![An untitled doodle [2016-10-14]. Ink on paper](/z-assets/images/mava/dso-115504-3d17c4191f1e9a4d176c0166c5a55348802e445e6d1996f2fc9f3085c514b7f5.jpg)
![An untitled doodle [2016-10-14]. Ink on paper](/z-assets/images/mava/dso-115505-3d17c4191f1e9a4d176c0166c5a55348802e445e6d1996f2fc9f3085c514b7f5.jpg)
![An untitled doodle [2016-10-14]. Ink on paper](/z-assets/images/mava/dso-115506-3d17c4191f1e9a4d176c0166c5a55348802e445e6d1996f2fc9f3085c514b7f5.jpg)
Hello insomnia. Its 0430. Time to doodle.
Thoughts
My motif is the “strictly normal” bisection, and this is something that people are beginning to recognize. It is the exact bisection of the pictorial space at the vertical axes. This draws the spectator to the division.
There are, however, other possibilities, these doodles explore one such alternative.
I was thinking about what would happen if both “sides” had almost subsumed each other (almost total inclusion), and that last vestige of interaction would be at the edges. These doodles explore were the result.
In Sequent 13 I did something similar. Generating where the two strictly normal lines completely overlap but are still touching in at least one place. In this the idea is to overlap much further so they are not touching and are spaced far apart, i.e. translate them to the quarters of the visual space instead of to an adjusted centre. Also, to consider the “colour”… should there be overprinting… should there be just one (between them)… or no colour and just show the lines. Perhaps the best way is to parameterize these options so all combinations can be made for comparison and qualitative evaluation.
comments powered by Disqus