By: Tristan Perich

Tristan Perich — Mon, 07 Feb 2011 20:42:29 +0000

Hi Vince: yes, the drawing is not unpredictable in an absolute sense, since it is running deterministic code on a self-contained microprocessor. The randomness employed is pseudo-random, and again is predictable. These limitations of closed computational environments intrigue me, and so the drawings are an intersection between that pristine system and the messy real world around us, where pens dry out and the texture of the wall influences their motion. I don’t add interactivity to the system to keep it within those limitations, which allow me to focus on the consequences of computation in the abstract. Of course, randomly moving a human’s hand is also limited by the patterned activity of our brains. Of course, though the motion of the motors controlling the pen is perhaps predictable, no practical formula would describe the finished drawing. It could be run in simulation, but that implies a certain degree of implicit unpredictability, since the only way to foresee the outcome is to run the algorithm. Lastly, the physical aspects, like the pen running out of ink or the angle it was clipped or the speed of the motors, contribute greatly to the subtle qualities of the line and ultimately the entire drawing, which of course cannot be captured by the webcam feed here. Thank you for your question.

By: vince

vince — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 21:16:43 +0000

It seems that the finished product can’t be unforeseen because the microchip has been programmed to have the pen follow a specific pattern. I’d like to better understand how the finished product won’t be something that has been precisely defined.

Comments on: Tristan Perich, Machine Wall Drawing

By: Tristan Perich

By: vince