. Maybe someday. There are some pieces where the main central figure is small. For example Bugs #6, and Bugs #12. But the surrounding space is not empty. The little figure is supported by the thin designs in the background. Bugs #9 has a mostly empty background, but the little bit of background design still supports, lifts up, and frames the small central figure.

It is not that I have a policy against creating art that evokes feelings of loneliness or isolation. Rather there is a compulsion to fill up the empty space, and as a result nothing is ever lonely.

Negative of yesterday's post Monochrome #5.

You might think this was inspired by a Soundgarden song (youtube). But it is nothing so deep. It is just a mechanical transformation of the previous piece.

Warm, Protective.

Yesterday, I was investigating putting the bright spot slightly off-center, Monochrome #4. At the time, I did not think about possible differences due to the direction of the offset. I mentioned that in passing, and was going to leave it there. But leaving it as a passing comment seemed incomplete. So I had to go back and create today's picture.

This one is basically yesterday's post mirrored across the horizontal center line.

The image suggests a sun in the sky, which probably accounts for my initial reaction.

Mischievous, Roguish. A child that will not stay still for a photograph.

Again, this is an experiment. What do I feel, first impressions, when I see this? Why? How does this translate to more complex pieces?

The image is trying to move the focus off center. The single fuzzy white dot is shifted down and to the right compared to Monochrome 3. Same clean shape, but it not, as if it refuses to be, where you expect it. Staying in the center is too expected, too symmetric.

When I am working on something and notice that main point of interest is in the center, I immediately feel compelled to change that; I cannot consciously do the normal or expected thing. So I shift the view slightly. The viewer experiences a subconscious search and then discovery to find the central feature. Just a playful tease.

Most of the time I shift the main feature to the right and down. I do not know why I favor that direction. I am not sure what different directions mean. Perhaps a shift lower is something that is grounded. Whereas a shift up suggests rising or falling.