sign in sign up
<<
Home , Computer art

Visual Intelligence: The First Decade of (1965-1975)

FrankDietrich

Abstract-The author traces developmentsin computerart worldwidefrom 1965, when the first computer art exhibitions were held by scientists, through succeeding periods in which artists collaborated with scientists to create computerprograms for artistic purposes.The end of the first decade of computerart was marked by economic, technological and programmingadvances that allowed artists more direct access to , high quality images and virtually unlimited color choices.

I. INTRODUCTION scientists were motivated mainly by tactile-input device. Harmon and research related to Knowlton devised automatic The year 1984 has been synonymous with visual phenomena: digitizing visualization of acoustics and the found- methods for work related to a the fundamental Orwellian pessimism of images, ations of binocular vision. Researchersat on and of voice a future mired in technological aliena- project sampling plotting tion. Yet one year later, in 1985, we are Bell contributed a wealth of information data under the direction of Manfred to the of Schroeder. Ken Knowlton contributed celebrating the official maturity of an art spur growth computer graphics. Numerous animations were several for animation. form born just 20 years ago: computer computer graphics languages for this article I will discuss the art. These adjacent dates, one fictional, produced, mostly educational pur- Throughout the other factual, share an intimate poses, but a few artistic experiments were research conducted at Bell Labs in further also conducted. Julesz and Noll worked detail relationship with technological develop- [1-5]. on the of The German center of was ment in general and the capabilities of display stereoscopic images. activity Noll the mathematics for N- established at the Technische Universitat imaging machines in particular. developed dimensional projections, as well as a 3-D Stuttgart under the influence of philo-

II. EARLY WORK AND THE FIRST COMPUTER ART SHOWS Computer art represents a historical breakthrough in computer applications. For the first time computers became involved in an activity that had been the exclusive domain of humans: the act of creation. The number of Ph.D.'s involved emphasized the heavily academic nature of the art form. The first computer art exhibitions, which ran almost concurrently in 1965 in the US and Germany, were held not by artists at all, but by scientists: Bela Julesz and A. Michael Noll at the Howard Wise Gallery, New York; and and Frieder Nake at Galerie Niedlich, Stutt- gart, Germany. Noll and Julesz conducted their visual research at Bell Laboratories in New Jersey. The Murray Hill lab became one of the hotbeds for the development of computer graphics. Also working there were Manfred Schroeder, Ken Knowlton, Leon Harmon, Frank Sinden and E.E. Zajac, who all belonged to the first generation of 'computer artists'. These

Fig. 1. A. MichaelNoll, Bridget Riley's "Currents", 1966. An early attempt at simulating an Frank Dietrich (artist, computer graphics consul- existingpainting with a computer.Much of 'op art' uses repetitivepatterns that usuallycan be tant), 3477 South Court, Palo Alto, CA 94306, in mathematicalterms. These waveforms were as sinusoids U.S.A. expressedvery simply generated parallel withlinear increasing period and drawn on a microfilmplotter. A. MichaelNoll also approximated Piet Mondrian's with Lines and created a version with Copyright ? 1985 IEEE. Reprinted with permission, painting Composition statistically digital from IEEE ComputerGraphics and Applications, pseudorandomnumbers. Xerographic reproductions of bothpictures were shown to 100subjects, and Vol. 5, No. 7, pp. 34-35, July 1985. the computer-generatedpicture was preferredby 59.

Pergamon Journals Ltd. Printed in Great Britain. LEONARDO, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 159-69, 1986 159 0024-094X/86 $3.00+0.00 Fig. 2. KennethC. Knowltonand Leon Harmon, Studies in Perception I, 1966.Knowlton and Harmon made this picture at BellLaboratories in Murray Hill, NewJersey. It is anearly example of imageprocessing and probably the first 'computer nude'. It wasexhibited in the show "The Machine" at theMuseum of ModernArt in New Yorkin 1968.Scanning a photograph,they converted the analogvoltages into binary numbers, which were stored on magnetictape. Anotherprogram assigned typographic symbols to these numbersaccording to halftonedensities. Thus the archetypeof artistictopics, the nude,is representedby a microcosmosof electronicsymbols printed by a microfilmplotter.

sopher Max Bense. Bense's main areas of Only in a second phase did artists "Some More Beginnings," a show research covered the history of science become involved and participate with organized by Experiments in Art and and the mathematics of aesthetics. He scientists in three large-scale shows: Technology at the Brooklyn Museum, coined the terms 'artificial art' and "," organized in New York (1968), and "," 'generative aesthetics' in his main work, London for the Institute of Contem- curated by Jack Burnham at the Jewish Aesthetica [6]. porary Art by Jasia Reichard (1968), Museum in New York (1970). The Advances in both and poetry (or text processing) formed the context and also offered initial guidelines for computer art. Computer-generated texts were produced in Stuttgartbeginning in 1960. An entire branch of text analysis relied heavily on computer-processed statistics dealing with vocabulary, length and type of sentences, etc. [7]. studios predated computer art studios, leading a number of visual artists to seek information about computers from university music de- partments. Dutch artist Peter Struycken, for instance, took a course in electronic music offered by the composer G.M. Koenig at one of the few European centers, the Instituut voor Sonologie at the Rijks Universiteit at Utrecht [8]. Lejaren A. Hiller programmed the "Illiac Suite" in 1957 on the ILLIAC computer at the University of Illinois, Champaign, and composed the well-known "Computer Cantata" with Robert A. Baker in 1963 [9]. Some musicians who were using computers as a compositional tool also created graphics in an attempt to foster synergism between the (Iannas Xenakis, Herbert Briin, etc.)[10-19]. The I filmmaker John Whitney, on the other Fig. 3. CharlesA. Csuriand James Shaffer, Sine WaveMan, 1967.This wonfirst in hand, his picture prize began structuring computer Computersand Automation magazine's annual computer art competition in 1967. Initially the artist animations according to harmonies of the drew a humanface and coded a handfulof selected coordinatesfrom the line .This data served musical scale and later called this concept as fixed points for the application of Fourier transforms.The result was a numberof sine curveswith Digital Harmony [20]. different slopes, although each shares the seed points from the drawing of the face.

160 Dietrich, Visual Intelligence catalogs of these shows still represent some of the best overviews of emerging approaches to computers and other technologies for artistic purposes [21-24]. These shows presented the first results and publicly questioned the relationship of computers and art. They attracted many more artists to the growing field of computer art but did not succeed in making the art world in general more receptive to the new art form.

III. THE TECHNOLOGICAL ARTIST AND THE COMPUTER When we look at the handful of early computer art aficionados, certain patterns emerge. All scientists and artists in this group belong to the same generation, born between the two World Wars, approximately 1925-1940. Their heritage is not bound by national borders; rather it is international, representing the highly industrialized countries of Europe, North America and Japan. Initially, artists saw a very utilitarian advantage in using the computer as an accelerator for "high-speed visual thinking" [25]. Robert Mallary calls this the synergistic use of the computer in the context of man-machine interactions. He Fig. 4. George Nees, 1968. One of the earliest created under refers to the computer's "application as a , completely computercontrol. This piece was exhibited at the Biennale in Venice in 1969. Nees had a tool for the long-standing enhancing on-the-spot interest in the study of artificial visual complexity in connection with the chance-determination creative power and productivity of the reaction. He programmeda Siemens 4004 computerto generate pseudorandomnumbers, which were artist by accelerating and telescoping the tightly controlled to determinewidth, length and depth of rectangularobjects. The three-dimensional on creative process and by making available data were stored magnetic tape and used to drive an automatic milling machine off line. The sculpture was cut from a block of wood. to its user a multitude of options that otherwise might not occur to him" [26]. Because these artists were not interested in descriptive or elaborated painting, they could allow themselves to relate to the simple imagery generated by computers. Their interest was fueled by other capabilities of the computer, for instance its ability to allow the artist to be an omnipotent creator of a new universe with its own physical laws. Charles Csuri pointed out this far-reaching concept in an interview: "I can use a well-known physical law as a point of departure, and then, quite arbitrarily, I can change the numericalvalues, which essentiallychanges the reality. I can have light travel five times faster than the speed of light, and in a sense put myself in a position of creating my own personal science fiction" [27]. Many of the artists were construc- tivists. They were accustomed to arrang- form and color and ing logically Fig. 5. Frieder Nake, Matrix Multiplications, 1967. These four pictures reflect the translation of a voluntarily restrictingthemselves to a few mathematicalprocess into an aesthetic process. A square matrix was initially filled with numbers.The well-defined image elements. They tried matrix was multipliedsuccessively by itself, andthe resultingnew matriceswere translatedinto images to focus on the act of seeing and of predeterminedintervals. Each numberwas assigned a visual sign with a particularform and color. These were in a raster to the numeric values of the matrix. The were perception by stripping away any notion signs placed according images computed on a AEG/Telefunken TR4 in ALGOL 60 and were with a ZUSE of content. The French de programmed plotted Groupe Graphomat Z64. A portfolio with 12 drawingswas publishedand sold in 1967 by Edition Hansjoerg Recherche d'Art Visuel, or GRAV, was a Mayer, Stuttgart, Germany.

Dietrich, Visual Intelligence 161 on one lane. Well-defined rules and random number generators guaranteed the creation of never-ending variations of with a very distinctive style [32, 33]. Cohen's project AARON is an early example of a functioning harmonic symbiosis between man and machine that enables the team to achieve a top performance. Increasingly sophisticated relationships between artists and com- puters have been classified by Robert Mallary in his article "Computer Sculp- ture: Six Levels of Cybernetics." He speculates that the computer could develop into an autonomous organism, capable of self-replication. Even if the machines could never actually be "alive," Mallary suggests their potential superior- ity. "The computer, while not alive in any organic sense, might just as well be, if it were to be judged solely on the basis of its capabilities and performances-which are so superlative that the sculptor, like a child, can only get in the way" [34]. But this prediction sounded like pure fantasy to those trying to enable the computer to assist the artist with very Fig. 6. Tony Longson, Quarter#5, 1977. As a sculptorTony Longson got interestedin the perception simple tasks. Especially in the beginning, of space and how it is supportedby perspectiveprojection and parallaxvision. Quarter#5 is the last of interfacing with computers required a series of started in 1969. All are made of four sheets of mountedwith small intervalson pieces Perspex artists to collaborate extensively with top of each other such that the viewer sees through all four layers. The complete image consists of an arrangementof dots in a rectangular grid. But this image has been decomposedrandomly into four programmers. sections, so that only a subset of dots is engraved into each sheet of plastic. Viewers approachingthe piece will see first an apparentlychaotic distributionof dots. However, once the vieweris positionedin one of four fixed viewpoints,chaos will suddenlychange into a highly structuredorder of dots in one of the quadrants[58]. IV. COLLABORATION OF ARTISTS AND SCIENTISTS/PROGRAMMERS/ ENGINEERS proponent of this direction and became to computer art. Instead the works Usually artists cooperated with instrumental in the Op Art and Kinetic generated by a computer requirefrom the scientists because only scientists could Art movements of the 60's [28]. Vera artist (or critic) "a rigorous stoicism provide access to computers in industrial Molnar, a cofounder of GRAV, con- against beauty." For Kawano, the research labs and university computer ceived a "Machine Imaginaire" to enable computer artist's only function is to teach centers. But artists needed the pro- her "to produce combinations of forms the computer how to make art by gramming expertise of scientists even never seen before, either in nature or in programming an . Thus the more. Some collaborations prospered museums, to create unimaginableimages." artist/programmer has become a "meta- over many years and led to successful She realized that the computer could artist," and the executing artist could be achievements in custom-designed pro- permit her "to go beyond the bounds of the computer itself, the "art-computer" grams for artistic purposes [35]. learning, cultural heritage, environment [31]. Even so, Ken Knowlton described the -in short, of the social thing, which we One artist who explicitly taught the different attitudes of artists and pro- must consider to be our second nature" computer is Harold Cohen. He wanted to grammers as a major difficulty. In [29]. Conventional aesthetics and their automate the process of drawing, or, to Knowlton's view artists are "illogical, social-psychological connotations were be more precise, Cohen wanted to have a intuitive, and impulsive." They needed seen as a hindrance to creative visual computer simulate his personal style of programmers who were "constrained, research. It was precisely the computer's drawing. Cohen set out in 1973 to create logical, and precise" as translators and nonhumanness that was understood to an expert drawing system at Stanford interfaces to the computers of the 1960s free art from these influences. Art critics University's Lab- [36]. But the first of a growing breed of who pointed out the cool and mechanical oratory. The computer was programmed technological artists with hybrid capa- look of the first results of computer art to model the essence of Cohen's creative bilities started to appear, too. Manfred did not grasp the implications of this strategies. The program contained a large Mohr proudly declared that he was self- concept. repertoire of various forms and shapes he taught in computer science, Edvard Zajec According to the Japanese artist had been using previously in his paint- learned programming and today teaches Hiroshi Kawano, who started producing ings. The other main component was a it to art students, and Duane Palyka computer art in 1959 [30], human 'space-finder' to establish compositional holds degrees in both fine arts and standards of aesthetics are not applicable relationships heuristically between forms mathematics.

162 Dietrich, Visual Intelligence V. THE FIRST GRAPHICS would learn the language to program ine dependent and also because each LANGUAGES their own movies, but he came to realize language was restricted in scope. The Early attempts at graphics languages that they usually wanted to create tools were useful for their inventors' goals fell into one of two categories. Either they something the language could not but lacked sufficient flexibility and ease were graphics subroutines implemented facilitate, and they also shied away from of use to accommodate the creative ideas in one of the common programming programming. Therefore he accommo- of many different artists. BEFLIX, languages and callable from them, or they dated the artists by, for example, writing however, was installed in several art were written in machine language and set special extensions to BEFLIX for Stan departments and provided the helping up their own syntax and command set or Vanderbeek, or creating a completely hand many programmershad given when vocabulary. The first graphics extensions, new language, EXPLOR (images from collaborating individually with artists. G1, G2 and G3 by Georg Nees, for EXplicit Patterns, Local Operations and At Ohio State University Charles Csuri instance, were written in ALGOL 60 and Randomness), for Lillian Schwarz [41]. directed, over many years, the develop- contained only commands for pen None of the graphics languages men- ment of several graphics languages, all control and random number generators tioned received widespread use, partly designed for ease of use, interactive [38]. More elaborate was Mezei's because their implementation was mach- control, and animation capabilities. One SPARTA, a system of Fortran calls incorporating graphics primitives (line, arc, rectangle, polygon, etc.), different pen attributes (dotted, connected, etc.), and transformations (move, size, rotate). A further development led to ARTA, an interactive language based on light-pen control. ARTA also provided subrou- tines for key-frame interpolation, allow- ing both the interactive drawing of two key frames and the description of the type of interpolation with a function [39]. A language extension similar to Fortran was GRAF, written by Jack Citreon et al., at IBM; GRAF also offered optional light-pen input [40]. Even though these graphics extensions made programming in machine code superfluous, they still required programming in Fortran or ALGOL 60. In the second group of graphics languages we find Frieder Nake's COM- PART ER 56 as well as Ken Knowlton's languages, BEFLIX and EXPLOR. The names of these programming environ- ments are indicative of either function- or machine-dependent implementation of the language. COMPART ER 56, for instance, refers to a particular computer, the Standard Elektric ER 56, for which the language has been written. ER 56 contained three subpackages, a space organizer, a set of different random number generators, and selectors for the repertoire of graphic elements. Nake used COMPART ER 56 extensively to create more than 100 drawings [30]. BEFLIX (a corruption of Bell Flicks) was designed to produce animated movies on a Stromberg-Carlson 4020 microfilm recorder. Points within a 252- by-184 coordinate system could be controlled, each having one of eight different shades of gray. In contrast with today's frame buffers, which hold the image memory in their bit map, BEFLIX's images resided in the computer's main 7. Herbert W. Portrait Albert memory. As an animation language it Fig. Franke, Einstein, 1973. A photographof Einstein was scanned and The data was stored on and instructions for several motion digitized optically. tickertape displayed on a CRT using programs provided developed for applications in medical diagnosis. Herbert Franke generated the colors with random effects as well as for camera control. numbersand by smoothingcontour lines. This series of portraits graduallybecomes more abstract and Knowlton had initially hoped that artists thus fuses visually Einstein's portrait and a nuclear blob.

Dietrich, Visual Intelligence 163 incarnation, GRASS, or GRAphics Symbiosis System, was designed by Tom DeFanti, first for a real-time vector display and later as ZGRASS for a Z80- based animation language for artists. This language has been widely used by programming artists, which indicates that it possesses sufficient generality to support different imaging strategies as well as suitable command and execution structures to adapt to artistic creation [44, 45].

VI. THE FIRST GRAPHICS SYSTEMS Let's turn the clock back again to the 1960s when the microcomputer had not even been conceived. The computers used initially were large mainframes, soon followed by minicomputers. Such equipment cost anywhere from $100,000 to several million dollars. All these machines required air conditioning and therefore were located in separate com- puter rooms, which served as fairly uninhabitable 'studios'. Programs and data had to be prepared with the keypunch; then the punch cards were fed into the computer, which ran in batch mode. In general, the systems were not interactive and could produce only still images. Pen plotters, microfilm plotters and line printers produced most of the visual Fig. 8. EdvardZajec, Prostor, 1968-69. One of a seriesof drawingsfrom the Prostor program. Zajec output. The first animations were created was concernedwith establishing a designsystem that could generate a multitudeof variations.Each timethe by plotting all still frames of the movie programruns, it definesa rectangleand subdivides it accordingto harmonicproportions. The figureformation inside this compositiontakes place by a line fromthis set: sequentially on a stack of or selectingsuccessively paper vertical,horizontal, diagonal and sinusoidal. The parametersfor lengthand amplitude with microfilm. Motion comply could only be re- harmonicratios. The linesconnect with each otheraccording to predeterminedrules [37]. viewed after these stills had been transferred to 16-mm film and projected. Only a few artists had the opportunity to use even more expensive vector displays the majority of early computer art. The with a mechanical drawing introduced in the late 1960s by companies microfilm plotter is something of a hybrid device [49]. such as IBM or newly founded graphics between a vector CRT and a raster image Output was often taken directly from manufacturers such as Evans & Suther- device [48]. The CRT beam scans the the machine and exhibited. Moreover, the land, Vector General, and Adage, whose screen sequentially, turning on and off signatures were sometimes plotted by the displays cost between $50,000 and under computer control. A camera machine as part of the drawing program. $100,000. These displays featured very mounted on the CRT makes a time Later, artists used these graphics as high addressability, up to 4000 by 4000 exposure during each scan. Thus the sketches for manually produced points, and could update coordinates fast resulting image looks like a photograph or copy for photographically transferred enough to support real-time animation of taken from a raster device. serigraphs. Artists also followed tradition wireframe models in 3-D [46]. One of the Some artists used the alphanumeric and signed their computer-generated first computer art shows incorporating characters of the line printer to produce work by hand. Color was often introduced these interactive displays took place at shaded areas by overstrikingone position only in this later phase ofpostproduction, the College of the Arts at Ohio State with different characters or using the or a limited range could be achieved by University in 1970 [47]. capacity of the eye to integrate these using different plotter pens. A more popular and cost-effective separate microimages into one larger Harold Cohen realized this limitation choice was the storage display tubes macroimage or supersign. The German of the available graphics equipment. His offered by Tektronix, starting around artist Klaus Basset attained extraordin- approach was to delegate only the job of $10,000. But even if only a single line was arily subtle shading effects by using a drawing to the computer, for which he to be changed, the picture had to be simple typewriter. His work clearly used a plotter, a CRT, or the funny- erased completely and redrawn. relates to computer art, even if he did not looking 'turtle'-a remotely controlled With the exception of the microfilm employ a computer directly to control the drawing vehicle. He colored the resulting plotter, all output devices were line or writing process. He programmed himself, line drawings later by hand, thus mixing vector oriented and thus characterized so to speak, to execute precisely designed automatic drawing and human painting

164 Dietrich, Visual Intelligence dimensionalicons. In addition, he introducesrotations and other transformationsof the cube to foster visual ambiguityand instability. The dynamics of this

combinations.

styles. He recently published a series of developed, but these input devices were into the computer's memory. Today his computer-generated line drawings in not widely available.) Once the data was paint systems, sophisticated3-D modeling The First Artificial Intelligence Coloring fed into the computer, there was no more software, and input provide quick Book as an invitation to everyone to creative invention. Therefore the design ways to create complex images, but the combine their creative efforts with those process took place exclusively in the first generation of computer artists had to of the computer [50]. conceptualization prior to running a focus on logic and mathematics-in MethodsMe-thods- of enteringe-nterina graphicsgraphics, were program.nrogram. ItItuuwasat was at leastleaszt a decadedecadeti before short,shorrt, ratherrathe-r abstractabs%tract methods. To some even more restricted. With hardly any Ivan Sutherland's interactive concepts, degree this restriction brought about interactive means of controlling the demonstrated in 1963 with "Sketchpad" creative concepts derived directly from computer, artists had to rely on programs [51], resulted in a breakthrough and the computer technology itself. and predefined data. (The technology of ultimate proliferation of paint systems light pens and data tablets had already that enabled the artist to draw directly

Dietrich, Visual Intelligence 165 VII. THE CONCEPTS The pioneers of computer art were driven by the newness of the technology, the untouched areas wide open for inventive investigation. Because of the lack of viable commercial applications at that time, they enjoyed the rare freedom to define their own goals, guided only by personal motivation and intuition. This small group of believers had a vision, which has not yet been fulfilled. These artists felt challenged to come up with sophisticated artistic and intellectual concepts to offset the crude computer graphics machines of the mid-1960s with their lack of color, speed and interactivity. It might be fruitful to resolve with today's technology the paradox Manfred Mohr found in his work, a paradox particularly : + applicable to the early days of computer ...... ':',':.. - . , . : : ii:. '5'.. . '. .':'):::~, ?:'' ? ':. art: "The paradox of my generative work is that formwise it is minimalist and 10. Colette and Charles Landlines, 1970. This couple has been collaborating on their contentwise it is maximalist" [52]. Fig. Bangert, computer art for almost two decades. In parallel Colette has continuedto draw her art by hand. The investigation of similarities and differences between 'handwork' and computerplots is the foundation of their creative concepts, and findings are fed back into new programs and more sophisticated hand drawings. This methodological approach is tightly coupled with the subject matter of all their work: VIII. COMBINATORICS landscapes. Colette reports: "The elements of both the computer work and my hand work are often like and other elements are. There is sameness and The was of by Nake repetitive, leaves, trees, grass landscape similarity, computer thought is [59]. as a "Universal Picture Generator" yet everything changing" capable of creating every possible picture out of a combination of available picture elements and colors [30]. Obviously, a the computer. They simulated intuition in arbitrary point of initial impact. The systematic application of the mathematics a very limited fashion and helped changes of color distribution were of combinatorics would lead to an overcome the severe restrictions of presented in numerical codes, which the inconceivable number of pictures, both human interaction with the computer. artist translated into actual color paint- good and bad, and would require an Random numbers could be constrained ings by hand. infinite production time in human terms, within a limited numeric range and then even if exactly computable. This raised applied to a set of rules of aesthetic X. MATHEMATIC FUNCTIONS the issue of preselecting a few elements relationships. If these rules were derived that could be explored exhaustively and from an analysis of traditional paintings, Numeric evaluations of functions presented in a series or cluster of the program could simulate a number of could be plotted directly. Graphs of subimages as one piece. Manfred Mohr, similar , according to Noll [53] different functions could be merged, or for instance, centered his work on the and Nake [30]. Or the artist could set up their points could be connected. These cube and concisely devised successive new rules for generating entire families of methods relate directly to experiments transformationsthat modified an ordinary new aesthetic configurations, using ran- with analog computing machines by Ben cube. The complex set of possible dom numbers to decide where and how to F. Laposky and Herbert W. Franke in the transformations was then plotted, and place graphic elements. 1950s. They constructed their own the transformations were displayed Peter Struycken recovered the rigorous imaging systems based on an arrange- simultaneously as a single image. A series tradition of the de Stijl and ment of voltage-controlled oscillators. of catalogs of his work from 1973 to consciously disregarded even abstract The voltages deflected the beam of present exquisitely documents the con- forms by focusing exclusively on pure oscilloscopes to produce electronic line sistent progression of his visual logic [52]. color. In his own words: "Form is an drawings. Laposky called his images easier conceptual representation and accordingly 'oscillons'. They were photo- repetition than color. Form can almost graphic time exposures of the CRT IX. AND ORDER, CHAOS, always be associated with a form that is display [54]. RANDOMNESS already known. How easy it is to connect Entire number fields were drawn with Other artists chose to investigate the abstract forms to reality: this is just like a digital computers, which features a full range between order and chaos, cloud, that like a snake, these like flowers. control superior to that of analog employing random number generators. Form is then regarded as something in systems. For instance, artist/scientists In this way they could create many itself, where recognition is as important would display modular relationships or different images from one program, as seeing as such" [8]. To discourage even particular properties such as primeness or introducing change with the random the faintest notion of content, he reduced various stages of a matrix multiplication selection of certain parameters to define, the image in "Plons" (Dutch for Splash) approaching its limiting boundaries. The for instance, location, type or size of a to simple squares forming a coordinate use of mathematics does not necessarily graphic element [8, 29]. Random num- system. The computer calculated propa- imply a highly geometrical result. Some bers served to break the predictability of gation of color energy emanating from an scientists tried to model irregular pat-

166 Dietrich, Visual Intelligence terns. Knowlton, for example, simulated and Manfred R. Schroe- crystal growth, ii11'1;r8 der visualized equations describing noise in phone lines. Both experiments relate to ra=5Ir'tcQCOCJi the mathematics of so prevalent i 1 today for the modeling of natural lrl phenomena [55]. i4 XI. REPRESENTATIONALIMAGES iZ r'BBlsB1 I Whereas the last type of image PltCI?2 nrrntn'l1 II aBftBBf-BflrB C1%%1 gaa visualizes the mathematical behavior of C' 1i,, II Ir r rW u numbers, the numbers could also repre- Irl r sent the coordinates of a hand drawing. latiCCLr Re,, =5Icley This data had to be meticulously entered r&Q 3CjlL'le? :rF+F+raer into the computer via punch cards; then various processing methods could be applied to the image data. Leslie Mezei deformed the image progressively into complete noise [56]. Charles Csuri and James Shaffer applied Fourier trans- forms to a subset of the data samples and generated complex sine functions through those fixed points. The originally digitized drawing, combined with several I% 11. Klaus 1974.The are of five 'I', 'O', sine waves, formed the final image of the Fig. Basset,Kubus, typewritergraphics composed only signs: 'o', 'H' and'%'. By overstriking these type symbols in various combinations, Basset achieved a of "Sine Wave Man". range halftonesfrom bright to dark.He usedthese tones to shadecubic objects, which he calculatedand The Japanese Computer Graphics meticulouslytyped by hand.Recently, Basset started to usea computerwith a lineprinter as anoutput Technique Group experimented with the device.He claimsthat the typewrittenpieces are moreprecise. metamorphosis of one image into a completely different one. Thus a realistic face could be completely distorted or the major stylistic method in his movie dots of different sizes and densities are gradually transformed into a geometric Hunger. employed. The artist could relate the gray entity such as a square. The interpolation Optical scanners automated the task of values of an image to a set of arbitrary techniques they were using for the entering visual data into the computer visual symbols and print out the creation of a simple image became the and in effect revealed the potential of converted images. Thus images were cornerstone of animation. This anima- machine vision. These images were stored created like the nude by Knowlton and tion technique, called key-frame anima- in the computer in the form of different Harmon, which on closer inspection is tion, was pioneered at the National Film numbers to encode different gray values, seen to consist of numerous electrical Board of Canada by Burtnyk and and later color. They could be printed symbols, or an eye whose close-up reveals Marcelli Wein [57]. Peter Foldes used with plotters, using a printing concept letters forming the sentence "One picture interpolation techniques successfully as similar to that used for halftones, where is worth a thousand words" (Schroeder).

Fig. 12. Sonia Landy Sheridan, Scientist's Hand at 3M, 1976. This educational masterpiece implicitly pays homage to the major utensil of early programming:the punchcard. The image of the handhas been transferredonto the top line of a stack of punch cards by an electrostatic process using a prototype of 3M'S VQC photocopier.Sheridan was trying Fig. 13. Duane Palyka, PaintingSdf-Portrait, 1975. (Photo: Mike to showthe childrenof the scientistsat 3M'scentral research labs in St Milochek). The artist painted a self-portrait on a computer at the Paul,Minnesota, how the computerstores information on cardsand how University of Utah ComputerScience Department in 1975. In the picture, the imageon the cardscan be manipulatedwithout even using a machine. Palyka is using a simple paint programcalled Crayon, written in Fortran This handcan be stretchedmillions of waysby merelyshifting the cards by Jim Blinn. The programran underthe DOS operatingsystem on a DEC [42, 43]. PDP-11/45 using the first Evans & Sutherland frame buffer.

Dietrich, Visual Intelligence 167 XII. THE END OF AN ERA Krampen and P. Seitz, eds., Hastings 28. Groupe de Recherche d'Art Visuel, House Publishers, Inc., New York, 1967, sur le Mouvement. The end of the first decade of computer Proposition Catalog, pp. 65-79. Galerie Denise Rene, Paris, Jan. 1961. art coincided with important changes due 5. A.M. Noll, "The as a Digital Computer 29. V. "Artist's Statement", to three Creative IEEE Molnar, Page mainly technological advances: Medium", Spectrum 4, 26-27 89-95 #43, pp. (1980). (1967). 30. F. A'sthetikals 1. The invention of the micro- 6. M. Aesthetica. in die Nake, Informationsverar- Bense, Einfuhrung Wien-New the Neue Baden- beitung, Springer Verlag, processor changed size, price, Aesthetik, Agis Verlag 1974. 1965. York, and accessibility of computers Baden, 31. H. "What Is Art?" 7. W. Nach Allen der Kawano, Computer The Fucks, Regein Krust, Artist and R. dramatically. computer Deutsche Computer, Leavitt, ed., Verlags Anstalt, Stuttgart, Creative could become a truly personal 1968. Computing, Morristown, N.J., 1976, pp. 112-113. tool. 8. P. Struycken, Structuur-Elementen 32. H. Cohen, What Is An Image? IJCAI 6, 2. Museum Interactive systems became 1969-1980, catalog. Boymans- 1028-1057. van pp. common in the creative process. Beuningen, Rotterdam, 1980, translated from Dutch by Bert 33. H. Cohen, "How to Make a Drawing", Traditional paradigms of artistic Speelpennig, p. 8. Science Colloquium. Nat'l Bur. of Stds., creation such as painting and 9. Isaacson L. Hiller, Experimental Music. Wash. D.C., Dec. 17, 1982. drawing, photographing and vid- McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 34. R. Mallary, "Computer Sculpture: Six Levels of Cybernetics", Artforum, May eotaping could be simulated on 1959. 10. J. Burnham, Modern 1969, pp. 29-35. the computer. Beyond Sculpture. George Braziller, Inc., New York, 1968. 35. Colette Bangert and Charles Bangert, 3. Raster increas- graphics displays 11. D. Davis, Art and the Future. Praeger "Experiences in Making Drawings by ed the complexity of imagery Publishers, New York, 1973. Computer and by Hand", Leonardo 7, significantly. Bit-mapped image 12. H.W. Franke, ComputerGraphics, Com- 289-296 (1974). Art. New 1971. 36. K.C. Knowlton, "Statement", Computer memories allowed virtually un- puter Phaidon, York, 13. S. Science and in the Art. Hardware and Software Vs. Aesthet- limited choice of color and thus Kranz, Technology Arts. Van Nostrand-Reinhold, New ics. Coordinators: Charles and Colette supported the creation of York, 1974. Bangert, Proc. Seventh National Sculp- smoothly shaded or textured 14. F. Malina, ed., Kinetic Art: Theory and ture Conf., Univ. of Kansas Press, Lawrence, 1972, 183-184. three-dimensional images. Practice. Selections from the Journal Apr. pp. Leonardo. Dover Publications, New 37. E. Zajec, "Computer Art: The Binary York, 1974. System for Producing Geometrical Non- These three advances combined to 15. F. Malina, ed., Visual Art, Mathematics figurative Pictures", Leonardo 11, 13-21 foster the migration of computer tech- and Computers. Pergamon Press, Elms- (1978). nology into art schools and artists' ford, N.Y., 1979. 38. G. Nees, Generative Computergraphik, 16. T. Dream Siemens 1969. studios as well as commercial production Nelson, Machines-Computer AG, Berlin-Munich, Lib. The South houses. The intimate collaboration bet- Distributors, Bend, Ind., 39. L. Mezei, "SPARTA: A Procedure 1974. Oriented Programming Language for the ween artists and scientists was no longer 17. J. Art and Reichardt, ed., Cybernetics, Manipulation of Line Draw- the of Ideas. New York Arbitrary required. Supported by emergence Graphic Society, ings", Information Processing 68, Proc. 1971. user-friendly general-purpose and high- Greenwich, Conn., IFIP Congress 69, North-Holland, Ams- 18. R. Russett and C. Starr, level graphics language, artists became Experimental terdam, pp. 597-604. Animation. Van Nostrand-Reinhold, or soft- 40. J.P. Citroen and J.H. Whitney, computer literate, they bought New York, 1976. "CAMP-Computer Assisted Movie ware off shelves stocked by a burgeoning 19. G. Cinema. E.P. Youngblood, Expanded Production", AFIPS Conf. Proc. 33, computer graphics industry. Dutton & Co., New York, 1970. 1299-1305. 20. J. BYTE Whitney, Digital Harmony. 41. K.C. Knowlton, "Collaborations with Pubs., Peterborough, N.H., 1980. Acknowledgements-The following artists and Artists-A Programmer's Reflection", 21. J. Reichardt, ed., "Cybernetic scientists provided valuable information and F. Nake and A. Rosenfeld, eds., Graphic Serendipity:The Computerand the Arts", visuals for this article. Thank you very much Languages, North-Holland, Amsterdam, Studio International Special Issue, Colette and Charles Klaus Basset, 1972, pp. 399-416. Bangert, London and New York, 1968. Jack Burnham, Harold Cohen, Charles A. 42. Sonia Landy Sheridan, Energized Art- 22. B. Kliiver, J. Martin, and R. Rauschen- Csuri, Herbert W. Franke, Kenneth C. science. Catalog, Museum of Science and eds., Some More An Ben F. berg, Beginnings: Industry, 1978. Knowlton, Laposky, Tony Longson, Exhibition Submitted Works Chicago, Robert Aaron Manfred of Involving 43. D. Kirkpatrick,"Sonia Sheridan", Mallary, Marcus, Technical Materials and Processes. Landy Mohr, Vera Molnar, Zsuzsa Molnar, Frieder Woman'sArt J. 1, 56-59 (1980). Brooklyn Museum and the Museum of Nake, Georg Nees, A. Michael Noll, Duane 44. T. DeFanti, "The Digital Component of Modern Art, in Art and Manfred R. Lillian Experiments the Circle Habitat", Proc. NCC Palyka, Schroeder, New 1968. Graphics Sonia Peter Technology, York, 195-203 Schwartz, Landy Sheridan, 23. J. (1976). and Edvard Burnham, ed., Software: Information 45. T. DeFanti, Control for Struycken Zajec. Its New Art. The "Language Easy Technology: Meaningfor Electronic Visualization", BYTE 90-106 Jewish Museum, New 1970. York, (1980). 24. F. et Electra: L'elec- Popper al., eds., 46. I.E. Sutherland, REFERENCES tricite et l'electronic dans 'art au XXe "Computer Displays", Scientific American June 1970. siecle., Mus6e d'Art Moderne de la Ville 1. K.C. "A Tech- 47. C. Csuri, ed., Interactive Sound and Knowlton, Computer de Paris, Paris, 1983. for Animated Movies", Visual Systems. Catalog, College of the nique Producing 25. M. Mohr, "Artist's Statement", The Proc. AFIPS Conf., No. 25, Spring 1964, Arts, Ohio State University, Columbus, Computer and its Influence on Art and pp. 67-87. 1970. Design. J.R. Lipsky, ed., catalog, Shel- 2. K.C. Knowlton, "Computer Animated 48. R. Baecker, "Digital Video Displays and don Memorial Art Gallery, Univ. of Movies", Emerging Concepts in Com- Dynamic Graphics", ComputerGraphics Nebraska, Lincoln, Spring 1983. puter Graphics, D. Secrest and I. (Proc. SIGGRAPH 79), 13,48-56 (1979). 26. R. Mallary, "Statement", ComputerArt: Nievergelt, eds., Benjamin/Cummings Hardware and Software Vs. Aesthetics. 49. K. Basset, "Schreibmaschinengrafik", New York-Amster- Publishing Corp., Coordinators: Charles and Colette H.W. Franke and G. Jiger, eds., dam, 1968, pp. 343-369. Bangert, Proc. Seventh National ApparativeKunst. VomKaleidoskop zum 3. E.E. Zajac, "Film Animation by Com- Sculp- ture Conf., Univ. of Kansas Press, Computer,DuMont Schauberg, Cologne, puter", New Scientist, No. 29, pp. Lawrence, Apr. 1972, 184-189. 1973, pp. 168-171. 346-349 (1966). pp. 27. A. Efland, "An Interview with Charles 50. H. Cohen et al., eds., The First Artificial 4. A.M. Noll, and the Visual "Computers Csuri", Reichardt, Intelligence Coloring Book. Kaufmann, Arts", Design and Planning, No. 2, M. Cybernetic Serendip- ity, p. 84. Menlo Park, Calif., 1984.

168 Dietrich, Visual Intelligence 51. I.E. Sutherland, "Sketchpad, a Man- 53. A.M. Noll, "Human or Machine: A 57. M. Wein and N. Burtnyk, "Interactive Machine Graphical Communications Subjective Comparison of Piet Techniques for Enhancing Motion System", AFIPS Conf. Proc. 23, 329-346 Mondrian's 'Composition with Lines' Dynamics in Key Frame Animation", (1963). (1917) and a Computer-Generated Pic- Comm. ACM, Oct. 1976. 52. M. Mohr, catalogs: Divisibility. Genera- ture", The Psychological Record 16, 1-10 58. T. Longson, "Artist's Statement", in tive Works, 1980-1981, Galerie Gilles (1966). Artist and Computer, R. Leavitt, ed., Gheerbrant, Montreal, 1981; Computer 54. B.F. Laposky, Electronic Abstractions. Creative Computing, Morristown, N.J., Graphics. A-R-C Musee d'Art Moderne Catalog, Sanford Museum, Cherokee, 1976, pp. 27-29. de la Ville de Paris, 1971; Drawings. Iowa, 1953. 59. Colette and Charles Bangert, "Artist's Galerie Weiller, Paris, Galerie Gilles 55. M.R. Schroeder, Number Theory in Statement", in Artist and Computer, R. Gheerbrant, Montreal, 1974; Cubic Science and Communications. Springer, Leavitt, ed., Creative Computing, Mor- Limit. Galerie Weiller, Paris, 1975; Cubic Berlin, 1984. ristown, N.J., 1976, pp. 18-20. Limit II. Galerie Weiller, Paris, 1977; 56. L. Mezei, "Randomness in Computer Dimensions. Galerie D+C Mueller-Roth, Graphics", Cybernetics,Art andIdeas. J. Stuttgart, 1979; Divisibility. Galerie Reichardt, ed., New York Graphic Teufel, Cologne, 1985. Society, Greenwich, Conn., 1971, pp. 165-174.

Call for Papers

Art and ArtificialIntelligence

The editors of Leonardo invite artists and others to submit articles on work involving art and artificial intelligence for publication consideration. Artists whose work involves ideas, techniques or technologies of artificial intelligence, expert systems, interactive programs are invited to submit articles under 2500 words on their work. Computer and video engineers, computer scientists, philosophers and other researchers are also invited to submit articles on aspects of their work that may be of interest to artists. Editorial guidelines may be found on the outside back cover of the journal. Additional information may be obtained from the main editorial office: Leonardo, 2112 Berkeley Way, Berkeley, CA 94704, U.S.A. Articles that have appeared in Leonardo in this theme area include the following: -Myron Krueger, "VIDEOPLACE: A Report from the Artificial Reality Laboratory", 18, 145 (1985). -Susan E. Metros, "Electronic Thinking Cap: Microcomputer-Enhanced Creative Problem Solving", 18, 100 (1985). -William I. McLaughlin, "Human Intelligence in the Age of the Intelligent Machine", 17, 277 (1984). -Stephen Wilson, "Computer Art: Artificial Intelligence and the Arts", 16, 15 (1983). -Peter Kugel, "Artificial Intelligence and Visual Art", 14, 136 (1981). -Michael J. Apter, "Can Computers Be Programmed to Appreciate Art?", 9, 17 (1977). -Michael Thompson, "Intelligent Computers and Visual Artists", 7, 227 (1974).

Dietrich, Visual Intelligence 169