This blog supports 3d model & rendering course at the university of toledo, center for the visual arts. Class members are invited to post updates and pictures of their work-in-progress; thoughts and opionions on the reading; helpful tips on the use of the modeling/animation software (blender and terragen); links to other 3d artists of interest; miscellany related to 3d art and space.
The most interesting part of this reading had to be in the fact that Rucker sees and encourages us to see everything as a pattern. When he spoke of the brain he mentioned how the right and the left control different functions that can be categorized as digital and analog. The digital part of our brain breaks information into pieces so that we may better understand things and encompasses such tasks as arithmetic and spelling. The analog part of our brain however, sees things as a smooth and complete piece of information, showing the ease at which one can recognize an image or how one can easily recite a song, changing ones pitch and tone at the correct locations. I have also recognized these patterns in terms of our current building block project. In the first phases were we piece together the individual blocks and eventually when we start to construct we will be in a digital process, putting various structures together to form one complete structure, on the other hand when the project is complete it could be deemed as analog int he fact that it is one complete and smooth work.
I totally agree with Katy that what made the reading so fascinating was who Rucker shows us how you can see everything as a pattern. Katy definitely made an interesting point in her post that our project on building blocks is just like piecing together a pattern. Or in a way kind of like a puzzle. You need all the pieces to make it work. I had never even thought about the blocks being considered as both digital and analog. That was a very good point! I like how at the end of this article Rucker states that truth is no longer some number like rules, nor a pretty picture, or a system of logic. Instead truth is infinitely complex. Truth is not some mathematical problem to be solved by logic, numbers, or information, or even a set of rules. But rather relates to a psychological activity. As Rucker states it can be perception, emotion, communication, etc. I found this quite interesting because my father is a psychologist and I here about this all the time.
Rucker sees everything as a pattern. I think when we our building are projects; it’s just like putting a puzzle together. We have to use each pieces to start a building block. I thought this reading was very helpful and interesting because I learn how Rucker uses his brain as he mentioned as how the right and left brain work. This is like a mathematics problem on how to solve the pieces to the puzzle. The molecule consist of two intertwines that hold it together by a long sequence of dyads.
From the very beginning, the article is so clear about the many differnt ways of looking at the same object, that I feel like all of his points can be argued with based on some slightly different perspective. For example, in saying that the hand is space, an object with no holes, a counter-idea surfaces, that might suggest the skin is actually permeable and breathable at microscopic levels. The membranes are actually a mesh, another nod to the 3D modeling.
Also, I was struck by the idea of one perspective's taking the priority, or being more accurate, precise, or just altogether better. From a very human standpoint, the tug of war over priority can be endless. In debating matters of spotty space versus smooth space to something as trivial as what is messy or what is clean, it is so necessary to be reminded that seemingly divergent ideas can actually be complementary. This also, I think, justifies relating a lofty article to domestic, personal applications.
btw, can we be clear on where exactly these posts should be made? Chris seemed to push for posting to the main page as opposed to here in the comment section. I would support anyone posting from now on to just do that, if only so that my post from last week isn't so lonely.
I thought that the reading was very interesting. I enjoyed reading about Rucker's ideas concerning the connections between things. His idea that everything is connected. I also enjoyed his theory concerning balance, counterparts, and his "yin and yang" philosophy. I agree with this ideas and thought that it was strangely ironic how correct his ideas were about nature, opposites, wholeness and counterparts. Our upcomming project continues to elaborate and confirm these ideas. For our own project we must construct our own building block, made from modified shapes, which we must then fit to replicas to produce a more elaborate shape.
After reading the article, the section I enjoyed most was that of Number and Space. I have never had a strong arm in mathematics and hence was turned off by the long mathematical explanations throughout the article. But in this particular section I was especially drawn to the quote, "One might ask whether a person is best thought of as a distinct individual or as a nexus in the web of social interaction." This quote is very interesting to me, because from the time man has been around they have had to live and interact with others in a high pressured world. As much as a person strives for individuality, there is always going to be a tie/influence to what is happening in society and others who are interacting with it.
In reading the article, I found it somewhat interesting that math is such a universal form, it's the same for everyone. I find it very interesting that it can be understood by people from many different languages and cultures, because it is something that "consists of concepts imposed on us from without. I also enjoy the idea of patterns, endlessness and the world having no obvious boundaries. I think that our block assignment can have infinite possibilities of combinations of patterns to construct our lego forms.
We do use math in everyday life sometimes without even realizing it. This article goes well with our project that we are constructing. With graphs and measures to make the blocks precise it’s a matter of “scale and structure” like Rucker say. Its interesting that math is the same in every language and every country. I enjoyed the writing about the concepts of dynamic grouping (dialectic triads). I liked how it broke it down into 4 functions of psychological orientation but reading through the lines could be determined as braking down what makes up a sphere or cylinder. Then once the object is established as a sphere or cylinder or cube that’s it there’s no changing it just as Rucker goes on to describe it is the same as numbers 5 is 5 and 2 is 2 there’s no changing them. It was interesting how Rucker goes on to say that even in music, astronomy, geology it all revolves around mathematics.
Not to be repetitive of everyone else's posts, but I did find the concept of math most interesting. The fact that it is universal, understood by everyone around the world is so fascinating. In almost every aspect of life, we use building blocks to advance in the ever growing technological world as well as our basic way of living.
Apologies to all for not posting prior to class, I tried to participate during class to compensate and also because I find the subject fascinating. The fact that Rucker starts with the hand as the model makes perfect sense from an evolutionary standpoint, after all the hand was the first real counting system, the finger or digit as pointed out in class, at the basis of binary counting. The hand as measure, also a bridging element from the "golden mean" to fractals and chaos theory, as related by the five archetypes of mathematics as Rucker describes. One of the things that fascinates me about this is how mathematics which started as a simple system of counting has the potential for quantifying all of life as we know it through quantum physics. To paraphrase Rucker's analysis, "infinity begins with the infinitesimal".
The most interesting part of this reading had to be in the fact that Rucker sees and encourages us to see everything as a pattern. When he spoke of the brain he mentioned how the right and the left control different functions that can be categorized as digital and analog. The digital part of our brain breaks information into pieces so that we may better understand things and encompasses such tasks as arithmetic and spelling. The analog part of our brain however, sees things as a smooth and complete piece of information, showing the ease at which one can recognize an image or how one can easily recite a song, changing ones pitch and tone at the correct locations. I have also recognized these patterns in terms of our current building block project. In the first phases were we piece together the individual blocks and eventually when we start to construct we will be in a digital process, putting various structures together to form one complete structure, on the other hand when the project is complete it could be deemed as analog int he fact that it is one complete and smooth work.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with Katy that what made the reading so fascinating was who Rucker shows us how you can see everything as a pattern. Katy definitely made an interesting point in her post that our project on building blocks is just like piecing together a pattern. Or in a way kind of like a puzzle. You need all the pieces to make it work. I had never even thought about the blocks being considered as both digital and analog. That was a very good point!
ReplyDeleteI like how at the end of this article Rucker states that truth is no longer some number like rules, nor a pretty picture, or a system of logic. Instead truth is infinitely complex. Truth is not some mathematical problem to be solved by logic, numbers, or information, or even a set of rules. But rather relates to a psychological activity. As Rucker states it can be perception, emotion, communication, etc. I found this quite interesting because my father is a psychologist and I here about this all the time.
Rucker sees everything as a pattern. I think when we our building are projects; it’s just like putting a puzzle together. We have to use each pieces to start a building block. I thought this reading was very helpful and interesting because I learn how Rucker uses his brain as he mentioned as how the right and left brain work. This is like a mathematics problem on how to solve the pieces to the puzzle. The molecule consist of two intertwines that hold it together by a long sequence of dyads.
ReplyDeleteFrom the very beginning, the article is so clear about the many differnt ways of looking at the same object, that I feel like all of his points can be argued with based on some slightly different perspective. For example, in saying that the hand is space, an object with no holes, a counter-idea surfaces, that might suggest the skin is actually permeable and breathable at microscopic levels. The membranes are actually a mesh, another nod to the 3D modeling.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I was struck by the idea of one perspective's taking the priority, or being more accurate, precise, or just altogether better. From a very human standpoint, the tug of war over priority can be endless. In debating matters of spotty space versus smooth space to something as trivial as what is messy or what is clean, it is so necessary to be reminded that seemingly divergent ideas can actually be complementary. This also, I think, justifies relating a lofty article to domestic, personal applications.
btw, can we be clear on where exactly these posts should be made? Chris seemed to push for posting to the main page as opposed to here in the comment section. I would support anyone posting from now on to just do that, if only so that my post from last week isn't so lonely.
ReplyDeleteI thought that the reading was very interesting. I enjoyed reading about Rucker's ideas concerning the connections between things. His idea that everything is connected. I also enjoyed his theory concerning balance, counterparts, and his "yin and yang" philosophy. I agree with this ideas and thought that it was strangely ironic how correct his ideas were about nature, opposites, wholeness and counterparts. Our upcomming project continues to elaborate and confirm these ideas. For our own project we must construct our own building block, made from modified shapes, which we must then fit to replicas to produce a more elaborate shape.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article, the section I enjoyed most was that of Number and Space. I have never had a strong arm in mathematics and hence was turned off by the long mathematical explanations throughout the article. But in this particular section I was especially drawn to the quote, "One might ask whether a person is best thought of as a distinct individual or as a nexus in the web of social interaction." This quote is very interesting to me, because from the time man has been around they have had to live and interact with others in a high pressured world. As much as a person strives for individuality, there is always going to be a tie/influence to what is happening in society and others who are interacting with it.
ReplyDeleteIn reading the article, I found it somewhat interesting that math is such a universal form, it's the same for everyone. I find it very interesting that it can be understood by people from many different languages and cultures, because it is something that "consists of concepts imposed on us from without. I also enjoy the idea of patterns, endlessness and the world having no obvious boundaries. I think that our block assignment can have infinite possibilities of combinations of patterns to construct our lego forms.
ReplyDeleteWe do use math in everyday life sometimes without even realizing it. This article goes well with our project that we are constructing. With graphs and measures to make the blocks precise it’s a matter of “scale and structure” like Rucker say. Its interesting that math is the same in every language and every country. I enjoyed the writing about the concepts of dynamic grouping (dialectic triads). I liked how it broke it down into 4 functions of psychological orientation but reading through the lines could be determined as braking down what makes up a sphere or cylinder. Then once the object is established as a sphere or cylinder or cube that’s it there’s no changing it just as Rucker goes on to describe it is the same as numbers 5 is 5 and 2 is 2 there’s no changing them. It was interesting how Rucker goes on to say that even in music, astronomy, geology it all revolves around mathematics.
ReplyDeleteNot to be repetitive of everyone else's posts, but I did find the concept of math most interesting. The fact that it is universal, understood by everyone around the world is so fascinating. In almost every aspect of life, we use building blocks to advance in the ever growing technological world as well as our basic way of living.
ReplyDeleteApologies to all for not posting prior to class, I tried to participate during class to compensate and also because I find the subject fascinating. The fact that Rucker starts with the hand as the model makes perfect sense from an evolutionary standpoint, after all the hand was the first real counting system, the finger or digit as pointed out in class, at the basis of binary counting.
ReplyDeleteThe hand as measure, also a bridging element from the "golden mean" to fractals and chaos theory, as related by the five archetypes of mathematics as Rucker describes. One of the things that fascinates me about this is how mathematics which started as a simple system of counting has the potential for quantifying all of life as we know it through quantum physics. To paraphrase Rucker's analysis, "infinity begins with the infinitesimal".