| "Rules: Logic and Applications" 2nd Workshop, Dec, 2019 |
| Aesthetic Morphisms |
| Jocelyn Ireson-Paine |
| www.jocelyns-cartoons.uk/rules2019/ |
| "Rules: Logic and Applications" 2nd Workshop, Dec, 2019 |
| Aesthetic Morphisms |
| Jocelyn Ireson-Paine |
| www.jocelyns-cartoons.uk/rules2019/ |
| Slides as PDF | Artistic Techniques Database Demo | Artistic Techniques Database Video | Contact |
|
My cartoon-enhancement demo shows the level at which I'd like to see artistic image processing carried out: small tasks, well-specifiable in terms of their artistic goals. This would provide modularity, yielding its customary gains in maintainability, robustness, and an explanation of what the code does.
Thinking in terms of optimisation and inverses and equivalences gives a useful high-level specification of artistic goals.
But we also need an ontology — a classification — of artistic transformations, otherwise we lack a language in which to specify.
This will need a sub-ontology of artistic space, so that we can specify the location and distribution of picture properties.
This should be developed by artists, because only they have the experience of struggling with the techniques and representations.
Knowledge of art history and the anthropology of art is also useful.
I have barely mentioned it, but my generalised inverses and equivalences hint strongly at category theory, and in particular, at adjunctions. Category theory may not turn out to fit them exactly: aesthetics is, after all, a biological phenomenon, and biology is always messy. But even as an approximate description, it may be a useful source of organising principles — an "intuition pump".
Closely related concepts probably apply to natural-language translation and to analogical reasoning, so all three should keep in touch.
Now let's build that ontology.
