Nov 28, 2005 - 0 Comments - Uncategorized -

The Fleshy-Headed Microbe

If you switch from the first orbit counting method to the second, the arms turn springy.


Download parameter file squork09.loo

Which raises the question, just what can we expect to see in fractals?

I think fractal art is very similar to photography. We don’t create the subject matter we create the way it is presented.

Everything you see in photographs you can expect to see in fractals. Fractals have the same potential as photography. That’s quite a bit, isn’t it?

Except for the wide range of expression made by human expressions, and of course reality in general, which has no equivalent in fractal imagery, since fractals are abstract, other than that, we should expect a lot from fractal art.

Well, maybe the absence of people and realism is a major limitation to fractal art. But are fractals really abstract?

The squork bugs here looks somewhat real, just stylized. Many fractals are named after real things because they have such a strong resemblance. Perhaps “abstract” is just the reality we haven’t seen before?

I wouldn’t describe fractals as abstract. I don’t expect to find “abstractions” when I’m using Sterlingware or Xaos.

But then maybe “abstract” is in itself an abstraction since truly abstract imagery is impossible. You can’t see abstract things!

I think I’m getting somewhere. Abstract art is merely “stylized” realism. Some abstract art is more stylized, meaning it doesn’t “look” like anything real, and some is less stylized, meaning it has been “abstracted” or slightly modified from it’s natural appearance.

Van Gogh’s paintings of flowers, people and other stuff would be the less stylized stuff and a white canvas without a frame painted white would be the extreme end of the abstract scale.

Maybe that answers the question, what can we expect in fractal art?

Everything from Van Gogh to a blank square.