_COMING SOON
The true HEADer_remix is coming, the true HEADer_remix is coming! soon, to a browser near you… keep your eyes peeled and your desire to dig beneath the image surface at ease… for now I present a sneak peak of the offerings:
_UPDATE
Just a few more tweaks and it will be ready.. oh man is this tool fun! Hopefully launching it by this weekend…
_QUITE THE COINCIDENCE
As previously described in semantic abuse, the logic of how this system works should leave the user hesitant to form any direct connections between the content of the text and the output of the image. I present here another image set that calls this very logic into question.
_DOUBLE PASS TEST
If it was only the color algorithm that produced a blue image, than I would have little to find surprising, SEAWATER created a very similar visual. It was when observing the b/w algorithm [alg_02] that I became particularly impressed.
_PRECONCEIVED NOTIONS ARE QUESTIONED
This continues the line of questions regarding semantics that must be asked of the tool itself, text2image, and the visual output being produced. OCEANWATER is a tangible word. When I conjure the mental image this text, the range of pictorial references are all very similar, in contrast to a commonly entered word such as Love.
When asked during a discussion the other day, “what do the images mean to you, what is the value of this system” - my initial response is that it provides a form of translation or visual representation. The most recent example of this would be my use of the tool last Sunday, inputting the phrase happy fathers day!
When describing this process to my professor of theory, an interesting concept began to unfold. If you imagine the phrase happy fathers day! [in pictorial form] what are those elements? Balloons, greeting cards, grown male figures – a predominantly blue color palette? Let’s see what Google Images has to say…
While these results are predominantly text based [providing an example of something difficult to communicate in pure visual language] - what if we repeat the process with that popular text2image entry, Love. Once again, bring the visual into your mind… this time I’ll refrain from offering any suggestions. As the short list of elements are formed, feel free to compare your imagination with that of a few websites with open search boxes :
If I haven’t already lost you to a sea of visual tangents, did the query of images reenforce your mental image? Let’s now take a look at what text2image will produce:
If this was the image that sat in your mind, please send me an email! If I were to try and draw a line of similarities between the variety of pictures found above and this latest one, it would likely remain on the topic of color. Which in many cases [as demonstrated with OCEANWATER] may be enough to deduct that the resulting picture is a true depiction of the text that was fed into the tool.
What about the case in which a picture fails to match a preexisting mental image [perhaps like the above example]? This may be where text2image has the ability to enable one to question their own preconceived notion of semantics. For the sake of this being a blog, [which promotes unfiltered thoughts to find themselves published on the internet], let us now make comparisons to that of an abstract painting [insert proper reference here... Picasso?] which is often displayed with an accompanying title written beside the work. In an abstract painting you are asked to rely on the fact that this title was the artists intent or inspiration while constructing the artwork. This is, of course, challenged with the introduction of an Untitled #____ naming scheme, further obscuring our text to image relationship.
One of the most interesting aspects of this whole discussion is observing the role text plays in the retrieval of these pictures. In the case of an image search engine, it relies on metadata [keywords which have been digitally attached to the image file] or by querying the filename itself. In both of these techniques the text sits on the periphery of the actual pictorial content. The pictured was observed and someone made a conscious and subjective decision to tag that information to the file. In the case of text2image, the text is the image and the image is the text! This is where the unique qualities of the digital medium come into play. By replacing the entire pictorial contents with the textual input provided, the text no longer sits on the periphery, but has become a core element in the visual outputs depiction.
While this relationship is explored through the immediacy of an interactive format, what information will the picture reveal if isolated and presented on its own?
*craaack… twist twist twist…* Hm that appears to be the sound of a whole new can [discussion] opening up. Time to walk away while enjoying and exploiting the riches of an informal writing medium.
_THE HORSE IN MOTION
Last night I was engaging in some productive procrastination, when I came across a particular work by Scott Blake [aka barcodeart man] known as the Free Chuck Close Art project. A painting is broken into a grid, extracting each of the many unique marks that make up the rasterization of of a portrait. They are then used to ChuckClose’ify any image provided by the user.
At the bottom of the page there is an animation of Muybridge’s The Horse in Motion run through this Free Chuck Close process:
Upon seeing it, I was immediately reminded of some earlier research I had done on the JPEG image header [using the very same raw material], where I had discovered a similar mark [or so I consider], which I dubbed the Chuck Close Aesthetic.
_AND THEN….
… I was inspired to work on a new tool, which could/should/shall repeat such an effect on any given image. I’ve drawing out a basic model of how it could work, and may begin work on it after bringing text2image to version 2.0. Until then, I’ll work on uploading some of the better examples of this research and share the results.
_TEXT2IMAGE RESEARCH
I have begun testing alternative algorithms for text2image. Here I’ve built a small tool that allows me to enter one textual input, while building 8 different images. From this display, alg_01 represents the current model in use, while alg_02, alg_03, alg_08 appear to be the most promising for new possibilities.
_MENTAL NOTES
I’ve got some decisions to make re: whether or not to publish working interactive versions of every new aesthetic I develop. By wanting to keep the latest output to myself, I’ve discovered an acquisitive personality that was previously unknown. Between personal intent and technical details, many questions remain…
+ what is more important, the image or the tool?
+ should there be exclusive content available only for showing in [the non-existent] exhibitions?
+ how do you maintain simplicity, while offering the user 3x the variety?
+ *insert next tough question here*
